Skip to main content

State Significant Development

Determination

Rocky Hill Coal Mine

MidCoast

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Response to Submissions
  6. Assessment
  7. Recommendation
  8. Determination

Rocky Hill Coal

Attachments & Resources

Request for DGRS (3)

Application (1)

DGRs (1)

EIS (55)

Submissions (7)

Agency Submissions (11)

Response to Submissions (35)

Amendments (114)

Assessment (3)

Recommendation (3)

Determination (3)

Approved Documents

There are no post approval documents available

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.

Complaints

Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint

Enforcements

There are no enforcements for this project.

Inspections

There are no inspections for this project.

Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.

Submissions

Filters
Showing 101 - 120 of 4292 submissions
Brad Bowden
Object
Gloucester , New South Wales
Message
Dear Sir
ROCKY HILL COAL PROJECT - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION SSD-5156
I am writing to oppose Gloucester Resources Ltd's development application for an open cut coal mine.
My reasons follow:
Distance from the mine. Statement from GRL...Statement from GRL. "The closest resident to any pit
will be 1.7kms away."
Fact - From the main extraction boundary area are:
* the Forbesdale Estate, of 35 rural/residential properties, situated 900 to 1800m,
* the Thunderbolts Estate and Avon View residential estates, to the north, situated 1.8klms to 2.5klms,
* the rural/residential properties along the Bucketts Way situated 1.8klms to 2.5klms.
This is not one resident but many, who will suffer the noise and dust from this mine. Even coal seam gas
wells and wind farms are legislated to be no closer than 2kms from a residence.

Noise and Health. This mine is far too close to Gloucester and the Forbesdale Estate. Noise and coal
dust from coal train movements and loading - potentially at night - is a great concern. Very fine coal dust
is a critical issue that GRL has not attended to - and which appears to be outside of the NSW
government's interest. No one seems to be dealing with the sub 2.5 to 1 micron particles - yet these are
the ones that travel furthest in the air and are able to enter the bloodstream through the lungs.

Further Expansion. I do not believe that the mine will stay at its proposed size. GRL will expand towards
town and will seek to mine coal on its other two exploration licence areas along the Bucketts Way.

Economics. Already GRL has acquired 29 properties and the owners have left their land and farming
businesses. I do not accept that GRL's economic assertions, nor its 'compensation' to Gloucester, nor its
royalties to NSW are sufficient reason to ruin the environment and water systems of this valley. I do not
accept that it is reasonable to inflict harm and suffering on people and communities simply for the profit of
a company - or for royalties.

Rehabilitation is clearly outside GRL's interest and capability. They will permanently damage geology
and its water systems. They will bring to the surface and discard waste coal. Potentially 30% of what is
mined becomes a legacy contaminant for someone other than GRL to worry about.
GRL's interest is to do the cosmetics and hand back the legacy.
No explanation has been given as to how a coal-dependent Gloucester will be restarted after the mines
close - and at what cost.

Treatment of this Community.
GRL has not been honest with Gloucester. It secretly bought land under a number of names. Its EIS fails to tell the truth about community opposition and fails to tell the truth
about the methods used to get 'willing sellers' of properties. I hope the Assessment Committee will detect
these. GRL refuses to state clearly its intentions regarding projected expansion towards Gloucester and
along the valley. However we do know that GRL does aspire to exploit the coal resource to the maximum
extent. We were fobbed off by Minister MacDonald stating that GRL 'was only exploring'. We pin-pointed
where GRL would start mining. MacDonald said 'Hose the community down'. We need your help.
There is no state reason to mine this coal and there is no sane reason to damage this valley and
community.
Please use the full extent of the Precautionary Principle. Please defend the notion of fairness and
humanity for people over profit.
Please refuse GRL's application.
I have made no reportable political donations.
Your Faithfully
Brad Jason Bowden
Michael Wall
Support
Forbesdale , New South Wales
Message
The mine will provide work opportunities to the area.
Grant Rowe
Support
Gloucester , New South Wales
Message
I believe the Rocky Hill Mine will benefit the Gloucester community. It will bring much needed jobs to the area plus flow on jobs to local business holders such as engineering shops boilermakers etc.
Name Withheld
Support
Singleton , New South Wales
Message
I believe that the town needs jobs and an injection of youthfull modern residents that will lead the township into the next century.
Name Withheld
Support
Kelvin , New South Wales
Message
Deveopement of this mine will provide greater employment opportunities for the people in the greater Gloucester area, and will also provide a greater requirement for the Services from loaclly owned businesses (Secondary Industries) located on the NSW Mid North Coast.
Name Withheld
Support
Hallidays Point , New South Wales
Message
Mining is a valuable resource in Australia. Not only does it provide jobs to the community but it allows Australia to have a very valuable export.
Jade Stewart
Support
Merewether , New South Wales
Message
I support the proposal.

Coming from a rural town in the Riverina, just about everybody left to pursue opportunities in other regions or the city once school had finished. It would have been terrific to have an industry such as mining to provide job opportunities for working age people.

Much of the work in region was generated by the rice growing and sheep and cattle industries. These industries, however, were significantly influenced by the prevailing climate. It was not uncommon for the local abattoirs or rice mill to close on short notice making wide spread redundancies. In contrast, an industry such as mining provides not only significant direct employment, but also significant flow on effects for the life of the mine. I believe these would be of great benefit to the Gloucester area. Ultimately, working age people being forced to leave town to seek stable employment elsewhere, results in depopulation and adversely affects a town's cultural fabric. As stated in the EIS, the proponent has a target of 75% of people being employed at the mine being locals.

It understood that mining is a temporary land use. It is very important, however, that proponents' invest substantial effort into the strategy and planning for final landuse and the rehabilitation required to achieve it. I believe that the proponent provides a clear vision for the post-mining landscape. The level of detail provided on this matter in the EIS gives me confidence that this vision will be achieved.
Name Withheld
Support
16 Frances St Gloucester nsw 24+ , New South Wales
Message
Fully support Rocky Hill, we need jobs, I do not believe the project will cause to mutch damage
Tony Tersteeg
Object
Gloucester , New South Wales
Message
On behalf of The Johnsons Creek Conservation Committee I object to this application because the proposal is simply too close to the towns of Gloucester and Forbsdale. This will result in unacceptable negative impacts on the residents of the area.
I strongly object to the applicant referring to affected residents as receptors. They are people, children mothers and fathers. The terminilogy is used to androginise them, to de-huminise them and it disgusts me.
The applicant refers on P. ES 9, also 2-68 and P4-39 to the traffic that will use Waukivory Road and concedes that it will be heavyly used in the construction stage and also during the life of the mine (an increase of 29% P4-236 They have stated that they do not intend to proceed to replace Jacks Road bridge until after production has commenced.. Waukivory Road from the Bucketts Way to Jacks Road is already in a poor condition. It will be completely destroyed with the amount of proposed traffic yet no upgrade is proposed to this road and it will be a cost to the community.
The applicant proposes to construct noise and visual barriers constructed of 40 metre high overburden hills P. ES12 however the building of these barriers will result in unacceptable noise and dust and it should be noted that it will take 4 years to construct these out of pit overburden dumps P.3-38. It should be noted that noise does not travel in straight lines expecially at night so it will have little or no positive effect on the citizens who will be consigned to a minimum of 14 years of hell. Blasting so near to residences can cause structural damage to houses yet there is no evidence in the EIS that the proponent intends to offer structural assessments before mining commences. The proponent intends to plant trees to provide a visual and acoustic barrier P.ES-18. The fact is that with an estiminated 14 years to completion of mining the trees will be no where near mature enough to provide such a barrier. They offer an offset area P.ES-21 yet there is no guarentee that another resource company cannot apply for an exploration lease in the future. Their Socio-economic study is an absolute disgrace, there is not the availability of the Gloucester workforce to enable the proponent to pretend that they can achive a 75% local workforce and their financial outcomes are unaceivable (refer Economists at Large submission for Gloucester Shire Council). It is in Fact rubbish. The proponent refers to a proposed Quarry on Waikivory Road P.1-17. This application has in fact being denied by Gloucester Gouncil. The applicant concedes that mining will destroy 50% of the KNOWN aboriginal sites in the area and argues that this is acceptable because it is only 7% of sites in a 490km area P 4-255. It then goes on that they will train buldozer drivers to become archaeologists to enable them to identify artifacts while driving their dozer. It treats the aboriginal people and white australians with contempt.
In conclusion, it must be stated that most of the negatives that have been stated above are due to the proposed mine being to close to a populated area. This is where people, families, children and the elderly live. They should not be considered expendable to profit a company whose shareholders are remote from the noise and dust that will be created by this proposal. Any person who approves this proposal will be culpable for the illness and probably deaths that will result. Tony Tersteeg. President Johnsons Creek Conservation Committee.
Name Withheld
Object
Barrington , New South Wales
Message
I wish to register my strong and complete opposition to the Rocky Hill Coal Mine proposed for near Gloucester. I have a number of reasons that apply at National, State, Local and personal levels.

I have listened carefully to the arguments for the mine and none of them in any way meet my concerns. The decision about whether the mine is approved must be based on good national, economic, environmental and social reasons.

It should be processed ethically at every stage.
Having examined the evidence produced by experts in the relevant fields. It seems that on all these issues the decision should only, in all honesty and conscience, deny the mine.

The evidence fom many other places and including South of Gloucester is that there are negative impacts on the:
-agriculture of the region the benefits of which flow far beyond the region
-health of the population
-cost of health services
-exsting industries in the region
-social fabric of the town
-value of realestate
-conversely, the affordability of rental property which becomes beyond the means of local people
-water quality and availability
-air quality
-damage to roads and other expensive infrastructure.

The ongoing cost of these impacts far outweighs any short-term benefits of a time limited mine that might accrue to public coffers. Most benefits onl y reach a select few, the financial markets and overseas interests.

Please study the real, detailed costings of these long term costs, not based on impact statements produced by mining companies or the companies they hire to do them. Rather look at, or commission, real, longitudinal studies of real places both here and overseas. Mt Isa might be an interesting place to start.

Nationally and at State levels we know that mining has lead to a two speed economy. Most of the money made from resources owned by Australian governments has flowed freely through our economy to a few individuals, non-productive financial markets and overseas. It might make the GDP look good for the moment but there is little to show for it. Successive governments across the country have failed to secure the true value of those resources for the people who voted for them.

The two speed economy benefits a few, pushes up the price of housing and other important services which impacts very adversely on the majority. Home ownership in places like Sydney and perth is beyond an increasingly larghe percentage of Australians.

In some Australian cities where mining money has concentrated, the cost of realestate has skyrocketed beyond the means of the average, even otherwise high-earning citizens. In many places there is a dire shortage of qualified tradespeople to meet the needs of the communities. The too few tradespeople we have are understandably lured away by the the promise of exceptionally high (if short-term) incomes.

Our overdependence on mining has directed resources away from other productive industries in Australia which are now struggling, have gone overseas or are in demise. Where will we be when the mining stops as we know it will. There is plenty of evidence from the changing nature of large overseas economies especially China.

Very little of the money made by the mine stays in the town. A very small amount is given to the town by way of grants. In Gloucester only a very small percentage of employment is provided by existing mines. Another mine will no doubt be similar. Yet another mine so very close to town, has enormous potential to damage our employment in agriculture, tourism, government services as well as the significant income in Gloucester from retirees and semi retirees who are attracted to the beauty of the region. These are the things that the Bureau of Statistics figures tell us is the true current wealth of our region.

The deleterios health effects of mining pollution is well known to those who live with them. We cannot as a society afford the social, personal and economic costs of these any longer. Mining may have brought benefits but the health and social impacts are long lasting and unacceptable today when we have so many clean and clever alternatives.

The damage to agricultural land is toatally unacceptable. We need to ensure the health of any productive agricultural land in good rainfall areas that are left. Gloucester is all of these. I see the production all around me and even in my own small block see the potential. Gloucester is also very close to large population centres such as Sydney and Newcastle making it ideal for the delivery of fresh produce. Our town, our State, our country cannot afford another mine in Gloucester.

Penelope Charles
82 Argyle Street
Barrington NSW 2422

[email protected]
Name Withheld
Object
Invergordon , New South Wales
Message
I and my husband decided to move to Gloucester over 20 years ago. We chose Gloucester because of its proximity to Sydney and Newcastle. We were looking for land that would allow us to develop a small rural horticultural business whilst also providing a comfortable rural lifestyle. We were also wanting an area that had clean reliable water and other suitable resources to allow us to prepare for predicted climate and economic changes. During the last 20 years we have invested all our resources into our business and property. The effects from coal, coal seam gas, ruby, gold and other extraction industries will have a major accumulative detrimental impact on our rural economy and our environment. Large capital mining investment in the Gloucester region is not appropriate because it will take resources from the region, displace farmers, destroy the environment, ruin the aquifers, pollute the river systems which provide water to Gloucester and downstream users (Taree etc), adversely impact on health, destroy the emerging horticultural food growing industries, ruin multi-million dollar tourist industry. The extraction industries in this area are for short term gain for the mining companies but with long term destructive consequences for Gloucester and the region. Governments need to be progressive in their planning and start investing in food and water production not destructive last century technology and industries such as coal. The economic proof is available ( Australian and internationally) indicating that coal is an uneconomical investment while sustainable energy technologies will soon provide economically viable alternatives.

Over the years I have done presentations and submitted papers to various working groups ( e.g. Newcastle coal loader, extension Stratford Mine. CSG etc) and contributed to various submissions. I am not prepared to include detailed information in this submission because it will be ignored like all previous correspondence and papers with only a polite or standard response from relevant authorities. I would however be willing to be part of a delegation or presentation to the Department to present relevant details.

In this submission I am giving a personal appeal rather than the multitude of facts and figures which our community has been submitting for years. If this Rocky Hill mine goes ahead not only will it destroy a most unique valley and water resources and land it will destroy the developing food producing businesses. The social and economic destruction of Gloucester will be an unforgivable legacy of decision makers during a time when they and governments need to be supporting sustainable industries and businesses. It is time to consciously make tough decisions and support small and local businesses instead of the giant corporate invaders.
Karen O'Brien
Object
Gloucester , New South Wales
Message
21st October 2013 Michael and Karen O'Brien
5 Fairbairns Road
FORBESDALE NSW 2422

Director, Mining Projects
Development Assessment Systems & Approvals
Department of Planning & Infrastructure
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2011
RE: THE ROCKY HILL OPENCUT COAL MINE-FORBESDALE NSW
Dear Sir,
We oppose the development of the Rocky Hill open cut coal mine at Forbesdale near Gloucester NSW.
My husband, myself and our two young sons moved to Forbesdale (Gloucester) NSW in January 1989. We wanted to raise our family in a rural area mainly due to our eldest son Shane having been diagnosed as a chronic asthmatic and we were hoping home grown food and good country air would help in the management of his condition. Gloucester was a lovely town, it ticked all of the boxes for us, that is; schools (preschools, infants, primary and high), good sporting facilities, a comprehensive commercial and cultural area, employment opportunities, great medical centre and local hospital. All this! Plus the best views and country side in NSW.
We purchased our property on Fairbairns Road, which has spectacular views to the Buckets Mountains, Morgani hills and the Avon valley. Michael gained employment at the local Dairy Farmers milk factory. Shane had excellent medical care. The boys started school, we had a third son and our family began our journey to become a solid part of the fabric of the Gloucester community.

In 2002 the Gloucester Dairy Farmers milk factory closed, leaving Michael unemployed. We started a business called Hillview herb farm. We supply local restaurants and the Newcastle rural markets with fresh culinary herbs. We also operate farm gate tours of our garden and supply morning teas and lunches to our visitors. Our business has consistently grown through our hard work and we have established a good name in both the produce & tourist industries. Tour groups visit our farm from all over Australia. We average 3 coach loads (48 seater)of visitors per week, year round. We employ up to 4 permanent casual staff and 7 contract growers.

Gloucester Resources Ltd (GRL) has over a five year period purchased numerous properties in the Forbesdale, Waukiory and Avon Valley District. This has been done under the generally known pretence of GRL being an agricultural company with the intention to secure and protect Australian agricultural land. GRL recently submitted a proposal application to the NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure (D.A No. SSD-5156) to develop the Rocky Hill open cut coal mine on the acquired land.

This mine will be less than a kilometre away from Forbesdale, our home! We cannot understand how a government could allow an open cut coal mine so close to a rural residential area. Also shouldn't the government be protecting our employment, food producing land and our water resources? Tourism is a major industry in Gloucester which is the base camp to the heritage world listed Barrington tops. Tourism has long term financial benefits to our community and to the NSW State. The local tourism industry contributed over 30 million dollars to our community's income last year and that figure did not include day trippers (which would increase that figure considerably). The expansion of mining in the Gloucester district will significantly damage our tourism industry.






We are very concerned about the many problems associated with an open cut coal mine situated so close to where we live and operate our business. These concerns include but are not limited to:

1: The health implications for our family, our neighbours and the Gloucester community and environment.

2: Our property and other properties in the Forbesdale area are devalued and unsaleable.

3: The adverse effect on our business, the local tourism industry, the agricultural industry and the environment.

4: Air pollution: Coal dust particles and diesel fumes are having and will continue to have adverse effects and consequences to our health and our business ethos of growing produce organically.

5: Water quality: What damage will happen to our local catchment area in the Avon Valley and the Avon Valley River? Impacts from opencut coal mining activities could potentially destroy a major river system.
The proposed mine site area is in a flood zone which could result in overflow of "mining dirty water".

6: Noise pollution resulting from heavy machinery, commercial vehicles, increased large truck and train movements is replacing our quiet, rural area.

7: Exclusion zone: The current NSW state government recently passed legislation that a 2 kilometre exclusion zone would exist between residential properties and coal seam gas. The NSW Government has not addressed an exclusion zone or even considered a 2 kilometre zone from mining activities. Why?

We request that the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure thoroughly investigate the community and environmental impacts of this mining proposal (D.A. No. SSD-5156 ) and reject it as a totally unviable prospect.

If for some personally unfathomable reason this proposal should proceed we would at least expect that the residents in Forbesdale would be part of the acquisition zone required by the mine and that our homes be purchased at a true value.

We are hoping that our State Government consider the effect that this decision will have on all members of our community, their lifestyles, dreams, homes and businesses.

Yours Sincerely,



Michael and Karen O'Brien.

Name Withheld
Support
ELEEBANA , New South Wales
Message
As a consequence of the reporting in the media and the numerous times the subject of Gloucester has been raised by Alan Jones over recent months, I have had a look at the EIS for the Rocky Hill Coal Project (and the material presented on the Rocky Hill and other websites) and, in light of my observations of Gloucester during visits to the Barrington Tops, am of the opinion that the planned mine would be of benefit to the town. I also believe that, if undertaken in the manner proposed, and despite the claims by some, it would have minimal adverse but many positive impacts.
During casual conversations with long-term residents and business owners at the times of my visits, one message consistently presented was that with the collapse of the timber industry and the dramatic changes that had occurred in the dairying industry, it was only coal mining that had kept the town alive and that in its absence, the town would be dead. A review of the socio-economic information in the EIS and Key Insights report also supports other observations, particularly the disproportionate number of older people - presumably retirees, with the explanation given being that young people and families routinely move away because of the absence of further education and job opportunities. Some even spoke of their relatives or friends moving elsewhere in the Hunter or even to QLD or WA to get good paying jobs, often in the mining industry, and the opportunity that this mine would present to them in terms of returning to the area. I also note with some concern that this imbalance in population age structure is only predicted to become worse, with a 50% increase in people aged 65 or over projected to occur in the next 18 years, with that cohort then making up more than 35% of the population. GRL's commitment to employ local people and its target of a 75% locally resident workforce within 3 years, along with its commitment to education and training of local youth, each of which I understand would be embodied in any approval, would assist in reversing this trend. GRL's other commitments in the EIS including their community grants program, would also provide or maintain essential infrastructure which Council obviously cannot afford and, in the case of the medical services, help alleviate a problem that is typical in most rural towns. The inability of Council to fund the required repairs or replacement of the Jacks Road bridge which services areas southeast of Gloucester (and which I understand has been closed for nearly 18 months) but which would be undertaken at GRL's expense, is just one such example and something which would benefit the community well into the future.
The direct and indirect injection of many millions of dollars into the local economy by way of direct and indirect employment would also benefit to the Gloucester area, businesses and the community at large both in the short and long term.
I agree that Gloucester Valley and the Barrington Tops are picturesque and also that tourism is an industry that has an important future in the area and should be promoted. However, I find it difficult to reconcile the $30 million annual contribution to Gloucester claimed by some as this equates to something of the order of $85000 per day, 365 days per year - the evidence does not support this, with the only apparent thing booming in Gloucester is the coffee shops, and then only during nice weather . I have also never heard any suggestion that the existing mining activity in the area has adversely affected the tourism industry, albeit some is visible from The Bucketts Way. In view of GRL's approach to its planned mine in order to minimize impact on scenic amenity both during and post mining, it appears that this lack of impact would continue to be the case. In fact, I believe that GRL should be complimented on their efforts to obscure views of its operations in a manner which is sympathetic to the scenic qualities of the area, and on the effectiveness of those efforts based on the photomontages presented. The progressive development of a final landform which is similar in all respects to that currently present, and the absence of a final void which is commonplace in open cut mines I have seen over the years both in Australia and overseas, should also be complimented as the end result would, unlike many areas, be indistinguishable to the majority of observers.
I have also had a look at the predictions regarding air quality, health and water, and the impact on agricultural land, all of which are genuine issues of concern in association with all contemporary mining developments and, in this case, to the residents and land users in the local area and along the rail line to Newcastle in particular. The predictions, peer reviewed by experts, all conclude that the impacts would be negligible.. In fact, I was impressed that, despite this, GRL has committed to spray its coal wagons with a polymer film so as to allay community concerns regarding coal dust from the wagons - an apparently unnecessary activity but one that indicates that this Company is genuinely concerned about both real and perceived impacts and community concerns.
The agricultural impact assessment clearly shows that statements that the planned mine will disturb prime agricultural land (where, according to Alan Jones: "the soil is that good you could eat it") is another fallacy and typical of the fear mongering, rather than science, that he and vested interest groups continue to promulgate to the detriment of the town's future.
In September 2011, the NSW Government released its NSW 2021 Plan, a 10 year plan to "restore NSW to its place of leadership". Of paramount importance in the achievement of this objective is to rebuild the economy, for without a strong economy none of the other goals is achievable and the NSW 2021 Plan and its objectives will be looked back on as another series of political platitudes which came to nothing. Approval of this project, though relatively small in the scale of coal mines, will demonstrate to all that Government is serious about achieving the NSW 2021 goals and engender confidence that projects that are designed to address the sensitivities of an area and realistic community concerns, and provide economic and social benefits to the local area and State are not only welcomed, but encouraged, in NSW.
Finally, the presence of the proposed mine would not discourage me from relocating to Gloucester. To the contrary, its presence would make the town a more attractive option as in the absence of such developments, I believe that, typical of many rural towns, its long-term future is questionable economically and consequentially, socially. Only with an age structure more typical of larger communities, and development that directly and indirectly creates a diversity of jobs and wealth opportunities locally, will the town and its community be dynamic and sustainable, and infrastructure and services maintained and improved.
Name Withheld
Object
Barrington , New South Wales
Message
Kellie Hewitt
Support
GULMARRAD , New South Wales
Message
This new mine will create many jobs for the local community and surrounds.
Name Withheld
Support
Kelvin , New South Wales
Message
I feel the new mine will bring much needed funding for the town & employment for the locals.
R&D Technology.Pty Ltd
Support
Gloucester , New South Wales
Message
R&D Technology Pty Ltd is a supplier of electrical and mechanical equipment to coal mining, utilities and general industry. We as an organisation have been involved in some way in every coal development in NSW since the 1993 and currently employ over twenty people, four of which work in our Gloucester office and workshop in Tate street. I am well aware of the very stringent controls placed on mining and am confident that should the Rocky Hill Coal Project development be approved, construction and ongoing operation of the mine will be of the ever increasing highest standard. Developments of any kind whether they be a major road, airport, shopping centre, or wind farm impact on some and especially those closest to the development. Major developments also supply much needed employment and are therefore seen as an asset to the wider community.
On behalf of R&D Technology Pty. Ltd. and particularly our employees and prospective employees in Gloucester, I support the Rocky Hill Mine development and look forward to discussing with design and construction personnel how we may resource it and service it's ongoing maintenance needs.
Warren and Jim Cliffe
Support
Gloucester , New South Wales
Message
Pippa Robinson
Object
Tibbuc , New South Wales
Message
I am writing to oppose the approval and formation of the Rocky Hill mine at Gloucester NSW.
It seems appalling to propose to mine coal so close to the town of Gloucester.
The proposal is already causing health problems in the community, particularly for the people who live in Forbesdale Estate, where they have recently built houses with love and excitement, often to fulfill retirement dreams. They now live with anxiety and depression caused by the fear of the mine destroying their lifestyles.
The proposed Rocky Hill Mine will destroy the Gloucester environment. At present Gloucester is a delightful small town, sheltered under the unusual dramatic craggy hills of 'The Bucketts'. It is the gateway to Barrington Tops, world heritage national park, a tourist attraction town, Gloucester has clean rivers and a water supply for 80,000 people in nearby towns. All this will rapidly change if mining proceeds.
It seems incredible that Rocky Hill plans to mine within 5 km of the schools and hospital and community houses of Gloucester when it is known that such activity so close to people's homes greatly increases their health problems.
I am shocked that the desire to rip the coal from the ground before the changing world climate creates new limitations on coal production will lead to the destruction of Gloucester as we know it. Pippa Robinson
Brian Jones
Object
Gloucester , New South Wales
Message
The health impacts associated with the proposed mine are paramount.
The impact on children's future health in years to come.
Potenital for house prices to devalue.
Potential job loses/uncertainty.
Interwoven impact on coal seam gas.
Impact on senior citizens.

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSD-5156
Assessment Type
State Significant Development
Development Type
Coal Mining
Local Government Areas
MidCoast
Decision
Refused
Determination Date
Decider
IPC-N

Contact Planner

Name
Colin Phillips