Our Home Is Not a Sand Pit
We are deeply concerned about the proposal to place a sand mine directly on our boundary fence, in what is currently a peaceful and thriving biodiversity zone. This is not vacant land. It is not wasteland. It is a living, breathing ecosystem — and it is our home.
Right now, we wake up to birdsong, not machinery. We see kangaroos and wallabies grazing in open areas at dusk. We know there are koalas moving through the trees. Eagles nest here. Frogs and turtles live in the wetlands and waterways. This land supports life in ways that cannot simply be replaced once destroyed.
A sand mine will not be quiet. It will bring constant heavy machinery, reversing alarms, truck movements, excavation, dust, and vibration — from early morning and throughout the day. The peace and safety of our homes will be replaced with industrial noise and activity just metres from our fence line.
Dust pollution will not stay neatly within the mine site. It will drift onto our homes, into our water tanks, over our gardens, and into sensitive habitats. Runoff and sediment threaten nearby waterways where frogs and turtles breed. Fuel and chemical risks pose further dangers to soil and groundwater.
Most heartbreakingly, this development will destroy critical habitat in a recognised biodiversity zone. Koalas depend on these trees and corridors to survive. Eagles require undisturbed nesting areas. Kangaroos and wallabies rely on this land for grazing. Once their habitat is cleared and fragmented, they do not simply relocate — many will disappear.
This is not just about inconvenience. It is about irreversible environmental loss. It is about protecting wildlife that has far fewer places left to go. It is about standing up for the integrity of a biodiversity zone that was identified for protection, not industrialisation.
As a community, we value clean air, quiet surroundings, and the preservation of native wildlife for future generations. We believe economic gain should not come at the cost of permanent environmental destruction and the loss of our local ecosystem.
We are asking decision-makers to listen to the people who live here, who care for this land, and who see its value every day. Once this habitat is gone, it cannot be restored to what it was.
This is our home.
This is wildlife habitat.
This is a biodiversity zone.
It should be protected — not mined.

To whom it may concern, I , Linda Merrilees of 521 Marsh Road Bobs Farm, object to the proposed sand quarry by Newcastle Sand
I am a local resident ( over 25 years) & have taught at Bobs Farm Public School for 34 years ( recently retired). Let's say I know the area, it's residents & natural beauty well
My list of objections ( no list of benefits)
*National Park across the road - animals & plant life don't know boundaries
*impact on Tourism - welcome to Port Stephens ( with a vast destroyed area of coastal bushland)
* local businesses impacted - Murray's Brewery, The Stables, Cookabarra Barramundi Farm, Kookaburra Cottages farmstead, Valhalla, Port Stephens Wildlife Refuge, Go Karts are a few
*affects on young local families who have purchased/ built nearby not knowing about this proposal
*25m of natural dunes will be levelled to 0m on their doorstep, along with silica, noise & destruction of coastal forests possibly including koala habitat among many other native species ( I know the area as I've ridden my horses here over the past 20 years & witnessed the natural beauty & wildlife)
*we rely on tank/ spear point water from the spring waters that filter through the dunes
* sand truck traffic issues have not been adequately addressed - sand trucks from at least 3 other sites are already a heavy presence on our roads - how will this impact School?
*I have first hand witnessed the devastation of the sand quarry Newcastle Sand operate at Williamtown ( cleverly hidden from the main road) Lunar landscape is what comes to mind
* I am also aware that Newcastle Sand have been fined by the EPA at this site - will they be like the company on Port Stephens Drive ( Harvey Norman site) & clear fell everything ( illegally)& just pay the fines as they did?
*images provided of so called rehabilitation of the site were so poor I almost laughed - a pile of weeds cannot replace 100 year old trees
* my question regarding use of this sand? Golf courses & building sites? Really? We already have several businesses extracting sand from the dunes , how is another necessary? There's no 'profound ' use for this sand, other than to line some Director's pockets. I'd be thrilled if someone could provide me with some meaningful use of this sand that warrants such disruption & destruction to local residents ( both human & animal!)
* Bobs Farm residents have been through a similar application before ( which gained national media attention) & this project appears to be riding on it's coat tails
So, in conclusion, I vigorously implore that the Department of Planning refuse this application for the detrimental reasons to our community that I have provided with no benefits whatsoever
Linda Merrilees
521 Marsh Road Bobs Farm

I object to the development of yet ANOTHER sand farm for the following reasons:
Biodiversity loss
Impacts on a sensitive coastal groundwater system
Increased truck traffic and road safety risks
Impacts on amenity, rural character and lifestyle
Potential impacts on schools, families and local residents
Potential health impacts from dust and silicates
Potential visual impacts on one of Port Stephens most important entrance corridors
Further industrialisation of the Bobs Farm–Salt Ash area
Cumulative impacts from existing and proposed extractive industries

Until such time the NSW Government complete the planned Nelson Bay Road dual carriage way this project should not proceed.
The amount of truck movements when combined with current operating businesses that generate truck movements cannot be supported by the current as built road infrastructure. This cumulative effort will be dangerous to road users in the local area.
In summary if the government wants to approve this project spend the money on the infrastructure to sustain it safely.

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed sand quarry development at Bobs Farm.

My family and I are residents of Bobs Farm, and this is not simply a place we live—it is our home, our community, and the place we deliberately chose to raise our three children. We chose Bobs Farm because of its peaceful rural lifestyle, its open spaces, native wildlife, and the quiet environment that is becoming increasingly rare. We understood the responsibilities that come with living rurally, but we did not choose to live beside an industrial mining operation.

The proposal to remove more than 10 million tonnes of sand from our area would permanently change the character of Bobs Farm.

Health Impacts

I am deeply concerned about the health impacts this project will have on my family.

Both my son and I have severe asthma. Another one of my sons and I also suffer significant allergies to dust and pollen. The additional dust generated by quarrying activities and heavy vehicle movements has the potential to significantly worsen our health, increase asthma attacks, and reduce our quality of life.

The long-term health impacts on children, elderly residents, and others living with respiratory conditions should not be underestimated. Dust does not stop at property boundaries.

Traffic and Road Safety

The proposal indicates approximately 40 heavy truck movements each day.

This is unacceptable on our local roads.

Residents have spent years asking for our roads to be repaired. We have been repeatedly told that fixing the roads is too expensive, despite living with potholes and deteriorating road conditions.

It is incredibly frustrating that authorities have considered our roads unsuitable for investment, yet they are now expected to accommodate constant heavy vehicle traffic associated with a commercial mining operation.

This raises serious concerns regarding:

* Road safety for local residents.
* Increased wear and deterioration of already poor roads.
* Safety for school buses, cyclists, horse riders and local traffic.
* Increased noise and vibration affecting nearby homes.

Loss of Rural Character

Bobs Farm is home to more than 112 residences, many of which have existed for generations.

Many homes are over one hundred years old and have been passed down through families. This proposal threatens not only the landscape but the history and identity of our community.

Families have invested their savings into properties here because of the peaceful rural environment. The introduction of an industrial sand quarry would fundamentally change the character of the area and diminish the lifestyle residents have worked so hard to achieve.

Environmental Concerns

The wildlife, native vegetation, birdlife and natural landscape are some of the defining features of Bobs Farm.

I am concerned about the impacts that excavation, vegetation clearing, dust, noise and increased heavy vehicle movements will have on local ecosystems and native wildlife.

Once this environment is damaged, it cannot simply be restored to its original condition.

Lack of Community Benefit

Residents already experience limited services despite paying significant council rates.

We have:

* No town water.
* No guttering.
* No local parks.
* Poor road maintenance.

Rather than investing in improving the infrastructure for the existing community, this proposal places an additional burden on residents while providing little obvious benefit to those who actually live here.

Impact on Families

This proposal is about far more than sand.

It is about the lives of the families who call Bobs Farm home.

It is about children growing up breathing clean air, riding bikes on quiet roads, hearing birds instead of heavy machinery, and enjoying the rural lifestyle that residents have spent years building.

Industrialising our community for the removal of millions of tonnes of sand comes at an enormous cost to the people who live here every day.

Conclusion

I respectfully ask that the decision-makers carefully consider the cumulative impacts this proposal would have on residents, our health, our safety, our environment, and our community.

The loss of the unique rural character of Bobs Farm cannot be replaced once it is gone.

I strongly urge the NSW Government to reject this proposal and protect the families, history, environment, and future of Bobs Farm.

Thank you for considering my submission.

I am a lifetime Anna Bay resident who along with many fellow residents believe the proposed Bobs Farm Sand Quarry (SSD-99860959) at 3631 Nelson Bay Road will not only damage our lives but the environment, native flora and fauna’s lives too. I have listed below two reasons which i strongly believe should result in the proposal being refused.

1. Severe Traffic & Road Safety Risks
The proposal seeks to extract up to 530,000 tonnes of sand per year—more than double Macka’s Sand which will result in massive truck volumes. That’s up to 40 trucks per hour turning onto Nelson Bay Road and navigating the Port Stephens Drive roundabout which will disrupt our day to day lives and ours more animals in risk of getting run over. The EIS fails to include an independent Road Safety Audit assessing risks to Bobs Farm Public School bus runs, local rural driveways, or peak holiday traffic on our main peninsula gateway.

2. Habitat Destruction & Threat to Wildlife
The quarry will destroy ~24 hectares of native vegetation that forms a vital north-south wildlife corridor between the Tomaree and Tilligerry Peninsulas. The Commonwealth identified this site as habitat critical to the survival of the Koalas. The land is documented habitat for Koalas, Squirrel Gliders, Flying Foxes, and apex predators like the Powerful Owl and Masked Owl. Buying offset credits doesn't save local species—it just records the local loss.

Let me ask you, when was the last time you saw a Koala in the wild? Only a few years ago you would’ve replied atleast once a week, now we struggle to see them once a year! Our planet isn’t slowly dying. It’s dying rapidly and every area of protected land plays a crucial role!! Therefore, I ask for refusal, requesting the Department REFUSE SSD-99860959.

Having 30 more semi trucks on our roads will require more tax payers money for the upkeep of the roads.
Not to mention the habitat of our local animals and vegetation in the area will be dramatically reduced if this goes ahead.
Noise will increase for residents, increased chance for accidents, delays & road "upgrades" will be required to support this project.
How much more do these people need to take before our home becomes barron and unlivable?

Subject: Objection to State Significant Development Application – Bobs Farm Sand Quarry (SSD-99860959 / EPBC 2026/10456)
To:
The Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
NSW Government
Dear Assessment Officer,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed Bobs Farm Sand Quarry (SSD-99860959) at 3631 Nelson Bay Road, Bobs Farm.
While the proponents have adjusted certain aspects of their scheme—such as moving to dry extraction—the fundamental nature of this heavy industrial development remains completely incompatible with our local community, our environment, and the broader identity of the Port Stephens gateway.
My primary concerns and grounds for objection are outlined below:
1. Severe Traffic Safety and Transport Risks
* School Proximity & Child Safety: The addition of heavy transport trucks—peaking at 120 movements per day and up to 20 movements per hour—poses an unacceptable risk along Nelson Bay Road, particularly given the proximity to local educational facilities like Bobs Farm Public School and shared school bus routes.
* Dangerous U-Turn Requirements: Mandating that heavy transport trucks travel east to complete a U-turn at the Port Stephens Drive roundabout introduces a major traffic hazard. This roundabout is already a critical bottleneck and a primary tourism and commuter corridor; injecting constant heavy vehicle turnaround maneuvers will severely compromise road safety and increase congestion.
2. Destruction of Critical Biodiversity and Habitat Corridors
* The proposed clearing of approximately 24 hectares of native vegetation and dry sclerophyll forest is devastating for local wildlife.
* This area functions as an essential ecological corridor linking the Tomaree and Tilligerry peninsulas. Removing this habitat directly threatens vulnerable and iconic local wildlife, including koalas, squirrel gliders, and threatened forest owl species.
3. Amenity, Noise, and Air Quality Impacts
* Silica Dust: The reality of dry sand extraction, processing, and truck loading brings persistent risks of airborne crystalline silica dust, threatening the health and wellbeing of nearby residents and local agricultural pursuits.
* Noise and Lifestyle Degradation: Proposed operations running from early morning through the evening (and maintenance 24/7) will erode the peace and rural amenity of the surrounding area.
4. Incompatibility with the Port Stephens Gateway
* Bobs Farm is the scenic gateway to the Tomaree Peninsula and Nelson Bay. Permitting a heavy industrial sand quarry at this entry point fundamentally undermines the region's character, lifestyle, and tourism-based economy.
Conclusion
The permanent environmental damage, road safety hazards, and industrial intrusion far outweigh any temporary economic benefits of this project. I urge the Department to listen to the community, reject this application, and protect the long-term future of Bobs Farm and the broader Port Stephens environment.

SUBMISSION OF OBJECTION
Bobs Farm Sand Quarry – SSD-99860959
3631 Nelson Bay Road, Bobs Farm

I wish to lodge a formal objection to the proposed Bobs Farm Sand Quarry.

I am a long-term resident of Port Stephens and have travelled Nelson Bay Road regularly for approximately 15 years. I am also a Registered Architect in New South Wales with extensive experience in the assessment of development proposals and planning controls. My concerns arise both from my experience as a local resident and from my understanding of sound planning and environmental assessment principles.

While I recognise the need for construction materials, the Environmental Impact Statement does not, in my opinion, demonstrate that this particular development, in this environmentally sensitive and highly visible location, is suitable or in the public interest.

Groundwater and long-term environmental risk

The proposal is described as a dry sand quarry, with extraction intended to remain above the groundwater table. However, this does not eliminate the potential for impacts on the shallow coastal groundwater system.

Of particular concern is the apparent inconsistency between the groundwater protection measures relied upon in the technical documentation. The hydrogeological assessment appears to rely on a separation of approximately 0.7 metres above groundwater, while the rehabilitation strategy refers to maintaining 1 metre above the highest predicted groundwater level.

This difference is significant where the proposed extraction floor would be located close to a variable groundwater table. The assessment also acknowledges limitations in off-site data, model calibration and predictions of future groundwater conditions.

The EIS therefore does not establish a clear, consistent and adequately precautionary groundwater protection standard. This is particularly concerning given the acidic groundwater, elevated metals and other groundwater-quality anomalies identified in the assessment material, together with the potential effects of extreme rainfall and future climate conditions.

These matters should be resolved before any approval is granted rather than being left to future monitoring and adaptive management.

Biodiversity and habitat fragmentation

The proposal would clear approximately 24 hectares of native vegetation and remove habitat for threatened species including the Koala, Powerful Owl, Masked Owl, Squirrel Glider and Grey-headed Flying Fox.

The Commonwealth has determined that the proposal is a controlled action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act because of its potential impacts on matters of national environmental significance. The Commonwealth assessment material identifies approximately 24.5 hectares of the site as habitat critical to the survival of the Koala.

Biodiversity offsets and future revegetation do not prevent this loss. They compensate for an impact after it has occurred and cannot recreate mature vegetation, tree hollows, established habitat or the existing function of an ecological corridor within any meaningful short- or medium-term period.

The assessment should also consider the cumulative fragmentation of habitat across Port Stephens rather than treating the site as an isolated area of vegetation.

Traffic and road safety

Nelson Bay Road is the principal gateway into Port Stephens and already carries substantial commuter, tourist and commercial traffic.

Having used this road regularly for approximately 15 years, I have witnessed increasing congestion, particularly during weekends, school periods and holiday peaks. The addition of quarry haulage vehicles over a ten-year operating period would increase the number of interactions between heavy vehicles, school traffic, buses, tourists and local motorists.

The traffic assessment appears to concentrate primarily on road capacity and intersection performance. That is not sufficient. An independent road safety audit, a specific assessment of risks associated with Bobs Farm Public School and an assessment based on peak tourism conditions should be required.

The question is not simply whether the road can technically accommodate additional vehicles, but whether the resulting safety, efficiency and amenity impacts are acceptable when considered with existing and future traffic growth and other extractive industries in the locality.

Noise, dust and sensitive receivers

The proposal is located near rural residences, tourism accommodation, a public school and conservation and recreational land.

The EIS appears to rely substantially on future monitoring and the later development of mitigation measures, particularly as quarry operations move closer to sensitive receivers. Compliance should be demonstrated as part of the assessment rather than determined after operations commence.

There is also concern that construction dust has not been fully quantified despite construction and site establishment being potentially significant dust-generating activities. The assessment acknowledges existing background particulate levels, making it particularly important that the cumulative health and amenity consequences of adding another dust-generating activity are comprehensively addressed.

Monitoring may identify an impact after it has occurred, but monitoring itself does not prevent or mitigate that impact.

Site suitability, cumulative impacts and public interest

The site is located within a sensitive coastal groundwater system, contains threatened-species habitat and forms part of the main tourism and transport gateway into Port Stephens. It is also close to residential, educational, tourism, conservation and recreational uses.

The proposal should not be assessed as a series of separate technical issues. Its groundwater, biodiversity, traffic, noise, dust, visual and social impacts will be experienced cumulatively by the surrounding environment and community.

The progressive approval of additional extractive industries is also changing the rural and environmental character of the Bobs Farm–Salt Ash corridor. The EIS has not convincingly demonstrated that this continued industrialisation is compatible with surrounding land uses or the long-term strategic interests of Port Stephens.

The proposal relies too heavily on biodiversity offsets, future management plans, future monitoring and uncertain rehabilitation outcomes. The Department must determine whether the impacts are acceptable before granting consent, not merely whether they might be capable of management after approval.

Conclusion

For these reasons, I do not believe the proposal has demonstrated that the site is suitable for the development or that its environmental, traffic and community impacts can be managed to an acceptable standard.

I respectfully request that the Department refuse SSD-99860959.

Should the application proceed to determination, I support its referral to the Independent Planning Commission so that the unresolved environmental and community concerns can be considered through a transparent and independent process.

Yours faithfully,

Murray Wood
Port Stephens resident
Registered Architect NSW ARBN 6320

To: Mr Jarrod Blane
NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure.
RE: Proposed Bobs Farm Sand Quarry at 3631 Nelson Bay Road, Bobs Farm
I totally reject and object to the installation of this Sand Quarry at Bobs Farm!
With respect I ask that this proposal be not be approved.

I live at the Sunrise Lifestyle Retirement resort at 4011 Nelson Bay Road, Bobs Farm and I am very concerned at the impact of the extra amount of large haulage trucks using Nelson Bay Road and going past my location. Every time I drive out of Sunrise I drive up Binder Road to turn left to go onto Nelson Bay Road. If the proposed Bobs Farm Sand Quarry was to be approved, my access (and many others living in this area) to join Nelson Bay Road will become more difficult and dangerous than it is presently!
The traffic survey conducted by Seca Solutions at the intersection of Port Stephens Drive and Nelson Bay Road was taken on the 18 February when there were no school holidays! They can say that the traffic flowed smoothly and the impact of ten large trucks per hour would not cause any additional problems but they do not live in this area!
When the school holidays are on, the roads are very busy with thousands of holidaymakers and these extra vehicles will cause absolute mayhem on our major arterial road, especially at the Port Stephens Drive roundabout!
As the below paragraph, taken from the Traffic Impact Assessment states, there will be a huge number of haulage trucks driving the 6.6km distance from 3631 Nelson Bay Road to the Port Stephens Roundabout and returning West along Nelson Bay Road. Therefore, a maximum of ten haulage trucks per hour, loaded with sand will be driving firstly East and then West, for 13km to go past their original leaving point at 3631 Nelson Bay Road. This is not specified in the Traffic Impact Assessment for this proposal and it is my submission there is an inherent traffic risk of potential vehicle collisions posed to local and tourist traffic by these large trucks.
"Sales would be by haulage truck at a maximum of ten (10) loaded trucks per hour equating to a maximum of 120
loaded trucks per day. This allows for peak activity periods however shall equate to an average of 46 loaded trucks
per day. All transport trucks would travel east along Nelson Bay Road and complete a U-turn at the Port Stephens
Drive roundabout. Haulage trucks will be prohibited from using Marsh Road."
There has been no Road Safety Audit done for this traffic impact and this should be a requirement with the added risk of so many extra vehicles coming out of the proposed sand quarry onto Nelson Bay Road.

2. I am also very concerned at the natural habitat of the land where the proposed sand quarry is to be located. The amount of land to be cleared for this sand mining operation is quite substantial and will not bode well for many resident animals, including threatened species of animals and birds in that area, including the Koala, Sugar Glider, Powerful Owl and Masked Owl. The proposal states the sand mining will continue for 10 years and after this time there will be no way the 40 Ha will be able to return to its original condition with so much vegetation stripped away.
I submit the above points in objection to the Newcastle Sand proposal for the Bobs Farm Sand Quarry and ask that it not be approved.
Thank you.
Ken Schneiders