Submission concerning application SSD-10410 Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction Project

I am writing to express serious concern and objection to the development application for the Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction Project.

This covers an important biodiverse area with threatened and endangered species, as well as the potential impact to waterways in the entire catchment, because of the proposed dam on site.

Two species listed on the EIS are endangered – the Dural Land Snail and the Koala.
The EIS does not appear to list the koala as endangered – can this be updated?

As we study koalas in the local area, please see below some additional information related to the importance of the entire Maroota region and the proposed development site:

*Koala habitat may be richer than what seems to be acknowledged on the EIS – The EIS acknowledges that the proposed site is koala habitat. This is evident with the range of bloodwoods and the grey gums on the site. However, the EIS includes trees that are not always officially recognised for their importance to koalas, and I am not convinced that the survey took those species into account.

These trees include the smooth barked apple (A Costata) and the brown stringybark (E Capitella). On page 58 the EIS references the document used to survey the site for koala habitat – this is ‘A review of koala tree use across NSW’ by the DPIE (2018). While this is a wonderful and in depth document by the DPIE, it does not list the smooth barked apple (A Costata) as a high use food tree in the KMA 2 area. It also lists the brown stringybark (E Capitella) as ‘irregular use’.

Contrary to what is listed on the DPIE ‘koala tree use’ document, Anyon-Smith and Kristensen (2021) demonstrate that in Healthcote National Park both the Smooth Barked Apple (Angophora Costata) and the brown stringybark are high or important use trees. This is particularly so for the smooth barked apple which along with the grey gum, had the majority of scratch marks, scats and koala sightings. The brown stringybark was used more in areas where there were no grey gums, brown stringybark use is documented through scratch marks and scats below the trees. What I am saying here, is that it is likely that the koala habitat on the proposed site is even more important to our local koalas than is recognised in the EIS.


* The EIS states that the swamp mahoganies on site (another primary koala tree) will be protected, but swamp mahoganies on their own are not an adequate food source for koalas, it is well documented that koalas need a variety of food trees, and they regularly go between different species to get their nutrients and keep their gut healthy. These particular swamp mahoganies are in close enough proximity to the trees at the proposed site, that it would be very reasonable to expect koalas in the area to be traveling between the bloodwood, grey gum, smooth barked apple trees, across to the swamp mahoganies and the supplementary trees of the swamp. This site has the benefit of multiple species of primary and secondary food use in close proximity, very important habitat that could directly impact koala ranges

*Endangered koalas exist in the area! The EIS survey found a probable koala scat, and our Hills-Hornsby Rural Koala Project maps show koala presence in the surrounding areas of the proposed site. Koalas are an endangered species and there is good evidence (presence, scat and habitat) to suggest that koalas are on this site or that this site is part of their range.

*Finally, I want to reiterate that the proposed dam is very troubling. The creeks are the life of the ecosystems in this area – ecosystems which include wombats, platypus, yellow bellied gliders and many vulnerable species. Water must not be stopped from flowing into them


*Offset Credits questions:
– why is Yellow Bloodwood only worth 286 credits when Red Bloodwood and Greygum are 536? Yellow Bloodwood is a high use koala food tree.
-Why are smooth barked apple and peppermint only 182? The importance of the smooth barked apple for koala habitat is mentioned above.
-Why are koalas not given an offset credit number on the EIS?


*Probable future sand mining (refer to figure 11 on EIS DLALC Landholdings)- Another concern is fear for how much the sand mining may extend in future as well, as the entire area below is rich in biodiversity and important habitat for endangered and threatened species.

The entire area along the Deerubbin (Hawkesbury) up to Canoelands, Maroota and beyond is rich in Dharug history. The proposed site has culturally significant sites according to the EIS. It is likely that the broader area in red below has far more.




*Final point - ENDANGERED, ICONIC Australian species exist on this site! The site impacts the waterways. These things cannot be replaced by an offset. The flora and fauna of this region are largely overlooked and highly biodiverse.
Can we find a way to work together to find a way that the owners of the proposed site can still make money, but that we keep safe our incredibly important biodiverse areas?

Thank you for taking the time to read this submission.
With trust and hope,
Lilly Schwartz
On behalf of Hills-Hornsby Rural Koala Project

Cattai Hills Environment Network CHEN is the peak community voice for the environment in Little Cattai catchment, CHEN laments that the rights of nature are not part of the planning process.

CHEN opposes this development because:

.platypus, koala, sugar glider are but a few of the species found in the area, the significant wetland Jackson Swamp will be adversely impacted

-Brewongle Environmental Education Centre will be adversely impacted

.120 heavy vehicle movements per day and 60 on Saturday add cumulatively to the impact on both Wiseman’s Ferry Rd and Old Northern Rd of trucks on those roads.

. The water requirements for the quarry will be supplied by bore water and surface water. A 12,000 square metre dam with a 10 metre high embankment will be constructed and retain water for use in the quarry. Both the bore water consumption and retention of water in the dam will effect the downstream water flow and impact the important down stream wetland (Jacksons Swamp).

. The presence of platypus have recently been confirmed through DNA studies in Cattai and Little Cattai Creeks. There may be platypus in the Jacksons Swamp Catchment that would be adversely affected by water removal from the catchment.

. Koalas are not listed in the threatened species list despite a probable scat being found and a range of koala food trees including swamp mahogany occurring on the site. Koalas have been identified in the surrounding areas.

. It is noted that 24 aboriginal archaeological and 2 potential aboriginal sites have been found and that they will be protected. Have the Darug groups been notified about these sites?

. Details of the land to be conserved under the biodiversity stewardship are not clear and the full impact of the land to be extracted has not been fully evaluated in terms of animal species present and associated impacts.

. It is noted in figure 11 that DLALC owned 1100 ha to the west of the extraction site which is the subject of this DA. This 1100ha is described as potentially extractable land and that this land is a potential source of sand for the future to be used when other reserves are exhausted. It seems from this that over time the whole of the Jacksons Swamp Catchment will become a quarry site of approximately 1100ha. This in itself is reason to say enough is enough no more quarry approvals in this area.

. The consultation process seems to have missed a number of people and groups. What was the process used to identify stakeholders?

.Animals such as the yellow bellied glider which is not listed in the EIS but is found widely through out the Maroota area is perhaps and indication that’s the species list is not extensive enough.

-does this contravene the COP26 Forest Agreement that Australia signed in November 2021

-does this contravene the Kunming Convention that Australia signed as part of COP15 UN Biodiversity conference

we welcome the right of Deerubbin LALC to seek employment opportunity on this land but would like to see eco tourism with platypus and koala as the way the land is developed https://deerubbin.org.au/business-enterprise-investment/

sand for Sydney can be extracted through other less impactful ways

23.3.22

Submission concerning application SSD-10410 Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction Project

I have lived and owned land in the Maroota area for the last 40 years and during that time I have become aware of the immense biodiversity of the bushland in the Maroota region. There was a huge push for Maroota Forest to become a National Park and as a result of that process there were many studies done on the extraordinary biodiversity of the area. Because of this awareness the value of the Maroota lands has been a dominating theme with many conservation organisations. The sand mining has always been controversial and in particular, the current friable sand mining proposal indicates what a huge and long term impact sand mining will have in the area over the coming decades.

Figure 11 shows that DLALC owns 1100 ha to the west of the extraction site which is the subject of this DA. This 1100ha is described as potentially extractable land and that this land is a potential source of sand for the future to be used when other reserves are exhausted. It seems from this that over time the whole of the Jacksons Swamp Catchment will become a quarry site of approximately 1100ha. Is this stage one of a much larger development? If so, what consideration is being given to cumulative impact?

The downstream impacts of water removal from the catchment has not been addressed. The water requirements for the quarry will be large and as noted in the EIS, supplied by bore water and surface water. A 12,000 square metre dam with a 10 metre high embankment will be constructed and retain water for use in the quarry. In drier years, these water systems are hugely important for the maintenance of biodiversity. What studies have been done to reveal the impact of withdrawing and retaining water from this catchment? Again, this is a cumulative impact additional to the other quarry sites in the area.

The presence of platypus have recently been confirmed through DNA studies in Cattai and Little Cattai Creeks. There may be platypus in the Jacksons Swamp Catchment that would be adversely affected by water removal from the catchment.

Koalas are not listed in the threatened species list (they should be listed as endangered) despite a probable scat being found and a range of koala food trees including swamp mahogany occurring on the site. Koalas have been identified in the surrounding areas.

nimals such as the yellow bellied glider which is not listed in the EIS but is found widely throughout the Maroota area is perhaps and indication that’s the species list is not extensive enough.



Offset - Details of the land to be conserved under the biodiversity stewardship are not clear and the full impact of the land to be extracted has not been fully evaluated in terms of animal species present and associated impacts. Shouldn’t the offset surveys be completed and visible to the public at the same time as the development proposal?


It is noted that 24 aboriginal archaeological sites and 2 potential aboriginal sites have been found and that they will be protected. I’m not aware of Darug groups having been notified about these sites. Have any Darug groups been contacted regarding this proposal?

The consultation process seems to have missed a number of people and groups. What was the process used to identify stakeholders?

Thank you for considering this submission

Kind Regards,

Pat Schwartz

I firmly object to this project for a number of reasons addressed in detail in my attachment letter. Firstly, as a noted receiver on adverse noise impact in the proposal we will be impacted to increase the level of noise we can already hear from PF Formation, as the current landscape ridges that provide a buffer for the current noise and silica dust particles will be those that the applicant plans to extract from. It will also significantly reduce the value of our property. There was a failure to inform the community, include those, like us, that are directly impacted and noted - therefore not providing a fair opportunity for residence to address concerns. The Traffic Report is grossly misleading and only provides a very minimal amount of the impacted roads the truck travel. In the last year only, I am aware of 3 trucks and trailers have overturned on these roads and pilling their loads - one in Pitt Town enroute to Maroota mines, one on Wisemans Ferry Road near the Stonehouse Cafe, Maroota, and one on Old Northern Road in Forest Glen!! Adding an additional 240 journeys on these roads is dangerous, especially seeing that number of other Maroota Sand Mining projects I see are requesting to expand, or extend, or increase their permissible number of trucks - Surely, these can sufficiently provide sand for the area without adding the biggest yet mine in close proximity to residential homes. I should add that my husband is a builder in Sydney and there is a shortages of many materials due to covid etc.; however, there is certainly NOT a shortage of sand. It is untrue for the applicant to claim their mine is to address a sand shortage when there is not a shortage and the expansion of existing mines would address any future needs. The applicant does not intend to rehabilitate the land despite The Hills Council's DCP requirement, stating that they are not required to do so by the state government. This is pretty disgusting considering we're in a climate crisis to allow for the continual rape and disrespect of our native land - all the while residential homes nearby are require to regenerate the land. I'm quick disgusted that the applicant is an 'Aboriginal Council' and it's a poor reflection upon Aboriginal values to Country. This mine will encroach upon residents and be a stones through away. There are many OTHER ALTERNATIVE ridges that could be mined and expanded from existing mines that extend into the bushland wilderness, without mines that adversely impact upon residential home owners. It is completely unnecessary and inconsiderate, and The Hills Council should be doing more to protect residential rate payers. Please read my attachment letter, which will discuss my objection more clearly. I ABSOLUTELY OBJECT TO THIS ENORMOUS MINE, AND FOR IT TO BE IN SUCH CLOSE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL HOMES!!

Glenorie Maroota Bioregional Forum submission to SSD-10410 Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction Project

Glenorie Maroota Bioregional Forum is a group that formed to progress initiatives toward a sustainable future for Sydney’s North West. This forum has grown from a local lobby group primarily concerned with the conservation of the ex-Maroota State Forest, to a forum with a broader focus on environmental, cultural and social issues in the Glenorie-Maroota area.



Please find below the following comments regarding the DA SSD-10410.



A significant increase to 120 heavy vehicle movements per day and 60 on Saturday - impact on both Wiseman’s Ferry Rd and Old Northern Rd and the local community that travel on these roads.

The water requirements for the quarry will be supplied by bore water and surface water. A 12,000 square metre dam with a 10 metre high embankment will be constructed and retain water for use in the quarry. Both the bore water consumption and retention of water in the dam will affect the downstream water flow and impact the important downstream wetland (Jacksons Swamp). A greater understanding of the long and short term impacts of this strategy, how they will be monitored and reported to the community and who will take action if Jackson’s Swamp is negatively impacted is required. How Jackson’s Swamp will be impacted and how those impacts will be mitigated and reported on is critical to decision making

Platypus exist in the area. There may be platypus in the Jacksons Swamp Catchment that would be adversely affected by water removal from the catchment. Surveys for this species are required and a management strategy developed to cover for the scenario where they are discovered during the works

Koalas are not listed in the threatened species list (they are endangered) despite a probable scat being found and a range of koala food trees including swamp mahogany occurring on the site, as well as Hills-Hornsby Rural Koala Project (HHRKP) maps showing koala presence in the surrounding areas. This lack of awareness of local records and apparent lack of consultation with the local koala conservation group, HHRKP is concerning. Additional work is required to assess the presence of Koalas in the locality and how the potential impacts on their habitat will be mitigated.

It is noted that 24 aboriginal archaeological and 2 potential aboriginal sites have been found and that they will be protected. Have the Darug groups been notified about these sites?

Details of the land to be conserved under the biodiversity stewardship are not clear and the full impact of the land to be extracted has not been fully evaluated in terms of animal species present and associated impacts.

It is noted in figure 11 that DLALC owned 1100 ha to the west of the extraction site which is the subject of this DA. This 1100ha is described as potentially extractable land and that this land is a potential source of sand for the future to be used when other reserves are exhausted. It seems from this that over time the whole of the Jacksons Swamp Catchment will become a quarry site of approximately 1100ha. This in itself is reason to say enough is enough no more quarry approvals in this area. The cumulative impacts urgently need to be considered and made clear, if this is stage one of a much larger development it should be treated as such.

The consultation process seems to have missed a number of people and groups. What was the process used to identify stakeholders? How will this be addressed prior to a decision being made on this application?

Animals such as the yellow bellied glider which is not listed in the EIS but is found widely throughout the Maroota area (and has been known in the area for over 20 years) is an indication that the species list is not extensive enough and there has been a failure to consider other surveys in the area that could inform the ecological assessment. The ecological assessment needs to be urgently updated with input from the local community and other studies from the local area that reveal a greater number of significant species.



Yours faithfully



Carolyn Hall,



Chair person

Glenorie Maroota Bioregional Forum

To whom it may concern,
As a resident within 1km of the proposed mine. I`m basing my objection to the mine in 3 parts. Social, Environmental and Traffic
1. Social & Economic Impacts, reference the submission prepared by Design Collaborative July 2021 on behalf of the applicant Deerunbbin Land Council, the applicant.
pg. 82 quote, The project will have a will have the most adverse impact on the immediate vicinity, being occupiers and landowners within 1km of the project site. Potential adverse impacts to the residents within close proximity includes impacts on there way of life, such as noise, vibration and dust. Other potential impacts such such as economic , heritage and biodiversity have a potential adverse impact on a much boarder community being being aboriginal groups, residents and workers in the LGA. The highest risk lies in operational noise and biodiversity. Along with the removal of 50 ha of native bushland will have unavoidable disturbance to flora and fauna
The has been no community engagement as outlined in section 5.2 of the report , reference email dated 17th April 2020 from Collin Phillips Team leader Energy and Resource assessment to delay community engagement committed due to COVID 19. The CCC would be established by way of a consent condition. There are approximately 61 landholder's directly impacted by the proposed mine as such the mine approval process should be placed on stop the clock provision until such time the community has been fully informed of the project and the implications of the project and the possibility of compulsory land acquisition
2 Environmental, The EIS clearly demonstrates the adverse impacts on sensitives wetlands to the North, West and South of the proposed mine. Native wildlife that currently occupies the site will be devastated by the clearing of the mine , these species include Snake, southern quolls, possum's, owls and parrots.
By way of biodiversity offsets this will protect these species however the area has not been identified .Proposed remediation of the site has a estimated allowance of $1.4mil equivalent to $3.00 per sqm which is clearly inadequate.
3 Traffic Generation, notwithstanding the traffic study, facts remain that 120 truck movement of local roads will have a material impact to local road users, un signalized intersections at Patricia Fay Drive and the intersection at Wisemans ferry Rd and Old Northern Rd poses a significant risk to life safety.

The Glenorie Progress Association objects to the project scale and impact on the environment:
Our view is that this project should not go ahead. We are against the destruction of the natural environment that could never be remediated. The additional truck traffic on Old Northern Road, already congested, is unacceptable. Already, more people are using ONR. So the added truck traffic will cause additional damage to the road and increase the delays and disruptions that road repair and ‘traffic safety management’ incurs. Of course, ONR is too narrow, does not include a continuous cycle track, has power poles and power wires and trees too close to the road edge. The new and existing truck traffic is/will be driven with an objective of speedy delivery and return-to-refill and as such constitutes a constant safety risk to all other traffic. While this area appears to be ‘rural’ there are many houses fronting ONR in addition to the various villages. As such, ONR is really a road through a residential area which is not amenable to an industrial truck traffic flow.
Our full reasons for the objection are outlined in the attached document.

To Whom it may concern,

firstly I would like to state I am a current landowner of property directly adjoining this project. I would like to state at no time has any person, company nor organisation mad any contact nor inform me of such a large scale project which will impact on my property, family, animals and endangered fauna and wildlife to which inhabits my property. I think this in its self is a major concern and any should be investigated to ensure the correct procedures have taken place.

Objection number One. I own and reside in a rural property directly adjoining the proposed Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction project. First and for most I would like to object to this project on the grounds that the areas to which this project will take place is land covered with Native Vegetation including but not limited too Melaleuca deanei, Tetratheca glandulosa,Darwinia fascicularis and Kunzel rupestris all identified within this project and listed as threatened Critically Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC).

Objection number 2. This project on the grounds to which the proposed project will be contravene Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 as some but not limited to species indentified hereafter are located in the Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction Project area;
Koala
Yellow Bellied Glider
Spotted Tailed Quoll
Eastern Free tail Bat
Common planigale
Platypus
White-footed Dunnart
Regent Honeyeater
Glossy Black Cockatoo
Swift Parrot
Powerful Owl
Masked Owl
Sooty Owl
Freckled Duck
Black Bittern
to name some but not all of the species located with in this land holding.

Objection number 3. The Maroota Sandstone Extraction Project has indicated using groundwater in extreme volumes for onsite application including installation of a large Dam 12000 square metre. This ground water usage will affect current landowners access to ground water currently used for farming, various animals and local wildlife.

Objection number 4. The Maroota Sandstone Extraction Project bore water and retentions water use in the quarry will impact on the Associated Wetlands preserved under the current preservations and conservation acts. These Wetlands include but are not limited to Wetlands Number 88 and Jacksons Swamp area.

Objection number 5. The Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction Project has indicated an extra 120 heavy truck movements Monday to Friday with 60 heavy truck movements Saturday. This is a concern to the current road structure being mostly single lane, various gradient, various road base material road with extremely limited over taking capacity. The road is currently damaged due to the recent March 2022 flood impact. This flood indicated shut road use to only one road in and out of the area via Glenorie. over the past three years a number of accidents included heavy vehicles. I will also mention that all access roads have primary schools with 40km hour operation areas.

Objection Number 6. A number of Aboriginal archeological including potential sites have been found in the stated areas.

Objection Number 7. Dust mitigation strategy. The site due to its overwhelming size will encounter dust from excavation equipment, transfer and loading process. This site is also open to the south and southwest areas which will also distribute dust to neighbouring properties. The neighbouring properties rely on tank water collected from rooftop collection process. The likelihood of dust polluting such water source relied on is high. Bearing in mind the area does not have access to city water.

Objection Number 8. The Maroota Sandstone Extraction Project if approved will land lock and cease the movement of current proected and threatened species migrating and foraging along the native areas of Maroota. This should be looked at as a major loss to the Maroota and surrounding areas.

I am indicating I was only notified by local community the Maroota Friable Sandstone Extraction Project was in for submission stage one day ago. This gave me three days to submitted an objection which I find extremely poor to say the least. This are has so much critical habitat and endangered species it is so disturbing of the lack of community knowledge of such a project.

Kind regards