Hanson have lodged their “Response To Submissions” (RTS) with the Department of Planning and Environment (DoPE)

This was posted on 11th October, but did not appear to get mailed out so it is being posted again. Some updates have been added at the end.


On 9th October we received the following email from DoPE.

We have received the Response to Submissions report for the Brandy Hill Expansion Project, and it can be viewed on our website at http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=5899

The Department will now send the RTS to agencies and Council for comment, and commence its assessment of the application.

Upon completion of our assessment, the application will be referred to the Independent Planning Commission (IPC) for determination. At this time, there will be further opportunity for members of the public to comment on the project, either in writing or by registering to speak at the public meeting.

Please contact me if you have any further questions, or would like to discuss.

Kind regards,

Genevieve Seed
Senior Planning Officer

Resource Assessments
320 Pitt Street | GPO Box 39 | Sydney NSW 2001
T 02 9274 6489

We have not had time to fully read and understand the RTS which can be accessed from the link above. There are 5 RTS documents. The last one is the main document. It is clear that Hanson have not listened to the community’s submissions as they have not altered their proposal in any way as a result of the submissions. During the past 4 years the community representatives on the CCC have used every opportunity at meetings to express community views and concerns.  The only changes they have offered are all to meet rules and regulations regarding noise, dust traffic etc.

Our primary concern about 24/7 has not been addressed. Hanson still ask for around the clock dispatch and secondary crushing.

Safety and amenity along Brandy Hill Drive has not been addressed with any offer to help build a footpath or bus stop bays.

No additional voluntary contributions are offered for roads, intersections or for road haulage trough other council areas eg Maitland City Council (MCC). (Just as we in PSC would expect Martins Creek quarry would to contribute to the maintenance of roads used through MCC and PSC areas).

You are invited to draw your own conclusions.

Please send us your comments about the RTS via our website, and we will post them for all to see.

BHSAG has send a letter to DoPE expressing our huge disappointment in the RTS and implore the department to recommend changes to the consent, when it is handed to the IPC.

We have also spoken with Councillor LeMottee and PSC staff, who are equally disappointed in the RTS, and have offered to collaborate with PSC to align our positions.

The DoPE expects responses from the other agencies by the end of October, and BHSAG expects to provide more information in a similar timeframe.


Margarete & Neil

on behalf of BHSAG

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s