Category Archives: News and updates

October 2016 Update

Posted on by
Reply

In this post:

  1. BHSA Committee Update
  2. Hanson’s Brandy Hill Quarry Expansion Status
  3. Daracon’s Martins Creek Quarry Expansion Status
  4. Next Steps

1 BHSA Committee Update

Though it has been 12 months since we have posted an update, the BHSA committee is still operating. However, James Hart is moving and has had to cease his activity on the committee, leaving just the Ritchies and Fishers plus Bob Adams and Peter Rees on the committee. If anyone else would like to join the committee for the important next phase, then please contact us.

The lack of recent posts is because no further CCC meetings have occurred while Hanson has been preparing their full EIS. The committee members have also needed a break from the stress and responsibilities of this important community issue.

We have not been completely idle! The council mergers announced by the NSW government in February or early March, which included PSC/Newcastle merger, triggered phone and email contact with NSW Planning. We wanted to make NSW Planning aware of BHSA’s role on the CCC, the size of the Brandy Hill community on the main haul route, our stance on the expansion (based on the results of our community surveys), and our concern over the impacts of the NSW government’s planned council mergers. While the topics raised in those discussions will be well known to Hanson, we felt that revealing the detail to Hanson before they submit their EIS would be counter-productive to our cause, so it was not posted on our website.

The proposed PSC/ Newcastle council merger remains a great concern. We expected that it would take PSC council’s attention away from them developing plans and costings for the concessions we have been asking for at the CCC. Those actions are essential prerequisites for them to negotiate with Hanson on any Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) that would cover road maintenance and the other concessions BHSA has been asking for to alleviate/mitigate community concerns over the expansion. The feedback from NSW planning was encouraging at the time, but after we joined a recent MCQAG delegation which met with PSC mayor and senior staff, our worst concerns have played out. PSC has done nothing on the Brandy Hill expansion, let alone considered the potential cumulative impacts of both quarry expansions!.

Committee members have also attended many Martins Creek Quarry Action Group (MCQAG) committee meetings. More on that matter in section 3.

Our dormant period is ending, as we understand that Hanson are close to finalising their EIS, and Daracon’s EIS went on public exhibit last week. Refer to the following sections 2, 3 and 4 for more details.

2 Hanson’s Brandy Hill Quarry Expansion Status

On the NSW Planning website:
http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=5899
this project is still at stage 2  “Proponent Prepares DA and EIS”, of the 7 stage process.

On 11th October Hanson contacted CCC attendees with the following:

“Hanson are finalising the EIS based on feedback from the Department of Planning and Environment and wish to include the agenda of the CCC meetings in the consultation section of the EIS. This will include the names of CCC members who attended the meetings and will be made public during the public exhibition period of the EIS. It is not proposed to include the minutes of the meetings.

Could you please advise via return email if you approve the inclusion of the agenda in the EIS.”

We replied with our consent, but have also asked why not include all the minutes as well, as from our perspective the minutes would clearly show the degree of actual consultation and where Hanson have and have not changed their proposal based on the community delegates feedback and requests.

From the above, we conclude that Hanson must be close to submitting their EIS. However, we also understand that after Hanson lodge their EIS, NSW planning will assess it for adequacy against the requirements in the Director Generals’ Requirements (DGRs) as stage 3. Then, as in the case of Daracon’s initial EIS, NSW planning may ask for additional detail, which would further delay the EIS going on public exhibit, which is stage 4 of the planning process.

A recent discovery of major concern to BHSA and MCQAG, is that the DGRs for both quarry expansions were changed without notifying the community groups, and probably not the councils, RMS etc. The new versions are dated 4th August 2016 for Martins Creek, and 5th July 2015 for Brandy Hill. The superseded versions have been removed from NSW planning’s website making it difficult to identify the actual changes, but it seems that additional requirements added after community feedback to the initial versions mainly around the cumulative impact of two quarry expansions, has been watered down! We have written to NSW planning on this matter and are waiting a reply.

3 Daracon’s Martins Creek Quarry Expansion Status

After NSW planning rejected Daracon’s EIS in July because of many deficiencies, a revised EIS was accepted by NSW planning and was put on public exhibit on 13th Oct. Submissions will be accepted up to 24th Nov. The DGRs for that project were revised on 4th August as noted above, so NSW Planning changed the goal posts. Why? We have asked for an explanation but have not yet received an explanation!

The Martins Creek Quarry EIS includes nothing on the potential cumulative impact of traffic, so we are very surprised and concerned that NSW planning, in putting the EIS on public exhibit, has deemed that the EIS meets the DGRs!

We are particularly concerned about the cumulative impact of the quarry truck movements of this expansion in conjunction with the Brandy Hill quarry expansion. While Daracon estimate that 25% of their annual tonnage will go via Brandy Hill Drive, at times, depending on contracts, that can ALL go along Brandy Hill drive, as it did for the Hexham rail siding project. The EIS states that the peak frequency of Daracon’s truck deliveries is 40 per hour. We expect Hanson’s figures will be similar. Add a similar number of unladen trucks going to each quarry and the peak total could be 160 truck movements per hour! If the additional trucks alone is not sufficient to have you concerned, perhaps the extended operating hours that Daracon want so that they can service the Sydney market, in conjunction with Hanson wanting a 24/7 permit for the same reason, will have you hopping mad!

The Martins Creek EIS can be viewed here: http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=6612
The first EIS document is an overview (~190 pages), with more detail in the many further documents. NSW planning are holding a community meeting at the Paterson School Of Arts Hall, at 6:30pm on 2nd November.

MCQAG have prepared the following leaflet that will be letter box dropped in all the affected areas and along haul routes in the coming days.
mcqag-community-letter_eis-exhibition-public-meeting_20161019

Your attendance at the Paterson meeting will show NSW Planning something of the level of concern for that project, but your best course of action to influence NSW Planning to either reduce the annual extraction tonnage, limit the proportion going via road with the balance going via rail, and/or limit the operating hours so that our sleeping hours are not disturbed, or any other matter concerning you, is to make a personal submission. It is easy via the NSW Planning website. That is also NSW Planning’s preferred method. Use the link above and scroll down. This will be a practice for when the Brandy Hill Quarry EIS goes on public exhibit.

4 Next Steps

Brandy Hill Quarry Expansion:

  • Draft what you want to say to NSW Planning for when the time comes to make your submission. Wait for the EIS to go on public exhibit. We expect NSW Planning will hold a public meeting during the exhibition period. Then finalise and send in your submission before the closing date (yet to be set).
  • Contact us if you can assist the BHSA committee. We need your help!

Martins Creek Quarry Expansion:

  • Read the EIS overview and relevant other documents on NSW planning website (above), and attend the Paterson meeting at 6:30pm on 2nd November.
  • Draft your submission ASAP, polish it up and send it to NSW planning before 24th November. Submissions are your primary and best means to influence NSW planning to reject, limit or change the proposal (eg restrict operating hours or maximum truck movements per hour), and/or apply conditions such as a VPA for roads, footpaths, sound attenuation, intersections, bus stops or other infrastructure or offsets that you want.

That’s all for now from the BHSA committee.

October 2015 Update

Posted on by
Reply

This update covers a few topics:

  • CCC matters
  • Progress on the survey about a path along Brandy Hill Drive
  • The impact of the Martins Creek quarry
  • Current Gravel Projects

CCC

Minutes of the May meeting were finalised and will be posted shortly on our website. The significant items included:

  • A draft Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) had been provided to CCC members on a confidential basis, seeking community feedback prior to it being finalised. A number of items were challenged, and these were to be fully documented by BHSA.
  • The need for a pathway along Brandy Hill Drive was discussed, but it was clear that the Port Stephens Council representatives were not taking the idea seriously, and were also not considering that Hanson were prepared to contribute funding for it.
  •  HANSON’s contribution of free and discounted gravel for residents to repair driveways after the April Super Storm was gratefully appreciated. (Note that the Daracon Martins Creek quarry provided no community assistance after that storm).

The September CCC was a significant milestone. The minutes will not be posted until they are approved at the next meeting, currently set for 26th November. The highlights were:

  • Councillors Paul LeMottee and Geoff Dingle, and John Maretich from PSC attended for the first time. The councillors fully supported the resident’s plea for a pathway. Hanson supported the need for a path and confirmed their willingness to negotiate on the funding of the safety improvements and pathway. Though John Maretich expressed concerns about the cost and practicality of building a pathway, PSC was asked to progress the engineering and cost assessments for input to subsequent negotiations. The previous council representative no longer works for the council.
  • BHSA advised that a survey was being conducted to get wider community feedback on the prospect of a pathway. Early responses were all strongly in favour of a pathway.
  • The feedback BHSA had provided on the draft TIA, had been forwarded to the consultant responsible, and most of the points had resulted in positive changes to the final TIA. Whilst not every suggestion had been taken up in full, it was a significant improvement, including recognition that the roadway is unsuitable for pedestrians. BHSA advised that we will challenge some aspects of the TIA when it is on public exhibition, as it paints an overly “rose coloured glasses” view of the suitability of the roads at present, and their assessment of the cumulative impact with the Martins Creek quarry grossly understated the number of trucks coming from there.
  • Hanson advised that the noise impact report had been prepared, and that their full EIS had now been presented to the department of planning (DOP) for an “adequacy check”. Hanson agreed to provide the CC members with a copy of the noise impact report.
    EIS is nearing the Public Exhibition phase, and the timing will depend on what if any additional documentation or changes the DOP requests from Hanson.

PATHWAY SURVEY

A letterbox drop and website post of the survey has resulted in about 50 responses at last count. Thanks to all the people who took the time. Almost all respondents strongly support the need for a pathway. A full analysis of the responses to each question, and a précis of the comments will be posted when time permits. If you have not yet returned your survey, please do by mid November.

Suffice to say that the feedback has strongly supported our committee’s push for infrastructure to improve safety along the main quarry haul route.

MARTINS CREEK QUARRY

We often have a representative at the MCQAG committee meetings and also at the MCQ CCC meetings. The Paterson community is very much opposed to Daracon operating that quarry at considerably higher levels of truck traffic than State Rail ever did, as it is having a significantly damaging effect on local businesses, area roads and residential amenity. Dungog council has taken legal action against Daracon for breaching the extraction licence they believe applies. Daracon pays no levy for road maintenance to any of the three council areas crossed by its haulage routes!

Daracon is hoping to legitimise its operations which are already approaching 1.5mtpa by submitting an EIS for that level of operation. The significant aspect for Brandy Hill is that they estimate that on average, 25% of their trucks will use the Butterwick road, Clarencetown Road, Brandy Hill Drive and Seaham Road route toward Raymond Terrace. Obviously, depending on the major contract destinations, the proportion using this route will vary but the peaks will almost double the trucks using Brandy Hill drive.

Daracon have not yet prepared their TIA, so we are yet to see their assessment of the cumulative impact of the two quarries.

CURRENT GRAVEL PROJECTS 

There are major infrastructure projects in the Williamtown area, including the airport upgrade. The three local quarries are all providing gravel for these projects, so the number of trucks using the route to Raymond Terrace  will be noticeably higher than usual. This is a taste of what the norm is likely to be if the quarry licences are increased, and the peaks will be even greater!

 

September Update and Footpath Survey

Posted on by
Reply

A few months have passed since our last website post but the Brandy Hill and Seaham Action committee has continued its work despite the April super storm, employers, surgery and holidays all needing attention.

A CCC meeting will be held on Thursday 24th Sept so we will have more to report after that on where Hanson’s submission is up to.

This week, a BHSAction survey form is being distributed to Brandy Hill residents with an update on the committee’s position on the proposed quarry expansion. We encourage you to read the information, and look for the survey form in your letterbox. Alternatively, print the form, complete it and return it to an address on the form.

2015 Survey

View from a Truck

Posted on by
1

Don’t let it be said that my investigation into the quarry expansion is half-hearted. On Wednesday 21st May, I accepted an invitation to spend a day on the road with Brian, one of the senior drivers from the Hanson quarry fleet. The intention was to gain a better understanding of how a truck “behaves” on the road and what options a driver has to minimise noise, and to alert the driver to the concerns of the resident walkers and bike riders.

Brian took a fully laden truck and dog to a concrete batching plant at Belmont. IMG_0589We drove to Newcastle via Industrial Drive and Stewart Avenue, then along City Road, through Charlestown and down through Redhead to the plant. I saw firsthand how ridiculously narrow some of these major roads are. Brian pointed out some pinch-points on curves where the gutter took up some of the road width forcing wider vehicles to hug the centre line. I certainly have a lot of respect for the skill required to keep a truck within its lane. Brian was constantly on the lookout in every direction for other traffic, pedestrians and cyclists and while we all do that when driving, it is quite something else when you are carrying 32 tonnes with a trailer!

I was told that one fully laden truck is the equivalent of 20 small cars, it has 18 forward gears and while compression braking is mandatory on all trucks quite often it is not necessary to use. A truck driving down Brandy Hill Drive, for example, would rarely need to use engine braking.

Hanson will be taking delivery of a new fleet of trucks in about 4 months. These trucks will have quieter engines and they have rubber pads separating the tray and the chassis to reduce the rattling sound when they are empty. There are other design changes like rounded sides. Rubber mountings on the tail gate also add to the reduction in noise levels WE HOPE.

In conclusion; I did not spend a day on a truck for my amusement. It was a fact-finding exercise. I observed a very competent driver who drove to the rules and conditions. That is not to say that all drivers and haulage companies have the same high standards, and we have seen some of those driving on our roads. But, it became obvious that the road conditions in many areas are woeful and we all need to be reminded to drive to the conditions and that we all have a part to play in our own road safety.

 

Brandy Hill Drive was constructed, as with most jobs Councils do, with the funds that developers and governments are prepared to contribute. It is more obvious now that there is so much more truck and car traffic, that it is quite inadequate. Brian and other quarry employees have wondered why no pathway exists along Brandy Hill Drive and Seaham Road. They agree with residents that bus stops along Brandy Hill Drive are substandard as there are only two where buses can totally pull off the road, one being at the top of Sophia Jane Drive and one nearly opposite Elouera Close. The condition of the roads will always be a major factor in the noise that trucks make, no matter how new they are. The course grade of blue metal that Council currently uses always generates more road noise.

 

While trucks are part of our society and that will never change, we have to demand the infrastructure that allows us to access our area in safety and for us to retain a semblance of the peaceful environment we chose to live in.

 

 

Compression Braking Road Signs

Posted on by
Reply

Just a short message to give an update on a small but significant issue that seemed to be getting nowhere. That is the installation of new road signs indicating that truck drivers travelling along Brandy Hill Drive have a responsibility to local residents to keep the truck noise to a minimum.
PSC have made it quite clear for a number of years now that the signs they put up many years ago, after constant complaints by residents, would have to do even though they were installed in the wrong positions.
Several months ago Hanson quarry offered to foot the cost of the signs and installation but it was only this week that all parties met and determined where the signs should be positioned. We can only hope that all drivers, be they from quarries, chicken businesses, grain etc will notice them and pay attention.

Thank you to Michael Benic, manager BH Quarry for funding this initiative, Brian, senior driver in the Hanson fleet for his advice as to the placement of the signs and to Marc Goodall from Council for his input on Wednesday.

Councillor involvement at latest quarry meeting

Posted on by
Reply

It has been quite difficult to get Port Stephens Council engagement on issues related to the Brandy Hill Quarry. On behalf of the Brandy Hill / Seaham Action Group I recently invited two Councillors, who had responded regarding these issues, and the quarry manager, to meet with me to ensure our concerns are known.

The meeting took place on March 18 at the quarry, and present were Michael Benic (manager, Brandy Hill quarry), Peter Kafer (West Ward Councillor), Geoff Dingle (East Ward Councillor), and myself. Thank you to both Councillors for attending and reporting these issues back to Council.

Points discussed included:

  • Compression braking signs. The present ones are too small and not placed in the most appropriate positions. Hanson have offered to pay for proper signs, much larger and in keeping with usual Council/RMS regulations. Hanson will forward advice passed on from their drivers as to best placement and then it is up to Council to install.
  • Speed limits on Brandy Hill Drive. These were queried by the manager and then discussed. Councillors stated that this option was often opposed by politicians as it was not popular with residents. What are your thoughts on this? Are you prepared to lower your own speed?
  • Speed limit along Clarence Town Road. Manager discussed problems with speed limit of 100 kph along Clarence Town Road at the entry/exit to the quarry. Drivers report that it takes a fully laden truck 20 seconds to cross Clarence Town Road but it only takes 7 seconds from when a car comes over the crest from the direction of Seaham, to the intersection. One of the drivers said that it ‘scares the hell out of him’ every time he has to cross that road. RMS and Council can’t see anything wrong with that intersection as it is now. They have spent ‘black spot’ grant on changes to the intersection. Have they thereby made it even more of a black spot?
  • Road noise issue. The road noise increases with the size of the gravel used. This comes as no surprise to most of us. Finer gravel obviously costs more and Council rarely uses it, according to the Councillors. Potholes and uneven surfaces also contribute to noise-based stress among residents.

I mentioned to Councillors that there are often terms used in discussions that most residents do not fully understand and asked for clarification.

One such term is “voluntary planning agreement”. These can be applied to development licences and are one of the potential outcomes of the Community Consultative Committee. The agreement is between the developer (Hanson) and the consent authority (eg. State Planning). Some of the potential topics include road maintenance, footpaths and other community infrastructures, hours of operation and truck movement restrictions.

While these issues have been on the agenda for a while now we have had no way to ensure that Council is listening. I hope Councillors Kafer and Dingle can get some results so that we start moving forward on some of these minor issues.

– Margarete

Formation of the Community Consultative Committee (CCC) and other matters

Posted on by
1

In today’s newsletter: news about the Quarry Consultative Committee, an update on our resident survey, and some notes about council representation.

Brandy Hill Quarry Community Consultative Committee (BHQCCC)

The BHQCCC has been chosen.

Community representatives are Neil Ritchie, Margarete Ritchie, Robert Adams, Les Fisher and James Hart.

Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd representatives are Tracey Marks, Kathy Lloyd,  Michael Benic and Scott Tipping.

A council representative and independent chairperson are yet to be appointed.

The first meeting for the committee was held on the 18th December, attended by the above plus the consultant Hanson has engaged to prepare the EIS for the quarry expansion. The agenda outlined the purpose, membership and operating guidelines for mining project consultative committees, current quarry operations, environmental monitoring and the status of additional monitoring required for the expansion EIS. The recent installation of a PM10 dust monitor will be of special interest to some readers. The minutes will be posted on our website when they become available in the New Year.

The BHQCCC is intended to continue functioning for the life of the quarry. In other words, we will not have to wait for Council to pass on information to the community; it will come straight to the community via the committee. The EIS for the expansion will not be ready for exhibit until near the end of 2014 with resolution of any concerns not expected until mid-2015. This will be a long process, and is very different from how prior expansions and operations were approved and monitored. Regular meetings are expected only quarterly, but others can be arranged on a needs basis.  At the next CCC meeting the EIS consultant will explain to us the input that he is seeking from the community. We expect that our survey will be a part of that process.

Survey

It is crucial that we have a solid community response to this survey so that we can honestly represent this community. So far we have had over 68 responses. We are aiming for about 150 or more. We have had most responses from the Brandy Hill area with a smattering from Seaham, Eskdale and Nelsons Plains. This was expected as residents of Brandy Hill bear the brunt of most truck movements but Giles Road residents are impacted upon by blasting and dust. So, if you haven’t completed your survey yet, it is not too late. You can either complete it online via the link at the top of this page, or you can fill out a form and drop it off. The forms and collection box are still on the counter of the Seaham Shop and your survey can be left there. If you know of anyone who has not received the survey, there will be some copies left at the shop for completion.

So far 100% of respondents have indicated that the 7 day, 24 hour/day operation is the key objection and the road conditions and extra truck movements along our roads (Brandy Hill Drive in particular) are the next big issues. None of this comes as a surprise but we have to have this documented. Please talk to other locals about these issues and encourage friends and neighbours to do the survey.

Thank you to those residents who helped with the latest ‘letterbox drop’ and to the person who left a donation of $5 towards our ongoing costs. So far all expenses – for the printing, paper, and our website hosting – have come from the donations made by residents at our initial community meeting. That is one of the reasons I have been urging you to get others to sign up to the website so that our printing costs can be reduced.

Council matters

I will leave you with this comment made by a senior staff member of Port Stephens Council. I was having a discussion about the lack of suitable walking/cycle paths to link the Brandy Hill / Nelsons Plains / Eskdale communities with Seaham School, Seaham Park, Brandon Park, Seaham Church and the Shop as well as with other residents. I was told I was highly disillusioned if I thought that would ever happen. According to this council manager, “Brandy Hill is way down the list of importance [regarding infrastructure] due to the small number of residents” – and that we didn’t have a “destination” to warrant a path anyway.

If the Council worked on the basis of population only, then other villages such as Williamtown, Bobs Farm, Salt Ash, Wallalong and Woodville would be even further down the list than Brandy Hill and Seaham. Our population is bigger than all the others mentioned. Maybe ask our elected representatives about their thoughts on this when you next talk to them. And why aren’t they speaking up for our needs?

I would also like to inform our community of the outcomes of the Council meeting I attended on the 10th December where the Wallalong/Woodville development proposal was voted on, but I think I will leave a full account to the representatives of the VOWW group who spoke on the night. I will ask for a comment from them as I believe it will be more comprehensive. So look for that early in the New Year.

Final note

I would like to thank you all for your support over the past six months.

On behalf of the entire committee of the BH/Seaham Action Group I would like to wish you all a Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays and a new year full of good cheer.

Best Wishes,

Margarete

Quarry Inspection

Posted on by
Reply
1-DSC07446

Water truck suppressing dust

The committee, standing proudly in front of something very very intersting that happened to be going on in the background, or so we thought.

The committee, standing in front of a recently blasted rock face

The quarry face with a dump truck on the next level.

3-DSC07448

View of the quarry floor from the highest point, showing rows of graded large rocks

4-DSC07452

View from above the primary crusher

2-DSC07447

Panorama view showing the rehabilitation, quarry and stockpiles

DSC07455

The final settling pond, from where runoff is pumped to the main dam

The Brandy Hill and Seaham Action Group committee accepted an invitation to inspect the Brandy Hill quarry on the 20th October. We were quite impressed by a very well organised business which prided itself on its environmental practices.

As residents we may not always agree with management that all our concerns are addressed. Dust management and blasting vibration have been mentioned by Brandy Hill and Seaham residents, so the committee members were interested to find out how these concerns were actually addressed. A watering truck operates each day continuously throughout the site from 5am. If the wind is excessive the plant shuts down but watering continues to minimise dust naturally occurring on site. The water is sourced from dams on-site. In 30 years the dams have not run dry although they did come close about 2 years ago during a particularly dry spell.

Blasting is carried out about once a week between 11am and 1pm to minimise the effect on the community. The quarry no longer undertakes large blasts. Smaller blasting is considered less intrusive for local residents. Blasting results in rock drops of about 30,000 tonnes.

If the quarry expansion is approved it would have to comply with current regulations which are certainly more rigorous than those of 1983. The quarry manager, Michael Benich, has promised that all environmental complaints are taken seriously and investigated by both his company and the EPA.

Other Interesting Facts.

Older parts of the quarry site are already being rehabilitated with animal habitat being restored and plantings undertaken.

The existing operating licence for the quarry does not allow for any water run-off to flow directly into the creek. All water is diverted into the dam system for settling of sediment and for reuse for dust suppression. If water does find its way into the creek it must be reported to the EPA.

An invitation has been extended to the community to visit the quarry site. If you would like to take up this offer, leave a message with me and I will co-ordinate a time suitable for the majority of those interested.

Welcome to our new website

Posted on by
Reply

Welcome to the website of the Brandy Hill and Seaham community action group.

We are a non-profit group that exists to represent community concerns to our representatives in local, state and federal government.

We formed after learning of the possible expansion of Brandy Hill Quarry, news that was not communicated to residents by our council. We aim to represent local views on this expansion, and work together with the quarry management to reach a solution acceptable to both parties.

We are also affiliated with the Voice of Wallalong and Woodville action group, and we support them in their endeavours to oppose a proposed intense urban development at Wallalong.

This website is a place for you to add your voice to the debate. Please leave your comments on our general feedback page, and if you are a resident, please complete our new survey on community concerns regarding the proposed quarry expansion.

If you would like to receive email updates, please click the ‘follow’ button on the right hand side of the page and add your email address.