SSD 6395 - Bobs Farm Sand Mine Project

I have opposed the Bobs Farm sand mine since I heard about it recently.
The Bobs Farm area is a very quiet neighbourhood opposite (in the
main) mangrove wetlands that are in close proximity to Port Stephens
and Tilligerry Creek, an area of outstanding beauty. To consider a
sand mine in this area, to mine ancient sand dunes and to go 15 metres
under the current water table seems to be excessive. No matter what is
done after mining to rehabilitate the area, it would not make up for
the loss of species including the increasingly rarely sighted koala.
The NSW Government has recently stated that they wish to keep koalas
in the area and have invested quite a deal of money into conservation
and preservation and the though of 180 extra truck movements per day
on Nelson Bay Road is anathema to this. The children at the Bobs Farm
School will be subjected to this every day, including the threat of
silica dust and other pollution. As it is right next door to a planned
eco resort, I believe that this planned sand mine should not proceed.
Bobs Farm should be left as it is, with only proposals sympathetic to
its quiet nature being considered to go ahead. Please do not give
approval to mine sand in Bobs Farm.

I object to this proposal.

I am very concerned that this proposal seeks to dredge below the water
table. I understand that 50 per cent of the sand would be dredged from
a depth of 15 metres below the water table. I support the expert view
of the local statutory water authority Hunter Water that this is
unacceptable and poses a risk to local water supply.

That local water security could be compromised for a short term
commercial enterprise seems absurd and should be rejected.

I am also concerned that there have been inadequate biodiversity
assessments for vulnerable and threatened species in this area - as
outlined in the Port Stephens Council submission. This is
unacceptable.

There are already too many environmental impacts in this area. I hope
to see this proposal rejected.

Sincerely
Susan Morley

Bobs Farm Quarry DA SSD 6395

I strongly object to the Bobs Farm Quarry DA SSD 6395.
Port Stephens tourism generates significant income because of our
natural beauty.
This proposal should be rejected for the following reasons:
* destruction of 64 acres of natural habitat causing significant
ecological and environmental consequences, especially for endangered
species
* ongoing removal of 750,000 tonnes of sand per year is likely to
cause an artificial lake
* sand removal will result in an addition 200 trucks per day on Nelson
Bay Road. When you add this to the additional trucks from the sand
mine in Williamtown, further sand mine should not be permitted on
Nelson Bay Road.
* potential ground water and lake contamination from acid sulfate is
is present in the soil
* increased heavy vehicle traffic and related noise will have a direct
impact on Bobs Farm Public School, local residents and businesses
* negative impact on Marsh Farm businesses, including Shark and Ray
Centre's development of eco-friendly tourism
* mine noise and impact on air quality

From reading the submission from Port Stephens Council, I have grave
concerns that the developer could did comply with the environmental
and biodiversity requirements. This suggests a lack of concern for the
environment which questions the developers ability to operate within
environmental constraints and rehabilitate the land when finished.

I have never made political donations and make my objection as a local
Port Stephens resident.

We would like to lodge our objection to the application no: ssd 6395 Bobs
Farm Sand Mine Project. We reside at 3357 Nelson Bay Road Bobs Farm
NSW. We are John and Lesley Martin.
Sent from my iPhone

The Director
Resource Assessments
Planning & Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney NSW 2001


Bob's Farm Sand Mine Quarry - DA SSD 6395

I wish to register a strong objection to this proposed sand mine on
the basis it does not satisfy the objectives of sustainable
development. As a member of the Port Stephens community for 24 years
and a regular visitor to the area from the 1970s I am appalled at the
increasing needless destruction of habitat in the shire. Since
becoming Port Stephens residents we have been members of two Landcare
groups and have contributed hundreds of hours to remove weeds and to
assist in the regeneration of habitat.

Why are the opinions of expert scientists and ecologists given so
little credence by developers and proponents of such projects? Surely
the motivation is simply to make a quick profit without a care about
the disastrous consequences of their proposal. Is our generation to
cause the collapse of the ecosystem denying a future for all?

We urge those staff of the Planning and Environment Department
considering this application to carefully consider the scientific
reports which note among other outcomes:


Loss of biological diversity
Loss of individual species
Fragmentation of Habitat
Riparian zone degradation
Expansion of dry land salinity

The destruction of old growth forest across the coastal fringe is not
sustainable and needs to cease, not only for the maintenance of our
diverse flora and fauna, but for people as well. The tourist industry
in Port Stephens is built on visitors (and residents) coming to enjoy
the natural beauty of the area, our forests and its inhabitants as
well as beaches and waterways. The 26 hectare scar that would result
from this sand mining activity will sadly stand testament to the
irrationality of this proposal. The resultant artificial lake in an
acid sulphate soil environment would be an ecological disaster.

The impact on our roads is already an issue with constant truck
movements from other sand mines using Nelson Bay Road and Cabbage Tree
Road. Marsh Road is not suitable for heavy trucks, built on the edge
of mangrove forests, and subjected to flooding, tidal influences and
the effects of sea level rise. It is also a relatively narrow road and
already busy with local traffic. The noise and disruption to residents
and the school are unthinkable.

I implore you to disallow this mine proposal to go ahead,

Margaret Lamond OAM
64 Boronia Drive,
Salamander Bay NSW

I have no financial interests relative to this proposal or political
affiliations.

Sent from my iPad

The Director,
Resource Assessments,
Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39 Sydney NSW 2001

Attention: Melissa Anderson
Via email: [email protected]
Application No SSD 6395
3631 Nelson Bay Road, Bobs Farm
Bobs Farm Sand Mine Project
31st January, 2019

Dear Ms Anderson,
Please find below a detailed submission objecting to the proposed Sand
Mine at Bobs Farm.

Within the Development Application the site is described by Wildthing
documentation in the following terms:
The study area forms part of a significant ecological corridor that
runs down the coast from the
Tomago Sandbeds in the south along the Stockton Bight to the Tomaree
Peninsula in the north. The
ecological corridor occurring along Stockton Bight is restricted by
the bare shifting sand dunes to the
east and largely cleared agricultural land to the west. The Lower
Hunter Regional Strategy (Planning
2006) identifies this area as part of a key green corridor linking
large vegetated areas, allowing the
movement and dispersal of biodiversity within the region. This
corridor links the Watagans and
Yengo National Parks with the coastal plains of the Tomago Sand beds,
Stockton Bight and Port
Stephens. The Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Biodiversity
Conservation Strategy (House,
2003) also identifies the Coastal Sand Apple - Blackbutt Forest
occurring along the Stockton Bight
dune system as a regionally significant habitat linkage. The Hunter
Regional Plan 2036 (NSW
Government, 2016) also shows the site to occur within a Biodiversity
Corridor.
The fragment of vegetation that the study area is situated has also
been mapped as a key habitat
(NPWS 2002). Key habitats define areas identified as centres of high
native species diversity for a
range of fauna assemblages (NPWS 2002). The proposal will result in
the removal of approximately
25.90ha of key habitat largely consisting of Coastal Sand Apple
Blackbutt Forest from the north-east
section of the corridor. The section of the corridor where the study
area is located is approximately
1.5km wide. (1)
This describes a significant ecological corridor site that Planning
NSW has identified as part of a key green corridor linking large
vegetated areas, allowing the movement and dispersal of biodiversity.
The Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Biodiversity Conservation
Strategy describes the forests occurring here as a regionally
significant habitat linkage. The area occurs within a Biodiversity
Corridor and is identified as a key habitat.

Despite these descriptors of an ecologically significant area within a
biodiversity corridor, this proposed sand mine development at Bob's
Farm is yet another example of habitat vs profit. The NSW State
government is unable to protect and defend our unique and fragile
environment. The government has in fact introduced legislation for
koala protection which in practice, does the exact opposite. Documents
obtained by the North Coast Environment Council and the National Parks
Association, under Freedom of Information Legislation show that the
government's proposed koala reserves fail to overlap with the location
of koala populations. The NSW government is ignoring expert advice
from one of its departments which found only 0.2 per cent of actual
koala habitats are included in the reserves earmarked by government.
Senior ecologist with the National Parks Association of NSW, Dr Oisín
Sweeney, said the findings are distressing. "This analysis shows that
unless the government starts taking koala protection seriously, we're
going to see the large-scale wipe-out of koala colonies in NSW," he
said. "The government's strategy has reserves with no koalas. That's
not going to work. To protect koalas, we need to protect where they
live, as well as protecting habitat to connect the colonies."(2)
The documents also show that only 14 per cent of the state's koala
habitats are protected. Logging, land clearing and development put 86
per cent of koala habitats at risk, located as they are on private
land and state forests. The World Wildlife Fund estimates koalas face
extinction in NSW by 2050 due to land clearing. In a report released
earlier this month, the WWF used satellite imagery to show bulldozing
rates of koala habitats have tripled since August 2017 when the
state's Native Vegetation Act was repealed.
"WWF-Australia estimates there are likely less than 20,000 koalas left
in NSW and at the current rate, they are on track to be extinct in the
state by as early as 2050," WWF-Australia conservationist Stuart
Blanch said. "We have to stop this excessive tree-clearing if we want
to keep koalas alive in the wild for future generations."(2)
I believe that NSW government legislation to protect koalas is
inadequate and misguided. I don't believe that koala habitat is secure
in much of NSW so the preservation of areas such as that at Bobs Farm
are essential for the preservation of koalas into the future.
Port Stephens Council has acknowledged the inadequacy of the
environmental assessment for the Bob's Farm Sand mine. PS Council in
their submission state:
P1 ENVIRONMENT AND ECOLOGY
A significant amount of inconsistencies and inadequacies were noted
throughout the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (Tattersall Lander
2018) and Biodiversity Assessment (Wildthing 2018) in relation to
biodiversity values for the proposed development. These include:
1. Incorrect threat listing status applied to EPBC Act listed species
resulting in incorrect assessments of significance i.e. Koala (listed
as Vulnerable, EPBC Act) has been assessed as Endangered under EPBC
significant impact criteria and Tiger Quoll (Endangered, EPBC Act) has
been assessed under Vulnerable species criteria.
2. Failure to assess the likelihood of occurrence and potential
impacts on the threatened Greater Glider, which is predicted to occur
within the locality.
P2 .......the biodiversity assessment is considered inadequate to
determine the potential impacts of the proposal on threatened species
and their habitats.
Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus). The proposal site contains preferred
and supplementary Koala habitat. However, Spot Assessment Technique
(SAT) surveys were not conducted for Koala.
P3.
Inconsistent and unclear reporting of Koala habitat buffer zones to be
established. Section 14.23 of the EIS reports that "a 50m buffer over
supplementary habitat would also need to be put in place around areas
of Preferred Koala Habitat" (i.e. the area of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest
in the North west of the proposal area), however, site plans and
Sections 14.13, 14.16 only report a 15 metre buffer to be retained
around the area of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest.(3)

While Port Stephens Council expresses concern about assessments
contained in the application, the Wildthing Ecological Report itself
contains damning statistics. A total of 1217 habitat (hollow-bearing)
trees were identified within the study area as a result of a
hollow-bearing tree survey. The vast majority of hollow-bearing trees
were present within Smoothbarked Apple - Blackbutt - Old Man Banksia
woodland on coastal sands assemblage. Many of these trees were
considered to be significant as a result of their very large size as
well as the variety and number of hollows they contained. Hollows were
available for roosting or nesting avifauna species, arboreal mammals,
reptiles and tree roosting microchiropteran bat species. (4)
Of these 1217 hollow bearing trees, 877 will be cut down to make way
for a sand mine. The map indicating these trees, (see below), is very
confronting. The assessment concludes ... The loss of hollow-bearing
trees is a Key Threatening Process under Schedule 3 of the TSC Act
1995. The removal of 877 hollow-bearing trees would be a significant
loss of this resource in the local area.
P64 Wildthing Biodiversity Assessment Report 1217 habitat trees
indicated by


In conclusion, Wildthing Ecological Report lists the likely impacts of
the Sand mine development:
The proposed Sand Mine will result in the following direct and
potential impacts or losses:
* Approximately 25.90ha of Coastal Sand Smooth-barked Apple Blackbutt
Forest;
* Approximately 9.5ha of Orchard;
* Approximately 25.90ha of Supplementary Koala Habitat;
* Approximately 25.90ha of known habitat for ten affected threatened
fauna species;
Glossopsitta pusilla (Little Lorikeet), Ninox strenua (Powerful Owl),
Haliaeetus leucogaster
(White-bellied Sea Eagle), Petaurus norfolcensis (Squirrel Glider),
Scoteanax rueppellii
(Greater Broad-nosed Bat), Falsistrellus tasmaniensis (Eastern
Falsistrelle), Miniopterus
australis (Little Bentwing-bat), Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis
(Large Bentwing-bat),
Phascolarctos cinereus (Koala) and Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed
Flying-fox);
* Suitable habitat for a number of additional threatened and other
flora and fauna species likely
to utilise the study area;
* Approximately 877 hollow-bearing trees;
* Habitat Fragmentation;
* Injury/Mortality to native fauna during felling of trees.(5)

The destruction of 25.9ha of known habitat for threatened fauna
species, including the bulldozing of 877 hollow-bearing trees, is
unacceptable. In the past year we have seen fires destroy or threaten
koala habitat in Williamtown, Lemon Tree Passage, Anna Bay and Mambo
Reserve, all within the Port Stephens local government area. Wildthing
Ecological Report, (Appendix E, A17), acknowledges the increased
intensity of bushfires due to climate change. Port Stephens Council
and Port Stephens Koalas, who operate the koala hospital at One Mile
Beach, are very aware that the area's koala hubs are under very real
threat. The connecting wildlife corridors between these hubs are under
continual pressure from development and we cannot simply hope that the
wildlife threatened by the development at Bobs Farm will move on to
nearby forests and reserves when so much of it is also under threat
already from man made and naturally occurring encroachments on
habitat. The koala population in Port Stephens has suffered a decline
of 20% in recent years and overall the population in NSW is threatened
with extinction by 2050. (World Wildlife Fund, 2018)
For these reasons we ask that this development proposal be refused.
Our unique wildlife has no voice except from those who understand that
habitat is key to their survival. We have to stop somewhere. We can't
continue to believe that animals will simply move on to nearby forests
and homes. Eventually we will simply run out of safe places for them.

I am concerned with the loss of habitat as a result of this proposal,
we also add the following. I am concerned:
* For the health of the local residents who will have their previously
peaceful rural existence destroyed by noise and air pollution
* About the longevity of Bobs Farm School where the students and staff
will be constantly disturbed by laden trucks passing in close
proximity for the next 15 years. Enrolments will soon decline if this
development proceeds.
* About the road and traffic safety on March Road and Nelson Bay Road
which already has to cope with a high level of heavy vehicular
traffic.
* That this development is not in the public interest and has
generated widespread condemnation in the Bobs Farm and wider Port
Stephens community
* That extraction below the water table has not been allowed in other
developments including sand mining, in this area.
* That the development of a lake with evaporation of 90 million litres
of fresh water per year is not sound environmentally. Fresh drinking
water is becoming an increasingly valuable commodity.

Regards
Murray Wood
B Arch RAIA
Reg# 6320 NSW


WOOD Architecture
a 23 Scott Circuit, Salamander Bay NSW 2317
t 0417 247 674
e [email protected]
w WOODarchitecture.com.au
_______________________________________________________________________
This message and any attachments are intended for the named recipients
only, and may be confidential/privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this message is
prohibited. If you have received this message in error please reply to
the sender immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those
of the represented and may not necessarily reflect the views of WOOD
Architecture P/L.

Hi Melissa

I wish to register my objection to the above application.

My reasons are:

- the loss of natural habitat
- the removal of many tonnes of sand and the unknown impact this may
have on further degradation and erosion in the immediate area
- the creation of an artificial lake and the unknown impact
- the extra trucks required to remove those tonnes of sand; damage to
the roads, danger to other road users. I use this road and already
note the failure of current trucks from this area to give way to other
road users.

Regards

Neil Kearton

31 st January 2019
The Director,
Resource Assessments,
Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39 Sydney NSW 2001
Attention: Melissa Anderson via email:
[email protected]
Dear Sir/Madam
Application No SSD 6395 - Bobs Farm Quarry - Bobs Farm Sand Mine
Project
I wish to object to the Bobs Farm Quarry/Sand Mine Project on the
basis that the proposed
development does not satisfy the objectives of ecologically
sustainable development. Not
only will the mine be environmentally destructive within its
boundaries, it will add to the
overall habit fragmentation and by the introduction of any new factor,
the artificial lake, will
upset the environmental balance.
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared by AMMOS Management
Pty Ltd dated
November 2018 undermines its own justification for the project by
revealing the extent of
environmental damage which will result from the removal of 750,tonnes
of sand a year from
above and below the water table in an area of old growth forest on
ancient sand dunes.
Any assessment of the public interest in the project going ahead must
address the public
interest which is not the case with what is proposed. It seems that
only the proponents will
benefit from this trade off. The public, fauna, flora and environment
seem not to have been
taken into consideration at all. I also believe that creating of an
artificial lake is inappropriate
because of the risk of destabilising the sand dune system and enabling
contamination of the
water table. Excavation creates a risk of exposure and oxidisation of
acidic sulphate soils
with acidic run-off into the water table disrupting biodiversity. I
state the risk of contamination
outweighs any benefit of sand extraction and more importantly puts
local residents and
school children at the nearby Bobs Farm School at risk.
How is this proposed `lake' to benefit the public? The creation of an
artificial lake which may
become contaminated due to acidic run-off is unacceptable. Here in
Port Stephens shire we
are surrounded by unpolluted blue water, rivers and beautiful beaches
and do not need an
environmental disaster being created in its centre. Also the potential
health hazards to the
community and eco-system cannot and should not be justified.
I therefore request that the Department of Planning take a critical
approach to the claims
made by the proponent and refuse this application.
Yours faithfully


ROBYN WILLIAMS

I wish to add my objection as per attachment. I also have concerns in
regard to the PFAS contamination. Should the site also be
contaminated, how will the exposure to residents and children in the
Bob's Farm School be handled? The site may become another legal issue
for the Government in the future.
This is also habitat for Koalas with evidence of them on site.

Ms. Anderson,
I am writing regarding my strong opposition to the Bobs Farm Sand Mine
Proposal.
This proposal will have disastrous consequences in terms of habitat
loss and threatens the local aquifer.
It is unconscionable to bulldoze 25 ha of native forest and further
risk contimainating the water of Port Stephens.
Sincerely,
Susan Davy

DA. SSD 6395 Bob's Farm Quarry Dear Melissa, As residents of the Tomaree
Peninsula, we are expressing our grave concern about the proposed sand
mine at Bob's Farm. The proposed destruction of 64 acres of key
habitat is distressing to us as residents & land care members. We work
tirelessly to regenerate bushland, especially koala food trees for our
koala population. The unique vegetation spoken of, struggles against
all odds to survive & cannot be replaced easily. Destruction will be
permanent & not recuperable, perhaps for generations, if that. Hazards
created by an estimated 200 truck movements a day, will result in a
more dangerous sole entry & egress to the Bay area, & could be quite
detrimental to commuters and the tourist trade. This will also be
devastating to the adjacent, anticipated development of an echo farm
and Irukandji Shark & Ray Centre. We anticipate your regard to the
voices of the community rather than favour large business ventures.
Yours Sincerely, Ted & Helen Bowly

The Director,
Resource Assessments,
Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39 Sydney NSW 2001

Attention: Melissa Anderson
Via email: [email protected]
Application No SSD 6395
3631 Nelson Bay Road, Bobs Farm
Bobs Farm Sand Mine Project


As an octogenarian I never cease to be amazed at the crass
commercialisation of prime ecological and agricultural land for short
term profit. However I am more concerned that this proposal will take
us further inside the environmental disaster network now plaguing our
State and Nation. Dead fish, parched pastures, eroding shorelines all
directly relate to moribund decision making within Government. Please
help our community take a stand against profligate developments such
as those now proposed at Bobs Farm.

The factual evidence of the likely destructive ecological scar that
this development would cause is irrefutable. The distress and
disruption to the Bobs Farm School and its future generations is
blatantly obvious. The loss of amenity to the Bobs Farm community who
already suffer ever increasing disadvantage through traffic speed and
volume should not be disregarded. It is beyond time to take a stand
against rapacious sand mining that already weighs excessively on the
Port Stephens LGA. Please help our community to turn this around.

Walter Lamond
( I am an active Landcare worker but have no political affiliations or
commercial interest in Bobs Farm )
64 Boronia Drive
Salamander Bay

30 January 2019

Sent from my iPad

Objection on the grounds of Silica dust exposure.
I have attached my formal objection on these grounds and have included
supporting documentation.
Please note that due to the limitations of file upload, I was unable
to attach the document "Workplace Exposure Standards for Airborne
Contaminants" 2018 edition. This is available on the Safe Work
Australia website.

We are writing to make you aware of an issue in the small township of
Bobs Farm, NSW. This issue is in relation to the totally inappropriate
development of a sand mine on an ancient sand dune.
The development application is currently with the NSW Department of
Planning and Environment, Major Projects, SSD6395, and currently
awaiting a SEARS from the Developer.
We ask that you please review the attached document which may assist
you in understanding some of the main points as to why this is a
totally inappropriate development. The document attached was submitted
to the department directly on Monday, October 29, 2018.
If there is any possible way that you could assist in preventing, or
drawing attention to this, it would be greatly appreciated.
We look forward to your response.
Kind regards,
Robert and Susan Goldsworthy

please consider of application attached.

Please see attached letter.

See attached pdf submission

Please take the time to peruse the link to the digital History of Bobs
Farm Public School to gain an insight to what will be threatened by
the proposed silica sand mine.

https://issuu.com/emmakateelder/docs/bobsfarmcomingsoon

I wish to register my objections to the proposed Bobs Farm Sand Mine. I
am very concerned that the proposed mine, located adjacent to the
Bob's Farm Public School, will significantly adversely affect the
local school and community.

My full submission is below as an attachment.

File attached