SSD 6395 - Bobs Farm Sand Mine Project

To Whom It May Concern

We are writing regarding the proposed sand mine off Nelson Bay Road at
Bobs Farm(SSD-6395).

We strongly oppose a mine at the entrance to Port Stephens a major
tourist hot spot and a residential and farming community for many
reasons. This can only impact the community at large negatively, from
the school metres from the mine, safety issues, traffic, noise, air
pollution and environmental issues.

We struggle to understand how a proposal of this sort would get any
kind of serious consideration given the proposed location.

School:
Bobs Farm Primary School has being operating for 100 years. The
proposed entrance/exit and mine itself is only metres from where
children are educated. Noise from machinery, trucks and general day to
day operations are going to cripple the school.

Safety:
This is a major concern with an extra 180 truck movements daily on
this rural narrow road beside the primary school where children will
be dropped off/picked up.
This is of particular concern to me as having been first on the scene
of a fatal car crash on Marsh Road am fully aware of the impact and
trauma it has on the community.

Traffic:
Extra 180 truck movements a day on an already busy road. Getting on to
Nelson Bay Road of a morning and evening is very frustrating now. Over
the peak extremely busy tourist season in December and January and
most weekends where we see an increasing number of car movements the
extra truck movements will make a bad situation so much worse.

Air Pollution/Health:
Silica dust is an extremely harmful consequence of this sand mine
which will affect employees and neighbours of the mine. It only takes
a small amount of airborne silica dust to create a health hazard.

Water Level:
Locals rely on tank water and ground water to live.

We don't know what will happen to our ground water in the future and
the environmental impact such a mine will have on our and our
neighbours future health.

The major loss to our community if a mine were to operate and the
school close and neighbours leave the area.

The impact the mine will have on existing tourist operators in our
small community, go Karts, brewery, winery, fish farm, farm stay &
produce farms.

If you saw the proposed area I'm sure you would ask why would anyone
agree to put a mine amongst a community with houses, farms and school
in such close proximity.

Many thanks for taking the time to read our submission and hoping for
a favourable outcome for our community and the greater Port Stephens
area.

Regards
Chris & Nuala Shilling

No sand mine in bobs farm !!

I oppose the Sandmen at Bob's Farm on many grounds, primarily
environmentally. There are old growth forests and wildlife that are
more important then short term financial gain. Also a school is
nearby. The extra trucks will also cause traffic congestion.
No sand mine at Bob's Farm please.

As a resident of the Tomaree Peninsula I strongly object to this proposed
sand mine as it has the potential to :

1.Impact heavily on the residents, primary producers and local
businesses at Bobs Farm

2.Negative impact on the approach/gateway to one of the State's
leading tourist destination areas ( totally inadequate buffer zone to
Nelson Bay Road)

3.Seriously degrade the subterranean water resource in this part of
the peninsula.

4. Destroy another substantial natural forest which is a known habitat
for koalas and other endangered species

5. Generate an unacceptable increase in heavy truck movements on
Nelson Bay Road and Marsh Road with associated added dangers at exit
and entry points.

6.Impact heavily on Bobs Farm school due to dust, noise and truck
movements.

7.The claims relating to onsite employment to be created appear to be
excessive. The economic benefits in my view will be mostly experienced
outside the Tomaree Peninsula. They will not in any way compensate for
the potential damage listed above.

I have serious doubts as to the possibility of successful restoration
of the site because sand mining removes almost all of the material
from the site and in this case, the application is to extract to 15
metres below the water table leaving deep holes which will fill with
water.

This area I believe is very fragile and should not be mined in any shape
or form. It contributes to the waterways of the area and having heavy
trucks trundling around would be doomed to bring a tragic outcome on
the wildlife of the area. Bobs Farm school has survived for a hundred
years and has proved to be an asset to the area by keeping it
footprint small and thus no impact on the environment only a positive
outcome. Imagine the impact on the school if big trucks loaded with
sand were trundling past all day. There are other sand mines in the
local vicinity that have been tolerated and have increased there loads
per day without any concern to people, property or the environment.
Enough is enough.

Our roads cannot handle this. Nelson Bay Rd is dark and unsafe in many
parts.

My submission against.
Removal of natural habitat forever and ever.
Local residents do not need a large freshwater hole in the ground we
have one Quarry Disater at Diemers Rd, No more.
Nelson Bay Rd. Will be destroyed with 200 heavy truck movements per
day.

I object to the proposed sand mine as it will result in a significant
increase in the number of large trucks using Nelson Bay Road.
The road is not suitable or safe for more trucks to use.

An increase in heavy vehicles using the road poses a corresponding
unacceptable increase in the likelihood of of accidents involving a
truck. Nelson Bay Road is the only route out of both the Tomaree and
Tilligerry Peninsulas and any significant accident on the road blocks
emergency access.

I am aghast that the Bob's Farm Sandmine Project could be contemplated
for approval. It is greatly detrimental to the well-being of this area
and the people who live in and pass through it. It will degrade the
landscape and amenity irretrievably. My objections are:
1. The development area is on the main road and approach to the unique
and iconically beautiful natural tourist area of the Tomaree
Peninsula.There are plans underway to have the Estuary declared a
World Heritage Estuary. A large proportion of the population here
depend on tourism for their income. Many groups are working to improve
Nelson Bay Road as the gateway to Nelson Bay. The staged clearing of
39 hectares of attractive bushland along this road will create an ugly
blot along the crucial entry roadway from the airport and Pacific
Highway to the tourist area.

2. The impact on the water table could be catastrophic and will add to
the present disaster of the PFASS pollution in the nearby Red Area.
The proposed sandmine area is adjacent to the northern boundary of the
North Stockton Catchment area. Hunter water in its submission has
noted to need to safeguard against aquifer pollution or contamination
and that "the proposal to extract sand below the water table to -15
metres AHD is inconsistent with current best practice and the approval
of other sand extractors in the area." "Hunter Water is of the opinion
that inadequate justification has been provided for the proposal to
leave a 25 hectare open lake following the completion of sand
extraction." It has also been stated in submissions that potential
acid sulphate soils have been recorded on the site.

3. The impact on Bob's Farm School and its amenity will be great with
dangerous truck movements around it, with their accompanying noise
unpleasantness and potential danger to young students.

4. Although there is questioning of details of Wildthing Environmental
Consultants report, there is no doubt that many flora and fauna
species that are vulnerable or endangered are threatened by the
development. We are spending millions on a koala hospital for the very
few remaining koalas on the Tomaree, once a prime habitat for them,
then cutting down such a huge area of trees from which they feed.

5. The longstanding and greatly enjoyed Ray and Shark farm adjacent to
the sandmine site has plans for an eco-friendly resort just 60 metres
from the site. The impact of noise, odour, vibration, interference
with the water catchment which is the source for the farm, and
considerable addition to traffic will be enormous on this as well as
other neighbours. The Department of Health has documented the impact
of noise here.

6. There is also a potential threat to aboriginal cultural heritage.

The number of factors against the sand mine in this location, the huge
permanent impact it will have on the whole population, economy and
ambience of this world class,iconic tourist area for the short term
economic gain of so very few people, must make it obvious that it is
not suitable and must not be contemplated..

I am sending this electronic submission to oppose the Sand Mine for Bob's
farm. I am concerned about the increased traffic and destruction to ou
local environment.

Dear Sirs / Madams

I would like to express my disagreement at the proposed Bobs Farm sand
mine, this project, if it goes ahead will have a very negative impact
on the local community and surrounds. The increase of large numbers of
heavy vehicles which will be travelling to and fro along Nelson Bay
Road is totally unacceptable and dangerous, large sections of this
road are still not much more than single lane goat tracks after years
of government inaction and ineptitude, these trucks will pose not only
a danger to the travelling public but will also damage the road
surface considerably. The area around Bobs Farm is a lovely leafy
environment with tourist attractions, fruit sellers and winery, why
damage such a pristine area for sand, do we really need to destroy
everything in this country in our relentless pursuit of profit and
greed. Several members of the community are engaged in developments
around the area that would not only enhance the surrounds but would
attract visitors to enjoy the area, these people have been effectively
left in limbo now. I implore you to reconsider this mining proposal,
we don't need it nor want it in our community.

Yours sincerely
Stuart Cranston

I oppose to the development of the sand mines

I object to the sand mine due to impact on already stretched
infrastructure. With council rates set to soar over next 7 years, they
may need more increases to cover public works especially with regard
to heavy vehicles traffic damaging already poor roads.

I am opposed to this sand mine going ahead. I struggle to see any
community benefit yet the potential destruction could be devastating.
As an oyster farmer with leases in the Tilligerry Creek I am concerned
that the mining will have a negative impact on the water quality in
Port Stephens. The negative impact to tourism will also be a big hit
to the bay

The old growth forest marks a beautiful welcome to this magnificent
Peninsula for those returning home or visiting alike. Even more so, it
is a home to much native flora and fauna, which is irreplaceable and
irreplicable, though sadly, very "wreckable". As citizens of earth, we
have a duty to that space which we inhabit and our goal should always
be to co-exist amidst that space, rather than destroy and exploit.

From a long term commecial perspective, there remains the potential
for Port Stephens to be designated a world heritage listing. Should
this take place, we would be in the world's eye as a centre for
ecotourism, which generates income on a much broader base than a sand
mine could, which can surely only benefit a few capital heavy
investors. Conversely, ecotourism can provide seasonal and long term
employment, as well as investment opportunities for those willing and
able to take entrepreneurial initiatives.

With progress being made in developing Newcastle airport as an
international airport, if we are to be people of vision for the
future, then it is our clear prerogative to decline this submission
and look intently forward with broad consideration to the best
decision that can be made. Rather than destroying habitat, wildlife
and beauty, we ought to look forward to creating world class walks and
bike rides, connected by water taxis, similar to the Three Capes Track
in Tasmania or the Abel Tasman Track, one of New Zealand's Great
Walks.

The production of the Three Capes Track on the Tasman Peninsula was a
collaborative project which utilised much of the creative talent of
The University of Tasmania. Similarly, we could look to developing a
walk from Birubi to Yacabaa with water taxi connections and NPWS
camping facilities at Fingal Light house. This is long term potential
to develop the creative and intellectual identity of the Hunter
region. A financially gluttonous and visually jarring sandmine on the
transit between the airport and this world class beauty would be a
barrier to such a creative project and thus against the young people
who are yet to study at Newcastle University and could contribute to
such an outstanding project.

Dear Sir/Madam

Please accept this submission outlining my objection to the proposed
sand mine at Bobs Farm.

Being a local resident and a daily commuter to Newcastle from Bobs
Farm I am honestly appalled at the thought of the traffic with another
180 truck movements a day. The road is not capable of absorbing this
without inconveniencing everyone other road user in the area.

I am also very concerned about the egress proposed so close to the
local school and the added risk and exposure to students and residents
that this will bring. I am employed in Health and Safety and the
Government is currently pushing all sorts of education programs around
the serious health risks of exposure to silica. How does exposing
children and the community to the air quality risk inherent through
sand mining equate with government policy around Silicosis?

Equally important to us is the risk to our water: Really!! Seriously!!
After everything that has gone on at Williamtown, although not the
same chemical risk, the essence of the scenario is exactly the same.
We do not have town water and rely solely on the ground water; why
would anyone put that water source at risk? Even if, as Mr Landers has
suggested, he can go ahead without mining 15 meters below the water
table (and everyone is aware of how ludicrous THAT would be) how could
you possible be sure that his mining operations would be contained as
well as he says. If it were to go ahead, we would still have serious
doubts as to the viability of mining in a sensitive ecological area
without environmental, social and long term community detriment. Our
water source would still be at risk through ordinary mining activities
and the always present risk of an environmental "accident" that is an
accepted and planned risk of mining activities.

The whole proposal is just completely without positive aspects for
anyone but the shareholders of the mine itself. Haven't we already
lost enough old growth forest and changed the ecological footprint of
the peninsula enough? Threatened species and feeding habitat of native
animals should be protected not put at risk.

This mine will have a detrimental effect on the families and community
of Bobs Farm and I can't stress our objection to this proposal enough.
Please give the very real concerns of the community your serious
consideration.

Kind regards
Deborah John

I hereby strongly oppose to the sand mine at Bobs Farm. It will destroy
critical habitat (including supplementary koala habitat) and have
substantial negative impacts on threatened species. In addition it
will have negative impacts for the quality of life and health of the
community at large.

The Bay has always been part of my families history and my life. From my
grandparents travelling from Cessnock with their family on the back of
the local delivery truck in the early 1930's for holidays, to bringing
my own family here to live.
I've seen so many changes to this beautiful area and I have to say it
won't be long with the ridiculous amount of land being covered by
buildings, roads and other hard surfacing that this area will have
some serious repercussions ecologically that will not be fixable no
matter how much money is thrown at it.
I object in the strongest possible way to another sandmine in this
area.
The environment is one of the few remaining areas of old growth along
the eastern seaboard that doesn't have to share space with building
development. The impact on the native flora and fauna is a huge
concern, as pushing them out, has a domino effect in remaining
bushland and will see enormous loss. The danger to the local
population with trucks on Marsh Road, especially with a school just
next door is unthinkable and the traffic dangers, during the school
holidays in particular, along Nelson Bay Road will be diabolical.
Please use real wisdom and common sense when considering this matter,
this proposal is a disaster waiting to happen.

GLENN BROWN CONCERNED RESIDENT
3411 Nelson Bay Rd, BOBS FARM | 0402 906 067 |
[email protected]
22.01.2019
To Whom it may concern,
I provide this submission to oppose and object to the submitted State
Significant Development SSD- 6395 for an Extractive Industry for the
purpose of Sand Mine Extraction and Processing of a resource of up to
750,000 tonnes/year with a total excavatable resource of 10M tonnes,
and down to a depth of 15mAHD.
I provide the following comments and justifications for consideration
by the proponent and for the assessment of the development. I have
raised a number of concerns identified within the submitted material
and issues that I have formulated on my own assessment and research of
similar activities and my life experience. I believe our families
perspective is not unique for this development in this location, whom
we all have an empathetic and deep connection to the current character
of our local area for its lifestyle and environment. We wish to
preserve the current amenity that we all enjoy on a daily basis.
My wife, family and I would like to highlight that we believe the
proposal WILL have significant impact in terms of amenity, noise,
property value, human and biophysical health and most importantly the
environment of the immediate vicinity, the local and wider area, and
will affect the valuable resources and amenity enjoyed and or utilized
by the local and wider community.
Our concerns for consideration by the applicant are as follows: WATER
1) In regards to best management practice, we note that the proposal
to extract sand below the water table to -15 metres AHD is
inconsistent with current best practice and the approval of other sand
extraction operations in the area, which have limits on the depth of
extraction imposed upon them in order to protect groundwater sources.
The nearby sand extraction activities rely on alluvial deposits of
sand to avoid excavation and impact to the watertable, minimise
clearing and aim to leave the post excavation landscape as it was at
the beginning.
o For example, sand extraction at Sibelco's Tanilba Northern Dune
operation, Sibelco's Anna Bay operation, the Cabbage Tree Road Quarry
(SSD- 6125, yet to commence) is restricted by COC 6, to a quarry
extraction depth maximum of 0.7m from the predicted maximum
groundwater level. The Salt Ash Sand Quarry (07_0094) and the
Fullerton Cove Sand Quarry (07_0145) and is restricted by COC 6, to a
quarry extraction depth maximum of 3m AHD Both have extraction depth
limits imposed upon them to safeguard groundwater sources. Measures to
protect groundwater sources are related to both pollution risk and the
loss of valuable water supplies through drainage and evaporation.
We requested that all extractive operations should be designed and
undertaken in a way that ensures protection of water sources and
facilitates sustainable future land use. Inadequate justification has
been provided for the proposal to leave a 25 hectare open lake
following the

completion of sand extraction, and it should at least be limited in
depth to protect the underlying groundwater source and so the site can
be rehabilitated in a way that ensures a sustainable land use,
compatible with the surrounding land.
As per the recommendations of HWC, we would also be more accepting of
an extraction depth limited to 1m above the natural ground water
table, and total rehab of the extraction area at completion of the
project, but this is only with regard to environmental impacts. We
also are concerned about a drop to the immediate watertable and loss
of the use of our local bores which we use for irrigation and for our
livestock as drinking water sources. Given we are many dwellings/rural
residential neighbours of up to 25 dwellings we would all be
significantly impacted by contamination or drop of the water table
resource.
2) We have serious concerns regarding the nearby PFOS and PFOA
contamination area surrounding the Williamtown RAFF base and the
potential for the contaminated waters and soil to be pulled/leached or
seeped closer to our properties and the water table.
There is well documented data that indicates there is potential for
contaminated soil, sediment or waters to be transported to
surface/subsurface waters as a result of runoff or leaching from these
contaminated areas(Red zones). PFOS and PFOA is detected as being
carried in soil, sediment, surface and groundwaters long distances.
Given the proximity of the extraction mine to the identified RED ZONE
areas and due to the PFOS/PFOA's persistence and environmental
solubility that allows it to be easily transported long distances and
between different medias such as soil and water. This is evident given
the contamination zone that has occurred surrounding the RAFF base is
for an approximate 5km radius and more in certain areas based on water
flows in the groundwater of this local area. (see GHD reference below
for more detail)
This is of concern given the permanent leaching pressure the proposed
extraction activity will place on the local area, and currently
uncontaminated areas such as Bobs farm and Marsh Road. These areas are
currently within the same groundwater table and catchment, and
expansion of this contamination RED ZONE area is detrimental to human,
flora and fauna health and it restricts the use of the land, and
effectively causes the property values of the area to be considered
invaluable.
Seafood from the Tilligerry creek in this entire area has a limit for
consumption by the general public and commercial oyster and prawn
farming has been decommissioned due to the level of contamination
(ref:
www.epa.nsw.gov.au/working-together/community-engagement/community-
news/raff-williamtown-contimination/Williamtown-precautionary-advice).
The only parameter protecting the properties and environment outside
of the contamination zone, is distance and the natural flow of the
groundwater sources.
A study completed by GHD for Air Services Australia, and the
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development in (June 2015),
`Air Services Australia; Managing PFC Contamination at Airports;
Interim Contamination Management Strategy and Decision Framework'. It
states that "Groundwater extraction that may occur during construction
works will generally be limited in both volume and duration, and as
such will not have a significant impact on an existing groundwater PFC
plume, and will be unlikely to alter the overall site risk profile.
Should projects involve removal of significant volumes of water over
long time frames, the implications of this on the hydrogeological
regime and remaining contamination should be considered ". This
project would cause a permanent removal of soil volume and impact to
the groundwater plume that could alter the site risk profile of the
area and render it PFOS contaminated forever. THIS IS UNREASONABLE AND
WOULD BE A SIGNFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT, to allow extraction of a
resource in an unsuitable location, and at unreasonable depth. Hence
the project should not be permitted as proposed in this location
within the watertable. (Ref:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwjahLTU
q5fgAhUWEnIKHU69Ag4QFjAAegQIABAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aph.gov.au%2FDocu
mentStore.ashx%3Fid%3D54ea0797-405b-42d0-a348-
cc5884207f15%26subId%3D408775&usg=AOvVaw2GBo7NoijDOHi4DeJ2AOoa)
A more suitable location would be Rural land located well away from
rural residents/dwellings and development and where is does not
require excavations at a significant depths. E.g closer
Page 2

to the beach dunes, on the edge of the national park (no neighbours)
and can be collected off
the surface without downward excavations due to alluvial replacement
of the resource.
3) It should be better assessed by the applicant the impact upon the
local aquifer and the interference it shall cause and any
plumes/downward osmosis towards the extraction area that
may occur, and any permanent drops/impacts to the current water table
and its quality.
We as residents are not on reticulated water and sewer and hence rely
on our rainwater and our private bores. A drop in the aquifer water
level will potential require all of our bores to become out of reach,
lack of resource or contaminated. If lowered below our bore drill
depth we would have re-drilled, and potentiall install larger pumps
run to collect the water we rely on. This water is utilised to top up
rainwater tanks, water paddocks and lawns, irrigate crops, provide
freshwater for livestock. Loss of these resources is unreasonable and
hence the development is considered to have a significant adverse
impact upon up to 25 plus landowners and should not be permitted. The
statement of ground water impact currently states "no significant
impact" which seems to be incorrect, and that drawdown can be a
possibility. I would more likely assume no significant impact, if
Hunter Water would permit dredging activities within the aquifer,
however we note HWC has serious concerns with the proposed activity
and has serious concerns for their water reserves.
WATER/ECOSYSTEMS
4) Near by groundwater dependent ecosystems have also been identified
as part of Development
Applications made to Council for tourist and visitor accommodations,
and have revealed the existence of GWD ecosystems that have been
missed in the Ecological and Groundwater Impact Assessment Reports. A
drop/impact to the local groundwater quality would have a significant
impact upon these ecosystems which also support Koala habitats and
their supplementary feed trees in the Port Stephens LGA. This would
also impact nearby landowner private dams and permanent water bodies.
This factor should be specifically addressed by the applicant.
INFRASTRUCTURE
5) Marsh Road is a formed rural road, with narrow carriageway width
and is not currently suitable
width or pavement installation to support many large vehicles both
loaded and unloaded. There has been inadequate consideration of the
road and its pavement in the EIS at this point in time and hence the
development should not be supported or be able to be assessed with the
current information. Other roads for surrounding sandmines are in poor
condition only due to truck movements and the weight of the vehicles
frequenting the roads. Causeing pot wholes or bumps in the road which
receive high traffic volumes given it's a classified road that
provides connection of the Tomaree Pennisula to the rest of the state.
6) I note, The Haulage Road is also not supported by Port Stephen
Council. There are a number of traffic, noise and safety concerns in
relation to the exit route being along Marsh Road especially around
school drop off and collection times.
AMENITY/CHARACTER/DENSITY
7) The surrounding region is experiencing high rates of urban growth
and the immediate area is
effectively rural development of a rural residential nature, hence
many residences within proximity of the activity. Tourism is important
locally and major resorts operate at Anna Bay, Nelson Bay and
Salamander Bay. The beaches are used for recreational fishing,
surfing, swimming and boating. There are national parks in the region.
The tidal waters support fishing nurseries and historically oyster
farming. Shallow groundwater resources at Anna Bay provide much of the
water requirements for Newcastle and Port Stephens. There are many
residenieces on March Road and Toursit developments within a 500m
radius of the sand mine and traffic routes.
The Noise impact assessment identifies 25 residences within the
extraction area and transport routes being the intersection of Marsh
Rd/Nelson Bay Rd, and is referred to as the "noise sensitive receiver
catchment area". This highlights the higher density of living in the
locality than is typical for a RU1 zone for primary production. The
immediate area, as easily discerned from an aerial image, is largely
rural residential, and utilised for large lot living, and not for
farming or livestock puproses that draw the landowners a significant
income. Much of the lots are far to
Page 3

small to permitted primary production, and are simply utilised for
living in the rural amenity and ideally to capitialise on the quite
spacing out of dwellings.
It should be noted that under local planning legislation, If the zone
were a R5 large lot residential living (for which the area is
currently mimicking in its land use), the local land use zoning would
not permit an extraction industry due to significant impact by noise
and amenity upon the surrounding residences. The residents currently
enjoy the large lot living landscape and its amenity.
Furthermore residences located at the Nelson Bay Rd/Port Stephens
Drive roundabout where the trucks will be performing a Loop turn to
leave the LGA should also be considered within the VIPAC noise impact
assessment, as these are more residents that will be impacted by noise
and traffic by the transport route.
The results of the noise modelling show that there are exceedances at
Receivers R1 &R3 and at R13 - R16 for both neutral and worst case
conditions from Year 1 operation onwards for the operation of the sand
mine and hence acoustic measures are required to be implemented to
mitigate these impacts to an adequate level. This is concerning, and
the project and its location needs to be more adequately assessed for
a better location with less adjoining residential dwellings.
8) Given the high density of surrounding landowners, No noise
generating activities shall be allowed to be performed during the
night time, and should be consistent with general construction noise
permitted hours, as is proposed for the daytime operations and
extraction conditions. Imagine this impact on the tourist and visitor
accommodation in addition to permanent residents within this locality
enduring permanent noise of varying degrees 24hrs per day. Other local
sand mines are not surrounding by the same density of tourist and
visitor accommodations (established and approved not constructed)
where such noise wrecks amenity of sleep and permanent or temporary
accommodation.
E.g. Shark and Ray Centre, Bobs Farm School, Proposed Waterpark and
other unknown local developments for the same purpose in proximity
that will be affected, and hence cannot potential proceed to be
developed due to nose and environmental impact.
9) What is the potential impact of vehicle light shine for employees
and trucks or equipment entering and exiting the site? This hasn't
been covered in the EIS and should be addressed accordingly for
appropriate assessment. Many of the properties on Marsh Road are
situated very close to the road pavement, and not set back like modern
day roadway setback provisions that are implemented in modern day
developments. This essentially causes a greater impact on the existing
dwellings surrounding the development and who have frontage to Marsh
Rd, as they are affected more by light shine and vehicular noise,
given their proximity to the roadway that will be utilised by the
development.
10)We also note that there is potential for many loss of jobs at the
School, surrounding tourist accommodations of an estimated 30-40
employees if the impact to surrounding land-uses is too great, and
will only make 8-10 jobs but this proposed SSD. This is not a
justifiable reason to allow the SSD to be permitted to proceed.
Sincerely,
Glenn Brown Concerned Resident
Page 4

The roads are not suitable for 180 trucks per day.

It is shared with many local and visitors and these trucks would pose
an additional risk to all these people for the benefit of a few.

Bob's Farm is currently a reasonably untouched land with flora and
fauna that needs to be respected for our future generations.

The Government needs to protect the the people!