Conondale
Range Committee
PO Box 150
KENILWORTH 4574
Objection
to Material Change of Use- Extractive Industry,
Part of Lot 5 on RP 165610, Moy Pocket.
DA 10181
Cooloola
Shire Council
PO Box 155
GYMPIE 4570
The Conondale Range Committee objects to the proposed expansion
on a number of grounds.
1.
Vegetation.
Much of the area proposed for quarrying on Lot 5 is an “Of
Concern” ecosystem. While the application mentions this,
it fails to provide a map as to the location and extent of
this ecosystem type.
This
information should have been included with the application.
It
is readily available from the EPA website and shows the location
of the “of concern” E. crebra, E. tereticornis
grassy woodland. This ecosystem is not well represented in
Reserves. The notophyll vine forest, although not classified
as “of concern”, is, in fact, lowland rainforest
which is not well represented in the area.
The area has been identified as a wildlife corridor being
one of a few places where the forests of the Conondales are
in corridor contact with the Mary River.
2.
Retrospective approval.
In
mid 2004, the quarry operators illegally cleared and commenced
quarrying some of this area. This was an infringement not
only in terms of its zoning, but also in breach of state government’s
vegetation management laws.
It
is understood that the quarry was ordered to pay a substantial
fine for this activity.
We
are concerned that councillors may feel more inclined to grant
approval since the operation has already commenced and a substantial
area of the “of concern” ecosystem has been removed.
3. Visual Effect of proposed expansion.
The
Kenilworth Bluff has been nominated as an Inspirational Landscape
on the National Heritage List. It is an impressive regional
landform towering grandly over the Mary Valley. While quarrying
activities were visible from some points to the north, the
presence of the ridge running through the centre of Lot 5
acted as a visual buffer to the south and east.
The
statement in the application that “it is proposed to
retain existing forest trees around the perimeter of the workings
to reduce visual access” is totally inadequate to reflect
the adverse visual impact the proposed work will have.
The plan is to lower the Knob from a height of 174 metres
to about 134 metres and to continue cutting benches further
up the ridge with clearing above to a height of around 190
metres.
The
visual scar would be considerable, reaching much further up
the Kenilworth Bluff than previously and should have been
properly modelled in the application and in response to Council’s
question.
4.
Revegetation Plans.
The
application is very vague about revegetation suggesting in
places it be ongoing and in others that it be carried out
at the cessation of quarrying.
We
have had considerable experience with the abandoned gold mine
in the Conondales.
Revegetation left until after the income-generating life of
a mine or quarry is unlikely to be carried out properly if
at all. In the case of the Conondales, the company declared
bankrupt and the clean-up and revegetation was eventually
carried out by the state government at a cost well in excess
of one million dollars.
An
ongoing Revegetation Plan needs to be undertaken and it needs
to be one that reflects the biodiversity of the surrounding
area rather than simply stabilization with grasses. Furthermore
it is reported that topsoil from the quarry, rather than being
used for rehabilitation purposes, has, at times, been sold.
5.
Buffer Area.
We
understand that Lot 5 was originally purchased by the quarry
to act as a buffer. Recent declaration of the quarry as a
Key Resource Area (KRA 89) show that the onus of providing
a buffer seems to fall principally on the surrounding residents,
especially to the south. The astute purchase of Lot 5 had
provided several hundred metres of buffer but this expansion
would see it reduced to just under sixty.
The
description of KRA 89 points out that
“a ridgeline southeast of the quarry will we retained
as a visual buffer to the Mary River valley….”
(Page 103 State Planning Policy for Protection of Extractive
Resources).
This
application exceeds this.
It
proposes to remove much of the ridgeline (the Knob), and to
extend considerably beyond it. This removes much of the effect
of the visual and acoustic barrier.
6.
Better Use of Land Presently Zoned for Quarrying.
The
KRA map of the resource shows that it underlies much of the
area currently zoned for quarrying. The application has failed
to demonstrate why this existing area is avoided in favour
of clearing and opening up adjoining land of considerable
environmental and visual aesthetic significance.
Download
CRC Objection as PDF file
[Adobe Acrobat Reader required]
* If the download does not work with your internet settings,
right click the above link and select 'save target as' to
download |
