Mine Subsidency Advisory NSW Archives - Page 2 of 3

Broken Hunter Water Pipes on Ingall Street direct Correlation in Water Flows in Office

July 24, 2023

If you have been following our problem on mayfieldmines.com, you would understand that the abandoned mine network in Mayfield is full of water, and everytime extra water enters the network, it pushes the water out from mines under Maitland Road into our buildings.

In 2020, a Legacy Mines NSW Report suggested broken Hunter Water pipes on Clara Street Mayfield were a significant factor in water flows into our buildings. During their 4 month investigation, Legacy Mines were taking regular water readings inside the abandoned mines. Legacy Mines drilled a bore on Clara Street as part of their investigation. During their work they noticed that the street had recently been repaired, and after investigation, they found that a garbage truck has subsidence on the street exposing a Hunter Water leaking water pipe. After the pipe was repaired, the water flow significantly dropped.

Clara Street – Hunter Water Repair

Professor Fityus suggested that water from broken pipes is entering the abandoned mine network and flowing into our properties. He wrote;

Comparison of the date of the repair with the seepage flow data reveals a perfect coincidence between the date that the repair was made and the data that the seepage rate made a sudden reversal and began to decline rapidly. To assess the plausibility that the leaking main could be the primary driver of seepage flows in thehttps://www.mayfieldmines.com/broken-hunter-water-pipes-ingall-street-direct-correlation-water-flows-office/?preview=true area, the dial before you dig service was used to ascertain the nature of the water mains in Clara Street. It determined that the pipe was an old style cast iron, concrete lined pipe, approximately 80mm in diameter, and connected to a larger main at either end.

Based on the water pressure in the area and the length and internal diameter of this pipeline at the location of the break, it is estimated that when intact, the flow through the pipe might be quite low most of the time, and probably less than 60 litres/minute in most circumstances. However, if there is a complete break, and the break is supplied with water from both directions, the maximum flow in this pipe could be in the order of 600 to 1000 litres/minute. If the break is not complete, such as in the case of a leaking joint or corrosion hole, then the flow will be less than it is for a complete break, but it depends on how big the hole is. It is plausible, however, that the pipe could be leaking as much as several tens of litres per minute (enough to feed the observed seepages at #38 ‐ #44), without there being a noticeable effect on the local supply or the water leaving the supply system; that is, it could occur un‐noticed for an indefinite period of time.

Upon inspecting the site of the repair 2 days later, there was no evidence of any muddy outwash from the site of the break, however traces of clean construction sand were still evident around the margins of the hole, suggesting that water from the leaking pipe was lost into the ground and did not produce significant volumes of outwash at the surface.

Clara Street – Hunter Water Repair – Water Flow

In July 2023, there are many broken Hunter Water pipes in Mayfield East which are directly opposite our buildings. Recently, the MP for Newcastle, Tim Crakanthorp asked Hunter Water water to investigate the increased water flow into our premises that has resulted in new water locations within the internal buildings (here and here). Hunter Water found a number of broken assets. In this video, we show another example of direct correlation between water running and slowing/stopping in one of our buildings – this time, broken Hunter Water pipes along Ingall Street which we believing were feeding extra water into the abandoned mines, with water then flowing into our meeting room on the ground floor of 44 Maitland Road Mayfield. Once Hunter Water repaired the Ingall Street broken Hunter Water pipe, water stopped flowing from the wall cavity.

Legacy Mine Maps Appeal

July 19, 2023

We have appealed the decision from the NSW Resource Regulator and asked them to reconsider. Below are the reasons why they rejected to provide us the maps, together with our reply to Subsidence Advisory and the NSW Resource Regulator on why we should receive.

• under section 121(6a) you must demonstrate that there is a legitimate concern about a risk to the health and safety of a person and that the provision of the survey plan available is likely to lessen that risk. You have not demonstrated how the provision of the plans are likely to lessen the risk to health and safety from any mine workings.

Since your last visit in 2019, we have had wall collapse almost inline with the subsidence events on Maitland Road. I have enclosed a photo of such collapse for your reference. Subsidence Advisory has previously taken photo of this area during you 2019 visit. As you can see, there is a safety aspect of the mines/location.

38 Maitland Road Wall Subsidence Comparison

• under section 121(6b) you must demonstrate that there is a legitimate public interest. A public interest is distinguishable from a private interest, where a private interest could be considered a self-interest to pursue a course of action for individual circumstances. No clear public interest has been demonstrated.

In a number of previous reports to the Government bodies including Subsidence Advisory, I have provided details about sinkholes in front of 38 Maitland Road. These holes are directly in front of our building. Please find enclosed the 2012 sinkhole (previously I sent you this in 2019 – this now was bigger than the 2020 sinkhole) and the sinkhole in 2020 after your subsidence team visited ….As you can see, these should be in the public interest.

38 Maitland Road Footpath Sinkhole Comparison

We are now waiting for the NSW Resource Regulaor for the final decision.

Why are Old Legacy Mine Maps Kept from the Public?

July 19, 2023

Are old legacy mine maps kept from the public so that people do not fully understand they are in a mine subsidence district, or to minimise the amount of claims registered by home owners. During our discussions with home owners in our area, we found that many did not know that their properties were beneath a mine so they never fully understood why their wall was cracking or the garage subsiding. Then we also have owners who told us they applied for subsidence damage, only to be told they are not in the “zone of influence”. Lastly, we also have the situation on hiding the true costs of constantly repairing subsidence damage.

In areas such as Mayfield, we need an open and frank discussion about the waste of money and resources that relate to the old legacy mines, particularly;

legacy mine maps to be added to the https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/spatialviewer/ website allowing homeowners to receive information about the old legacy mines that would include the year of mining, the map of the mining including depths/etc and any remedial work that has been completed. Since many of the maps date back to the 1800s, a non-guarantee in accuracy would be agreed to by users – we all use it as “best guide” but not 100% accurate
open and public record of mine subsidence claims. If people are worried about privacy concerns, then at least the street name, total claims, and total houses should be listed.
cross referencing with agencies such as Newcastle Council (road, kerb, stormwater, etc..) repairs, together with Hunter Water (pipe repairs) should be help with Subsidence Advisory for action plans to solve hot spots.

It seems to us that by keeping information secret from the public, Subsidence Advisory does not disclose the true cost of constantly repairing people’s homes, or roads, etc… And there is no public accountability for the costs to keep repairing public roads, sewer, Hunter Water pipes, stormwater etc…. in mine subsidence districts.

Its our money. Beside the issues on our properties, when we started looking at the overall management of legacy abandoned mines in the Mayfield and Newcastle area, we found a big problem where no agencies talk with each other, and all just handle the very minimum work needed to solve “today’s” problem. So when you look at streets which have 30+ repairs, or the same pipe system being repaired year after year, at what point should one of these government bodies take some responsibility?

Mine Subsidence Mayfield

Mine Subsidence Damage Mayfield Properties

July 19, 2023

We have extensive mine subsidence damage throughout our properties.

When working with Subsidence Advisory and other agencies, we have been told that there are no mines beneath us, then we have mines beneath us, then the subsidence damage is to be claimed through Legacy Mines, then told that Legacy Mines is not the correct department, and so on.

In 2019 during a Subsidence Advisory visit, inspectors were shown a number of subsidence issues that included road subsidence, kerb subsidence, building subsidence, slab subsidence as well as the water that was flowing from under Maitland Road. Through internal Subsidence Advisory documents, they wrote “no damage to the buildings consistent with mine subsidence was observed or reported.”. This is completely wrong.

Recently, we have been advised by engineers that Subsidence Advisory should have been fixing the repair work since the first signs of mine subsidence occurred, as early back as 2010.

We are still waiting to have meeting with Subsidence Advisory.

38 Maitland Road Mine Subsidence Damage 01

38 Maitland Road Mine Subsidence Damage 02

38 Maitland Road Subsidence Damage Repair – 01

38 Maitland Road Subsidence Damage Repair – 02

38 Maitland Road Subsidence Damage Repair – 03

38 Maitland Road Subsidence Damage Repair – 04

38 Maitland Road Subsidence Damage Repair – 05

Maitland Road Mine Subsidence Damage 04

Omara Street Mayfield – 30 Repairs and Counting…

July 19, 2023

We have taken a short walk opposite our building on Omara Street Mayfield. It shows a tremendous amount of asset/road repairs along the street.

Checking historic evidence, it shows that many of the Hunter Water services have been repaired many times over the years. Right now, it shows another repair service handled by Hunter Water.

Mayfield is in a high mine subsidence district. Hunter Water and Newcastle Council assets are continuously breaking with water then flowing into the legacy mines which them flows into our properties. There is extensive evidence (historic) about multiple problems in this area.

Both Hunter Water and Newcastle Council are ignoring requests to help with a solution for the overall problem (the legacy mines problems). Both agencies have referred us to look for a solution from the NSW Government’s Legacy Mines report on our properties – this report suggested broken pipes are feeding the abandoned mine network and this water flows into our buildings.

Beside damage to us, we have talked with a number of home owners who have subsidence damage on these same streets. The re-active (not pro-active) attitude of all agencies continue to waste our money – it keeps being explained to me, everyone stays in their lanes – when the road needs repairing, Newcastle Council will repair the road. It does not necessarily look on what has caused the problem, but they will keep repairing the same damage over and over.

Omara Street Mayfield 30

Omara Street Mayfield 29

Omara Street Mayfield 28

Omara Street Mayfield 27

Omara Street Mayfield 26

Omara Street Mayfield 25

Omara Street Mayfield 24

Omara Street Mayfield 23

Omara Street Mayfield 22

Omara Street Mayfield 20

Hunter Water Leak Repair on Omara Street Mayfield

Omara Street Mayfield 19

Omara Street Mayfield 18

Omara Street Mayfield 17

Omara Street Mayfield 16

Omara Street Mayfield 15

Omara Street Mayfield 13

Omara Street Mayfield 14

Omara Street Mayfield 12

Omara Street Mayfield 11

Omara Street Mayfield 10

Omara Street Mayfield 09

Omara Street Mayfield 08

Omara Street Mayfield 07

Omara Street Mayfield 06

Omara Street Mayfield 05

Omara Street Mayfield 04

Omara Street Mayfield 03

Omara Street Mayfield 02

Omara Street Mayfield 01

Subsidence Advisory NSW Still Not Willing to Meet With Us – 4 Months and waiting….

July 19, 2023

Its now been nearly 4 months since the request to Subsidence Advisory NSW to meet with us.

We have requested;

– information about the mines beneath our properties and on Maitland Road
Subsidence Advisory NSW outcome = told us to contact NSW Resource Regulator to request the information

– information on the work they have done together with other government agencies in reference to our properties
Subsidence Advisory NSW outcome = continue to keep silent

– request to meet with senior Subsidence Advisory manager
Subsidence Advisory NSW outcome = after many months of chasing, their last response is “We acknowledge your request for a meeting on site however we are unable to facilitate a meeting at this stage of the claim”

We are really frustrated by Subsidence Advisory’s response and lack of support. Our various problems have existed for over 14 years and, as time passes, the problems have become significantly worse. Subsidence Authority has visited us in 2012, 2015 and 2019, however only the 2019 is registered in Subsidence Advisory internal notes.

Below is part of a long email we have sent to Subsidence Advisory NSW;

During your on-site visits, I was told that mine subsidence is not covered on our properties and I should look for help through Legacy Mines. Because of this, we have constantly been handling/paying for various repairs to the buildings. However recently, I have been advised that Subsidence Authority should have been handling the subsidence damage – it’s a another reason why I have asked to meet with a senior manager to understand clearly about our situation.

Over these last months, I have asked support from Subsidence Advisory to meet with me, and, to help provide information whether other government agencies have contacted with you to help with our situation, and/or, to solve their own subsidence damage. For both requests, you have ignored to answer me – so again I am asking if there is a reason why you do not want to help and reply to these requests.

Subsidence Advisory is fully away of our situation as you have personally inspected our serious problems 3 times. Initially, our 38 Maitland Road Mayfield workshop and warehouse was damaged, and is now completely unusable – the integrity of the building is in question. Subsidence damage is found across 42 and 44 Maitland Road and we are in such a damaged position in our business, that most of our staff have resigned. Our sales/retail business is almost completely destroyed and by continually delaying us, avoiding to answer our questions, or sending us to websites/departments that you know cannot help us, is compounding further losses on our side.

Please therefore write to us and let me know clearly about Subsidence Authority’s position on our situation, whether government agencies have been in touch to work with you on our situation, and whether we can meet together with senior manager to discuss our problems.

I have also followed your guidance and filled in the Subsidence Claim form. Please find enclosed photos of subsidence evidence at 38 Maitland Road that directly correlates to photos taken by Subsidence Authority in 2019, as well as evidence at 42 and 44 Maitland Road. We have more information and should be able to recheck with builders/repairers for repairs over these years. Since subsidence events are constant, and one team members is solely focused on handling daily repairs due to the mine problems.

———–

Subsidence Advisory NSW said they have no records of any mine subsidence claims or issues with our properties. They asked us to relodge the claims online, where we found their website lodgement faulty, so then we have manually lodged new subsidence claims. During their visit in 2019, Subsidence Advisory officers in their internal office documents said “no damage to the buildings consistent with mine subsidence was observed or reported.”

Online Subsidence Advisory Lodgement Errors

Mine Subsidence Damage 2019 Sent to Mine Subsidence Authority 02

Tarin Street Mine is the Water Source?

May 18, 2023

We take up the story in January 2015 where water is streaming inside our warehouse from under Maitland Road, Mayfield. At this time we don’t fully understand where the water is coming from but the intensity has increased and flowing from a number of locations out of the soil wall. One submersible pump is not enough to remove the water, so we installed 2 pumps. In this video water is not only coming from multiple locations to the left, but also from the centre of the soil wall, and, from the right of the soil wall. We contact Newcastle Council, and chase very hard for support. At the end of 8 weeks chasing…”XXX is the first point of contact, but he is on holidays”.

Many months later, and having no clear response from Newcastle Council, we ask help from both the Mayfield Business Association and lobby Councillor Tierney to investigate the situation. Newcastle Council’s ultimate findings are;

• An old 1960’s telegraph pole is the cause of the sinkhole in front on the property along Maitland Road. This was also the cause of the sinkhole in 2012 (according to Newcastle Council), and Newcastle Council will again say that this telegraph pole is the cause of another hole in 2019 and 2020. More about the moving telegraph pole later.

• That possibly underground mine workings in Tarin Street might be the cause.

• The case was then closed by Newcastle Council.

And from freedom of information records, Newcastle Council notes are as follows;

I advise that a review of Council records reveal no underground drainage assets are located across the frontage of your property and there are no council assets in the vicinity of the property that would result in water infiltration into the building.

In addition I can confirm that we are drainage pits across the road, however they do not run towards the property, furthermore there is a drainage easement located at 44 Maitland road which is a significant distance away from the property and is down slope from the property.

As such the seepage flows within your property are possibly emanating from old mine workings or an underground spring, and is not associated with the underground pipe drainage system.

Green dye that was placed in the stormwater network across the road found its way into our property.

Tarin Street Mine Water Source ?

Take A Closer Look – Road Repairs

May 12, 2023

Its hard enough to have Newcastle Council repair a pothole. So how do you explain rows and rows of streets being repaired in our area?

If we had an open and transparent mine subsidence authority and related government agencies, we could quickly cross correlate data showing public assets (stormwater, sewer, drinking water, data cables, etc..) and how the legacy mines are impacting on these services.

What is Newcastle’s pro-active mine subsidence policies for the old abandoned mine network – or, do we wait for damage first, then repair, then wait for the damage to return, then repair again….?

Mine Subsidence Road Repairs? – Mayfield East

Subsidence Repairs Tighes Hill?

Tighes Hill Road Repairs?

Road Repairs Mayfield?

Road Repairs Mine Subsidence

Mine Water Undermining Warehouse

May 12, 2023

Mine water from abandoned mines is destroying our buildings.

Mine water is flowing permanently from abandoned mine workings that are located under the footpath and Maitland Road. The mine water runs into catchment pits we have created, and then this water is pumped into the drains. The mine water you see in this video is water we cannot catch and is sitting under the concrete slab and “seeping” out of the expansion joints.

We have 8 locations the mine water is running into our warehouse property.

Mining Techniques in the 1800s

May 4, 2023

Below is an extract from the Royal Commission in 1886 where the commissioners chatted with the manager of Ferndale Colliery;

65. You have worked the coal under the Maitland Road, I believe? Yes.
66.. What depth is the coal from the surface under that road? It is about 1.5 feet from the surface down to the roof of the coal.
67. Of what rock is the roof composed ? Soft past.
68. And to the south -west of the Maitland Road, what is the depth of the coal ? It crops out just beyond the Maitland Road.
69. In that swampy hollow formed by the elbow of. Tighe’s Creek, is the coal found? Yes, it is found in the swampy hollow at Tighe’s Cheek.
70. Then, between the Ferndale workings the outcrops to the south-vest of the Maitland Road, has the coal been worked by other parties ? It was last worked by Mr Bevan, and by Chas. Austin, and several small owners.
71. Are the workings of these small collieries connected with those of Ferndale? Yes.
72. Were any barriers left between them ? I left a barrier of coal between Tighe’s Hill and Peppertown.
73. But in these little collieries that you have spoken of, do you know what Was the nature of the surface deposits above the coal -seam ? It was clay and conglomerate, and in the crop it would be mostly composed of this rotten post, with a body of clay on the top of it.
74. Do you know whether these surface deposits gave these owners any trouble? I do not think so.
75. Was the surface of the crop-workings covered by the tide in that position ? No.
76. Have the pillars in these collieries been taken out? Yes we took out all the pillars in Peppertown.
77. But I am now speaking of these little collieries? ‐ Yes the pillars were taken out.
78. Did they take them out to the very crop? Yes, they took all they could.
79. Then these collieries being connected with Ferndale, will now be drowned out? ‐ Yes; every one of them.
86. On looking at your tracing of the plan, the coal workings are represented to terminate abruptly and follow a curved line,‐does this curved line represent the position of the outcrop?‐ Yes.
87. This is where the coal has become lost in the level deposits? Yes.
91. And did the surface come down and cut out the conglomerate? Yes.
92. Then in that case what was in front of the coal seam? Sand and clay.
96. Towards the crop, did the conglomerate give place to sand suddenly or gradually? Sometimes there would be a portion of post in it. Sometimes it would be 6 or 7 inches, and in others as high as a foot, and cut out the conglomerate.
97. When you struck the surface deposits to the north‐west and north, did these deposits give you any trouble? Only in one portion of the mine.
98/99. Have you taken out the whole of the pillars in this section? …. I mean that section to the west? We have taken out all the pillars to the west of Waratah Railway, excepting under the Maitland Road.
100. Did you experience any difficulty from the surface in doing so? No.
101. What measures did you take to prevent it filling up the workings? We took no measures at all. We took the pillars out and let it fall.
102. Was there any surface‐water? None whatever.
103. Contiguous to the shaft I believe you experienced some difficulty from “cave‐in” Did it give you some trouble? Yes.
104. Would you tell us about it? In the flat of Tighe’s Hill, in four different places, the roof fell in, and worked out to the crop, so that there was no covering to support the crop, and we had to construct a dam to keep the water back.
105. Did any water come in along with the sand? Yes; a considerable quantity came in, but we made these dams, and kept it back.
106. I understand this part of the workings is above tidal influence? Yes; But there is a great body of water in the sand, down about 15 feet.
119. Had you any considerable growth in water from the Ferndale workings? Yes.
120. Where did the water come from? From a flat in the old workings to the west of Ferndale shaft.
121. How much water did you get? We were pumping in No8 16,000 gals. an hour.
161, And you have told us that you pumped 16,000 gallons an hour from that pit ‐ was the water fresh or salt? It was salt water.
162. Where did it come from? Principally from the hard roof of conglomerate.

Ferndale Colliery