Bega - RTA - NSW Government

ISBN 978-1-921766-60-2 

Bega bypass 

Review of Environmental Factors 

VOLUME 1 / SEPTEMBER 2010 

RTA/Pub. 10.291 

1

Roads and Traffic Authority 

Bega Bypass 


September 2010

Executive summary 

The proposal 

The Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW (RTA) proposes to construct a bypass of the township of Bega 

located on the Princes Highway on the south coast of NSW (the proposal). The proposal is for a two lane 

highway bypass about 3.5 kilometres in length and would generally follow an existing road reservation to 

the west of the Bega township. 

The proposal extends from the southern abutment of the Bega River Bridge in the north to Finucane 

Lane in the south. It mainly follows an existing road reservation established by the Bega Valley Shire 

Council and aligns with the Bega River Bridge which was built in 1975 to be compatible with this road 

reserve. 

Key features of the proposal are: 

� A new bridge over the bypass on High Street. 

� A new bridge over the bypass on Ravenswood Street. 

� Two major access points linking the town, the bypass and properties to the west of the bypass 

including: 

– A new roundabout on the southern side of the Bega River bridge. 

– A new southern access in the vicinity of Boundary Road/Applegum Close. 

� A new road connecting Applegum Close to Ravenswood Street, due to loss of direct access from 

Applegum Close to the bypass. 

� Realignment of Finucane Lane. 

The Bega bypass would result in: 

� Improvement in the efficient movement of freight on the South Coast. 

� Improved amenity in Bega due to reduced heavy vehicle numbers in the Bega CBD improving noise 

and air quality impacts. 

� Improved safety within the Bega CBD with separation between local and through traffic. 

� Improve road safety by upgrading the Princes Highway to current design standards. 

� Improved pedestrian and cyclist safety within the Bega CBD due to reduction in heavy vehicles and 

other through traffic. 

� Improve travel times on the highway (proposed 100 km/h speed limit compared to through town 

travel speeds). 

A Bega bypass has been planned since the 1940’s, when the local council and the then Department of 

Main Roads began setting aside a road reservation which was subsequently incorporated into the Bega 

planning scheme in 1965. A number of options have been considered for the proposal and the options 

consideration process has included input from the community and other stakeholders. The identification 

of the preferred option took into account social, environmental and economic factors. 

21/18937/157350 



i

Community and stakeholder consultation 

During preparation of the REF, the RTA consulted with the local community and stakeholders such as 

Bega Valley Shire Council, the Aboriginal community and government agencies. 

Environmental impacts 

The proposal would have both beneficial and adverse environmental impacts. The adverse 

environmental impacts would be avoided, managed and mitigated through the implementation of sitespecific 

safeguards. 

The main environmental impacts associated with the proposal are discussed below. 

Ecology 

A total of around 6.95 hectares of Lowland Grassy Woodland endangered ecological community would 

be cleared. Of this, 0.58 hectares is of moderate to good condition and 6.37 hectares is of low condition. 

An assessment of significance found that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on this 

endangered ecological community. 

About 24 hectares of vegetation, including both native and exotic vegetation, would be cleared. This 

includes the removal of six hollow-bearing trees at the southern end of the route and limited bushrock 

outcropping. Removal of these features would result in habitat loss for some species. 

Assessments of significance were undertaken for potential impact on nine fauna species. These 

assessments conclude that it is unlikely that there would be a significant impact on any threatened fauna 

species as a result of the proposal. 

Noise and vibration 

During construction, noise criteria would potentially be exceeded in sensitive receivers adjacent the 

proposal. Vibration impacts are likely to be noticeable, but unlikely to cause structural damage as the 

majority of works would occur at distances greater than 50 metres from residences. A construction noise 

and vibration management plan would be prepared and implemented to manage and mitigate impacts. 

A total of 63 receivers would need to be considered for operation noise mitigation measures. Feasible 

and reasonable noise attenuation at these receivers would be determined during detailed design. 

Visual amenity 

The proposal would have a moderate to high impact on the landscape character. These ratings are due 

to the predominantly open and rural setting combined with the landform and scattered vegetation 

present. Urban design principles and site specific safeguards have been developed and would apply to 

the proposal. 

Traffic and access 

During construction, traffic impacts would minimised as much of the work would be located on land that 

is currently undeveloped and separate from the Princes Highway. Access across the bypass corridor 

would be altered during operation with access proposed via the High and Ravenswood Street 

overbridges. This would result in some increased travel times for local residences however it would also 

reduce the need for local traffic to travel on the bypass and would increase road safety 

Long term benefits of the proposal include the reduction of vehicles from the Bega CBD, particularly 

heavy vehicles, which would improve safety and amenity within the CBD. The proposal would also allow 

21/18937/157350 



ii

B-doubles to bypass Bega removing the need to unhitch and reattach trailers currently required when 

travelling northbound. 

Aboriginal cultural heritage 

A section 90 permit under the National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1974 has been obtained for the whole 

proposal footprint. The proposal would impact upon Aboriginal objects of low scientific significance in the 

proposal footprint. 

Soil, hydrology, drainage and water quality 

Construction activities would potentially cause erosion, sedimentation and degradation of local water 

quality including groundwater. During operation, the proposal would increase the volume and rate of 

stormwater run-off onto adjacent areas, potentially causing scour and impacts on water quality. 

Management plans would be prepared and implemented to mitigate these impacts. 

Socio economic issues 

Local businesses are expected to experience short-term positive impacts during construction, particularly 

in the accommodation, entertainment and grocery sectors, as well as trades and services. Businesses 

are not expected to be affected by any amenity changes during construction. Amenity in the vicinity of 

the construction footprint would be affected through the introduction of construction traffic, noise, dust 

and visual impacts. 

During operation access between the Bega CBD and existing properties on the western side of the 

corridor would be altered, resulting in increased travel distances and times. Noise and visual impacts, are 

expected for residences located adjacent to the proposed bypass. Amenity through the Bega CBD would 

improve, largely as a result of the reduction in the number of vehicles using the existing Princes 

Highway, in particular heavy vehicles 

While passing trade may reduce, no major impacts to businesses are expected in the long-term. This is 

due to the improved local amenity, continued local demand and modified business operations. 

Conclusion 

The REF has identified that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on the environment or on 

matters of national environmental significance or Commonwealth Land. 

Display of the review of environmental factors 

This review of environmental factors is on display for comment between 20 September 2010 and 25 

October 2010. You can access the documents in the following ways: 

Internet 

The documents would be available as PDF files on the RTA website: 

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/constructionmaintenance/majorconstructionprojectsregional/southcoast/prince 

shwy/begabypass.html 

How can I make a submission? 

To make a submission on the proposal, please send your written comments to: 

RTA Project Manager 

21/18937/157350 



iii

Nick Boyd 

PO Box 477, Wollongong NSW 2520 , 

Email: nick_boyd@rta.nsw.gov.au 

Facsimile number: 02 4221 2590 

Submissions must be received by 25 October 2010. 

Privacy information 

All information included in submissions is collected for the sole purpose of assisting in the assessment of 

this proposal. The information may be used during the environmental impact assessment process by 

relevant RTA staff and its contractors. 

Where the respondent indicates at the time of supply of information that their submission should be kept 

confidential, the RTA would attempt to keep it confidential. However there may be legislative or legal 

justification for the release of the information, for example under the Freedom of Information Act 1989 or 

under subpoena or statutory instrument. 

The supply of this information is voluntary. Each respondent has free access at all times to the 

information provided by that respondent but not to any identifying information provided by other 

respondents if a respondent has indicated that the representation should be kept confidential. 

Any respondent may make a correction to the information that they have provided by writing to the same 

address the submission was sent. 

The information would be held by the Roads and Traffic Authority, 90 Crown Street, Wollongong, NSW 

2500. 

What happens next? 

Following the submissions period, the RTA would collate submissions. Acknowledgement letters would 

be sent to each respondent. The details of submission authors would be retained and authors would be 

subsequently advised when proposal information is released. 

After consideration of community comments the RTA would determine whether the proposal should 

proceed as proposed, or whether any alterations to the proposal are necessary. The community would 

be kept informed regarding this RTA determination. 

If the proposal is approved, the RTA proceeds with final design and tenders are called for construction of 

the proposal. 

If you have any queries, please contact the RTA project manager on Ph: 02 4221 2438. 

21/18937/157350 



iv

Contents 

Volume 1 – Main Report and Appendix A 

Executive summary i 

1. Introduction 1 

21/18937/157350 

1.1 Proposal identification 1 

1.2 Purpose of the report 2 

2. Need and options considered 7 

2.1 Strategic need for the proposal 7 

2.2 Proposal objectives 10 

2.3 Alternatives and options considered 11 

3. Description of the proposal 18 

3.1 The proposal 18 

3.2 Existing road and infrastructure 18 

3.3 Design parameters 21 

3.4 Major design features 22 

3.5 Construction activities 28 

3.6 Ancillary facilities 32 

3.7 Public utility adjustments 33 

3.8 Property acquisition 34 

4. Statutory and planning framework 37 

4.1 State Environmental Planning Policies 37 

4.2 Local Environmental Plans 40 

4.3 Other relevant legislation 40 

4.4 Confirmation of statutory position 42 

5. Stakeholder and community consultation 43 

5.1 Consultation strategy 43 

5.2 Community involvement 43 

5.3 Aboriginal community involvement 45 

5.4 Government agency and stakeholder involvement 45 

5.5 Ongoing or future consultation 51 

6. Environmental assessment 52 


Review of Environmental Factors

21/18937/157350 

6.1 Ecology 52 

6.2 Noise and vibration 62 

6.3 Landscape character and visual amenity 74 

6.4 Traffic and access 79 

6.5 Greenhouse emissions 85 

6.6 Air quality 88 

6.7 Climate change 90 

6.8 Aboriginal cultural heritage 93 

6.9 Non-Aboriginal historic heritage 97 

6.10 Soils, hydrology, drainage and water quality 99 

6.11 Land use and property 108 

6.12 Socio-economic 110 

6.13 Demand on resources 115 

6.14 Waste management 116 

6.15 Hazards and risks 117 

6.16 Cumulative environmental impacts 119 

6.17 Summary of beneficial effects 121 

6.18 Summary of adverse effects 121 

7. Environmental management 122 

7.1 Environmental management plans (or system) 122 

7.2 Summary of safeguards and management measures 122 

7.3 Licensing and approvals 130 

8. Conclusion 132 

8.1 Justification 132 

8.2 Ecologically sustainable development 132 

8.3 Conclusion 134 

9. Certification 136 

10. References 137 

11. Terms and acronyms used in this REF 139 

Clause 228 Checklist 144 

Matters of National Environmental Significance 148 

Table Index 

Table 3.1 Existing road infrastructure 19 



21/18937/157350 

Table 3.2 Indicative heavy vehicle movements 31 

Table 3.3 Indicative property acquisition requirements 34 

Table 4.1 Matters for consideration under the LSCREP No 2 38 

Table 5.1 Summary of main community issues raised on the options 44 

Table 5.2 Summary of government agency and stakeholder issues 46 

Table 5.3 Assessment of items of Clauses 13, 14, 15 and 16 of the ISEPP48 

Table 6.1 Occurrence of endangered ecological communities 53 

Table 6.2 Occurrence of listed fauna species within the study area with 

potential for impact. 57 

Table 6.3 Types of vegetation cleared 59 

Table 6.4 Summary of significance assessments for threatened fauna 61 

Table 6.5 Interim Construction Noise Guideline construction noise criteria at 

sensitive receivers 63 

Table 6.6 British Standard 6472 human comfort vibration limits 63 

Table 6.7 Guideline values for short term vibration on structures (DIN 4150-3) 

63 

Table 6.8 Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise operational traffic 

noise target levels, LAeq(period), dB(A) 64 

Table 6.9 Rating background level (RBL) dB(A) 68 

Table 6.10 Predicted construction noise levels, LAeq(15min) dB(A) 69 

Table 6.11 Typical vibration levels (mm/s peak) 69 

Table 6.12 Summary of road traffic noise impacts 71 

Table 6.13 Landscape character impacts 77 

Table 6.14 Average weekday traffic volumes 79 

Table 6.15 Projected traffic volumes without the Bega bypass, year 2015 (future 

existing) 81 

Table 6.16 Projected traffic volumes with the Bega bypass, year 2015 (with 

proposal) 81 

Table 6.17 Projected traffic volumes with the Bega bypass, year 2025 design 

82 

Table 6.18 Vehicle numbers on the existing Princes Highway through Bega82 

Table 6.19 Projected heavy vehicle numbers on the Princes Highway through 

Bega 83 

Table 6.20 Scenario one: emissions from traffic using Bega town route without 

bypass (2015) 87 

Table 6.21 Scenario two: emissions from traffic using both bypass and Bega 

town route (2015) 87 

Table 6.22 Climate change projections for the Bega region 90 

Table 6.23 Preliminary assessment of archaeological potential within the 

proposal footprint 95 



21/18937/157350 

Table 6.24 Non-Aboriginal heritage items 97 

Table 7.1 Summary of site specific environmental safeguards 122 

Table 7.2 Summary of licensing and approval required 130 

Figure Index 

Figure 1.1 The proposal (northern end) 3 

Figure 1.2 The proposal (southern end) 4 

Figure 1.3 The general locality of the proposal 5 

Figure 1.4 The proposal footprint and the existing road reserve 6 

Figure 2.1 B-double route through Bega 9 

Figure 2.2 B-double decoupling area 10 

Figure 3.1 Site of the proposal at Ravenswood Street looking south 20 

Figure 3.2 Looking south along Princes Highway and Finucane Lane 

intersection 21 

Figure 3.3 Major features of the proposal 24 

Figure 3.4 Proposed site for the northern roundabout (looking north at existing 

Bega River Bridge) 25 

Figure 3.5 Artist sketch of High Street bridge 26 

Figure 3.6 Indicative property acquisition required for the proposal 36 

Figure 6.1 Endangered ecological communities present in the area 55 

Figure 6.2 Noise catchment areas and noise monitoring locations (north) 66 

Figure 6.3 Noise catchment areas and noise monitoring locations (south) 67 

Figure 6.4 Landscape character zones 76 

Figure 6.5 Artists impression heading south towards the proposed northern 

roundabout 78 

Figure 6.6 Soil landscapes at Bega, NSW 100 

Appendices 

A Environmental Checklists 

Volume 2 - Appendices 

B Consultation material 

C Biodiversity Assessment 

D Noise and Vibration Assessment 

E Visual Impact Assessment 

F Greenhouse Assessment 

G Aboriginal Heritage Assessments 

H Socio-economic Assessment 



1. Introduction 

1.1 Proposal identification 

The Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW (RTA) proposes to construct a bypass of the township of Bega 

located on the Princes Highway on the south coast of NSW (the proposal). The proposal is for a two lane 

highway bypass about 3.5 kilometres in length. The alignment would following an existing road 

reservation to the west of the Bega township (refer to Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2). 

The Princes Highway is the major north–south transport link between Sydney, the Illawarra and south 

coast regions. It is a critical link for both passenger and freight transport and is a major route for tourism. 

Currently northbound B-doubles are not permitted to travel through Bega. The proposal would enable the 

Princes Highway between the Snowy Mountains Highway and the Victorian border to be used by Bdouble 

vehicles in both directions. It would also remove through vehicles from the town centre, improving 

safety and amenity for residents. 

The proposal extends from the southern abutment of the Bega River Bridge in the north to Finucane 

Lane in the south. It mainly follows an existing road reservation established by the Bega Valley Shire 

Council in the 1960s and aligns with the Bega River Bridge which was built in 1975 to be compatible with 

the road reservation. 





including: 

– A new roundabout on the southern side of the Bega River bridge. 



Applegum Close to the bypass. 


The proposal is in the Bega Valley local government area (LGA) in the RTA Southern region on the NSW 

south coast. The main land uses in the study area include residential, commercial and agricultural, 

particularly dairy farming. Other land uses include the Mimosa Rocks National Park and the Bournda 

Nature Reserve. The main water courses in the study area are the Brogo River and the Bega River. The 

Bega River crosses the Princes Highway just to the north of the proposal then runs parallel about 350 

metres to the west of the proposal. Refer to Figure 1.3 for the general locality of the proposal. 

The proposal footprint is defined as the area of direct impact. This is mainly in the allocated road 

reservation which is characterised by open pasture, with rural residential to the west and urban/industrial 

to the east. The proposal footprint and the existing road reservation are shown in Figure 1.4. 

The Australian and NSW governments have committed joint funding for planning and construction of the 

proposed bypass. The construction phase of the proposal is expected to be around two years and to be 

completed in late 2013. 

21/18937/157350 



1

1.2 Purpose of the report 

This review of environmental factors (REF) has been prepared by GHD and nghenvironmental on behalf 

of RTA Southern region. For the purposes of these works, the RTA is the proponent and the determining 

authority under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). 

The purpose of the REF is to describe the proposal, to document the likely impacts of the proposal on 

the environment, and to detail protective measures to be implemented. 

The description of the proposal and associated environmental impacts have been undertaken in context 

of clause 228 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the Threatened Species 

Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act), the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act), and the Australian 

Government’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). In doing so, 

the REF helps to fulfil the requirements of Section 111 of the EP&A Act, that the RTA examine and take 

into account to the fullest extent possible, all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment by 

reason of the activity. 

The findings of the REF would be considered when assessing: 

� Whether the proposal is likely to have a significant impact on the environment and therefore the 

necessity for approval to be sought under Part 3A of the EP&A Act. 

� The significance of any impact on threatened species as defined by the TSC Act and/or FM Act, in 

accordance with Section 5A of the EP&A Act and therefore the requirement for a Species Impact 

Statement. 

� The potential for the proposal to significantly impact a matter of national environmental significance 

or Commonwealth land and the need to make a referral to the Australian Government Department of 

the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) for a decision by the Commonwealth 

Minister for the Environment Protection, Heritage and the Arts on whether assessment and approval 

is required under the EPBC Act. 

21/18937/157350 



2

Legend 

Buckajo Road 

Ridge Street 

The proposal 

Waterways (lines) 

Highways 

West Street 

Bega River 

John Street 

Angle Street 

Princes Highway 

Valley Street 

Kooringal Place 

Major roads 

Secondary roads 

Other roads 

Bridge Street 

Norman Avenue 

Fairview Street 

Ravenswood Street 

overpass 

Northern 

roundabout 

High Street 

overpass 

High Street 

Old Highway Street 

Kirkland Crescent 

Poplar Street 

Figure 1.1 Concept design (Northern end) 

Meringo Street 

Dowling Street 


Bega Street 

Nelson Street 

Baker Street 

Gowing Avenue 

Prospect Street 

Maher Street 

Watson Street 

Bloomfield Avenue 

Minyama Parade 

Wallace Street 

Heath Street 

Eden Street 

Spindler Street 

Swan Street 

Broulee Street 

Hill Street 

Eden Street 

Mckee Avenue 

Peden Street 

Upper Street 

Girraween C rescent 

Victoria Street 

Rawlinson Street 

Lynjohn Drive 

Bodalla Road 

Auckland Street 

Zingel Place 

Barrack Street 

o 

1:10,000 (at A4) 

00.0375 0.075 0.15 0.225 0.3 

Kilometers 

Map Projection: Transverse Mercator 

Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) 

Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 55 

G:\21\18937\GIS\Maps\21.18937.Z005_Bega_RTA_Location_Map(A4)_20100804.mxd 

Laws Drive 

Little Church Street 


Church Street 

Manning Street 

Game Crescent

Applegum Close to 


connection 

Max Slater Drive 

Legend 

Finucane Lane 

The proposal 


Highways 


Applegum Close 

Finucane Lane 

realignment 


Charlotte Street Redgum Close 

Major roads 


Other roads 

M inyama Parade 

Finucane Lane 

Figure 1.2 Concept design (Southern end) 

Mecklenberg Street 


Lynjohn Drive 

Intersection with 

Boundary Road 

and the existing 


Boundary Road 

Willow Court 

East Street 

Boundary R o ad 

o 

1:10,000 (at A4) 

00.0375 0.075 0.15 0.225 0.3 

Kilometers 




G:\21\18937\GIS\Maps\21.18937.Z005_Bega_RTA_Location_Map(A4)_20100804.mxd

Wadbilliga National Park ! 

! 

Devils Hole 

Wyndham 

South East Forest 

National Park 

Morans Crossing 

Mogilla Rd 

Tantawangalo Mountain Rd 

Dubbo ! 

Wollongong ! 

Nowra ! 

Wagga Wagga ! 

Canberra " 

! 

Albury 

Melbourne 

Maitland ! 

Newcastle ! 

! 

BathurstCentral 

! Coast 

! 

Sydney " 

Candelo 

Numbugga 

Snowy Mountains Hwy 

Kameruka 

Myrtle Mountain 

! 

Bega 

Regional Locality Map 

Toothdale 

South East Forest 

National Park 

B uckajo Rd 

Bega R iver 

Candelo Bega Rd 

Wyndham Ln 

Figure 1.3 Regional context 

Buckajo 

Bega Valley 

Black Range 

Kingswood 

Kanoona 

South Wolumla 

Yurammie 

State Forest 

Frogs Hollow 

Wolumla 

Princes Hwy 

Brogo 

Greendale 

Bro go River 

Coopers Gully 

Stony Creek 

Bega 

Tarraganda 

Yellow Pinch 

Biamanga National Park 

Mumbulla Mountain 

Bournda 

Nature Reserve 

Angledale 

Tathra Rd 

Mimosa Rocks 

National Park 

Doctor George Mountain 

Chinnock Nelson 

Bournda 

Berrambool 

Merimbula 

Millingandi 

Bald Hills 

Jellat Jellat 

Reedy Swamp 

Tathra Rd 

Kalaru 

Wallagoot 

Sapphire Coast Dr 

Bournda 

National Park 

Tura Beach 

Beg a St 

Tanja 

Mogareeka 

Tathra 

Wapengo 

Tathra Bermagui Rd 

SOUTH PACIFIC OCEAN 

Legend 

Murrah 

The proposal 

Highways 

Major roads 

National Parks 

Conservation Area 

Woodland 

Waterways 

Seas 

Bega general area 

o 

1:200,000(at 

A4) 

0 1 2 4 6 8 10 

Kilometers 




G:\21\18937\GIS\Maps\21.18937.Z006_Bega_RTA_Regional_Context_fig1_3.mxd

Legend 

Buckajo Road 

Proposal footprint 

Existing bypass 

road reservation 

Waterways 

Bega RiverPrinces Highway 

Figure 1.4 Existing bypass road reservation 

and proposal footprint 

Angle Street 

Finucane Lane 

Highways 

Major roads 


Other roads 

Valley Street 

Poplar Street 



High Street 




BEGA 


Baker Street 

Gowing Avenue 



Hill Street 

Eden Stre et 




Finucane Lane 

Eden Street 

Redgum Close 

Koolgarra Drive 

Laws Drive 

Boundary Road 



Zingel Place 

High Street 

Church Street 



Lynjohn Drive 

Bridge Street 

Gipps Street 

Douglas Street 

Canning Street 

Parker Street 


Carp Street 

Upper Street 

Park Lane 

Belmore Street 

East Street 

Tathra Road 

Bunyarra Drive 

East Street 

Glebe Avenue 

Boundary Road 

Glebe Lane 

Howard Avenue 

o 

0 100 200 400 600 800 

Meters 




G:\21\18937\GIS\Maps\21.18937.Z004_Bega_RTA_Existing_Bypass_fig1_4.mxd

2. Need and options considered 

2.1 Strategic need for the proposal 

2.1.1 Relevant strategies and plans 

NSW State Plan 2010 

The NSW State Plan – Investing in a Better Future identifies priorities and targets for delivering services 

for NSW. The State Plan identifies a number of priorities including ‘delivering better transport and 

liveable cities’. 

Targets within this priority include: 

� Improve the road network. 

� Improve road safety. 

� Grow centres as functional and attractive places to live, work and visit. 

These targets identify the need to upgrade the Princes Highway and to improve road safety outcomes by 

upgrading roads. They also identify the need to accommodate population growth in major regional 

centres such as Bega in an environment which makes places attractive for people to live. 

The proposal would assist in meeting these priorities and targets by upgrading the Princes Highway to 

improve traffic and freight efficiency and to improve road safety. It would also remove through vehicles 

from Bega town centre, improving safety and amenity for residents. The NSW State Plan therefore 

supports this proposal. 

South Coast Regional Strategy 2006-2031 

The South Coast Regional Strategy sets out land use plans for the South Coast and includes the 

Shoalhaven, Eurobodalla and Bega Valley local government areas. It identifies Bega as a major regional 

centre and as a growth area in which new urban development should be focussed. 

The strategy identifies the Princes Highway as regionally significant infrastructure. It further notes that 

there are transport and accessibility limitations in the south coast due to the dispersed settlement pattern 

and that the Princes Highway is very important in connecting communities, supporting economic 

development and linking to neighbouring regions. 

The proposal is consistent with the South Coast Regional Strategy as it would upgrade the Princes 

Highway. It is also in accordance with the existing road reserve which has largely been taken into 

account for existing and future development planning (refer to section 6.11 for further information on land 

use). 

2.1.2 Road network 

Road freight 

The Princes Highway is a critical north-south link between Sydney, Wollongong and the communities 

along the south coast down to the Victorian border. The railway does not extend south of Bomaderry in 

21/18937/157350 



7

the Shoalhaven local government area and the Princes Highway is therefore the primary land transport 

route servicing the south coast, 

The Princes Highway through Bega is therefore an important freight route and is designated as a 25 

metre B-double route and a 4.6 metre high vehicle route. These vehicles are restricted access vehicles 

and may only be driven on approved routes. 

This B-double route is currently restricted to southbound travel only through Bega (refer to Figure 2.1). 

This is because the Princes Highway does not accommodate the turning circle for B-doubles travelling 

north at the corner of Gipps Street and Carp Street in Bega. Due to this restriction, northbound B-doubles 

are required to break their load south of Bega, and haul each trailer through Bega separately (refer to 

Figure 2.2). This results in a total of three movements through Bega, (ie two northbound trips and one 

southbound trip). Around 25 B-doubles undertake this manoeuvre per week. 

The proposal would improve accessibility to the south coast and freight efficiency by removing this 

inefficient travel pattern, as well as removing through heavy vehicles from Bega. 

Traffic data and efficiency 

Currently 40 per cent of all southbound traffic (counted north of the Bega River bridge) on the Princes 

Highway is through traffic. For northbound traffic on the Princes Highway, 42 per cent is through traffic 

(from Kerrisons Lane south of the proposed bypass to the bridge north of Bega). 

Current traffic volumes through Bega show the percentage of heavy vehicles is about 8-12 per cent 

(dependent on the direction). Heavy vehicle numbers in the year 2015 through Bega are expected to be 

in the order of 905 northbound and 648 southbound vehicles per day. With the bypass this is estimated 

to reduce to 419 vehicles per day northbound and 208 vehicles per day southbound, improving safety 

and amenity in Bega. The remaining heavy vehicles entering Bega would have a destination in the 

township. 

Currently the Princes Highway through Bega has a number of speed zones (ie 50 km/h, 60 km/h and 

80 km/h). The proposal would provide a consistent speed around Bega of 100 km/h. This would improve 

travel times and traffic efficiency. Refer to section 6.4 for further detail on traffic analysis. 

Road safety 

The vertical and horizontal alignment of the Princes Highway in the area is considered to be poor and 

inconsistent with the RTA’s current performance measures and planning targets. The proposal would 

improve road safety by upgrading the Princes Highway to current design standards and removing 

highway traffic, including heavy vehicles from the Bega township. Refer to section 6.4 for information on 

traffic crash history. 

21/18937/157350 



8

Figure 2.1 B-double route through Bega 

21/18937/157350 



9

Figure 2.2 B-double decoupling area 

2.2 Proposal objectives 

The objectives of the proposal are to: 

� Provide continuous 25 metre B-double access on the Princes Highway between the Snowy 

Mountains Highway and the Victorian border. 


� Improve road safety in the town by removing conflicts between local and through traffic. 

� Improve travel times on the highway (proposed 100 km/h speed limit compared to existing 50 km/h, 

60 km/h and 80 km/h speed limits). 

� Improve amenity in the town by removing heavy vehicle through traffic and reducing traffic noise 

levels. 

� Maintain the town’s east-west connectivity (including for pedestrians and cyclists). 

� Create a road that best fits with the landscape and allows the area to maintain its character and 

amenity. 

� Meet the sustainability objectives of the Australian and NSW Governments. 

� Provide value for money. 

21/18937/157350 



10

2.3 Alternatives and options considered 

2.3.1 Background 

A Bega bypass has been planned since the 1940’s, when the local council and the then Department of 

Main Roads began setting aside a road reservation connecting the existing Princes Highway south of the 

Bega River and crossing to the southern outskirts of Bega on the western side of the township. In 1965 

Bega Municipal Council (now the Bega Valley Shire Council) included a road reservation for a bypass on 

the western edge of the town in its then planning scheme. In 1969, a concept design for a bypass was 

developed within this reservation. The alignment left the existing highway to the south of the Bega River 

Bridge and travelled south to near the intersection of the existing highway and Applegum Close. In 1975, 

the Bega River Bridge was completed with the bridge aligned to ensure that it would be compatible with 

the construction of a bypass along the existing road reservation. 

2.3.2 Methodology for selection of preferred option 

In 2008 the Federal Government announced funding for the Bega bypass as part of its Nation Building 

Program. RTA commenced strategic options investigations and confirmed that a bypass of Bega was the 

preferred strategic option. 

As a proposed bypass corridor had been established in the 1960s by the Department of Main Roads and 

the local council, this corridor route was initially investigated to determine if it was still feasible for a 

bypass. Having determined it was feasible, preliminary enquiries were also made into potential 

alternative corridors around Bega. These identified geographic constraints including flood prone land to 

the east of Bega, as well as prime agricultural land. To the west lies the Bega River and steeper 

topography. It was found that any alternative corridor would require a longer length of road and a new 

crossing of the Bega River. From these investigations it was determined that the assigned road corridor 

was the best fit for the proposed bypass of Bega. 

In 2009 an options study (Parsons Brinckerhoff 2009) was undertaken to re-examine existing design 

(from 1969) and identify further design options. These options formed the basis for the value and risk 

management workshop held in June 2009. Participants in this workshop included RTA project staff, and 

representatives from Bega Chamber of Commerce, Bega Valley Shire Council, NSW Department of 

Planning, NSW Police, Bega Local Aboriginal Land Council, GHD as well as an independent facilitator. 

From this workshop, six options associated with the existing reservations were identified. Community 

consultation on these six options was undertaken including: 

� Distribution of about 11,000 community updates in November 2009. 

� Display of the six options at Bega Valley Shire Council administration centre from 23 November 2009 

to 21 December 2009. 

� Open invitation to a community workshop held at Bega Town Hall on 9 December 2009 (further 

details on these options can be found in Appendix B). 

In December 2009, a second value management workshop involving the members of RTA, GHD, council 

and Chamber of Commerce as well as an independent facilitator was held to further analyse the options. 

This included developing criteria that took into account input from the community consultation. Each 

option was evaluated against the following criteria: 

� Community severance/social impacts. 

21/18937/157350 



11

� Amenity impacts. 

� Safety impacts. 

� Footprint impacts (environmental). 

� Functionality. 

� Value for money. 

A preferred option was identified as a result of the value management workshop. Additional design 

issues raised were also investigated and considered. The process for identifying the preferred option is 

further described in section 2.3.3 below. The preferred option is described in chapter 3. 

2.3.3 Strategic options analysis 

Three strategic options have been analysed. These were: 

� The base case option. 

� Upgrade existing highway. 

� Western bypass of Bega option. 

These broad options and the analysis of each are described below. 

Base case (do nothing) option 

The base case option was considered for this proposal. It is important to assess any proposal against the 

‘base case’ option to clearly identify the benefits being achieved compared with taking no action. The 

base case option would involve retaining the existing poor and inconsistent section of the Princes 

Highway through Bega and maintaining it as required. 

This option would not be consistent with the Australian Government Nation Building Program through 

which funding has been provided for a bypass of Bega. This option would also not be consistent with the 

NSW State Plan 2010 to upgrade the Princes Highway, to improve road safety and to improve the 

amenity of Bega. This option would also not be consistent with the NSW South Coast Regional Strategy 

2006-2031 which identifies the Princes Highway as regionally significant infrastructure. 

The base case option was discounted as it would not meet the strategic need for the proposal and did 

not perform well against the project objectives. 

Upgrade existing highway option 

The upgrade existing highway option would include improvement of the bend at Carp Street and Gipps 

Street in Bega. This option would require reconstruction of the inside corner of this intersection to provide 

for the swept path of northbound B-doubles. A signalised pedestrian crossing would need to be 

implemented to account for the increased width of the highway. 

The upgrade existing highway option would not be consistent with the Australian Government Nation 

Building Program as funding has been provided specifically for a Bega bypass. This option would not 

bypass Bega and B-doubles and highway traffic including 4.6 metre high trucks would continue to pass 

through the township. 

21/18937/157350 



12

This option would upgrade the Princes Highway however it would not be consistent with the NSW State 

Plan 2010 as it would not improve the amenity and attractiveness of Bega town which is a major regional 

centre. 

This option would be cheaper and would require less construction activity, reducing the level of ground 

disturbance and new infrastructure. It would also maintain the existing association of Bega and its 

businesses with the highway eg those businesses reliant on passing trade. 

This option however would not meet the following project objectives: 

� Speed limits would not increase to 100 km/h. 

� Conflicts between local and through traffic in Bega township would remain, impacting on road safety. 

� Heavy vehicle through traffic and traffic noise levels would not be removed from Bega town. 

The following further issues were identified with this option: 

� It would not take into account the historic and ongoing local planning for a western bypass for Bega. 

� Potential impacts to the clock tower, which has local heritage significance, the Court House and the 

Commercial Hotel. 

� Increased delays and congestion in high traffic times due to traffic signal control at Carp Street and 

Gipps Street. 

� Acquisition of town centre commercial property. 

� Substantial utility relocation. 

� Would not utilise land already reserved and purchased for the bypass. 

The upgrade existing highway option was discounted as it would not meet the strategic need for the 

proposal and did not perform well against the project objectives. 

Western bypass of Bega option 

The western bypass of Bega option is the preferred strategic option. This option would involve 

construction of a two lane highway on the alignment of an existing road reservation formally established 

since 1965. It would align with the southern end of Bega River Bridge and would involve construction of 

intersections into and out of Bega and connections to provide east to west connectivity across the 

bypass. 

This option would be in accordance with the Australian Government Nation Building Program through 

which funding has been provided for a Bega bypass. This option would be consistent with the NSW State 

Plan 2010 as it would upgrade the Princes Highway and improve road safety and the amenity of Bega. 

This option would further be consistent with the NSW South Coast Regional Strategy 2006-2031 which 

identifies the Princes Highway as regionally significant infrastructure. 

The proposal would meet all of the project objectives including providing continuous 25 metre B-double 

access on the Princes Highway between the Snowy Mountains Highway and the Victorian border. This 

option would improve road safety and amenity in the Bega township by removing highway through traffic 

and travel speeds would be 100 km/h, maximising travel efficiencies. 

The western bypass of Bega option is the preferred strategic option as it would best meet the strategic 

need for the proposal and the project objectives. 

21/18937/157350 



13

2.3.4 Selection of preferred road alignment 

The Bega Bypass – Planning and Engineering Options Study (Parsons Brinkerhoff 2009) identified three 

alignment options within the preferred strategic option for consideration: 

� Alignment option 1 – Involved updating the 1969 design to comply with current design standards. 

� Alignment option 2 – This option had an identical horizontal alignment to option 1, however it had an 

improved vertical geometry to minimise gradients, which would result in improved light vehicle and 

heavy vehicle performance. 

� Alignment option 3 – This option extended the bypass to the south to Finucane Lane, bypassing an 

additional section of the Princes Highway that has a poor alignment and extended the horizontal and 

vertical alignment to achieve efficiencies in earthworks thereby reducing overall construction costs. 

Overall, there were no major differences between the three options, as the horizontal alignment for much 

of the proposed corridor has been fixed since 1965. However, the study recommended that option 3 

undergo further investigation as more detail was required for the vertical alignment and the extension of 

the bypass to Finucane Lane. 

As recommended by the study, option 3 was then further investigated. This was facilitated through a 

value and risk management workshop in June 2009 which was attended by representatives from the 

RTA, GHD and relevant stakeholders. Risks and opportunities of the proposal were discussed, leading to 

the development of a number of design refinement and options for the proposal. In particular six options 

for the southern access (refer to section 2.3.5) were identified. 

2.3.5 Selection of design access points 

Northern access 

Design opportunities for the northern access of the proposal were limited, as the bypass was required to 

align with the Bega River Bridge and still provide access into Bega CBD. 

The northern access includes a three way roundabout linking the existing Princes Highway and the 

bypass. The existing highway would provide access to the Bega CBD. The single lane roundabout would 

cater for B-doubles. It would also provide a physical speed constraint for vehicles transitioning from the 

100 km/h speed zone on the bypass to the 80 km/h speed zone on the Bega River Bridge and through 

North Bega. 

Southern access 

Six options were considered for the southern access arrangements and were placed on public display in 

late 2009. 

These options are described below and the design plans that went on public display are shown in 

Appendix B. 

Southern access - option 1 

Option 1 would include construction of a four way intersection on the bypass near Boundary Road. The 

intersection would connect to the existing highway to the east and to Applegum Close to the west. The 

bypass would have a posted speed limit of 100 km/h. 

21/18937/157350 



14

This option was not considered appropriate due to the road safety issues associated with operating the 

four way intersection in a high speed environment, with movements from all directions (both the eastern 

and western access points). This would also impact on private property to the east and have an adverse 

visual impact on residences to the west. 


Option 2 includes the construction of an underpass beneath the bypass as an extension of Boundary 

Road. Two left-in/left-out only intersections would provide access to the north and southbound 

carriageways. The extension of Boundary Road underpass would meet Ravenswood Street which is 

located to the west of the bypass. This extension would provide access to the bypass for residents on 

Ravenswood Street. Access to Applegum Close would also be altered with access to be provided via the 

extension of Boundary Road. The bypass would have a posted speed limit of 100 km/h. 

This option was not considered appropriate due to the underpass arrangement being difficult to 

construct, requiring a large construction footprint, potentially being confusing for motorists, and being an 

expensive option. Neither the eastern or western access points were considered adequate for current 

design standards. 


Option 3 includes the construction of a roundabout on the bypass in the vicinity of Boundary Road. The 

roundabout would have five legs located at Boundary Road (existing), Applegum Close, Old Princes 

Highway east to Bega, for the new bypass and Princes Highway south to Eden. A road extension 

between Applegum Close and Ravenswood Street would also be constructed to provide access to 

residents on Ravenswood Street. The bypass would have a posted speed limit of 80 km/h. 

This option was assessed as two separate components (access to the east and west): 

� The eastern access for option 3 is considered to be an appropriate access into Bega, however when 

compared to other options it would result in a speed limit of 80 km/h, which is lower than the key 

proposal objective of achieving a 100 km/h posted speed limit. 

� The western access for option 3 was not considered appropriate due to the large amount of 

earthworks required to allow access to the western side of the bypass, resulting in impacts on utilities 

and private property including land acquisition and visual impacts. For the above reasons option 3 

was not considered as the preferred option. 


Option 4 includes the construction of two T-intersections. One would be located to the south of Boundary 

Road connecting to the existing Princes Highway. The second intersection would be located to the north 

of Boundary Road, connecting a new access road to Ravenswood Street. This access road would be 

located on an existing road reservation, west of the bypass. The existing access to Applegum Close 

would also be lost, with an alternate access to be provided off the new access road between the bypass 

and Ravenswood Street. The bypass would have a posted speed limit of 100 km/h. 

Option 4 was assessed as two separate components (access to the east and west): 

� The eastern access is considered an appropriate access for the bypass. 

� The western access for this option was deemed acceptable for further consideration however it was 

found that when coupled with the eastern access for Option 4, it would result in road safety issues. 

21/18937/157350 



15

These issues included the potential weave movement between eastern and western accesses, as 

well as the mix of slow moving traffic with high speed bypass traffic. For this reason, this option was 

eventually considered to be inappropriate. 


Option 5 includes the construction of two T-intersections. One would be located to the north of Boundary 

Road providing access to the eastern side of the bypass and the existing Princes Highway. The second 

intersection provides access to the western side of the corridor to the south of Applegum Close in the 

vicinity of the existing private access that crosses the corridor. This access includes the construction of a 

new road between the bypass and Ravenswood Street on an existing road reservation of Auckland 

Street and Boundary Road. The bypass would have a posted speed limit of 100 km/h under this 

arrangement. 

Option 5 was not considered to be appropriate due to road safety issues similar to that described in 

option 4, in particular the potential weave movement between the two intersections. Other reasons for 

this option not being considered are: 

� Difficulty in constructing the proposal. 

� Impacts to a number of existing utility services. 

� The poor access to Boundary Road. 


Option 6 includes the construction of two T-intersections. One would be located to the south of Boundary 

Road and would provide access to the eastern side of the corridor to the existing Princes Highway. The 

second intersection would be located where Ravenswood Street and the bypass corridor intersect. This 

intersection would be slightly realigned to the south, and provide access to the residents living to the 

west of the bypass. Under this arrangement, Applegum Close would no longer be accessible directly 

from the existing highway or the new bypass. A new access road would be constructed between 

Applegum Close and Ravenswood Street via an existing road corridor. The bypass would have a posted 

speed limit of 100 km/h under this arrangement. 

Option 6 was considered to be a viable option with both the eastern and western access points 

considered to meet the objectives of the proposal. A potential road safety issue was later identified with 

this option. There is a potential conflict of southbound traffic with those turning into Ravenswood Street 

from the southbound lane of the bypass. 

Preferred option 

The northern access option and southern access option 6 was identified as the preferred option. These 

options address community concerns and issues raised at the value management workshop regarding 

access from the west. During this iterative process the following adjustments were made to the 

remainder of the Bega bypass concept design: 

� Realigning the proposed bypass at the southern end including lowering the vertical alignment to 

reduce the proposal footprint. 

� Raising the vertical alignment slightly between High Street and Charlotte Street to reduce the spoil 

created by the southern re-alignment. 

21/18937/157350 



16

� Providing an overbridge at Ravenswood Street to eliminate conflicts with local and bypass traffic. 

This would also enable safe pedestrian access for residents on the western side of the bypass. 

� Realigning Finucane Lane and the new intersection to improve sight distance. 

� Providing three metre wide shoulder in the southbound direction between the proposed Boundary 

Road intersection and the existing cemetery access road to informally cater for slow moving funeral 

processions from town to the cemetery located to the south of the proposal. 

A detailed description of the preferred option (the proposal) is in chapter 3. 

21/18937/157350 



17

3. Description of the proposal 

3.1 The proposal 

The proposal involves constructing a two lane undivided highway bypass to the west of Bega. It would 

involve the realignment of the Princes Highway for a distance of about 3.5 kilometres. It would extend 

from the southern abutment of the Bega River Bridge in the north to Finucane Lane in the south and 

follows an existing road reservation established in 1965. 


� A western bypass of Bega. 




including: 

– A new roundabout south of the Bega River Bridge. 



Applegum Close to the highway. 


Construction of the proposal would include stockpile sites, site compounds, internal roads and access 

tracks. Culverts, lighting at interchanges, bridge screening and safety barriers would be included as 

required as part of the proposal. At this stage no on site batch plant is anticipated. 

Refer to Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2 for the concept design. The concept design may be refined following 

public exhibition of this REF and during the detailed design phase. 

3.2 Existing road and infrastructure 

3.2.1 Existing Princes Highway 

The Princes Highway (HW1) between the Bega River Bridge and Finucane Lane is a single undivided 

carriageway with a lane of traffic in each direction. Formal kerb and guttering is present except in the 

southern section of the highway where there is no adjacent development. Lane widths are on average 

3.5 metres through built up areas reducing to 3.3 metres in the more rural areas. 

Shoulder width is generally two to three metres in built up areas and closer to one metre in the southern 

rural sections of the highway. The shoulders through the built up areas are used for informal kerb side 

parking. Parking along the Princes Highway within the Bega CBD is formalised on both sides of the road. 

The vertical and horizontal alignment is poor and is inconsistent with the RTA’s current road design 

standards. The road geometry restricts speed to a maximum of 80 km/h, however the speed limit is 

mostly 60 km/h with the urban section between Swan Street and Loftus Street reduced to 50 km/h. 

21/18937/157350 



18

Traffic signals are located at the intersections of Church Street and Auckland Street in the Bega CBD. 

Pedestrian crossing facilities include: 

� Traffic signals located south of High Street. 

� Kerbside pedestrian refuges located about 50 metres and 450 metres west of Gipps Street. 

� Pedestrian refuge near Rawlinson Street. 

� Pedestrian refuge 50 metres north of Elbe Street. 

There are no major traffic calming facilities, such as speed humps. 

The Princes Highway is a designated B-double route, however the highway through Bega (northbound) 

is not suitable for B-doubles due to the lack of suitable turning radius at the corner of Gipps Street and 

Carp Street. There are no restrictions to B-double movements in the southbound direction. 

The existing highway through Bega would be retained and reclassified as a local road once construction 

of the bypass is completed. After the opening of the proposal, traffic conditions through the Bega 

township are expected to improve due to removal of through traffic and its conflict with local traffic. 

3.2.2 Bega bypass corridor 

The Bega bypass corridor is largely in the existing road reservation, however at the southern end some 

areas are outside the existing reservation (refer to Figure 1.4). The corridor commences at the southern 

abutment of the Bega River Bridge and travels to the south to Finucane Lane. 

A number of roads cross or intersect the corridor as outlined in Table 3.1 below. 

Table 3.1 Existing road infrastructure 

Road Description 

High Street High Street is a local road that runs perpendicular to and intersects the 

bypass corridor towards the northern end. The street comprises of two 

lanes with kerb and gutter on both sides. The pavement width kerb to 

kerb is 12 metres and the pavement surface is a spray seal. There are 

grassed verges on both sides but no formed paths. The drainage 

consists of gully pits at kerbs connected to a piped system. 

Fairview Street Fairview Street is a local road running east west to the south of High 

Street and intersects with Meringo and Valley Street. This road currently 

provides a connection east west across the bypass corridor. The street 

comprises of two lanes with kerb and gutter on both sides. The 

pavement width varies and the pavement surface is a spray seal. There 

are grassed verges on both sides but no formed paths. The drainage 

consists of gully pits at kerbs connected to a piped system. 

Ravenswood Street Ravenswood Street in the vicinity of the proposal is unsealed and is 

about six metres wide. Where it crosses the bypass corridor there is no 

kerb and gutter and its drainage consists of table drains on both sides. 

There are informal verges and no paths (refer to Figure 3.1). 

Boundary Road There is no formed road within the Boundary Road corridor west of the 

existing highway. It can best be described as a track which is four metres 

wide with no formal verges, paths or drainage. 

21/18937/157350 



19

Road Description 

Applegum Close Applegum Close in the vicinity of the proposal is sealed and is about six 

metres wide. There is no kerb and gutter and its drainage consists of 

table drains on both sides. There are informal verges and no paths. It 

currently has a junction with the Princes Highway at the southern edge of 

the urban area of Bega. 

Finucane Lane Finucane Lane intersects with the existing Princes Highway where its 

speed limit is 100 km/h. It has a formal intersection arrangement 

including a widening of the highway to allow southbound vehicles to pass 

vehicles turning right into Finucane Lane (refer to Figure 3.2). It is sealed 

and is about 5.5 metres wide. There is no kerb and gutter and it has no 

formal drainage. There are informal verges and no paths. 

Figure 3.1 Site of the proposal at Ravenswood Street looking south 

21/18937/157350 



20

Figure 3.2 Looking south along Princes Highway and Finucane Lane intersection 

3.3 Design parameters 

The following design parameters were considered during development of the concept design and would 

continue to be considered during detailed design: 

� Minimise the number of access points to the bypass. 

� Left-in/left-out at all at grade bypass access points where possible. 

� Provision of a main access point to Bega at the northern end of the proposal. 

� Provision of a minor access point to Bega at the southern end of the proposal. 

� Where property owners are required to travel more than 2.5 kilometres to access their properties, a 

U-turn bay is to be provided. 

� The fill batters for the fill embankments designed to minimise the width of the proposal and keep it 

within the designated road corridor. 

� Maintenance of property access during construction and operation. 

21/18937/157350 



21

� The lowest edge of the shoulder of the proposed highway would be located 0.5 metres above the 

high flood level in that location. 

3.3.1 Design criteria 

Specific design criteria have been developed for the proposal including for the bypass and for works on 

adjacent roads. A summary of key criteria are identified below for both the proposed bypass and 

upgrades to local roads as a result of the proposal. 

The design criteria for the bypass include: 

� A design speed of 100 km/h. 

� A typical cross section of two 3.5 metre wide travel lanes and a 2.5 metre wide outside shoulder. 

� Bridges crossing the highway would have a minimum clearance of 5.3 metres and a maximum span 

of 35 metres. 

� A minimum sight distance of 175 metres would be provided to and from all access points. 

� The proposal would be designed for use by a 25 metre B-double. 

� There would be no raised medians. 

� A maximum vertical grade of five per cent and a minimum of 0.5 per cent. 

The design criteria on adjacent local roads include: 

� A minimum design speed of 50 km/h. 

� A typical cross section would have a minimum three metre wide sealed lanes and 0.8 metre wide 

shoulders in accordance with Bega Valley Shire Council standards. 

� Designed for use by 19 metre semi trailers, unless the road is a designated B-double route. 

� Allow for a 19 metre semi trailer to access properties. 

All other requirements for local roads would be negotiated with Bega Valley Shire Council. 

3.3.2 Engineering constraints 

Engineering constraints have been identified for the design and construction of the Bega bypass. These 

include: 

� Limited space available within the existing road reservation in order to achieve the design objectives. 

� The presence of existing utilities. These utilities are described in section 3.7. 

� Geology of the local landscape and its impact on bridge structures. 

� Connection with existing Princes Highway to meet current design standards. 

� East/west connectivity. 

� Local topography. 

3.4 Major design features 

A description of the major design features is provided below and illustrated in Figure 3.3. The concept 

design is included in Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2. 

21/18937/157350 



22

3.4.1 Access to Bega from the bypass 

Northern roundabout 

A three-legged roundabout is proposed at the northern tie in, linking the existing highway, the bypass 

and the road into Bega CBD (see Figure 3.4). The single lane roundabout has been designed to cater for 

B-doubles, and would provide a physical speed constraint for vehicles making the transition from the 

100 km/h bypass to the 80 km/h speed zoning for the Bega River Bridge and North Bega. 

A wall is proposed on the western side of the proposal at this location and would extend to the High 

Street overbridge. The wall would provide for noise attenuation as well as directing pedestrians to the 

High Street Bridge or Bega River Bridge pedestrian underpass. 

Intersection with Boundary Road and the existing Princes Highway 

A T-intersection catering for all vehicle movements is proposed at the southern end of the bypass. It 

would link the bypass to the existing Princes Highway via a new realigned Boundary Road. Right turn 

and left turn lanes from the highway onto the bypass are proposed and the intersection would allow for 

B-double movements. Boundary Road would consist of one lane in each direction widening to cater for a 

separate left turn lane at the intersection in the westbound direction. There are no pedestrian paths 

proposed at this intersection. 

21/18937/157350 



23

Figure 3.3 Major features of the proposal 

� 

N

Figure 3.4 Proposed site for the northern roundabout (looking north at existing Bega River 

Bridge) 

3.4.2 East – west connectivity 

High Street overbridge 

The High Street overbridge would be on the existing alignment of High Street. The bridge would cross 

over the bypass and provide flood free connectivity between east and west Bega. 

It is proposed that Fairview Street would be closed at the bypass and all pedestrian and vehicular traffic 

redirected to High Street. 

The overbridge would be constructed from pre-cast concrete and founded on piled abutments. The 

bridge would consist of two 3.5 metre traffic lanes and one metre shoulders, plus a 3.5 metre shared 

cycle/pedestrian path on the northern side of the bridge and a two metre path on the southern side. The 

bridge would have anti-throw screens on both sides. Figure 3.5 is an artist’s impression of the High 

Street overbridge. 

21/18937/157350 



25

Not to scale. Subject to detailed design 

Figure 3.5 Artist sketch of High Street bridge 

Ravenswood Street overbridge 

A new overbridge is proposed at Ravenswood Street to provide connectivity between the Bega CBD and 

the rural-residential properties to the south-west of Bega. The provision of the overbridge at Ravenswood 

Street would also assist in separating through highway traffic from local vehicles travelling between 

southwest Bega and the CBD. The bridge would consist of two 3.5 metre wide traffic lanes and one 

metre shoulders, plus a two metre path on the northern side of the bridge. The bridge would have antithrow 

screens on both sides. 

Ravenswood Street would be sealed near the bypass and drainage would be improved at the 

intersection of Ravenswood and Charlotte streets to provide flood immune access into Bega. 

3.4.3 Local roads 

Applegum Close to Ravenswood Street connection 

Due to the need to limit access point to the bypass, a new length of road is to be constructed to maintain 

community connectivity. The Applegum Close to Ravenswood Street connection would allow residents 

that currently access the highway via Boundary Road and Applegum Close to use this new length of 

local road, maintaining their access to the highway and Bega town centre. It would consist of two lanes, 

each three metres wide and 0.8 metre wide shoulders in accordance with Bega Valley Shire Council 

standards. The pavement surface would be a spray seal with no kerb and gutter. Table drains would be 

included within the proposed corridor. No formal paths are proposed. 

Finucane Lane realignment 

The existing T-intersection between the Princes Highway and Finucane Lane would be realigned about 

50 metres to the north of the existing intersection. This would provide improved sight distance and 

intersection geometry both on the highway and on Finucane Lane. 

The realignment would allow the new intersection to be constructed with minimal disruption to traffic as it 

is independent of the existing intersection. 

21/18937/157350 



26

3.4.4 Cuts and fills 

There are numerous cuts and fills along the bypass alignment, due to the rolling terrain. Batters for cuts 

and fills would be designed to minimise maintenance requirements and reduce urban design impacts. 

Cut and fill batter slopes would generally need to be about 2:1, horizontal to vertical, with benches every 

six metres of height. The maximum cut depth would be around 12 metres and the maximum fill height 

would be around 10 metres. 

3.4.5 Retaining wall structures 

Where corridor width is restricted by adjacent private properties or environmental constraints, retaining 

walls have been proposed wherever possible to avoid and minimise property acquisition. 

Retaining wall structures would be in the following locations: 

� On the eastern side of the proposed bypass, generally to the north of the Boundary Street junction. 

� On the western side of the proposal, generally from Applegum Close to about 100m north. 

3.4.6 Noise attenuation 

Operational noise attenuation would be required at some receivers. The operational noise management 

and mitigation measures would be determined during detailed design after a feasible and reasonable 

assessment. This assessment would be undertaken in accordance with DECCW’s Environmental Criteria 

for Road Traffic Noise (EPA 1999) and the RTA’s Environmental Noise Management Manual (RTA 

2001). 

Refer to section 6.2 for detailed assessment of construction and operational noise impacts and for where 

operational noise attenuation would be required. 

3.4.7 Urban design and landscape 

The core urban design principles for the proposal aim to: 

� Create a memorable varied experience for road users that maximises the broader views of the 

adjacent landscape and topographic features of the road design. 

� Reveal and celebrate rural landscape. 

� Maintain connectivity within Bega. 

� Create memorable but sympathetic gateways at north and south intersections. 

� Minimise visual impact through sensitive road and landscape design. 

Additional urban design principles for the proposal focus on: 

� A landscape treatment that draws upon the existing quality of both native grasslands and pasture 

grasslands to stabilise batters and ensure that new earthworks marry with existing landform. 

� Shaping of new batters to match the natural undulations of the existing topography. 

� Making use of the ‘hide and reveal’ nature of the cut and fill sections of highway to provide a 

memorable road user experience. 

21/18937/157350 



27

� Treatment of intersections so that they provide memorable access points to Bega whilst 

complementing their rural context. 

� Using soft landscape treatments to ameliorate visual impacts. 

� Designing out road noise issues through minimising uphill grades and incorporating landscape 

mounds where appropriate. 

� Maintaining adequate connectivity for cyclists and pedestrians particularly in the north-west of Bega 

where the bypass passes between residential areas and the town centre. 

3.4.8 Traffic facilities 

Roadside wire rope safety fence is proposed to provide protection from roadside hazards and to 

discourage pedestrians from crossing the bypass. 

Signage design would be undertaken as part of detailed design and would consider the relevant RTA 

design and safety guidelines. 

Additional street furniture and sign posting requirements would be addressed as the concept design is 

finalised and during the detailed design. 

Street lighting requirements of the bypass would be considered as part of the detailed design. 

3.5 Construction activities 

3.5.1 Work methodology 

The work methodology for the proposal would be refined during the detailed design phase. Construction 

activities would be guided by a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to ensure that 

works are carried out within the specified works area and are completed to incorporate all safeguards as 

described in this REF and any measures identified as a result of submissions to the REF. 

The proposal is expected to involve the following work methodology: 

� Progressive installation of temporary erosion, sedimentation and drainage controls. 

� Adjustment of utilities as required (this may include electricity, telecommunications, gas, water and 

sewer). 

� Establishment of a compound site. 

� Establishment of stockpile sites. 

� Removal of vegetation and grubbing. 

� Drainage works. 

� Construction of retaining structures including footings. 

� Surface preparation by graders, dozers, scrapers and other equipment. 

� Compaction of the resultant surface using compaction equipment. 

� Recycling of suitable excavated material and incorporation of suitable material in earthworks. 

� Cut and fill material to be transported and placed as compacted fill. 

21/18937/157350 



28

� Importation of gravel materials. 

� Bridge construction including: 

– Piling. 

– Abutment construction. 

– Erection of main structural components. 

– Installation of bridge furniture eg lighting, throw screens, hand rails etc. 

� Installation of roadside drainage structures. 

� Construction of roadside batters. 

� Construction of roadside gutters and mounds. 

� Application of flexible asphalt pavement by pavers and rollers. 

� Landscaping and re-vegetation of the construction site. 

� Line marking and installation of signs and guide posts. 

� Site clean up and disposal of all surplus waste materials. 

No specific staging of the works is anticipated. 

3.5.2 Plant and equipment 

Plant and equipment for the proposal would be determined during the construction planning phase. It is 

expected that plant and equipment used for the proposal would include: 

� 30 tonne excavators � Graders 

� Air compressors � Jack hammers 

� Asphalt milling machine � Kerbing machine 

� Asphaltic paving machines � Line marking vehicles 

� Bulldozers � Mulcher 

� Chain saws � Road sweeper 

� Concrete cutters � Rollers/vibrating compactors 

� Concrete pump � Scrapers 

� Concrete supply agitator trucks � Small excavators or backhoes 

� Concrete vibrators � Stump grinder 

� Cranes/hiabs � Trucks 

� Demolition saw � Water tankers 

� Dump trucks � Light vehicles 

� Excavation plant � Pneumatic hand or power tools 

� Front end loaders 

21/18937/157350 



29

3.5.3 Earthworks 

The estimated volume of material sourced from cuts would be around 197,660 cubic metres. The 

estimated volume of fill required is around 190,920 cubic metres. It is anticipated that there would be a 

surplus of material from cut to fill. To account for this excess, fill batters would be flattened where space 

permits. 

An estimated 53,590 cubic metres of topsoil, based on an average thickness of 400 millimetres, would be 

removed and used for landscaping on the bypass. 

Therefore, about 5000 cubic metres of material would need to be transported from the site by trucks. The 

accuracy of earthwork volumes is subject to variations in bulking factors for excavated material, relative 

compaction achieved for placed material and volume of unsuitable material. 

3.5.4 Source, disposal and quantity of materials 

Fill material would be sourced from surplus materials from other RTA projects, wherever possible. Other 

fill material required for the reinforced earth walls and the road pavement would be sourced from 

appropriately licensed facilities. 

Exact material quantities are unknown at this stage but would include concrete, steel, aggregate and 

quarry materials. These materials would be sourced from local quarries and commercial suppliers 

wherever possible. Initial estimates of quantities of material required include: 

� 42,000 tonnes of dense grade road base. 

� 65,000 square metres of spray seal. 

� 6,000 cubic metres of concrete (in situ). 

� 55,000 tonnes of select fill. 

Suitable surplus material from excavations would be used on site wherever possible, for example as 

noise mounds or landscaping treatments. Additional surplus material that cannot be used on site would 

be re-used or disposed of in the following order of priority: 

� Transfer to nearby RTA projects for immediate use. 

� Transfer to approved RTA stockpile site for future use during projects or routine maintenance. 

� Transfer to RTA approved site for re-use on concurrent private/local government project. 

� Disposal to an accredited materials recycling or waste disposal facility. 

� As otherwise provided for by the relevant waste legislation. 

� Quantities of water required during construction are unknown at this stage. It is proposed that water 

would be used from the construction sedimentation ponds, however where not available would be 

sourced from other local supplies. This is discussed further in section 6.10.2. 

3.5.5 Traffic management and access 

There would be a large number of heavy vehicle movements resulting from the construction of the 

proposal. These would mainly be associated with transport of construction machinery and equipment to 

the proposal site, import and disposal of fill material via trucks and removal of machinery post 

21/18937/157350 



30

construction, However as the majority of the work would be located away from the existing highway 

traffic impacts would be minimised. 

Construction vehicles would access the proposal site from the existing Princes Highway either from the 

north or south of Bega. Where possible, truck movements through the Bega CBD along Gipps Street, 

Carp Street and Newtown Road would be minimised. 

Table 3.2 outlines the indicative heavy vehicle movements required during major aspects of the 

construction phase. 

Table 3.2 Indicative heavy vehicle movements 

Work item Duration Heavy vehicle 

movements per day 

21/18937/157350 



Comments 

Earthworks 18 months 60 Does not include the movements of 

other smaller plant required to 

undertake this activity within the site. 

Bridgework 9 months 8 This excludes any earthworks 

required for bridges (numbers 

included above). 

Pavement works 6 months 50-100 Does not include the movements of 

other plant required to undertake this 

activity (i.e. compactors and graders 

within the site). 

Landscaping 3 months 5 Excludes movements with topsoil 

(included in earthworks). 

The majority of the 60 heavy vehicle trips required per day during earthworks would occur within the site. 

It is estimated that about 113 vehicles would be required to access the site daily during the busiest 

construction phase (ie if bridge, pavement and landscaping works were all to occur simultaneously). 

The movement of workers, supervision and the general movement of materials and small plant are 

estimated to generate a maximum of 150 small vehicles accessing the site daily. 

A Traffic Management Plan would be prepared to provide for two-way traffic flow and turning 

movements. Two-way traffic flow would be maintained on the Princes Highway for most of the 

construction period. At times during construction, traffic may be restricted to one lane with traffic control 

implemented on the Princes Highway. This would occur when the proposal is being connected to the 

existing alignment of the Princes Highway. Traffic management for the northern roundabout, southern 

intersection and highway tie-in would be reviewed and approved by the RTA prior to implementation. 

Some local roads would also be impacted due to the construction of the proposal. 

The traffic management plan would detail specific routes that construction traffic and local traffic would 

follow throughout the construction phase. This would be included in any contract documentation. Traffic 

management measures outlined in section 6.4.1 would also be implemented. 

3.5.6 Workforce and working hours 

It is estimated that 150 construction and site management personnel would be required. 

31

It is anticipated that work for the proposal would be undertaken during the DECCW recommended 

standard hours for construction work: 

� Monday to Friday: 7 am to 6 pm. 

� Saturday: 8 am to 1 pm. 

� Sundays and Public Holidays: no work. 

Construction outside of the standard hours is not anticipated as the proposal is mainly located on a 

vacant greenfield site with little interaction with traffic (apart from the local streets of High Street, Fairview 

Street and Ravenswood Street). 

Should any out of hours work be required, works would be undertaken in line with procedures contained 

in RTA’s Environmental Noise Management Manual 2001, Practice Notes vii – Roadworks Outside of 

Normal Working Hours. This would include notifying the local community of any works planned to be 

undertaken outside the standard hours. 

3.6 Ancillary facilities 

Ancillary facilities would include a site compound and stockpile sites. Ancillary facilities would be subject 

to an approved Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). 

3.6.1 Site compound and stockpile locations 

A site compound would be used to store plant and equipment and to provide for construction staff 

parking, toilets and amenities. Chemicals and fuels for construction would be stored in appropriate 

storage areas in the compound site. The compound and stockpile sites would be subject to the site 

location criteria set out in the RTA’s Stockpile Site Management Procedures. 

The location of compound and stockpile sites is difficult to determine at this stage of proposal 

development and would be subject to change during the detail design stage. However, potential site 

compound locations are identified below: 

� South east of the proposed roundabout and around 0.7 hectares. 

� On the eastern side of the corridor between Fairview Street and Gowing Street and around 0.7 

hectares. 

� On the western side of the corridor to the south of Rawlinson Street and around 0.35 hectares. 

� On the western side of the corridor between Finucane Lane and the realigned Finucane Lane and 

around 0.25 hectares. 

It is anticipated that the site compounds would be located within the bypass corridor. When suitable 

compound site locations are determined during the detailed design phase, RTA regional environmental 

staff would be consulted for advice on the level of further environmental assessment required. Further 

assessment may include the preparation of an addendum to this REF once the final sites have been 

identified. 

21/18937/157350 



32

3.7 Public utility adjustments 

3.7.1 Existing services 

Detailed site surveys have identified the location of existing services. Further detailed investigation would 

be required to confirm their location and depth as part of the concept and detailed design phase. Below 

is a summary of the services in the corridor and their estimated location. 

Water 

The potable water supply mains near the bypass corridor are listed below: 

� 250 millimetre diameter water main traversing Kooringal Place. 

� 200 millimetre diameter water main traversing High Street. 

� Unknown diameter water main running parallel to Brogo Street. 

� Unknown diameter water main traversing Fairview Street. It is noted that Bega Valley Shire Council 

believe this main is a redundant gas main. Further site survey has indicated that it could be water. 

� 450 millimetre diameter water main traversing Bega bypass road corridor. 

� 100 millimetre diameter water main running parallel to Ravenswood Street. 

� 100 millimetre diameter water main traversing Applegum Close. 

Sewer 

The sewer infrastructure in the vicinity of the bypass corridor is: 

� 150 millimetres diameter sewer main crossing High Street. 

� Sewer pumping station and utilities. 

� Sewer rising main to north of the proposed northern roundabout. 

Telstra 

There are numerous Telstra underground assets that may be impacted by the proposal. These include 

fibre optic and copper lines. Telstra would complete utility investigations and a scope of works for 

relocation and protection during the detailed design phase. 

Country Energy 

There are numerous Country Energy overhead assets that may be impacted by the proposal. Country 

Energy are being consulted to determine any protection and/or relocation requirements. 

3.7.2 Strategy for protection and relocation of assets 

Water 

Bega Valley Shire Council is considering a number of upgrade requirements for water mains. RTA is 

currently liaising with council to determine any impact on detailed design of the proposal. 

Sewer 

Council’s 150 millimetre diameter sewer traversing the proposed route at High Street would be 

decommissioned, flushed and capped off. Designs would be prepared during detail design. 

21/18937/157350 



33

Telstra 

Telstra assets may be impacted and RTA is consulting with Telstra in accordance with standard 

procedures. 

Country Energy 

RTA is consulting with Country Energy to determine any design and/or construction requirements of any 

adjustments to its electrical infrastructure. 

3.8 Property acquisition 

The indicative property acquisitions required are shown in Table 3.3. Final areas would be determined 

during the detailed design phase and after geotechnical investigations have been completed. A map is 

provided in Figure 3.6. 

Table 3.3 Indicative property acquisition requirements 

Lot/DP Indicative area (m 2 ) Ownership 

Likely acquisition 

Lot 20, DP 811592 2,708 (complete acquisition) Private 

Lot 61, DP 1086574 Complete acquisition (area to be confirmed) Private 

Lot 17, DP 112193 Partial acquisition (Lot 8 DP 843822) (area to be 

confirmed) 

21/18937/157350 



Council 

Lot 2941, DP 1086626 45,816 (partial acquisition) Private 

Potential acquisition 

Lot 40, DP 826237 400 (partial acquisition) Private 

Lot 1, DP 799865 220 (partial acquisition) School 

Lot 74, DP 750190 Partial (dependent on geotechnical investigation) Private 

Lot 62, DP 1086574 Partial (dependent on sediment basins) Private 






Lot 71, DP 862966 Partial (dependent on local road investigations) Private 

Lot 1, DP 779337 Partial (dependent on local road investigations) Private 

Lot 9, DP 845274 Partial (dependent on sediment basins) Private 


34

All property valuations and acquisitions would be carried out in accordance with the RTA Land 

Acquisition Policy and the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991. Property acquisition 

plans would be prepared for each of the affected properties as part of the detailed design. 

21/18937/157350 



35

Figure 3.6 Indicative property acquisition required for the proposal

4. Statutory and planning framework 

4.1 State Environmental Planning Policies 

4.1.1 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP) aims to facilitate the effective delivery 

of infrastructure across the State. 

Clause 94 of ISEPP permits development on any land for the purpose of a road or road infrastructure 

facilities to be carried out by or on behalf of a public authority without consent. 

As the proposal is for a road and is to be carried out by or on behalf of the RTA, it can be assessed 

under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Development consent from 

council is not required. 

The proposal is not located on land reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 and does 

not affect land or development regulated by State Environmental Planning Policy No. 14 - Coastal 

Wetlands or State Environmental Planning Policy No. 26 - Littoral Rainforests. 

Part 2 of the Infrastructure State Environmental Planning Policy (ISEPP) contains provisions for public 

authorities to consult with local councils and other public authorities prior to the commencement of 

certain types of development. Consultation, including consultation as required by ISEPP (where 

applicable), is discussed in section 5.4.1 of this REF. 

4.1.2 State Environmental Planning Policy No 44 – Koala Habitat Protection 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 44 – Koala Habitat Protection (SEPP 44) identifies the Bega 

Valley LGA within Schedule 1 as land to which SEPP 44 applies. SEPP 44 does not apply to this 

proposal as development consent is not required. 

The aim of SEPP 44 is to: 

21/18937/157350 

encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation that provide 

habitat for koalas to ensure a permanent free-living population over their present range and 

reverse the current trend of koala population decline. 

SEPP 44 defines core and potential koala habitat as follows: 

Core koala habitat is an area of land with a resident population of koalas, evidenced by attributes 

such as breeding females (that is, females with young) and recent sightings of and historical 

records of a population. 

Potential koala habitat means areas of native vegetation where the trees of the types listed in 

Schedule 2 constitute at least 15 per cent of the total number of trees in the upper or lower strata 

of the tree component. 

Ecological investigations (2006) identified one feed tree species, Eucalyptus tereticornis (forest red gum) 

listed in Schedule 2 of the SEPP. The potential to impact koala habitat has been considered in the 

biodiversity assessment in Appendix C. This assessment determined that while one species of regional 

feed tree occurs in very low density in the study area, the habitat is considered too marginal to provide 



37

core koala habitat, although it may be part of a wildlife corridor. The assessment considered that koalas 

were very unlikely to be present in the proposal site and that the proposal is not likely to impact koalas. 

Although SEPP 44 does not apply to this proposal as development consent is not required, care would 

be taken during construction to minimise the impacts to koalas and feed trees though the implementation 

of mitigation measures listed in section 6.1.4. 

4.1.3 Lower South Coast Regional Environmental Plan No 2 

From 1 July 2009, the Lower South Coast Regional Environmental Plan (No 2) (LSCREP No 2) is a 

deemed state environmental planning policy. 

Clause 6(e) of the LSCREP No 2 requires that a determining authority under Part 5 consider the aims, 

objectives, policies and principles that are relevant to the activity. 

Clauses 8, 11, 19, 22, 27, 34, 38 and 41 outline objectives in relation to a range of values, which are 

addressed specifically for the proposal in Table 4.1. 

Table 4.1 Matters for consideration under the LSCREP No 2 

Policy Response 

Natural areas 

(8)(a) to protect natural areas of ecological, scenic or scientific 

interest. 

(b) to strictly control any reduction in the extent of important 

natural areas. 

(c) to protect and preserve bushland: 

21/18937/157350 

(i) within urban areas, or 

(ii) which provides a natural buffer between settlements. 

Coastal and waterway environments 

(a) to minimise changes to natural coastal processes resulting from 

development, 

(b) to protect water quality, 

(c) to minimise risks to people and property resulting from coastal 

processes, 

(d) to maintain the visual quality of the coastal and waterway 

environments, 

(e) to provide for the appropriate recreational use of beaches, other 

coastal lands and waterways, and 

(f) to maintain or enhance public access to and use of beaches, 

other coastal attractions and waterways in appropriate locations. 



Impacts on ecological values have been 

considered manageable and are 

discussed in section 6.5. 

The proposal is not located in or adjacent 

to coastal areas or waterways as defined 

by SCRLEP No 2, and is therefore not 

expected to impact on these areas. 

Potential for indirect impacts on Bega 

River would be minimised through the 

implementation of mitigation measures 

listed in section 6.10.3. 

38


Rural land 

19 (a) to conserve better quality agricultural lands for the purposes 

of agriculture, 

(b) to facilitate farm adjustments, 

(c) to enable other forms of development associated with, or 

compatible with, rural activity in appropriate locations, and 

(d) to minimise the cost to the community of fragmented and 

isolated development. 

Natural resources 

22 Water resources 

The objective of this plan in relation to water quality and water 

resources is to encourage the effective use and the protection of 

the quality of the region’s water resources. 

27 Fisheries 

The objective of this plan in relation to fisheries is to preserve and 

enhance recreational and commercial fishing activity. 

Urban land 

34 Residential development 

The objective of this plan in relation to residential development is to 

promote the provision of a range of adequate, affordable and 

suitable housing to meet the needs of the region’s population. 

Tourism & recreation 

38 (a) to provide opportunities for establishing a wide range of 

tourist and recreational opportunities within the region, 

(b) to encourage tourism activity that would complement the 

existing natural and man made features of the region and be of 

positive benefit to the region’s economy, 

(c) to encourage the location of tourism facilities to complement 

transport services, infrastructure, other tourism attractions and 

urban facilities, and 

(d) to encourage the adoption of planning controls containing 

incentives for tourism development where appropriate. 

21/18937/157350 



The proposal is not located on land zoned 

for rural use. Further, the safeguards and 

mitigation measures in this REF are 

designed to minimise impact to areas 

outside the proposal site, which may be 

used for agricultural proposes. 

The design of the proposal has considered 

erosion and sedimentation risks and 

potential impacts on water quality. Specific 

environmental management measures to 

protect water quality are discussed further 

in section 6.10.3 and 6.13. 

Impacts to water quality in the Bega River, 

located in the vicinity of the proposal site, 

have the potential to impact on 

recreational fishing activity. Water quality 

is addressed in section 6.10 of this REF. 

Impacts on water quality are considered 

manageable with implementation of 

mitigation measures outlined in 

section 6.10.3. 

The proposal does not relate to, and 

would not impact on the provision of 

residential development. Amenity impacts 

such as noise and visual, are considered 

in section 6.2 and section 6.3 of this REF. 

The proposal is not expected to adversely 

impact on tourism and recreation. 

39


Regional services 

41 Transport 

(a) Safeguard the role and efficiency of the main road system of the 

region, particularly by recognising the importance of primary arterial 

roads and identify priorities for the maintenance and improvement 

of road and air transport in the region. 

(b) to identify priorities for the maintenance and improvement of 

road and air transport in the region. 

4.2 Local Environmental Plans 

4.2.1 Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2002 

21/18937/157350 



This proposal directly supports the 

transport objectives of the LSCRLEP No 2 

by improving the safety and efficiency of 

the main road system of the region. 

The proposal site is located within the Bega Valley Shire local government area (LGA). Development 

within this portion of the Bega Valley Shire LGA is controlled by the Bega Valley Local Environmental 

Plan 2002 (Bega Valley LEP). 

4.3 Other relevant legislation 

4.3.1 NSW State legislation 

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 

The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act) provides an integrated system of 

licensing for polluting activities within the objective of protecting the environment. 

The contractor and the RTA are obliged to notify DECCW when a ‘pollution incident’ occurs that causes 

or threatens ‘material harm’ to the environment. 

National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 

The National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NPW Act) legislates Aboriginal heritage in NSW and is 

administered by the DECCW. 

Part 6 of this Act refers to Aboriginal objects and places and prevents persons from impacting on an 

Aboriginal place or relic, without consent or a permit. The RTA Procedure for Aboriginal cultural heritage 

consultation and investigation was followed and an Aboriginal cultural heritage and archaeological 

assessment has been prepared. A test pit excavation program has been implemented in the proposal 

site. 

As discussed in section 6.7.1, there are Aboriginal objects present in the proposal site. Prior to any 

impacts on these objects the RTA must obtain Section 90 consent from the Director-General to destroy, 

deface or damage an Aboriginal object or Aboriginal place. A section 90 permit was obtained in August 

2010 for the whole proposal footprint. Refer to section 6.7.1 for further information on the Aboriginal 

cultural heritage assessment. 

40

Fisheries Management Act 1994 

The Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act) aims to conserve, develop and share the fishery 

resources of the State for the benefit of present and future generations, including conserving fish stocks 

and fish habitat and promoting ecologically sustainable development. 

The definition of ‘reclamation work’ under the FM Act includes any work that involves: 

21/18937/157350 

(a) using any material (such as sand, soil, silt, gravel, concrete, oyster shells, tyres, timber or 

rocks) to fill in or reclaim water land,…. 

The definition of ‘water land’ under the FM Act includes land submerged by water: 

(a) “whether permanently or intermittently….” 

As the proposal would involve the filling of drainage lines subject to intermittent submersion by water, the 

proposal would involve reclamation work as defined by the FM Act. The RTA is required to give written 

notification to the Minister for Fisheries for any dredging or reclamation work and consider any responses 

in accordance with Section 199 of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. 

An object of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 is to ‘conserve fish stocks and key fish habitat’. The 

proposal is located in an area mapped as key fish habitat. This includes the Bega River located north 

and west of the proposal footprint and wetlands located west of the proposal footprint. A flood channel 

(intermittent drainage line) that would be crossed by the Applegum Close to Ravenswood Street 

connection has potential to be key fish habitat. Industry and Infrastructure (Primary Industries Fisheries 

and Aquaculture) are currently preparing a draft Fish habitat conservation and management policy and 

guidelines. RTA would consult with Primary Industries Fisheries and Aquaculture regarding the potential 

key fish habitat in the proposal footprint. Refer to section 6.1 for assessment and mitigation of potential 

direct and indirect impacts on key fish habitat. 

Refer to sections 6.1.3 and 6.10.2 for further detail on the assessment of impact on aquatic ecology and 

hydrology. 

Water use approval 

As there is currently no water sharing plan in place within the proposal site, the Water Act 1912 would 

apply to any water taking activity in relation to the proposal. It is noted that a draft water sharing plan for 

the Bega and Brogo Rivers Area Unregulated, Regulated and Alluvial Water Sources is in preparation. 

4.3.2 Commonwealth legislation 

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 

Under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) a referral is 

required to the Australian Government for proposed actions that have the potential to significantly impact 

on matters of environmental significance or on Commonwealth land. These are considered in Appendix 

A. 

The assessment of the proposal’s impact on matters of national environmental significance and on 

Commonwealth land found that there is unlikely to be a significant impact. Accordingly, the proposal has 

not been referred to the Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the 

Arts (DEWHA). 



41

4.4 Confirmation of statutory position 

All relevant statutory planning instruments have been examined for the proposal. It is concluded that 

ISEPP operates to remove the development consent requirements, thereby permitting assessment of the 

proposal under Part 5 of the EP&A Act. 

21/18937/157350 



42

5. Stakeholder and community consultation 

5.1 Consultation strategy 

A community involvement plan for the project has been developed by the RTA to set out the approach for 

consultation. 

The objectives of the community involvement plan are to: 

� Inform the community of the scope of the proposal. 

� Consult the community to obtain feedback and community views/issues on the proposal. 

� Gain feedback to inform the concept design process for the: 

– East/west access arrangements onto and across the bypass corridor. 

– Urban design considerations. 

� Inform the community of the likely construction schedule. 

The community involvement plan sets out: 

� The strategic approach for dealing with all stakeholder groups in relation to the project works. 

� The responsibility for stakeholder consultation. 

� The communication strategy and activities to interface with the community. 

Consultation has been undertaken with the local community, Aboriginal stakeholders and government 

agencies and stakeholders. The details of consultation undertaken to date, and consultation are 

discussed in more details in the following sections. The RTA would continue to undertake community and 

stakeholder consultation as necessary. 

5.2 Community involvement 

The RTA conducted an initial four week consultation period regarding the proposal from 23 November 

2009 until 21 December 2009. 

During that time, about 11,000 community updates outlining the proposal were distributed to households 

in the Bega area and surrounding towns. 

The proposal was also displayed at the Bega Valley Shire Council Administration Centre, Zingel Place, 

Bega during this four week period. 

During the consultation period an open invitation community workshop was held on 9 December 2009 at 

the Bega Town Hall to discuss and compare different access options for the proposal as described in 

section 2.3.2. The workshop was attended by about 35 members of the local community. 

The RTA received 11 submissions from the community in response to the consultation. In addition, there 

were a range of other issues raised through the community workshop on 9 December 2009. A summary 

of the main issues raised is included in Table 5.1. 

21/18937/157350 



43

Table 5.1 Summary of main community issues raised on the options 

Summary of main issues raised Response 

The southern access needs to be 

simple. Some of the options put forward 

are complex and confusing for 

motorists. 

There is a need for B-double access 

into Boundary Road from the bypass. 

Ravenswood Street needs to be 

upgraded to improve access for 

residents. 

Residents on the western side of the 

proposed bypass want access onto the 

bypass and into Bega township. 

Need to consider a lower speed limit 

along the bypass to decrease noise 

pollution and increase safety. 

Provide for pedestrian and cyclist 

access at the northern access 

roundabout and at Ravenswood Street. 

Residents wish to have sound barriers 

installed. 

Appropriate drainage needs to be 

installed to allow natural watercourses 

to flow. 

Need to keep Country Energy informed 

about the bypass so they can factor the 

proposal into the planned works. 

21/18937/157350 



The Bega bypass proposal would be developed to ensure that all 

road users would be able to easily and safely access the bypass 

through the provision of a high standard of road environment and a 

well integrated signposting scheme (refer to section 3.3). 

The intersection at the bypass and existing highway has been 

configured so that B-double access is provided to Boundary Road. 

An overbridge would now be provided at Ravenswood Street instead 

of an at-grade junction providing access from the western side of the 

bypass into the Bega township. 

In addition, Ravenswood Street would be improved by sealing the 

road and improving drainage at the intersection of Ravenswood and 

Charlotte Streets to provide flood immune access into Bega. 

Applegum Close would be linked to Ravenswood Street by 

constructing a new road along Boundary Road reserve. 

Access into the Bega township would now be provided via the 

proposed bridges over the bypass, reducing the need for local traffic 

to travel on the bypass. However, due to safety issues, the existing 

Applegum Close access to the Princes Highway would be closed. 

Access to the bypass from this area would be via Ravenswood Street 

overbridge then via Bega to the proposed eastern intersection in the 

vicinity of Boundary Road (refer to sections 3.4 and 6.4.2). 

The proposed 100 km/h speed limit for the bypass is consistent with 

adjoining sections of the Princes Highway and the proposal 

objectives. Section 6.2 addresses noise impacts of the proposal. 

Support for the pedestrian and cyclist facilities at the northern 

roundabout is given and noted. 

At the northern roundabout, pedestrians and cyclists would be 

directed to access points at the existing Bega River Bridge and at the 

proposed High Street overbridge. 

At Ravenswood Street, pedestrians and cyclists would utilise the 

proposed Ravenswood overbridge pedestrian and cyclist facilities. 

Refer sections 3.4 and 6.4.2. 

A noise assessment has been undertaken as part of this REF. The 

results of the noise assessment are included in section 6.2 and 

Appendix D. The final methods of attenuation would be considered 

during detailed design. 

Drainage infrastructure would be designed to cater for designated 

storm events as well as maintaining natural flows (refer to 

section 6.10). 

The design of the bypass has been developed in consultation with all 

stakeholders including utility providers. The RTA would continue to 

liaise with Country Energy to ensure that the impacts to their 

infrastructure would be minimised (refer to Table 7.1). 

44

5.3 Aboriginal community involvement 

The Aboriginal community has been consulted in accordance with the NSW DECCW Interim community 

consultation requirements for applicants (DECCW 2005) and the RTA’s Procedure for Aboriginal Cultural 

Heritage Consultation and Investigation (RTA 2008). 

Kayandel Archaeological Services prepared an Aboriginal Cultural Assessment and Archaeological 

Survey Report for the RTA in relation to the proposal. This assessment included Aboriginal community 

involvement, as follows: 

� On 27 November 2008, a site visit was carried out by representatives of the RTA including the RTA 

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Advisor, Bega Local Aboriginal Land Council and Yukembruk Merung 

Ngarigi Consultancy (a local stakeholder) as part of the Stage 2 preliminary assessment of the RTA 

Procedure for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation and Investigation. This survey identified 

cultural landscape features and two stone artefacts. 

� Three Aboriginal Focus Group meetings were held at Bega RTA office on 3 March 2009, 20 October 

2009 and 2 June 2010. 

� Aboriginal stakeholders, including nominated cultural knowledge holders, were invited to participate 

in an oral history program. Four interviews were held on 27 March and 1 June 2009. 

In March 2010 New South Wales Archaeology Pty Ltd conducted subsurface test excavations which 

involved representatives of the Bega Local Aboriginal Land Council, members of the local indigenous 

community that registered an interest (including Yukembruk Merung Ngarigo Consultancy). 

The Aboriginal Cultural Assessment and Archaeological Survey Report, including the outcomes of 

Aboriginal community involvement, are discussed further in section 6.7.1 of this REF, as are the 

outcomes of the sub-surface test excavations undertaken by New South Wales Archaeology Pty Ltd. 

5.4 Government agency and stakeholder involvement 

In December 2009, a number of government agencies and stakeholders were contacted by letter to 

provide preliminary details of the proposal and an opportunity to comment on the proposal. The agencies 

and stakeholders contacted were: 

� NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (Merimbula Office). 

� Bega Valley Shire Council. 

� NSW Heritage Branch. 

� NSW Department of Planning. 

� Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. 

� NSW Industry and Investment. 

� Far South Coast Conservation Management Network. 

� Southern Rivers Catchment Management Authority (Bega Office). 

� South East Livestock Health and Pest Authority (Bega Office). 

The issues raised in the submissions and RTA’s responses are provided in Table 5.2. 

21/18937/157350 



45

Table 5.2 Summary of government agency and stakeholder issues 

Issue Response 

Bega Valley Shire Council 

Request the REF include an 

introduction outlining the scope, 

background and objectives. 

Request the REF include a detailed 

description of the extent of works. 

Request the REF include the 

environmental safeguards and impact 

mitigation. 

Request the REF include the 

statutory requirements. 

Request the REF include a detailed 

traffic assessment, biodiversity 

assessment and archaeological 

assessment. 

The proposal should allow for access 

to the unsealed section of 

Ravenswood street (vehicle and 

pedestrian), the proposed regional 

hospital, Boundary road (B-doubles), 

Bega cemetery and Bega (Bdoubles). 

The REF should include details of the 

entrance to Bega at both southern 

and northern ends. 

Consideration should be given to an 

industrial rezoning and possible new 

service centre between the old Bega 

hospital and Kerrisons lane. 

Land on the western side of the 

bypass should not be isolated 

(especially residents of Kooringal 

Street and Valley Street). 

21/18937/157350 



Chapter 1 of this REF contains an introduction that outlines the scope, 

objectives and explains where the proposal sits in a regional context. 

The objectives of the proposal are further discussed in section 2.2. 

This REF contains a detailed description of the extent of works in 

section 3.5. 

This REF describes a number of environmental safeguards to minimise 

impacts. A summary of the same is provided in section 7.2. 

The statutory requirements are outlined in section 4 of this REF. 

Environmental assessments including traffic, biodiversity and 

archaeological assessments are located in sections 6.4, 6.1, 6.7.1 and 

6.9 of this REF, respectively. 

The inclusion of an overbridge at Ravenswood Street would provide 

conflict free access to Bega for both motorists and pedestrians. 

Ravenswood Street would be improved by sealing the road where it 

crosses the proposal and improving drainage at the intersection of 

Ravenswood and Charlotte Streets to provide flood immune access into 

Bega. Applegum Close would be linked to Ravenswood Street by 

constructing a new road along Boundary Road. 

The proposal would also provide two sufficient access points linking the 

town, the bypass and properties to the west of the bypass. A new 

roundabout south of the Bega River Bridge and a new southern access 

in the vicinity of Boundary Road/Ravenswood Street would also be 

provided. 

The proposal would connect the existing Princes Highway with the 

proposed bypass at the intersection within the vicinity of Boundary Road. 

This intersection would provide all turning movements at grade and 

would cater for existing B-double movements into Boundary Road from 

the proposed bypass. The intersection would feature a dedicated right 

turn lane for northbound traffic wishing to enter the southern end of Bega 

and a left turn-in slip lane for southbound traffic. 

Access to the proposed regional hospital would not be affected. 

The REF includes details of the entrance to Bega at both the northern 

and southern end in section 3.3 and section 6.3. 

Discuss of the impacts on current and future land uses is located in 

section 6.11. 

Two overbridges are proposed, one at High Street and another at 

Ravenswood Street, to provide connectivity between the Bega CBD and 

the rural-residential properties to the west of Bega (refer section 6.12). 

46


Consideration should be given to the 

presentation of the bypass and avoid 

presenting neglected and overgrown 

batters. 

NSW Industry and Investment 

Agricultural land use conflicts should 

be minimised and related mitigatory 

responses discussed. 

Resource loss and fragmentation 

should be avoided. 

Operating farms should have reliable 

access to the road network, 

infrastructure and utilities. Their 

internal access should not be 

restricted. This should be the case 

during construction and operation. 

The REF should assess impacts on 

the safe use of farm machinery and 

routine farm activities during 

construction and operation. 

Where the proposal would divide 

existing farm operations an 

appropriate design to support 

ongoing agricultural use and be 

developed in consultation with the 

landholder. 

A weed management plan and 

measures to limit pest animal impacts 

should be implemented. 

Biosecurity, disease spread and risk 

of bushfires should be considered. 

Rehabilitation should be undertaken 

to curtail erosion, limit weed 

germination, avoid the sedimentation 

of waterways and restore productive 

land use options. 

21/18937/157350 



The visual amenity and appropriate mitigation measures are discussed 

in section 6.3. 

Agricultural land use conflicts and appropriate mitigation measures are 

discussed in section 6.11. 

Resource loss and fragmentation has been minimised by providing 

sufficient access to both sides of the bypass, minimising acquisition as 

much as practicable and providing measures to minimise vegetation loss 

(sections 3.3, 6.4, 6.11 and 6.1). 

Access to all operating farms would be provided so that a 19 metre semi 

trailer can utilise local roads and turn into private properties. Access to 

infrastructure and utilities would be maintained throughout the 

construction and operation of the bypass (section 6.4.2). 

Access from local roads to operating farms would be provided (as stated 

above) so that farm machinery can access farm properties 

(section 6.4.2). 

The proposal is located mostly within the corridor that has been set 

aside for the bypass. Minimal land acquisition is required for the bypass 

(see section 3.8) and all acquisitions are located at the edge of 

properties and therefore the proposal would not result in division of any 

properties. 

Some sedimentation basins (construction and operation) may be 

required outside the bypass corridor, which would need to be subject to 

ongoing consultation with landowners. 

Weed management measures would be implemented as part of the 

proposal (refer section 6.1.4). 

Biosecurity, disease spread and bushfire risk would be managed 

through implementation of management measures outlined in the PEMP 

(refer to section 6.1 and 6.15). 

Soils, hydrology and water quality are discussed in section 6.10. Weed 

management is discussed in section 6.1.4. 

47


The REF should identify areas of 

drainage impedance and potential 

flood prone land. Mitigation 

responses should address potential 

flooding and erosion on farmland and 

access to farmland. 

Consultation should be undertaken 

with local government weed 

authorities, catchment management 

authorities, and owners and 

managers of effected agricultural 

operations. 

NSW Heritage Branch 

The REF should address the heritage 

significance of the site and any 

potential impact upon it. 

Non-Aboriginal heritage items should 

be identified by field survey and a 

statement of significance and an 

assessment of the impact should be 

undertaken in accordance with the 

guidelines. 

Any required permits must be 

obtained and if any unexpected 

archaeological relics are uncovered 

during the course of work excavation 

should cease and excavation permit, 

or an exception notification 

endorsement obtained. 

21/18937/157350 



Hydrology, water quality and flooding is discussed in section 6.10. 

Consultation has been undertaken with the Southern Rivers Catchment 

Management Authority and the other authorities and stakeholders of 

agricultural operations mentioned in this section of the REF. 

Heritage issues are discussed in sections 6.7.1 and 6.9 of this report. 

Non-Aboriginal heritage items are discussed in section 6.9 of the REF. 

This requirement is included in section 6.7.1 of this REF. 

Letters inviting a response were also sent to the Australian Government Department of Environment, 

Water, Heritage and the Arts, the NSW Department of Planning, Far South Coast Conservation 

Management Network, South East Livestock Health and Pest Authority (Bega Office) and Southern 

Rivers Catchment Management Authority (Bega Office). No response has been received to date. 

5.4.1 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP) 

Clauses 13, 14, 15 and 16 of ISEPP requires that public authorities undertake consultation with councils 

and other public authorities, when proposing to carry out development without consent. Table 5.3 lists 

the item and assesses whether these are relevant to the proposal. 

Table 5.3 Assessment of items of Clauses 13, 14, 15 and 16 of the ISEPP 

Item Response 

Clause 13 

Substantial impact on stormwater management services 

provided by a council. 

The proposal would involve impacts to the 

stormwater system. Formal consultation with the 

Bega Valley Shire Council is required. 

48

Item Response 

Likely to generate traffic to an extent that would strain the 

capacity of the road system in a local government area. 

Involves connection to, and a substantial impact on the 

capacity of, any part of a sewerage system owned by a 

council. 

Involves connection to, and use of a substantial volume of 

water from, any part of a water supply system owned by a 

council. 

Involves the installation of a temporary structure on, or the 

enclosing of, a public place that is under a council’s 

management or control that is likely to cause a disruption 

to pedestrian or vehicular traffic that is not minor or 

inconsequential. 

Involves excavation that is not minor or inconsequential of 

the surface of, or a footpath adjacent to, a road for which a 

council is the roads authority under the Roads Act 1993 (if 

the public authority that is carrying out the development, or 

on whose behalf it is being carried out, is not responsible 

for the maintenance of the road or footpath). 

21/18937/157350 



While a number of truck movements would be 

required during the construction phase, they would 

be managed to limit impact through a traffic 

management plan. This would include defining an 

appropriate route for trucks, to avoid local roads, 

and to determine the safest and most efficient 

method of ingress and egress from the site to limit 

the impact to local traffic in the Bega Valley Shire 

Council LGA. However, the proposal may strain the 

capacity of the road system during the construction 

period. 

Positive long term traffic changes are expected as a 

result of the proposal, specifically the removal of 

heavy vehicle through-traffic from the Bega CBD. 

Formal consultation with the Bega Valley Shire 

Council is required. 

The proposal would involve decommissioning 

Council’s sewer traversing High Street. 

Formal consultation with Bega Valley Shire Council 

would be required. 

The proposal would not involve connection to, and 

use of a substantial volume of water from any part 

of a water supply system owned by the Bega Valley 

Shire Council. Construction contractors would 

obtain water from the proposed sedimentation 

basins. This would only be supplemented from an 

appropriately licensed water distribution facility in 

the event there is insufficient availability of water in 

the basins. 

Formal consultation with Bega Valley Shire Council 

would not be required. 

The proposal would involve works that are likely to 

cause a disruption to pedestrian or vehicular traffic 

that is not minor or inconsequential. Constructing 

the bypass would change the existing east-west 

access arrangements between the town and areas 

to the west of the bypass. During construction, both 

vehicular and pedestrian access in the High Street 

area would be disrupted. A traffic management plan 

would be used to limit impacts to vehicular 

movements at this time. During the operational 

phase, a bridge over the bypass would be required 

at High Street and Ravenswood Street. 



The proposal would involve the substantial 

excavation of a road or footpath managed by the 

Bega Valley Shire Council. This is particularly 

relevant at High Street and Ravenswood Street. 



49

Item Response 

Clause 14 

Is likely to have an impact that is not minor or 

inconsequential on a local heritage item (other than a local 

heritage item that is also a State heritage item) or a 

heritage conservation area. 

Clause 15 

Development that is to be carried out on flood liable land 

that may be carried out without consent and that would 

change flood patterns other than to a minor extent. 

Clause 16 

Clause 16 of the ISEPP states that a consent authority 

must not carry out any of the following development 

without giving written notice to the specified authority and 

taken their responses into consideration: 

(a development adjacent to land reserved under the 

National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974—the Department of 

Environment and Climate Change, 

(b) development adjacent to a marine park declared 

under the Marine Parks Act 1997—the Marine Parks 

Authority, 

(c) development adjacent to an aquatic reserve 

declared under the Fisheries Management Act 1994—the 

Department of Environment and Climate Change, 

(d) development in the foreshore area within the 

meaning of the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority Act 

1998—the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority, 

(e) development comprising a fixed or floating 

structure in or over navigable waters—the Maritime 

Authority of NSW, 

(f) development for the purposes of an educational 

establishment, health services facility, correctional centre 

or group home, or for residential purposes, in an area that 

is bush fire prone land (as defined by the Act)—the NSW 

Rural Fire Service. 

21/18937/157350 



The proposal would likely have a minor or 

inconsequential impact on a local heritage item 

(other than a local heritage item that is also a State 

heritage item) or a heritage conservation area. 


Council is not required. 

The proposal would not involve development on 

flood liable land. 

While the proposal would have the potential to 

affect the flow of water in minor drainage lines 

located outside identified flood liable land, 

mitigation measures, would ensure that 

downstream flood patterns would be unlikely to be 

affected other than to a minor extent. 



No part of the road corridor is land reserved under 

the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, is 

adjacent to a declared marine park or declared 

aquatic reserve or foreshore area and would not 

involve development over navigable waters or for 

the purposes of an educational establishment, 

health services facility, correctional centre or group 

home, or for residential purposes. 

As such, consultation with a specified public 

authority is not required under Clause 16 for this 

proposal. 

Formal consultation with Bega Valley Shire Council for clause 13 of the ISEPP has been undertaken and 

comments will be taken consideration. Comments received from Bega Valley Shire Council on 24 August 

2010 requested further meetings with the RTA. This would be undertaken as part of detailed design as 

requested. 

50

Consultation with Bega Valley Shire Council would continue throughout the construction of the proposal. 

5.5 Ongoing or future consultation 

This REF is to be placed on public display and community comments will be invited. Information days will 

also be held during the display period. Details of these information dates and locations will be advertised 

prior to the events and issued in the next RTA Community Update as well as through the local media. 

Following display of the REF, a submissions report will be prepared addressing issues raised and made 

available to the public via the project website. 

The community would be informed of any major design changes. The following ongoing consultation 

would be undertaken: 

� Consultation with community stakeholders to assist in managing impacts during construction. 

� Follow-up meetings to discuss access arrangements with directly affected landholders. 

� On-going meetings with local council, government agencies, utility providers and community 

stakeholders as required. 

� Ongoing updates throughout the planning phase and construction period to the immediately affected 

community as well as travelling public. 

� Ongoing updates as required of the project website 

(http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/constructionmaintenance/majorconstructionprojectsregional/southcoast/pr 

inceshwy/begabypass.html). 

21/18937/157350 



51

6. Environmental assessment 

This section of the REF provides a detailed description of the potential environmental impacts associated 

with the construction and operation of the proposal. All aspects of the environment potentially impacted 

upon by the proposal are considered. Site-specific safeguards are provided to ameliorate the identified 

potential impact. 

6.1 Ecology 

A biodiversity assessment was prepared by nghenvironmental in July 2010 to assess the direct and 

indirect ecological impacts of the proposal. A copy of the biodiversity assessment is provided in Appendix 

C, and a summary is provided below. 

6.1.1 Methodology 

Prior to field work the following database searches were carried out to identify threatened and migratory 

species that have the potential to occur in the proposal site: 

� The DECCW threatened species database was searched for the Southern Coastal Plains sub-region 

of the Southern Rivers Catchment Management Authority 28 October 2009. 

� The Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, protected matters search tool was 

searched for an area 10 kilometres in radius from the centre of the proposal footprint 10 November 

2009. 

The potential for listed species to occur in the study area was evaluated based on the database findings, 

habitat preferences of species, the available habitat in the study area, as well as information from 

previous surveys in the locality. 

The broader ‘study area’ included a one kilometre buffer either side of the proposal footprint to account 

for indirect impacts. The field survey was undertaken over an eight day period in October 2009 and 

January and March 2010. The survey covered the proposal footprint and three wetlands located 

downstream. 

Flora survey methodology 

The ‘random meander’ method (Cropper 1993) was used to survey for flora listed under the TSC Act, 

EPBC Act and rare or threatened Australian plants (ROTAPs). Vegetation community condition was 

classified using DECCW’s Biometrics methodology (two condition classes: low and moderate to good). 

The surveys targeted all listed threatened species with potential to occur. 

Fauna survey methodology 

Day-time fauna survey methods included: 

� Identifying habitat features. 

� Opportunistic fauna sightings. 

� Searches for signs of fauna, such as scats, diggings and scratches. 

21/18937/157350 



52

Nocturnal fauna survey methods included: 

� Spotlighting transects (for mammals, bats and owls). 

� Call playback (for frogs and owls). 

� Anabat recording (for microbats). 

� Stag watching (for arboreal mammals, bats and owls). 

� Surveys on directly impacted hollow-bearing trees. 

Survey effort is illustrated in the attached Biodiversity Assessment (Appendix C). 

6.1.2 Existing environment 

The proposal footprint has been extensively modified as a result of agricultural activities and 

infrastructure such as roads and utilities. Most of the proposal footprint is characterised by exotic 

vegetation. Several wetlands that form part of the Bega River floodplain and its tributary gullies are 

located within one kilometre west of the proposal footprint 

Flora 

Vegetation communities 

Vegetation communities in the proposal study area include: 

� Southeast Lowland Grassy Woodland. 

� Coastal Floodplain Wetland. 

Where the groundcover is dominated by exotic species, both the Southeast Lowland Grassy Woodland 

and the Coastal Floodplain Wetland are identified to be in low condition. In some locations the Southeast 

Lowland Grassy Woodland community is dominated by native groundcovers. Where this occurs, the 

community is identified as being in moderate to good condition, even if the canopy cover is as low as four 

per cent. 

Endangered ecological communities 

Three endangered ecological communities (EECs) have the potential to occur in the study area. Table 

6.1 outlines these communities. 

Table 6.1 Occurrence of endangered ecological communities 

EEC Statutory Listing Occurrence in study area 

Lowland Grassy Woodland TSC Act Present 

Freshwater Wetlands on Coastal 

Floodplains 

White Box, Yellow Box, Blakely’s 

Red Gum Grassy Woodland and 

Derived Grasslands (‘Box Gun 

Woodland’) 

21/18937/157350 



TSC Act Present 

TSC Act - Endangered 

EPBC Act – Critically 

endangered 

Not present 

Lowland Grassy Woodland EEC and Freshwater Wetlands on Coastal Floodplains EECs occur in the 

study area and are mapped on Figure 6.1. 

53

While exotic vegetation is present over most of the proposal footprint, there are sufficient native species 

to qualify as the Lowland Grassy Woodland EEC. Of this EEC, up to 0.58 hectares is in moderate to 

good condition and around 6.37 hectares is in low condition. 

Three wetlands conforming to the EEC Freshwater Wetlands on Coastal Floodplains are located near 

the proposal footprint. Two of these wetlands are extremely degraded due to clearing, grazing and weed 

invasion, and have very few native flora species. The largest and most southerly of the three wetlands is 

in moderate to good condition. Although this wetland has been affected by disturbance, it includes a 

large area of open water, extensive stands of emergent native sedge species, patchy areas of sedges 

and rushes around the margins and a number of native forbs. 

Threatened flora 

The study area may provide potential habitat for four threatened flora species: 

� Austral Toadflax (Thesium australe), listed as Vulnerable on both the TSC and EPBC Acts. 

� Yellow Loosestrife (Lysimachia vulgaris), listed as Endangered under the TSC Act. 

� Square Raspwort (Haloragis exalata), listed as Vulnerable under the TSC and EPBC Acts. 

� Tall Knotweed (Persicaria elatior), listed as Vulnerable under the TSC and EPBC Acts. 

No threatened flora species listed under the TSC Act and/or EPBC Act were recorded during the field 

survey. The above four flora species may occur, however the likelihood of occurrence is considered to be 

low due to the high level of degradation and disturbance from clearing, grazing and weed invasion. 

21/18937/157350 



54

Legend 

Bega River 

Buckajo Road 

Figure 6.1 Location of endangered ecological communities 

Angle Street 

Proposal footprint 


Highways 

Major roads 


Other roads 


Freshwater Wetlands on 

Coastal Floodplains, low 

Freshwater Wetlands on 

Coastal Floodplains, mod-good 

Lowland Grassy Woodland, low 

Lowland Grassy Woodland, 

mod-good 

Finucane Lane 


Valley Street 

Poplar Street 



High Street 





Baker Street 

Gowing Avenue 



Hill Street 

Eden Stre et 




Finucane Lane 

Eden Street 

Redgum Close 

Koolgarra Drive 


Laws Drive 


Zingel Place 

High Street 

Church Street 



Lynjohn Drive 


Boundary Road 

Bridge Street 

Gipps Street 

Douglas Street 

Canning Street 

Parker Street 

Carp Street 

Upper Street 

Park Lane 

Belmore Street 

East Street 

Tathra Road 

Bunyarra Drive 

East Street 

Glebe Avenue 

Boundary Road 

Glebe Lane 

Howard Avenue 

1:17,500 (at A4) 

o 

0 100 200 400 600 800 

Meters 




G:\21\18937\GIS\Maps\21.18937.Z007_Bega_RTA_Location_Map_EEC_fig6_1.mxd

Weeds 

The majority of the proposal footprint is dominated by exotic pasture grasses or weeds. The areas of 

native vegetation are also weed affected. Four of the weed species recorded are listed as Class 4 

Noxious Weeds in Bega Valley LGA. These are listed below and must be controlled in accordance with a 

management plan produced by the local control authority (Bega Valley Shire Council): 

� Blackberry (Rubus sp.). 

� Fireweed (Senecio madagascariensis). 

� African lovegrass (Eragrostis curvula). 

� Paterson’s Curse (Echium plantagineum). 

Two Class 5 weeds were recorded: 

� Willow (Salix spp.). 

� Bridal Creeper (Asparagus asparagoides). 

Weeds in Class 5 cannot be sold or propagated, but there is no legal requirement to control them. 

Fauna 

Fauna habitat types 

Three main habitat types were recorded in the study area, open pasture, pasture with scattered trees, 

and aquatic and riparian zones. Within each habitat type, important fauna resources including rocky 

outcrops and hollow-bearing trees were present. The main fauna habitat types are described below. 

Open pasture 

Most areas north of Applegum Close have been cleared of native vegetation for agricultural purposes. In 

a few areas, there are patches of vegetation which provide ‘stepping stones’ through the cleared 

landscape for mobile fauna such as birds. In general, open pasture provides little shelter or refuge for 

fauna, however it provides potentially suitable foraging habitat for microbats, owls, raptors and other 

aerial foragers. 

Pasture with scattered trees 

This habitat was recorded mostly south of Applegum Close and extends either side of the existing 

Princes Highway, beyond the proposal footprint. The majority of the ground cover consists of exotic 

grasses, however the scattered trees are native. This habitat is likely to be derived from a native grassy 

woodland community. 

The pasture with scattered trees provides a simplified, low quality habitat for some woodland species. It 

also provides hollow-bearing trees and a degree of connectivity within the fragmented landscape. 

Twenty-seven hollow-bearing trees were identified, mostly in open pasture. The majority of hollowbearing 

trees provide small to medium hollows, suitable for small bird species and microbats. In the Bega 

Valley, agricultural practices have lead to the removal of a large number of trees and woodland areas. 

These features are therefore a limited resource of increasing conservation importance. Microbats and 

parrots, including threatened species, could potentially use these hollow-bearing trees as roosting or 

nesting habitat. The surrounding habitat is considered to be unsuitable for use by other threatened 

hollow-dependent fauna, including yellow-bellied gliders (not recorded despite targeted surveys, and not 

21/18937/157350 



56

expected to occur) or large forest owls (hollows present are not large enough and owls not recorded 

despite targeted surveys). 

Pasture with scattered trees may be used by a number of introduced pests including rabbits, foxes and 

commonly occurring native fauna such as kangaroos, wallabies and wombats (none of which were 

recorded during the survey). While the common wombat is known to use a variety of habitats including 

river corridors, pasture areas and forests, they are considered ‘edge specialists’ and are most abundant 

where these habitat types intersect (Roger et al. 2010). Good quality habitat for the common wombat 

does not occur within or adjacent to the proposal footprint. Dispersing wombats may cross the highway. 

However, it is unlikely due to dispersal corridors being generally located within forested or wooded areas. 

Granite outcrops occur and were observed to provide basking and sheltering habitat for common species 

of reptiles and frogs. 

Aquatic habitat 

Six aquatic areas are present including three farm dams and three naturally occurring wetlands on the 

floodplain of the Bega River (refer section 6.10). Bega River and the wetlands are mapped as key fish 

habitat by Industry and Infrastructure (Primary Industries Fisheries and Aquaculture). A flood channel 

(intermittent drainage line) crosses the proposed Applegum Close and Ravenswood Road connection. 

This flood channel links a wetland in the north and a farm dam in the south. It has no pools, was dry 

during the site survey and is expected to only flow during high rain flooding events. This flood channel 

also has potential to be key fish habitat although its value is likely to be minimal as it is highly disturbed. 

All aquatic habitats are accessible to agricultural stock and have been impacted by trampling, clearing, 

weeds, and other impacts associated with stock access. However these areas provide habitat for native 

birds, frogs, reptiles and mammals. 

Threatened fauna 

The database searches identified 29 bird species, three species of amphibians, seven bats and eight 

marsupial species listed under the TSC Act with potential to occur within the study area. Twelve species 

listed under the EPBC Act were identified as having potential to occur, including three birds, four frogs, 

four mammals and one freshwater fish. 

Based on the habitat present and the results of field surveys, sixteen species were considered to have a 

greater than low potential to occur within the study area (refer Appendix C). However, only seven of 

these species (refer Table 6.2) were considered to have potential to occur (refer section 6.1.3 for 

discussion of impacts). 

Table 6.2 Occurrence of listed fauna species within the study area with potential for impact. 

Common Name Scientific Name Statutory Listing Potential occurrence in 

study area 

Green and gold bell 

frog 

21/18937/157350 

Litoria aurea TSC Act – Endangered 



EPBC Act – Vulnerable 

May inhabit lagoons and 

dams outside proposal 

footprint in potential 

indirect impact area. 

Barking owl Ninox connivens TSC Act – Vulnerable May forage in study area. 

57

Common Name Scientific Name Statutory Listing Potential occurrence in 

study area 

Diamond firetail Stagonopleura 

guttata 

Eastern freetail-bat Micronomus 

norfolkensis 

Greater broadnosed 

bat 

21/18937/157350 



TSC Act – Vulnerable May inhabit study area. 

TSC Act – Vulnerable Recorded within the 


Scoteanax rueppelli TSC Act – Vulnerable Recorded within the 


Large-footed myotis Myotis macropus TSC Act – Vulnerable May inhabit study area. 

Great egret Ardea alba EPBC Act - Migratory Recorded outside proposal 

footprint in potential 

indirect impact area. 

A total of eighty three fauna species were recorded during the field surveys. This includes: 

� Four frog species. No threatened amphibian species were recorded. Most of the frogs recorded were 

common species that are tolerant of disturbance. This supports the observation that most of the 

wetlands within the study area were highly modified and in low condition. 

� Sixty-nine bird species. Birds of open landscapes, wetlands birds (including the great egret which is 

listed as migratory under the EPBC Act) and raptors were recorded). 

� Nine mammal species. Eight bat species were recorded within the study area, including two 

microbats the Eastern freetail-bat and the Greater broad-nose bat. One introduced mammal, the red 

fox, was recorded. 

The majority of fauna species recorded are considered to be highly mobile species tolerant of degraded 

habitats. The full list of fauna species recorded during the field surveys, and the habitat in which they 

were recorded, is provided in Appendix C. 

6.1.3 Potential impacts 

Flora 

Vegetation communities 

Around 24 hectares of vegetation would be cleared. Refer to Table 6.3 for the break down of vegetation 

types that would be impacted. 

58

Table 6.3 Types of vegetation cleared 

Vegetation cleared Area 1 (hectares) 

Exotic dominated pasture 12.0 

Native dominated pasture: 12.0 

Lowland Grassy Woodland EEC (low condition) 6.37 

Lowland Grassy Woodland EEC (moderate to good condition) 0.58 

Derived from Lowland Grassy Woodland, but not EEC 5.05 

Total 24.00 

Note 1 Areas are approximate. 

Indirect impacts to vegetation communities may include altered drainage patterns which may affect the 

composition and structure of adjacent vegetation, including freshwater wetland EECs. Sedimentation of 

down slope areas from soil erosion may also affect vegetation communities. These impacts may 

particularly affect the nearby waterways, which are already degraded. 


Up to 0.58 hectares of moderate to good condition Lowland Grassy Woodland EEC and 6.37 hectares of 

low condition Lowland Grassy Woodland EEC would be removed. Assessments of significance 

undertaken in accordance with Section 5A of the EP&A Act and Section 94 of the TSC Act concluded 

that the proposal would be unlikely to have a significant impact on the Lowland Grassy Woodland EEC, 

given the lack of viability of this community in the proposal footprint. 

The works would not directly impact any Freshwater Wetlands on Coastal Floodplains EEC but may 

degrade this community if indirect impacts such as changes to drainage patterns are not managed. For 

example. drainage structures would be constructed to divert stormwater and runoff. This could potentially 

affect the quality and quantity of runoff water into nearby natural wetlands which include EEC in 

moderate to good condition. Assessments of significance undertaken in accordance with Section 5A of 

the EP&A Act and Section 94 of the TSC Act concluded that the proposal would be unlikely to have a 

significant impact on Freshwater Wetlands on Coastal Floodplains EECs, provided recommended 

mitigation measures are implemented. Mitigation measures for the proposal are provided in section 6.1.4 

and 6.10.3. 

Threatened flora 

Potential impacts to threatened flora are considered very unlikely as no threatened flora species are 

considered likely to occur within the study area. No assessments of significance were undertaken. 

Weeds 

Activities including excavation, transport of soils and reshaping of landforms have potential to spread 

weed seeds. This may affect disturbed soils in the proposal footprint or vegetation surrounding the 

proposal footprint. Haulage of spoil material has the potential to spread seeds, including African 

Lovegrass, which is established at the northern end of the route, to new locations. 

21/18937/157350 



59

Fauna 

During construction impacts on fauna may include: 

� Construction equipment may modify habitat through compaction or cause noise and vibration 

disturbance. 

� Pollutant risks - fuels and other chemicals associated with construction may spill and have the 

potential to degrade habitat for flora and fauna. 

� Disturbance of fauna movement patterns or mortality from vehicle collision. 

Fauna habitat and connectivity 

Six hollow-bearing trees and a limited number of bushrock outcropping would be removed resulting in 

habitat loss for some species. 

Drainage structures to divert stormwater and runoff could potentially affect the quality and quantity of 

runoff water into nearby natural wetlands and farm dams that provide potential habitat for native species. 

Soil and water management and mitigation measures would be implemented to manage this impact 

(refer to section 6.10.3). 

During flooding events, the proposed Applegum Close and Ravenswood Street connection may impact 

on aquatic fauna movement along a flood channel (intermittent drainage line) linking a farm dam and a 

wetland. This is potential key fish habitat. Aquatic fauna that may be affected include fish, amphibians 

and crustaceans. No threatened aquatic fauna would be impacted. RTA would consult with Primary 

Industries Fisheries and Aquaculture regarding aquatic fauna connectivity along this flood channel. 

Kangaroos, wallabies and wombats may be at risk of collision with vehicles on the bypass. High roadside 

fatality rates are reported for wombats along the Princes Highway around Brogo Pass and Yellow Pinch 

(personal communication Lenore Taylor via Nick Boyd 7 June 2010). 

These areas are outside of the study area and provide good quality wombat habitat (forest near water). 

Brogo Pass is a narrow section of highway near Brogo surrounded on both sides by forest, with the 

Brogo River running parallel to the road. Yellow Pinch is a wider section of highway near Wolumla, 

surrounded by forest. As there is lower habitat quality for wombats, kangaroos or wallabies adjacent to 

the proposal footprint, it is considered that there is a low likelihood of roadside fatality as a result of the 

proposal. No mitigation is proposed for this potential impact. 

Threatened fauna 

Assessments of significance were undertaken in accordance with Section 5A of the EP&A Act and 

Section 94 of the TSC Act for threatened fauna species recorded, or with a moderate or higher likelihood 

of occurring within the study area based on habitat availability. Assessments in accordance with 

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) significant impact guidelines 

(DEH 2006) were undertaken for potential impacts on Matters of National Environmental Significance 

(MNES). These assessments took into consideration the effect of implementing appropriate safeguards 

(section 6.1.4). A summary of the results are provided in Table 6.4 below and detailed assessments are 

provided in Appendix C. 

21/18937/157350 



60

Table 6.4 Summary of significance assessments for threatened fauna 

Common name Scientific name 

Green and gold bell 

frog 

21/18937/157350 



Legislative status 

TSC Act EPBC Act 

Conclusion of 

significance 

assessment 

Litoria aurea Endangered Vulnerable Not significant 

(marginal habitat only) 

Barking owl Ninox connivens Vulnerable - Not significant 

(forage habitat only) 

Diamond firetail Stagonopleura 

guttata 

Eastern freetail-bat Micronomus 

norfolkensis 

Greater broad-nosed 

bat 

Scoteanax 

rueppelli 

Vulnerable - Not significant 


(roost sites unlikely to 

be affected) 



be affected) 

Large-footed myotis Myotis macropus Vulnerable - Not significant 


be affected) 

Great egret Ardea alba - Migratory Not significant 

(marginal habitat only, 

species is not at edge of 

distribution) 

With the implementation of recommended mitigation measures and safeguards outlined below, the 

proposal would be unlikely to result in a significant impact on any threatened ecological communities or 

species. 

6.1.4 Safeguards and mitigation measures 

� Prior to commencement of construction the works area and ‘no go’ areas would be clearly 

delineated. 

� Equipment and material movements would be programmed to minimise traffic across the site. 

� Weed management controls would be implemented for existing infestations, construction works and 

maintenance works. Noxious weeds (Blackberry, Fireweed, African lovegrass, Paterson’s curse) 

would be controlled in accordance with any applicable management plans produced by the Bega 

Valley Shire Council. 

� The Freshwater wetland EEC located south of the Ravenswood Street overpass would be fenced as 

a no-go zone prior to and during all construction works. 

� Drainage and the Soil and Water Management Plan would be designed to protect nearby Freshwater 

Wetlands identified on Figure 6.1 and their associated feeder drainage lines. Drainage design would 

minimise changes to the quantity and quality of runoff to these lagoons. 

61

� RTA would consult with Industries and Infrastructure (Primary Industries Fisheries and Aquaculture) 

regarding aquatic fauna connectivity along the flood channel at the Applegum Close and 

Ravenswood Street connection. 

� Where clearing of fauna habitat is required, staged-clearing protocols would be put in place to 

minimise risks to resident fauna. These protocols would consider the timing and method of felling. 

� Where mature or hollow-bearing native trees would be removed, each lost hollow would be mitigated 

by the installation of a nest box (eg at a ratio of 1:1). 

� Disturbed areas would be rehabilitated as soon as practical after works using locally occurring native 

species where appropriate. 

6.2 Noise and vibration 

A noise and vibration assessment was undertaken by GHD to assess the noise and vibration impacts of 

the proposal. A full copy has been included in Appendix D and a summary of the noise and vibration 

assessment is provided in this section. 

Noise and vibration impacts have been addressed in accordance with DECCW’s Environmental Criteria 

for Road Traffic Noise (EPA 1999), the Interim Construction Noise Guideline, Assessing Vibration: A 

Technical Guideline, and the RTA’s Environmental Noise Management Manual (RTA 2001). 

6.2.1 Noise and vibration criteria 

Construction noise criteria 

The DECCW Interim Construction Noise Guideline provides guidance for assessment of construction 

noise. The guideline recommends standard hours for construction activities as follows: 

� Monday to Friday: 7am-6pm. 

� Saturday: 8am-1pm. 

� No work on Sundays or Public Holidays. 

Construction works are to be undertaken during the standard construction hours identified above (also 

refer to section 3.5.6). 

The Interim Construction Noise Guideline provides noise management levels for sensitive land uses. For 

non-residential sensitive land uses, the management levels apply only when the sensitive land use is 

occupied eg school hours. Table 6.5 provides the Interim Construction Noise Guideline construction 

noise criteria that apply to the proposal. 

Where the noise guideline management levels are exceeded all feasible and reasonable work practices 

to minimise noise should be applied. 

The assessment point is 30 metres from the residence, or the resident boundary, whichever is the closer 

to the dwelling. 

21/18937/157350 



62

Table 6.5 Interim Construction Noise Guideline construction noise criteria at sensitive receivers 

Land use Interim Construction Noise Guideline management level, LAeq(15 min) 

Residential – recommended standard 

hours 

21/18937/157350 



Noise affected level – Background + 10 dB(A) 

Highly noise affected level – 75 dB(A) 

Classroom Internal noise level – 45 dB(A) 

Hospitals Internal noise level – 45 dB(A) 

Place of worship Internal noise level – 45 dB(A) 

Passive recreational area External noise level – 60 dB(A) 

Construction vibration criteria 

Human comfort vibration criteria 

The human comfort limits applicable to construction works are shown in Table 6.6. 

Table 6.6 British Standard 6472 human comfort vibration limits 

Receiver type Period Continuous vibration 

(1 Hz to 80 Hz mm/s 

Peak 1 ) 

Impulsive vibration 

(1 Hz to 80 Hz mm/s 

Peak 2 ) 

Residential Day 0.28 8.6 0.2 

Note 1: Based on sinusoidal vibration sources. 

Structural damage vibration criteria 

Intermittent vibration 

dose value (VDV) 

(m/s 1.75 ) 

Table 6.7 presents guideline values for the proposal for the maximum absolute value of velocity to impact 

foundations of nearby buildings. The values are considered conservative and do not necessarily lead to 

structural damage. 

Table 6.7 Guideline values for short term vibration on structures (DIN 4150-3) 

Line Type of structure 

1 

2 

Buildings used for commercial purposes, 

industrial buildings, and buildings of similar 

design. 

Dwellings and buildings of similar design and/or 

occupancy 

Guideline values for velocity (mm/s) 

1 Hz to 10 Hz 10 Hz to 50 Hz 50 Hz to 100 Hz 

20 20 to 40 40 to 50 

5 5 to 15 15 to 20 

Source: German Standard DIN 4150-3: 1999-02 Structural Vibration – Part 3: Effects of vibration on structures. 

63

Operational noise criteria 

The DECCW Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise provides non-mandatory traffic noise target 

levels for residential receivers. In accordance with the RTA Environmental Noise Management Manual 

Practice Note (i), the criteria applicable to the proposal are: 

� New road - the majority of the proposal falls under the new road criteria. 

� Redevelopment of existing road - the redevelopment of existing road criteria may apply to residents 

at the northern and southern end of the bypass. 

The target levels should aim to be achieved 10 years after proposal opening. 

The road traffic noise target levels are in Table 6.8. Where the criteria are already exceeded, the existing 

road traffic noise levels should not be increased by more than 0.5 dB(A) and 2 dB(A) for new roads and 

redevelopments, respectively. 

Table 6.8 Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise operational traffic noise target levels, 

LAeq(period), dB(A) 

Situation Day (7am – 10pm) Night (10pm – 7am) 

New freeway or arterial road corridor 55 LAeq(15hr) 50 LAeq(9hr) 

Redevelopment of existing freeway or arterial 

road 

21/18937/157350 



60 LAeq(15hr) 

Existing school class room (internal) 45 LAeq(1hr) - 

Passive recreation and school playgrounds 55 LAeq(15hr) - 

Sleep disturbance 

55 LAeq(9hr) 

The DECCW Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise outlines that sleep disturbance impacts are 

dependent on: 

� Maximum noise level of an event. 

� Number of occurrences. 

� Duration of the event. 

� Level above background or ambient noise levels. 

For continuous rather than intermittent traffic flow the RTA Environmental Noise Management Manual 

recommends maximum noise pass-by events should not exceed LAeq (1hr) noise levels by more than 

15 dB(A). 


The sensitive receivers for noise in the study area are: 

� Urban residences to the north, south and east of the proposal footprint. 

� Scattered semi-rural residences to the west of the proposal footprint. 

� Bega West Public School (including indoor areas and outdoor playground areas). 

64

Noise catchment areas 

Eleven noise catchment areas (NCAs) were identified. These are shown in Figure 6.2 and Figure 6.3 and 

described below: 

� NCA-1W: Residential area to the west of the existing Princes Highway entering Bega from the north 

and near the proposed northern roundabout. This noise catchment area is impacted by existing 

traffic noise from the Princes Highway. 

� NCA-1E: Residential area to the east of the existing Princes Highway entering Bega from the north 

and near the proposed northern roundabout. This noise catchment area is impacted by existing 

traffic noise from the Princes Highway. 

� NCA-2W: Residential area to the west of the Bega bypass corridor and south of High Street. This 

noise catchment area is not substantially impacted by existing road traffic noise. 

� NCA-2E: Residential area to the east of the Bega bypass corridor near High Street. This NCA is not 

substantially impacted by existing road traffic noise. 

� NCA-3: Residential area to the east of the Bega bypass corridor and just north of Bega West Public 

School. This noise catchment area is not substantially impacted by existing road traffic noise. 

� NCA-4: Residential area to the east of the Bega bypass corridor near Minyama Parade. One isolated 

residential location on the west side of the corridor has also been included in this noise catchment 

area. This noise catchment area is not substantially impacted by existing road traffic noise. 

� NCA-5: Residential area to the east of the Bega bypass corridor near Redgum Close. Part of this 

noise catchment area is impacted by existing road traffic noise from the Princes Highway. 

� NCA-6: Scattered rural residences near the proposed southern intersection. This noise catchment 

area is impacted by existing traffic noise from the Princes Highway. 

� NCA-DA1: Approved seniors living development (DA 2006.0276) to the west of the Bega bypass 

corridor and just south of NCA2W. The DA has been approved, by Bega Valley Shire Council, 

subject to a condition requiring that the design and orientation of the dwellings meets the 

requirements of Australian Standard 3671 – Road Traffic Noise Intrusion. This may require the 

reorientation of the dwellings adjacent to the proposal. 

� NCA-DA2: Approved residential development (DA 2003 0265) to the west of the existing Princes 

Highway and just north of Finucane Lane. The proposal is shifting the existing Princes Highway 

alignment slightly closer to the approved development. A condition of the development consent 

requires that the dwellings be designed and constructed in accordance with AS 3671. 

� NCA-BWPS: Bega West Public School is located midway down the corridor on the eastern side. 

Figure 6.2 and Figure 6.3 illustrate the location of the noise catchment areas and their associated noise 

monitoring locations. 

21/18937/157350 



65

Figure 6.2 

52 Valley Street 

Legend 

Background Noise Monitoring 

Road Traffic Noise Monitoring 

Noise Catchment Areas 

NCA1W 

NCA2W 

52 Fairview Street 

Seniors Living 

Development 

NCA1E 

Noise Catchment Areas and Noise 

Monitoring Locations (North) 

73 Kirkland Crescent 

NCA2E 

NCA3 

51 Meringo Street 

Bega West 

Public School 

1:4274 

0 20 40 80 120 160 

m 


Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Austrailia (GDA) 


G:\21\18937\Tech\Noise\Noise Modelling\SoundPlan\DGA Source Height SoundPlan Design Model\REF_Figure6_2_Rev2.sgs

Legend 

Background Noise Monitoring 

Figure 6.3 

Road Traffic Noise Monitoring 

Noise Catchment Areas 

NCA4 

Noise Catchment Areas and Noise 

Monitoring Locations (South) 

2 Ballima Court 

NCA5 

293 - 297 Newtown Road 

Approved 

Development 

Finucane Lane 

NCA6 

1:4766 

0 25 50 100 150 200 

m 


Horizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Austrailia (GDA) 


G:\21\18937\Tech\Noise\Noise Modelling\SoundPlan\DGA Source Height SoundPlan Design Model\REF_Figure6_2_Rev2.sgs

Noise monitoring results 

Noise monitoring was undertaken between 23 November and 3 December 2009. Background noise 

monitoring for the construction noise assessment was undertaken at four locations (52 Fairview Street, 

51 Meringo Street, Bega West Public School, and 2 Ballima Court) along the proposal footprint. 

The background noise monitoring results (away from the existing Princes Highway) are typical of rural 

areas with low background noise. The background noise levels at locations influenced by existing road 

traffic noise from the Princes Highway during the day-time period are 3 dB(A) to 8 dB(A) greater than 

background noise levels at locations not influenced by road traffic noise. 

Road traffic noise monitoring for the operational noise assessment was undertaken at four locations (52 

Valley Street, 73 Kirkland Crescent, 293 Newtown Road, and Finucane Lane) exposed to existing road 

traffic noise from the existing Princes Highway. 

The road traffic noise monitoring results are typical of areas influenced by road traffic noise. Road traffic 

noise is present during the night-time period though not to the same extent as during the day-time period. 

Logger data results of the rating background level (RBL) and road traffic noise descriptors are 

summarised in Table 6.9 and noise monitoring locations are shown in Figure 6.2 and Figure 6.3. 

Table 6.9 Rating background level (RBL) dB(A) 

Noise monitoring location Day LA90(Day) Evening LA90(Evening) Night LA90(Night) 

52 Fairview Street (NCA-2W) 34.0 29.0 27.5 

51 Meringo Street (north of NCA-3) 33.5 29.0 26.5 

Bega West Public School (NCA-BWPS) 35.5 29.5 26.0 

2 Ballima Court (NCA-4) 32.0 31.8 26.5 

52 Valley Street 1 (NCA-1W) 40.0 31.5 29.5 

73 Kirkland Crescent ` (NCA-1E) 35.5 28.5 25.0 

293 – 297 Newtown Road ` (NCA-5) 36.5 29.5 24.3 

Finucane Lane ` (NCA-DA2) 35.0 30.5 25.5 

Note 1: Road traffic noise monitoring locations corrected to represent ‘free-field’ conditions 


Construction noise 

Acoustic modelling was undertaken to predict noise levels during construction of the proposal. 

The predicted construction noise for each noise catchment area when all plant items are operating is 

shown in Table 6.10. An indicative list of equipment likely to be used during construction, and the sound 

pressure level generated, is included in Table 5-2 of Appendix D. 

21/18937/157350 



68

Table 6.10 Predicted construction noise levels, LAeq(15min) dB(A) 

NCA Noise 

management 

level 

21/18937/157350 

Nearest 

offset 

distance 

(metres) 



Preliminary 

site works (6 

months) 

Bulk 

excavation 

and base 

preparation 

(18 months) 

Bridgeworks 

(9 months) 

NCA-1W 50 50 m 64 69 58 65 

NCA-1E 46 70 m 62 67 54 63 

NCA-2W 44 40 m 64 69 66 65 

NCA-2E 44 35 m 66 71 73 67 

NCA-3 44 45 m 65 70 52 66 

NCA-4 42 55 m 63 68 52 64 

NCA-5 42 45 m 65 70 44 66 

NCA-6 47 60 m 58 63 35 59 

NCA-BWPS 55 50 m 64 69 61 65 

Note: Bold text indicates where construction noise levels may exceed the noise management level 

Road 

surfacing 

(6 months) 

The predictions represent a worst case noise level at the nearest residence to the road alignment for 

each noise catchment area. Construction activities have the potential to exceed the construction noise 

criteria at all the noise catchment areas surrounding residences. The highly noise affected level 

(�75dBA+) is not predicted to be exceeded. 

Every feasible and reasonable measure should be implemented to minimise the noise and vibration 

impacts of construction activities on sensitive receivers. Noise and vibration mitigation measures in 

section 6.2.4 would be included in the Construction Environment Management Plan. The management 

measures would be implemented where feasible and reasonable to reduce noise impacts. 

Construction outside of the standard working hours is not expected. Should any out of hours work be 

required, they would be undertaken in accordance with procedures in RTA’s Environmental Noise 

Management Manual 2001, Practice Notes vii – Roadworks Outside of Normal Working Hours. This 

would include notifying the local community of any works planned to be undertaken outside standard 

construction hours. 

Construction vibration 

The predicted ground vibrations at various distances are shown in Table 6.11 for typical equipment that 

may be used, based on data from the RTA Environmental Noise Management Manual. 

Table 6.11 Typical vibration levels (mm/s peak) 

Plant item 

Vibration level at distances (mm/s peak) 

10 m 20 m 50 m 100 m 

15 tonne roller 7 to 8 3.8 1.5 0.8 

7 tonne compactor 5 to 7 3.0 1.2 0.6 

69

Plant item 

21/18937/157350 

Vibration level at distances (mm/s peak) 

10 m 20 m 50 m 100 m 

Dozer 2.5 to 4 1.6 0.7 0.3 

Backhoe 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 

Pavement breaker 4.5 to 6 2.6 1.1 0.5 

The nearest residential receivers to construction activities are generally more than 30 metres however 

some are potentially closer. The majority of construction activities would occur at distances greater than 

50 metres from residences, where the risk of vibration impacts to the residential amenity is low. 

The vibration from construction plant would be considered intermittent vibration. It is likely that residents 

would notice vibration from construction activities. There is the potential for vibration levels to be intrusive 

where earthworks occur within 20 metres of adjacent residences, or where rolling and compacting 

activities occur within 50 metres of adjacent residences. With consideration to the criteria outlined in 

Table 6.7, the expected magnitude of ground vibrations should not cause damage if the equipment 

operates at distances greater than 10 metres from the buildings. 

Operational noise 

Road traffic noise predictions were undertaken using the United Kingdom Department of Transport 

‘Calculation of Road Traffic Noise’ (CoRTN) algorithm. Noise predictions were undertaken for the 

following: 

� Year 2015 future existing (traffic flow on the existing highway for year opening without construction of 

the proposal). 

� Year 2015 opening (proposal design for year opening). 

� Year 2025 design (proposal design 10 years after opening). 

Traffic forecast data for these scenarios are outlined in section 6.4. Other noise model inputs and 

assumptions are in Appendix D. 

The CoRTN algorithm and noise modelling process was validated against the road traffic noise 

monitoring data and simultaneous traffic counts undertaken for the proposal in November and December 

2009. A summary of the predicted future operational road traffic noise impacts on residences is provided 

in Table 6.12. 

A number of buildings were assessed at ground floor and first floor level as separate receivers, as 

mitigation may not be required for both levels of the one building. 

The road traffic noise target levels for the operation of the proposal are 55 dB(A) (day) and 50 dB(A) 

(night). However, as some receivers at the northern extent of the proposal are already affected by noise 

from existing roads, the criteria are already exceeded. In this case, the existing road traffic noise levels 

should not be increased by more than 0.5 dB(A) and 2 dB(A) for new roads and redevelopments, 

respectively. In addition, Bega West Primary School has a lower target still of 45 dB(A) that should be 

met indoors when occupied (during the day in this instance). 



70

Table 6.12 Summary of road traffic noise impacts 

NCA Number of 

receivers 

NCA-1W 22 

(plus 3 first 

floor 

receivers) 

NCA-1E 18 

(plus 2 first 

floor 

receivers) 

NCA-2W 8 

(plus 1 first 

floor 

receiver) 

NCA-2E 7 

(plus 1 first 

floor 

receiver) 

NCA-3 11 

(plus 1 first 

floor 

receiver) 

NCA-4 19 

(plus 5 first 

floor 

receivers) 

NCA-5 4 

(plus 1 first 

floor 

receiver) 

NCA-6 3 

(no first 

floor 

receivers) 

NCA- 

BWPS 

21/18937/157350 

10 4 

(plus 8 first 

floor 

receivers) 

TOTAL 102 

(plus 22 first 

floor 

receivers) 

Noise target dB(A) Number of receivers 

that exceed target 

noise level 



Number of receivers 

subject to acute 

noise exposure 

Day Night Day Night Day Night 

Various 1 

(55-65) 

Various 1 

(55-65) 

Various 1 

(50-60) 

Various 1 

(50-60) 

24 23 3 1 16 

5 5 0 0 0 

55 50 7 6 2 1 7 

55 50 4 

(incl. 1 

first floor) 

4 

(incl. 1 

first floor) 

Receivers 

to treat 3 

0 0 4 

(incl. 1 first 

floor) 

55 50 9 6 0 0 8 

55 50 18 17 0 0 18 


floor) 

55 50 3 2 1 

(incl. 1 

first floor) 

Various 

(59-65) 

45 2 

Various 

(45-65) 

Various 

(53-60) 

Not 

applicable 

Various 

(50-60) 

0 2 

1 1 0 0 1 

7 

(incl. 1 

first floor) 

78 

(incl. 2 

first floor) 

Not 

applicable 

64 

(incl. 1 

first floor) 

Not applicable 

6 

(incl. 1 

first floor) 

Not applicable 

7 


floor) 

2 63 


floor)) 

1 Various: Noise target based on ENMM Practice note (i). New freeway or arterial road corridor and redevelopment of existing 

freeway or arterial road. 

2 Internal noise target (the management levels apply only at times when the sensitive land use is occupied) 

3 This is mitigation of receivers by Lot and DP. 

4 There are eight buildings at Bega West Primary School 

71

Practice note (iv) of the RTA Environmental Noise Management Manual provides guidance for selecting 

‘feasible and reasonable’ noise mitigation measures for reducing road traffic noise impacts at residences. 

The RTA Environmental Noise Management Manual considers it reasonable to consider noise mitigation 

options when any of the following apply: 

� There is no existing road traffic noise exposure and the Year 2025 Design noise levels are greater 

than 0.5 dB(A) above the Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise traffic target noise levels. 

� There is existing road traffic noise exposure above the noise target levels and the Year 2025 Design 

noise levels are 2 dB(A) above the year 2015 Future Existing noise levels. 

� When there is existing road traffic noise exposure and the Year 2025 Design noise levels are above 

the acute 65 LAeq(15hr) Day and 60 LAeq(9hr) night noise levels. 

Table 6.12 identifies the 63 receivers that would need to be considered for mitigation. During the detailed 

design stage of the proposal, further investigation of all feasible and reasonable noise mitigation options 

would be undertaken for the receivers identified in Table 6.12 as requiring mitigation. All feasible and 

reasonable noise mitigation treatments would be considered for the affected receivers, in consultation 

with their respective landowners to reduce traffic noise levels to within the applicable noise limits. 

There are also two proposed subdivisions where the noise targets may potentially be exceeded. One is 

an approved seniors living development (DA 2006.0276) to the west of the Bega bypass corridor and just 

south of NCA2W. The second is an approved residential development (DA 2003 0265) to the west of the 

existing Princes Highway and just north of Finucane Lane. Individual receivers were not modelled for 

these two subdivisions however expected day time noise levels are shown in the noise contour plots in 

Figures 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4 in Appendix D. Detailed noise mitigation measures have not been provided as it 

is the developer’s responsibility to determine the mitigation requirements as per their development 

consent conditions. 

Assessment of maximum noise levels 

The use of engine brakes on the approach to the northern roundabout may potentially increase 

maximum noise level events from heavy vehicles. Therefore, there is the potential for exceedances of 

the sleep disturbance guidelines due to engine braking during the night-time period. 

The RTA Environmental Noise Management Manual uses the maximum noise level assessment to 

prioritise treatments as opposed to setting decisive criteria. An excerpt from the Environmental Noise 

Management Manual is as follows, 

21/18937/157350 

This maximum noise assessment should be used as a tool to help prioritise and rank mitigation 

strategies, but should not be applied as a decisive criterion in itself. 

Sleep disturbance at the northern roundabout would be considered in the selection of feasible and 

reasonable mitigation measures during detailed design of the proposal. 

There are no substantial road gradients or other traffic control devices along the alignment, therefore 

engine braking is not anticipated at other locations along the proposal. Therefore sleep disturbance 

impacts are not anticipated at other locations along the alignment. 



72

6.2.4 Safeguards and management measures 

Construction 

A Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan would be prepared and implemented to manage 

and mitigate adverse noise and vibration disturbance, taking into consideration DECCW’s Interim 

Construction Noise Guideline, 2009. The following measures would be included in the Construction 

Noise and Vibration Management Plan. 

Noise mitigation 

� The construction areas would be configured to minimise noise impacts to the surrounding 

community. The following would be considered: 

– Construction compounds would be laid out in such a way that the primary noise sources are at a 

maximum distance from residences, with solid structures (sheds, containers, etc) placed between 

sensitive noise receivers and noise sources and as close to the noise sources as is practicable. 

– Compressors, generators, pumps and any other fixed plant would be located as far away from 

residences as practicable and behind site structures. 

– Material dumps, loading and unloading areas would be located as far as practicable from the 

nearest residences. 

� Equipment would be selected to minimise noise emissions. Equipment would be fitted with 

appropriate silencers and be in good working order where possible. Machines found to produce 

excessive noise compared to normal industry expectations would be removed from the site or stood 

down until repairs or modifications can be made. 

� To reduce the annoyance associated with reversing alarms, broadband reversing alarms (audible 

movement alarms) would be used for site equipment where possible. Satisfactory compliance with 

occupational health and safety requirements would need to be achieved and a safety risk 

assessment may need to be undertaken to determine that safety is not compromised (refer to 

Appendix C of the Interim Construction Noise Guideline). 

� General construction activities would be limited to the recommended construction hours wherever 

feasible and reasonable. 

All site workers would be directed to take practical and reasonable measures to minimise the impact to 

local residences during the course of their activities. This would include: 

� Avoid the use of loud radios. 

� Avoid shouting and slamming doors. 

� Where practical, machines would be operated at low speed or power and switched off when not 

being used rather than left idling for prolonged periods. 

� Keeping truck drivers informed of designated vehicle routes, parking locations and delivery hours. 

� Minimise reversing. 

� Avoid dropping materials from height. 

� Avoid hard impact noise such as metal to metal contact. 

� Keep engine covers closed while equipment is operating. 

21/18937/157350 



73

Vibration mitigation 

� The contractor would undertake a dilapidation survey for buildings within 50 metres of construction 

works. A copy of the report would be provided to the landholder. 

� Vibration monitoring would be undertaken in accordance with a procedure outlined in the 

Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan. 

Community relations 

� The community would be kept informed of the project through regular updates including of the 

construction program and progress. 

� Affected residents would be given prior notification of nearby works and noisy or vibration generating 

activities. 

� The RTA’s Environmental Noise Management Manual 2001, Practice Note vii – Roadworks Outside 

of Normal Working Hours would be followed for any work outside of the standard working hours. This 

would include notifying the local community of any works planned to be undertaken outside standard 

construction hours. 

� A community liaison phone number and site contact would be provided so that noise and/or vibration 

related complaints, if any, can be received and addressed in a timely manner. 

Operation 

� Feasible and reasonable noise attenuation measures would be determined during detailed design for 

impacted areas. 

� A post-construction noise monitoring program would be undertaken to confirm that the noise level 

targets are achieved. The noise monitoring program (including simultaneous traffic counts) would be 

undertaken within 12 months of opening once traffic flows have stabilised. 

6.3 Landscape character and visual amenity 

A visual impact assessment was undertaken by Clouston Associates in July 2010. A full copy has been 

included in Appendix E and is summarised in this section. 

An Urban Design Report was undertaken by Clouston Associates in May 2010. A full copy has been 

included in Appendix E and is summarised in this section and section 3.4. 


The visual impact assessment is based on the RTA’s Environmental Impact Assessment Guidance Note 

- Guidelines for landscape character and visual impact assessment. 

The visual impact ratings are high, moderate and low. These are defined as: 

� High: The visual impact on these receptors/viewers would require amelioration at the site planning 

stage to allow viewers to continue to enjoy the existing visual amenity. 

� Moderate: The visual impact on these receptors/viewers is at a localised scale and can be mitigated 

at detail design phase or already has some existing screening or setback that minimises impact. 

� Low: The visual impact on these receptors/viewers is considered low and little or no amelioration is 

needed. 

21/18937/157350 



74


The urban design vision for the proposal is “A rural highway that best fits the scenic landscape through 

which it passes”. The vision is a reflection of the high scenic quality landscape that the township of Bega 

lies within and that the bypass corridor overlooks. Refer to section 3.4 for the urban design objective and 

principles for the proposal. 

Landscape character 

Bega township is aligned along a ridgeline, with urban development straddling the ridge. The western 

side of the ridge offers a scenic outlook across the valley floor, to the Bega River and the foothills of the 

Great Dividing Range. The eastern side offers a less extensive visual catchment as the nearby hills limit 

the potential for distant views. 

The bypass corridor follows the western side of the ridgeline and crosses an undulating landscape. The 

corridor falls from north to south and changes in character from a suburban setting in the north that still 

offers scenic views to the foothills to open rural paddocks with scattered remnant native trees in the 

south. 

The bypass corridor generally has an urban edge to the east and a rural edge to the west. Features to 

the west include the Bega River floodplain, wetlands, the Bega River, semi-rural land with scattered 

residencies and open agricultural grazing land. The eastern side of the bypass corridor is higher land and 

is mostly urban development including low density housing, local streets, a school and utilities depot on 

the edge of the Bega central business district. 

The landscape character zones are shown in Figure 6.4. 

21/18937/157350 



75

Figure 6.4 Landscape character zones 


The potential impacts on landscape character and visual amenity have been avoided and minimised 

during the concept design stage. A landscape and urban design concept plan has been developed in 

accordance with the urban design principles and would apply to the proposal (refer to Appendix E). 

Landscape character impacts 

The impact of the proposal was assessed for each landscape character zone as summarised in Table 

6.13. 

21/18937/157350 



76

Table 6.13 Landscape character impacts 

Character zone impact rating Landscape character zones 

Moderate impact Urban Development and Urban-Rural Transition areas between 0.5 

and 2 km away from the proposal. 

Moderate-high impact Urban Development and Urban-Rural Transition areas within 0.5 km 

distance of the proposal. 

21/18937/157350 



Floodplain areas up to 1 km away from the proposal. 

Floodplain, Cleared Undulating Grassland, Vegetated Hills and Open 

Farmland areas in 1 – 2 km distance of the proposal. 

High impact Floodplain and Cleared Undulating Grassland areas that are within 

0.5 km distance of the proposal. 

Cleared Undulating Grassland areas up to 1 km away from the 

proposal. 

These ratings result from the predominantly open and rural setting combined with the landform and 

scattered vegetation present. 

Visual impact analysis 

A viewshed analysis was completed to identify the likely extent to which the proposal may be viewed 

from the surrounding landscape, from both the public and private domain. Two scenarios were assessed: 

� Scenario one: impacts of the new bypass alignment on regional and localised views, excluding 

potential features such as noise mounds and noise walls. 

� Scenario two: impacts of the new bypass alignment on regional and localised views, including 

potential features such as noise walls or noise mounds. Note that any potential noise attenuation 

measures would be subject to feasible and reasonable assessment during detailed design (refer to 

section 6.2). For the purposes of scenario two, all potential noise walls and noise mounds were 

assessed. 

Scenario one impacts 

The visual impact ratings for scenario one range from moderate to moderate to high. This is primarily due 

to the rural and scenic nature of many of the viewpoints and because some viewpoints are close to the 

proposal. 

Scenario two impacts 

The visual impact ratings for scenario two range from a moderate to high rating. The increase in visual 

impact compared to scenario one is primarily due to potential noise attenuation measures, such as noise 

walls and noise mounds. 

77

Figure 6.5 Artists impression heading south towards the proposed northern roundabout 

To mitigate potential impacts on the existing visual quality rural views would be maintained where 

possible and landscaping and urban design would focus on blending the proposal with the surrounding 

landscape. This would also apply to any noise walls or noise mounds identified during detailed design. If 

noise walls or noise mounds are required, the RTA regional environmental staff would be consulted to 

advise on any additional environmental assessment required. 


� Detailed design would be guided by the urban design principles for the proposal. 

� An appropriate planting and landform design would be developed to highlight and celebrate the key 

arrival and exit points to/from Bega and to integrate the highway into its rural setting. 

� Cut and fill batters would be designed to minimise visible cut faces; maintain smooth transitions 

between cut and fill and to incorporate appropriately grouped tree planting wherever practicable. 

� Soft landscape elements would be implemented wherever practicable to blend the proposal with the 

rural character, particularly native tree plantings and native grasses that reflect grazing character. 

� Structures (eg. High Street and Ravenswood Street bridges) would be designed to best suit 

surrounding landscape character. 

� Materials, finishes and colours for structures including any noise walls would aim to create a 

consistent form and to blend with the rural character of the surrounding landscape. 

� Landscaping would be used to minimise the visual impact of any noise walls or noise mounds. 

� Batter and landscaping maintenance would be incorporated into the overall maintenance program for 

the bypass. 

21/18937/157350 



78

� If noise walls or noise mounds are required, RTA regional environmental staff would be consulted to 

advise on any additional environmental assessment required. 

6.4 Traffic and access 



The major thoroughfare through Bega is the Princes Highway which runs along the NSW South Coast 

and into Victoria. The highway travels south through North Bega where it crosses the Bega River Bridge 

and enters the outskirts of town. The highway then turns east and travels through the CBD of Bega 

where it forms the main street, known as Carp Street. The highway turns south at the end of Carp Street 

and becomes Gipps Street. The highway then winds its way south through Bega (where it is also referred 

to as Newtown Road), and then exits the town and continues south. 

Table 6.14 outlines the average weekday traffic volumes that use the existing Princes Highway for 

locations north and south of the proposed bypass. These locations were considered to provide an 

indication of traffic on the Princes Highway and the proposed bypass. These weekday traffic volumes are 

relatively low compared to other major regional centres on the south coast. 

Table 6.14 Average weekday traffic volumes 

Location Northbound Southbound Total 

Princes Highway north of Bega 

bypass 

Princes Highway south of 

Bega bypass 

Existing local roads 

21/18937/157350 



Daily % heavy 

vehicles 

Daily % heavy vehicles 

4074 12.0% 4143 7.6% 8217 

3223 8.0% 3276 9.7% 6499 

Descriptions of other local roads in the vicinity of the proposal are located in section 3.2. 

Crash history 

The crash history for the Princes Highway in the vicinity of the proposed Bega bypass indicates that 

between 1 October 2004 and 30 September 2009 there were 27 crashes on the highway through Bega. 

Of these, 12 resulted in injuries to a total of 14 people and 15 were tow away. The primary crash type 

was rear end collision, with 29.6 per cent being of this type, whilst a further 14.8 per cent involved 

intersection, adjacent approaches and 7.4 per cent involved hit pedestrians. 

The data also indicates that the crash rate for this section of the Princes Highway is 57 per 100 million 

vehicle kilometres travelled, which is 1.5 times the typical crash rate (of 38 per 100 million vehicle 

kilometres travelled) for a rural two-lane undivided highway. 

Pedestrians 

The majority of pedestrian connections in Bega are along formalised roads. 

79

Pedestrian movements near the proposal are mainly on local streets such as High Street, Fairview 

Street, Brogo Street, Ravenswood Street, Applegum Close and Finucane Lane, which do not have 

formal footpaths. Pedestrians generally use the road pavement, grass verges or nature strips. 

Formalised pathways generally only occur in the town centre and along residential frontages to the 

Princes Highway. 

East-west pedestrian movements occur across the vacant land near the proposed northern roundabout, 

although there are no formal pedestrian facilities in this location. 

Cyclists 

There are no formal cyclist facilities in the bypass corridor, with the nearest facilities located to the north 

of the proposed northern roundabout. Cyclists currently use the existing Princes Highway and streets 

that cross the bypass corridor. 

Bus stops 

The Bega Valley Local Transport Information Guide (Bega Valley Shire Council 2009) notes that there 

are currently three different local bus services in operation, as well as the state government CountryLink 

bus service which connects Bega to Sydney and Eden. The Bega-Tathra bus route also operates in the 

Bega township, including services to Bega West, High St, Fairview St and Ravenswood St. 

There are two bus stops on the Princes Highway at Applegum Close (one northbound and one 

southbound). 


Construction 

The impacts on existing road infrastructure would be minimal as the majority of the works would be on 

land that is currently undeveloped to the west of town. The following streets interface with the proposal 

and would be impacted during construction: 

� High Street. 

� Fairview Street. 

� Brogo Street. 

� Ravenswood Street. 

� Boundary Road. 

� Applegum Close. 

� Finucane Lane. 

� The private driveway that runs west from the cul-de-sac at the end of Gowing Street. 

During the construction there would be temporary impact on access at Ravenswood Street and High 

Street, where overbridges would be constructed. There would also be temporary impacts to access at 

Finucane Lane as a result of realignment. Alternate access would be provided during construction to 

ensure that movement across the bypass corridor into Bega is maintained. Some local road detours may 

slightly increase travel time across the proposed bypass. 

21/18937/157350 



80

Whilst the High Street Bridge is constructed, alternative access for vehicles to High Street, Fairview 

Street and Brogo Street would likely be via Poplar Avenue. Alternatively, access across the corridor on 

Fairview Street may be maintained until the High Street overbridge is operational. 

During construction a large number of vehicles would be required to access the bypass corridor and the 

construction compounds (see section 3.6 for indicative compound locations). This would include small 

vehicles for construction workers, as well as heavy vehicles for equipment and material delivery and 

earthworks. 

About 113 heavy vehicles would be required to access the site daily during the busiest construction 

phase (if bridge, pavement and landscaping works all occur simultaneously). Vehicles are likely to 

access the site via the northern and southern extents of the proposal and would move along the bypass 

corridor internally. Therefore travel along the existing road network would be limited and impacts on 

traffic would be relatively minor. 

A Traffic Management Plan would be prepared in accordance with RTA QA Specifications and the RTA’s 

Traffic Control at Work Sites Manual 2003. 

Operation 

Traffic volumes 

Traffic forecast data for ‘Year 2015 Future Existing’, ‘Year 2015 Opening’ and Year 2025 Design’ cases 

is shown in Table 6.15, Table 6.16 and Table 6.17 respectively. 

Table 6.15 Projected traffic volumes without the Bega bypass, year 2015 (future existing) 

Location 

21/18937/157350 



Northbound Southbound 

AADT % HV AADT % HV 

Princes Highway – North of the bypass 4588 12.% 4666 7.6% 

Princes Highway – South of the bypass 3630 8.0% 3689 9.7% 

Table 6.16 Projected traffic volumes with the Bega bypass, year 2015 (with proposal) 

Location 



Bega bypass 1885 14% 1866 12% 

Princes Highway – North of the bypass 4588 12.0% 4666 7.6% 


Existing Princes Highway, from Bega township to northern 

intersection of the bypass 

Existing Princes Highway, from southern intersection of the 

bypass to Bega township 

2703 10.6% 2800 4.7% 

2359 3.2% 1823 7.3% 

Note: percentages have been calculated based on the assumption that heavy vehicle composition on the Bega bypass is 14 per 

cent. 

81

Table 6.17 Projected traffic volumes with the Bega bypass, year 2025 design 

Location 

21/18937/157350 





Bega bypass 2297 14% 2275 12% 

Princes Highway – North of the bypass 5593 12.0% 5687 7.6% 


Existing Princes Highway, from Bega township to northern 

intersection of the bypass 

Existing Princes Highway, from southern intersection of the 

bypass to Bega township 

3296 10.6% 3412 4.7% 

2876 3.2% 2222 7.3% 

Note: percentages have been calculated based on the assumption that heavy vehicle composition on the Bega bypass is 14 per 

cent. 

The proposal would result in better traffic conditions through the Bega township as traffic would bypass 

Bega to the west. Table 6.18 outlines the numbers of vehicles that are predicted to use the existing 

Princes Highway in Bega in each direction, with and without the bypass. 

Table 6.18 Vehicle numbers on the existing Princes Highway through Bega 

Vehicles on existing Princes Highway in 

Bega entering via north intersection 

Vehicles on existing Princes Highway in 

Bega entering via south intersection 

Year Without bypass With bypass Without bypass With bypass 

2015 9254 5503 7319 4182 

2025 11,280 6708 8922 5098 

Without the proposed bypass, the number of vehicles using the Princes Highway through Bega (from the 

north or south) is forecast to increase between 2015 and 2025 by 22 per cent. Table 6.18 shows that, 

with the proposed bypass, the number of vehicles using the highway through Bega is predicted to be 

substantially reduced, by about 6900 vehicles per day in 2015 and about 8400 vehicles per day in 2025. 

This would result in: 

� Improved safety due to less vehicles being on the road within the Bega CBD (in particular heavy 

vehicles). 

� An improvement in general amenity (noise and air quality) in the Bega town centre. 

Heavy vehicle traffic volumes 

Table 6.19 outlines the predicted number of heavy vehicles that would travel on the existing highway 

through Bega if the bypass is not constructed (in the years 2015 and 2025) and also includes the 

predicted number of heavy vehicles on the existing highway with the proposed bypass. 

82

Table 6.19 Projected heavy vehicle numbers on the Princes Highway through Bega 

Year Direction Heavy vehicle numbers on existing 

Princes Highway without bypass 

2015 

2025 

21/18937/157350 



Heavy vehicle numbers on existing 

Princes Highway with bypass 

North 905 419 

South 648 208 

Total 1553 627 

North 1,103 509 

South 849 259 

Total 1893 768 

As can be seen from Table 6.19 the proposed bypass would result in a substantial reduction in the 

number of heavy vehicles from the existing Princes Highway within the Bega CBD. The majority of heavy 

vehicles bypassing Bega would consist of B-doubles and semi trailers, while heavy vehicles still travelling 

through Bega would mostly consist of smaller service and delivery vehicles. This would reduce the 

number of large slow moving vehicles from the roads in town, improving travel times. It would also 

increase safety as the available space through Bega for heavy vehicles is limited and therefore creates 

the potential for conflict between heavy vehicles and small vehicles or pedestrian and cyclists. 

Currently 25 metre B-doubles cannot travel through town in a northbound direction and therefore are 

required to remove one trailer before travelling through town only to return to pick up the second trailer 

before continuing their journey. This results in additional heavy vehicle movements through town due to 

the need for a truck to travel through Bega CBD twice. The proposed bypass would remove the need for 

B-doubles to undertake this manoeuvre (unless they are required to travel into Bega CBD) and therefore 

the number of B-doubles travelling on the highway through town would be reduced. This reduction of Bdouble 

traffic through Bega was not able to be quantified in the traffic forecasts as the source of traffic 

data does not provide detail of the composition of the heavy vehicle traffic. 

Access 

There would be several permanent changes to the local road network as a result of the proposal. 

Access into the Bega township from the western side of the bypass would be provided via the proposed 

bridges over the bypass. Access from Fairview Street into town would be via the proposed High Street 

overbridge, while access to Bega CBD from Applegum Close would be via the proposed Applegum 

Close to Ravenswood Street connection and the proposed Ravenswood Street overbridge (see Figure 

3.3). This would also reduce the need for local traffic to travel on the bypass. 

Due to safety issues, accessing the bypass directly from Ravenswood Street and Applegum Close would 

not be possible and therefore access to the bypass would be via the proposed eastern intersection in the 

vicinity of Boundary Road. This would be accessed via the proposed Ravenswood Street overbridge, 

local streets and the existing highway on the eastern side of the corridor. 

Access to all operating farms would be provided so that a 19 metre semi trailer and farm machinery can 

access farm properties, both through farmhouse gates and access gates to paddocks, where this facility 

currently exists. 

83

Road safety 

The proposal would reduce the number of vehicles required to travel through the Bega CBD reducing the 

potential for conflict between local and through traffic, particularly heavy vehicles. This would improve 

road safety throughout the Bega CBD, including the potential for vehicle crashes. 

The proposal would also improve the horizontal and vertical alignment of the Princes Highway between 

Boundary Street and Finucane Lane to meet current design standards and improve road safety. 

Pedestrians and cyclists 

The operation of the bypass would impact on some informal pedestrian and cyclist routes such as the 

use of Applegum Close and Fairview Street from the west of the proposal into the Bega township. 

Due to safety reasons, pedestrians would be prevented from crossing the bypass at the northern 

roundabout. A wall would be installed at this location and would extend to the High Street overbridge. 

This would direct pedestrians to use the High Street overbridge or the existing Bega River Bridge 

underpass to move between the Bega CBD and the western side of the bypass. 

Impacts to pedestrian and cyclist movements into Bega from Fairview Street are considered minimal as 

an alternate crossing of the bypass is located at High Street, one street to the north. This crossing 

includes the provision of a shared path on the either side of the bridge. 

Impacts to pedestrian and cyclist movements into Bega from Applegum Close are considered to be more 

substantial, as direct access across the bypass corridor to the southern edge of Bega would be removed. 

An alternate route would be provided via the proposed Applegum Close to Ravenswood Street 

connection and the proposed Ravenswood Street overbridge. 

Pedestrian access would not be permitted along the bypass corridor, however the bypass would be 

constructed with 2.5 metre wide shoulders to allow for cyclists to travel along the bypass. 

Bus stops 

Bus stops would be considered further during the detailed design phase. It may be preferable to relocate 

the existing bus stops closer to Ravenswood Street overbridge to enable commuters to cross the bypass 

safely by utilising the pedestrian facilities on the bridge. Local bus routes may require some rerouting to 

accommodate permanent changes in access during operation of the bypass. RTA would consult with 

local and regional bus companies and Bega Valley Shire Council prior to construction to minimise 

impacts on bus transport. 


� A detailed Traffic Management Plan would be prepared in accordance with the RTA’s Traffic Control 

at Work Sites Manual 2003 and RTA Specification G10 - Control of Traffic, and approved by the RTA 

prior to implementation to provide a comprehensive and objective approach to minimise any potential 

impacts on road network operations during construction. 

� The Traffic Management Plan would include such measures as provision of safe access points to 

work areas from the adjacent road network, safety barriers where necessary, impose temporary 

speed restrictions when necessary, maintain adequate sight distance and display prominent warning 

signage. 

� Construction traffic would enter/exit the construction zone only in areas designated for this purpose 

in the Traffic Management Plan. 

21/18937/157350 



84

� Approval for road occupancy would be obtained for any lane closures or road traffic changes. 

� Movement of spoil would occur within the site where practicable, to minimise the number of trucks on 

the surrounding road network. 

� The community would be kept informed about upcoming road construction activities, including 

through advertisements in the local media and by prominently placed advisory notices. 

� Any disruption to access would be notified in advance in accordance with RTA’s Draft community 

involvement and communications resource manual, 2008. 

� Property access would be maintained at all times where feasible. Where changes to access 

arrangements are necessary, the RTA would advise owners and tenants and consult with them on 

alternate access arrangements. 

� Property access points would be separated from work areas (for example, through the installation of 

fencing) to ensure safety. 

� RTA would consult with local and regional bus companies and Bega Valley Shire Council prior to 

construction to minimise impacts on bus transport. 

6.5 Greenhouse emissions 

A greenhouse assessment was undertaken by GHD to assess the greenhouse emissions of the 

proposal. A full copy has been included in Appendix F and is summarised in this section. 


The greenhouse assessment was prepared in accordance with the principles of: 

� The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard developed by the 

World Business Council for Sustainable Development 2004. 

� Life Cycle Assessment principles (ISO 14040 series). 

� Department of Planning’s Draft Guidelines Energy and Greenhouse in EIA, August 2002 (the 

‘Guidelines’). 

� The RTA’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory for Road Construction Projects calculator. 

The purpose of the greenhouse assessment was to calculate the greenhouse emissions associated with 

the proposal, and to identify strategies for reducing emissions. Emission sources considered included: 

� The extraction and processing of construction materials, such as concrete, steel and aluminium. 

� Transportation of construction materials to from and within the site. 

� Fuel use by excavators, trucks and other equipment during the construction phase. 

� Removal of vegetation. 

� Energy consumption for operation and maintenance of the completed bypass. 

� Changes in fuel consumption from vehicles using the Bega bypass. 

Greenhouse emissions were categorised, in accordance with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, as follows: 

� Scope one emissions: greenhouse emissions created directly by a person or business from sources 

that are owned or controlled by that person or business. Scope one emissions are produced by the 

21/18937/157350 



85

combustion of fuels such as diesel at the proposal site, and by vehicles and plant equipment which 

the proponent owns and has operational control over. Note that only the direct combustion of the 

fuels is considered as scope one. 

� Scope two emissions: greenhouse emissions created as a result of the generation of electricity, 

heating, cooling or steam that is purchased and consumed by a person or business. These are 

indirect emissions as they arise from sources that are not owned or controlled by the person or 

business who consumes the electricity. Scope two emissions arise from the consumption of 

electricity at the proposal site, in plant equipment that is owned and operated by the proponent 

(emissions arising from the extraction, processing and transportation and distribution of fuels and 

electricity are classified as scope three, since these activities are not within the operational control of 

the end user). 

� Scope three emissions: greenhouse emissions that are generated in the wider economy as a 

consequence of a person’s or business’s activities. These are indirect emissions as they arise from 

sources that are not owned or controlled by that person or business but they exclude scope two. All 

other emissions associated with the proposal are defined as scope three, since they are produced 

outside the proposal site, and the proponent does not have operational control of the facilities from 

which they originate. Emissions resulting from the combustion of fuels for this transportation are 

classified as scope three. 

Construction 

The estimation of greenhouse emissions from road use enables consideration of the changes to 

emissions resulting from changing road conditions. For this analysis, the emissions from road use in 

2015 were calculated for two scenarios: 

� Without bypass: traffic on the existing Princes Highway route through Bega. 

� With bypass: traffic on both the bypass and on the former Princes Highway route through Bega. 

Estimating future traffic emissions took into account: 

� Vehicle kilometres travelled by vehicle class. 

� Fuel types and consumption by each vehicle class. 

� Emissions from combustion of the fuel. 


Construction 

The assessment identified about 9710 tonnes CO2-equivalent (this is the emissions of other non-carbon 

dioxide greenhouse gases multiplied by their global warming potential so that their effects can be 

compared to the equivalent emissions of carbon dioxide) of greenhouse emissions for the construction 

period (equivalent to 500 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year over the 20 year life of the proposal). This 

included 4700 tonnes CO2-equivalent scope one emissions, 10 tonnes CO2-equivalent scope two 

emissions and 5000 tonnes CO2-equivalent scope three emissions. 

The major sources of emissions were: 

� Diesel consumption in plant and generators (50 per cent of total emissions). 

21/18937/157350 



86

� Steel materials used in construction (17 per cent of total emissions). 

� Cement used in construction (15 per cent of total emissions). 

� Aggregate used in construction (seven per cent of total emissions). 

These four key emissions represented 89 per cent of the total emissions for construction. 

Operation 

Table 6.20 and Table 6.21 outline the estimated emissions from traffic with and without the bypass in 

2015. 

The assessment identifies that the bypass is projected to reduce overall emissions from vehicles. This 

saving would be about 1500 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year (based on year opening traffic levels), 

though this does not take into account increase in traffic levels over time. The annualised saving over 20 

years would be 1000 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year or a total of about 20,000 tonnes CO2-equivalent 

over a 20 year period. 

Table 6.20 Scenario one: emissions from traffic using Bega town route without bypass (2015) 

Without bypass 

21/18937/157350 

AADT 

2015 



Annual estimate based on forecast AADT in 2015 

Annual vehicle 

kilometres travelled Annual fuel (litres) 

Town Light vehicles 8,349 14,322,500 1,762,000 4,500 

Town Heavy vehicles 905 1,553,000 928,000 2,700 

Total 9,254 15,875,500 2,690,000 7,200 

Annual tonnes 

CO2-e 

Table 6.21 Scenario two: emissions from traffic using both bypass and Bega town route (2015) 

With bypass 

AADT 

2015 1 

Annual estimate based on forecast AADT in 2015 

Annual vehicle 

kilometres travelled Annual fuel (litres) 

Bypass Light vehicles 3,263 4,151,000 501,000 1,300 

Bypass 

Heavy 

vehicles 488 621,000 313,000 900 

Town Light vehicles 5,085 8,723,000 935,000 2,400 

Town 

Heavy 

vehicles 418 717,000 392,000 1,100 

Total 9,254 14,212,000 2,141,000 5,700 

Annual tonnes 

CO2-e 

87


Construction 

� Alternative fuels and power sources (such as biodiesels and ethanol blends) would be used 

wherever practicable. 

� Transport of materials would be scheduled and loads optimised to minimise trips required and 

associated emissions. 

� Construction equipment, plant and vehicles would be appropriately sized. 

� Equipment and plant would be regularly serviced to ensure efficient performance. 

� Energy efficient vehicles, plant and equipment would be selected for works wherever possible. 

� The use of recycled steel content would be investigated. 

� The use of waste material in cement would be investigated (eg fly ash, granulated blast furnace 

slag), to minimise the quantity of cement required. 

Operation 

� Alternative power sources (eg solar power) would be investigated for operational lighting. 

6.6 Air quality 


Air quality monitoring has not been undertaken for the proposal and no air quality monitoring is 

undertaken in the Bega local government area. A search of the National Pollutant Inventory for the 2007 

to 2008 reporting period for Bega (postcode area 2250) identified 17 air pollutant substances from 10 

sources. The indicative top sources of air pollutants included: 

� Dairy product manufacturing. 

� Mineral, metal and chemical wholesaling. 

� Cropping. 

� Unimproved pasture. 

� Improved pasture. 

Most of the above sources are located away from the Bega township. The main source of emissions 

impacting upon air quality in the vicinity of the proposal is motor vehicles which are associated with the 

existing highway and the township of Bega. The impact of this source is minimal due to the relatively 

small levels of pollutants. 

The air quality surrounding Bega is considered to be relatively good as the land uses in the region are 

mainly for rural purposes, conservation (National Parks and Nature Reserves) or for natural resources 

(eg State Forests). Overall it is considered that air pollution levels in the vicinity of the proposal are 

relatively low. 

21/18937/157350 



88

6.6.2 Impact assessment 

Construction 

During construction the following activities would potentially result in air quality impacts: 

� Clearing of vegetation. 

� Stripping, stockpiling and managing of topsoil. 

� Earthworks, leading to the creation of airborne dust, especially in dry and windy conditions. 

� Road sub-grade preparation and road pavement works. 

� Transport and handling of soils and materials. 

� Use of construction vehicles leading to the creation of exhaust fumes. 

Potential air quality impacts during construction would predominately be associated with the generation 

of dust. Dust settlement may impact upon adjacent residences causing soiling of washing and surfaces. 

Substantial dust generation could result in health impacts to nearby receivers. Air quality impacts as a 

result of dust generation are considered to be minor they would be limited to the short-term during the 

construction phase only and due to the implementation of the safeguards and management measures 

outlined in section 7.2. 

Machinery and other construction vehicles would emit exhaust fumes. The impact of these emissions 

would be temporary in nature and limited to the construction phase only. 

Odours may be generated during the application of asphalt and may affect nearby residential dwellings. 

The impacts of odour during construction would be minimal due to the short duration of asphalt-laying 

activities. 

Overall, potential air quality impacts during construction would be short-term in nature and would occur in 

a progressive fashion as the works progress along the length of the bypass. 

Operation 

Some properties adjacent to the bypass may experience a reduction in existing air quality, as they are 

currently located away from any major traffic source. This decrease is considered to be relatively minor 

as emissions would dissipate within a short distance of the bypass, maintaining existing regional air 

quality levels. 

The Bega bypass is not expected to increase traffic volumes through the area. Therefore it would not 

result in an increase of vehicle emissions within the region. The bypass would however reduce the 

amount of traffic through the Bega CBD. This would result in reduced localised emissions in the township 

due to fewer vehicles on the existing highway. The proposal would also result in more efficient traffic 

movements and a reduction of heavy vehicle movements by allowing B-doubles to travel on the bypass 

uninterrupted. 


� The Construction Environmental Management Plan would detail the materials, methods and 

monitoring arrangements to manage air quality. Any monitoring would comply with DECCW 

guidelines for the Sampling and Analysis for Air Pollutants in NSW. Any conditions of licences or 

approvals, in relation to maximum air pollutant levels, would be complied with. 

21/18937/157350 



89

� Exposed surfaces would be watered regularly to minimise dust emissions. 

� Stabilisation of disturbed surfaces would take place as soon as practicable. 

� All construction plant and machinery would be fitted with emission control devices complying with 

Australian Design Standards. 

� Construction plant and equipment would be maintained in a good working condition in order to limit 

impacts on air quality. 

� Plant and machinery would be turned off when not in use. 

� No burning of any timbers or other combustible materials would occur. 

� Work activities would be reprogrammed if the mitigation measures are not adequately restricting dust 

generation. 

� During periods of high winds, dust generating activities would cease. 

� Stockpiled materials would be covered or stored in areas not subject to high wind. 

� Construction facilities and site sheds would be designed and operated to minimise the emission of 

dust, smoke, and other substances. 

� Local residents would be advised of hours of operation and duration of works and supplied with a 

contact name and number for queries regarding air quality. 

6.7 Climate change 

Climate change refers to the warming temperatures and altered climate conditions associated with the 

concentration of gases in the atmosphere known as greenhouse gases. The following reports were 

reviewed to identify potential climate change impacts for the Bega bypass: 

� Climate Change in Australia: technical report (CSIRO 2007). 

� Climate Change in the Southern Rivers Catchment (CSIRO 2007). 

During development of the concept design, an impact identification and risk assessment workshop was 

undertaken with key project personnel to identify potential climate change impacts on the proposal. 

6.7.1 Projected climate change conditions 

Climate change projections for the ‘Southern Rivers catchment’ region were identified for the years 2030 

and 2070, presenting both the ‘high’ and ‘low’ greenhouse emission/concentration scenarios. Table 6.22 

summarises the climate change projections. 

Table 6.22 Climate change projections for the Bega region 

Climate change 

variable 

Temperature 

change ( o C) 

21/18937/157350 

Present climate 

Average 

maximum: 

Jan - 27 o C 

Jul – 16 o C 



2030 2070 

Low High Low High 

+0.2 o C +1.8 o C +0.7 o C +5.6 o C 

90

Climate change 

variable 

Extreme heat – 

projected number 

of days above 

35 o C 

Extreme heat – 

projected number 

of days above 

40 o C 

Rainfall change – 

Annual (%) 

Extreme winds 

(%) 

Extreme rainfall 1 

(%) 

Hail risk 2 (no. of 

hail days per 

year) 

Fire risk 3 (no. of 

fire days per 

year) – for Nowra 

Evaporation 

increase (%) 

21/18937/157350 

Present climate 

2 days (Moruya) 

5 days (Bega) 

0 days (Moruya) 

1 day (Bega) 



2030 2070 

Low High Low High 

2 days 

(Moruya) 

0 days 

(Moruya) 

3 days 

(Moruya) 

1 day 

(Moruya) 

2 days 

(Moruya) 

0 days 

(Moruya) 

6 days 

(Moruya) 

2 days 

(Moruya) 

866 mm/yr -13 % +7 % -40 % +20 % 

n/a -10 % + 16 % -32 % +23 % 

n/a +7% +5% 

n/a +0 days +2 days 

13 fire days 

(Nowra) 

1 Defined as a one in 40 year 1-day rainfall event 

2 A2 emissions scenario 

14 fire days 16 fire days 15 fire days 20 fire days 

1575 mm +1 % +13 % +2 % +40 % 

3 Number of days annually with a ‘very high’ or ‘extreme’ fire danger index. Changes are for 2020 and 2050, respectively 


Climate change has the potential to change weather patterns for the Bega area. The following potential 

changes in weather conditions are identified for the Southern Rivers catchment. 

� Temperature increases of between 0.2 o C and 5.6 o C by 2070. 

� An increase in the number of days with maximum temperatures over 35 o C and 40 o C. 

� Changes in annual rainfall levels including potential decreases and increases. 

� Changes in the number of extreme rainfall events. 

� An increase in the number of drought periods. 

During construction, there may be an increased risk for extreme weather events, such as intense rainfall 

causing flooding or dry, hot weather conducive to generation of dust. These impacts would be managed 

through implementation of the safeguards and management measures in section 6.6 and 6.10 of this 

91

REF. In addition, increased temperatures during construction may result in heat stress for workers as 

well as affecting asphalt laying activities. 

During operation of the bypass, an increase in maximum temperatures and the number of days 

experiencing extreme temperatures may affect the integrity of pavement, bridges and other infrastructure 

either directly or through evaporative changes. 

Changes to soil moisture content may cause expansion of contraction of some materials such as clay 

soils. To avoid future damage to the bypass, only suitable material would be used for construction of the 

road structural foundations. 

An increase in the intensity of rainfall events could potentially increase flood events and/or severity. By 

2030 rainfall could vary between -13 percent to +7 percent of current annual levels and by 2070 could 

vary between -40 percent to +20 percent of current rainfall levels. An increase in localised flooding at 

local watercourses could result in: 

� Drainage and stormwater impacts. 

� Aquaplaning (cars sliding in pooled water on the pavement). 

� Changes to flora and fauna species and distribution, including pest and weed species. 

� Soil and erosion and water quality impacts. 

� Potential over topping of basins. 

Due to the distance from the coast, the proposal would not be subjected to sea level rises or storm 

surges as a potential effect of climate change. 

The proposal has been designed for the 1 in 100 year flood event, including for the access east and west 

of the bypass. Design would be further refined during the detailed design phase. 

The proposal would result in greenhouse gas emissions which may contribute to climate change. It is 

anticipated that diesel use for heavy machinery would be the main emissions source during construction. 

The remainder of emissions as a result of construction would mostly be associated with the materials 

used in construction and clearing of biomass (vegetation). During operation the source of greenhouse 

gas emissions would largely be from lighting. A small amount of emissions would be generated from 

ongoing maintenance activities. 

The proposal is projected to reduce the overall emissions from vehicles over time. This would be 

achieved by increasing the efficiency of the road network and allowing highway traffic to bypass Bega. 

Refer to section 6.5 of this REF for further consideration of greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the 

proposal. Implementation of the safeguards and management measures in section 6.5 would minimise 

the impact of the proposal on climate change. 

6.7.3 Safeguard and management measures 

� Material that may expand or contract as a result of decreased rainfall would not be used for 

construction of the road structural foundation. 

� Detailed design, including for drainage and flood immunity, would take into consideration the effect of 

climate change on the project. 

� Clearing of biomass (vegetation) would be minimised wherever possible. 

21/18937/157350 



92

� Energy efficient street lighting would be used wherever possible. 

6.8 Aboriginal cultural heritage 

Two Aboriginal heritage reports were prepared to assess the impacts of the proposal on Aboriginal 

heritage and are summarised in this section: 

� Aboriginal Cultural Assessment and Archaeological Survey Report, August 2009, Kayandel 

Archaeological Services 

– Cultural Assessment 

– Archaeological assessment (preliminary survey) 

� Bega Bypass Subsurface Test Excavation, April 2010, NSW Archaeology Pty Limited 

– Archaeological assessment (test pit excavation program) 

A copy of Bega Bypass Subsurface Test Excavation (NSW Archaeology Pty Limited 2010) is included in 

Appendix G. A copy of the Aboriginal Cultural Assessment and Archaeological Survey Report (Kayandel 

Archaeological Services 2009) has not been included due to culturally sensitive information. 


A search of the DECCW Aboriginal Heritage Information Management Systems (AHIMS) was 

undertaken on 26 September 2008 to identify any known sites within or immediately adjacent to the 


A preliminary assessment of the potential effect of the proposal on Aboriginal cultural heritage was 

undertaken in accordance with the RTA Procedure for Aboriginal cultural heritage consultation and 

investigation (RTA 2008). A site visit was carried out on 28 November 2008. In attendance were 

representatives from the RTA, the Bega Local Aboriginal Land Council and Yukembruk Merung Ngarigi 

Consultancy. This survey identified cultural landscape features and two stone artefacts. 

Kayandel Archaeological Services was subsequently engaged to provide an Aboriginal Archaeological 

Survey Report and Cultural Heritage Assessment to identify any Aboriginal cultural heritage constraints. 

The report focused on identifying any past Aboriginal land use, areas of archaeological potential and 

potential constraints for future land use. NSW Archaeology were engaged to undertake a test pit 

excavation program. The assessment methodologies are detailed chronologically below. 

Both the Kayandel Archaeological Services and NSW Archaeology assessments were prepared in 

accordance with the NSW DECCW Interim Guidelines for Aboriginal Community Consultation - 

Requirements for Applicants. 

Cultural heritage assessment 

Historical and archaeological research and preliminary cultural mapping was undertaken and formed the 

basis for consultation with registered Aboriginal stakeholders. An Aboriginal Focus Group meeting was 

held on 3 March 2009 and input sought into a draft cultural assessment methodology. Aboriginal 

stakeholders were also invited to participate in an oral history program which occurred between March 

and June in 2009. 

21/18937/157350 



93

Archaeological assessment 

Preliminary survey 

A second site inspection was undertaken on 10 February 2009 by Kayandel Archaeological Services and 

the RTA’s Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Adviser, Southern Region. The purpose of this inspection was to 

record information about actual and potential sites, their condition, the likelihood of deposits containing 

archaeological materials, and to ground truth a preliminary cultural and landform model. 

A pedestrian survey technique was used to investigate the proposal footprint. Opportunistic transects 

were taken to investigate any exposures and potential sites identified by Bega Local Aboriginal Land 

Council were revisited. Basic information about landforms, visibility and survey coverage was noted. 

Subsurface test excavation program 

Based on recommendations from the preliminary archaeological survey, a subsurface test excavation 

program was undertaken in March 2010 by NSW Archaeology and representatives of the Bega Local 

Aboriginal Land Council, registered Aboriginal stakeholders and Yukembruk Merung Ngarigo 

Consultancy. 

The subsurface test excavation program was conducted to determine: 

� Whether or not subsurface Aboriginal objects are present at the proposal site. 

� The nature and the integrity of the archaeological deposit. 

A total of 60 test squares in 10 test transects were excavated within five test areas along the bypass 

reservation. Two test transects each measuring 25 metres long were excavated in each of the test areas. 

An Aboriginal Focus Group meeting was held on 2 June 2010 to review the draft subsurface test report 

and submissions were invited prior to finalisation of the report. 

The results of the subsurface investigation, which included input from the Aboriginal Focus Group, were 

used to design appropriate management and mitigation strategies for the proposal. 


The proposal site is located in the boundaries of the Bega Local Aboriginal Land Council. 

No registered AHIMS sites were located within the proposal footprint, however a potential bora ring 

(ceremonial) site is located about 130 metres west of the proposal. Twenty one Aboriginal objects or 

places are recorded within two kilometres of the proposal. These include ceremonial sites, scarred trees, 

stone artefacts and areas of potential archaeological deposits (PADs). 

Cultural heritage assessment 

A cultural heritage map was produced following consultation with registered Aboriginal stakeholders as 

part of the Cultural Heritage Assessment in the Aboriginal Cultural Assessment and Archaeological 

Survey Report. The map shows areas of Aboriginal cultural significance and value in and around the 

proposal. 

The Aboriginal cultural heritage map identifies the ridgeline that crosses the proposal as a pathway 

connecting sites of special ceremonial significance. The ridgeline has previously been subject to urban 

development and road construction. Wetlands, such as those west of the proposal, are generally 

identified as important sources of weaving materials. Views of ridgelines and overlooking wetlands were 

21/18937/157350 



94

assessed as being of potential cultural significance and may have acted as a focus for past human 

occupation including thoroughfares, camping grounds and resource gathering. 

The oral history interviews indicated a strong sense of overall cultural significance is attached to the 

locality due to its focus as a gathering and meeting place for generations of Aboriginal people, both in the 

past and in the present. The interviews demonstrated a wide network of interconnecting people, sites, 

places and stories. 

The proposal site therefore occurs in areas of intangible Aboriginal cultural significance. 

Archaeological assessment 

Preliminary survey 

The preliminary survey considered the proposal footprint to have varying archaeological potential. No 

Aboriginal cultural heritage objects or places were observed during the field investigations. A number of 

locally occurring potential raw material sources such as quartzite, quartz and hornfels were located and 

may have been suitable for past human exploitation. 

The preliminary archaeological survey and assessment identified and mapped areas of possible 

archaeological potential in the proposal site. The results of this preliminary assessment and mapping are 

summarised in Table 6.23. 

Table 6.23 Preliminary assessment of archaeological potential within the proposal footprint 

Section of the proposal footprint Preliminary 2009 assessment of archaeological 

potential 

North of High Street Much of this area was assessed as having no 

archaeological potential, a small section was 

considered to have low archaeological potential 

High Street to Rawlinson Street Moderate archaeological potential or higher, in 

areas that have not been previously disturbed 

Rawlinson Street to Prospect Street Good views and proximity to wetlands equate to 

moderate potential 

Prospect Street to Applegum Close Moderate potential on flatter dry areas 

Applegum Close to the Reservoirs Low potential 

South of the Reservoirs to end Low potential 

Source: adapted from Kayandel Archaeological Services 2009 

The preliminary archaeological assessment recommended a subsurface archaeological testing program 

to ground-truth the preliminary mapping of archaeological potential. 

The sites in Table 6.23 were then used in developing a sub-surface excavation program. 

Subsurface test excavation program 

Two test transects were excavated in each of the following five test areas: 

� High Street to Rawlinson Street. 

21/18937/157350 



95

� Rawlinson Street to Prospect Street. 

� Prospect Street to Applegum Close. 

� Opposite Finucane Lane (in a sediment control area). 

� Applegum Close to Reservoirs. 

A total of 83 stone artefacts were retrieved during the excavation program. The majority of the stone 

artefacts were representative of flaking debitage (flaking debris) however two retouched items were 

recovered. Artefacts were recovered from nine out of ten test transects. This result indicated that 

subsurface artefacts are widely distributed across the proposal footprint. The archaeological deposits in 

each of the test areas were assessed to be of low archaeological significance. 

The proposal footprint was assessed to be unlikely to contain human burials due to the shallow nature of 

the soils and their slight acidity which would prevent the long term preservation of bone. 

It was concluded that the proposal footprint is unlikely to contain deposits with more than low 

archaeological significance. 


Cultural heritage impacts 

The proposed excavation and construction activities would directly impact on an important ridgeline, 

which provided pathways to special sites surrounding the proposal. The ridgeline pathway has previously 

been disturbed by urban development and road construction. The proposal is therefore not inconsistent 

with previous development on the ridgeline. Potential impacts would be minimised by confining works to 

the proposal footprint, thereby avoiding impacts to areas of the ridgeline outside the proposal footprint. 

Potential indirect impact to wetlands located to the west of proposal may include reduced water quality 

as a result of erosion and sedimentation. These impacts are considered manageable with the 

implementation of safeguards detailed in section 7.2 of this REF. 

Aboriginal objects 

Subsurface Aboriginal objects may be impacted during construction as a result of civil earthworks. Cut 

and fill levels of plus or minus 10 metres (refer section 6.10.2) would result in the destruction of soil 

profiles with archaeological potential. 

The identified Aboriginal objects were assessed to be of low significance only. NSW Archaeology 

determined that there are no archaeological constraints relating to the proposal given that the results of 

the test excavation can be considered a reasonable accurate reflection of the nature of the Aboriginal 

objects located within the entire proposal footprint. 

Given the nature of the Aboriginal objects in the proposal footprint, no impact mitigation such as, salvage 

or monitoring is considered to be warranted in respect of the proposed impacts. 


A section 90 permit has been received for the entire proposal footprint. The proposal would be carried 

out in accordance with the conditions of this permit and with the following safeguards. 

21/18937/157350 



96

� Excavation and construction works would be confined to the minimum area required to limit impacts 

in culturally significant areas. 

� Indirect impacts to nearby wetlands would be mitigated by safeguards and measures outlined in 

section 6.10.3 to minimise erosion, sedimentation and water quality impacts. 

� Any future Aboriginal community consultation and assessment would be undertaken in accordance 

with the RTAs Procedure for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation and Investigation. 

6.9 Non-Aboriginal historic heritage 

A non-Aboriginal heritage assessment was carried out by nghheritage in November 2009 and is 

summarised below. 


A desktop investigation was completed to identify listed heritage items within and surrounding the 

proposal. This included searching: 

� The Australian Heritage Database (including the National and Commonwealth Heritage Lists and the 

Register of the National Estate. 

� The NSW State Heritage Register (items of State significance) and State Heritage Inventory (items 

listed by local government and State agencies). 

� The RTA Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Register. 

� The Heritage Schedule of the Bega Local Environment Plan (locally listed items). 

A site inspection was undertaken on 9 and 10 November 2009 in order to identify potential 

archaeological heritage items within the proposal footprint, including relics as defined by the Heritage Act 

1977. The site visit also assessed the likely impact of the proposal on the heritage significance of these 

items. 


The search results of the identified heritage databases are found in Table 6.24. 

Table 6.24 Non-Aboriginal heritage items 

Search Regional context Proposal footprint and surrounding 

area 

Australian Heritage 

Database 

21/18937/157350 

Ninety one heritage items were found 

within Bega Valley Shire. Fourteen of 

the 91 heritage items were recorded 

in the Bega township area. 



There are no heritage items listed on the 

National or Commonwealth Heritage List that 

are within or adjacent to the proposal. 

Additionally, there are no items listed on the 

Register of the National Estate that are 

within or adjacent to the proposal. 

97

Search Regional context Proposal footprint and surrounding 

area 

State Heritage Register 

and State Heritage 

Inventory 

Bega Valley Local 

Environmental Plan 

2002 (LEP) Schedule 5 

and 6 (Heritage Items) 

RTA Heritage & 

Conservation register 

21/18937/157350 

Fifty eight heritage items were within 

the Bega township area. One of 

these items – the former CBC Bank 

building is listed on the State 

Heritage Register under the Heritage 

Act 1977. 

Fifty six heritage items were recorded 

in the Bega township area. 

One heritage item, the Alsops Bridge, 

was recorded in the Bega township 

(this does not include items contained 

within the RTA Bega office and 

depot). 



There are no heritage items listed on the 

State Heritage Register or State Heritage 

Inventory that are located within or adjacent 

to the proposal. 

The Old Bega Hospital, located around 150- 

200 metres from the southern end of the 

proposal, was the only heritage item 

identified to be within proximity to the 

proposal. The proposed bypass would be 

located further away from the hospital than 

the existing Princes Highway, which is about 

150 metres away. This item has local 

heritage significance. 

The Alsops Bridge is located further than 5 

kilometres of the proposal site and would not 

be affected by works. This item has local 

heritage significance. 

The majority of listed heritage items within and around the Bega township are concentrated on the northeastern 

part of the town. In this area there are many examples of buildings from the early settlement 

period. 

The proposal footprint has a history of agricultural land use since the 1860s. The site inspection did not 

reveal any additional heritage items or potential relics within the proposal area. Most of the residences 

adjacent to the proposal are of modern construction (post 1960s). No significant historic use or 

infrastructure, such as old road alignments that would be a potential source of relics, are known to have 

occurred in the proposal footprint. However due to past agricultural landuse practices in the proposal 

footprint, there is low potential for relics be present. 


The proposal would have no direct impact on listed heritage items as none are located in or near the 

proposal footprint. There is some potential for the proposal to detract from the immediate rural setting of 

the Bega township area; however no heritage conservation areas are identified. For assessment of visual 

impacts refer to section 6.3 of this REF. 

The Old Bega Hospital is listed as an item of local heritage significance and is located about 150 to 200 

metres east from the southern end of the proposal. It is not considered that the proposal would have any 

impacts on the Old Bega Hospital. 

Due to past agricultural land use, it is considered that the potential for relics to be present within the 

proposal footprint is low. However, if any sub-surface relics are present they may be disturbed by 

earthworks. 

98


If any relics are uncovered during construction, works in the vicinity of the relic would immediately cease 

and the RTA’s Senior Environmental Officer and the RTA Senior Environmental Specialist (Heritage) 

would be contacted for advice on how to proceed. 

6.10 Soils, hydrology, drainage and water quality 


Soils 

The topography of the region is characterised by undulating low hills and rises to moderately inclined 

hills. Elevation in the proposal footprint ranges from 20 metres Australian height datum to around 70 

metres Australian height datum. 

The geology at the proposal footprint consists of Lower Devonian Bega Batholith granitics and Brogo 

granodiorite (Tulau 1997a). Soil landscapes mapped within the proposal footprint are the Lower Brogo 

(lb) soil landscape (refer Figure 6.6). 

This soil landscape group is detailed below as adapted from Tulau (1997a). 

21/18937/157350 

Lower Brogo (lb): Soils on crests to midslopes are moderately well-drained leached Red Earths 

and leached Yellow Earths and shallow well-drained leached Yellow Earths. Lower slope and 

drainage line soils are poorly drained Yellow Podzolic Soils, Yellow Solodic Soils and Gleyed 

Podzolic Soils from the Bemboka soils landscape. 

These soils range from sandy loams to clayey coarse sand and are characterised as infertile, acid 

soils subject to seasonal water logging (lower slopes and springs) and water erosion hazard with 

localised bedrock outcrops. Soils may pose foundation and groundwater pollution hazards. 

Topsoils in the Lower Brogo soil landscape are not considered to be subject to dispersion 

limitations, however the A2, B2 and C horizon subsoils are all subject to dispersion limitations. 

Severe sheet and rill erosion have been known to occur where Lower Brogo soils have been disturbed 

by road construction (Tulau 1997a). 

Acid sulfate soils 

Soils in the Lower Brogo soil landscape are not identified as acid sulfate soils in Tulau (1997a). A search 

of the Australian Soil Resource Information System database on 8 June 2010 found a low probability of 

acid sulfate soils occurring in the proposal site. 

Contaminated land 

A search of the DECCW NSW Contaminated Lands database was undertaken on 8 June 2010. This 

found that there are no known cases of contaminated land in the Bega Valley Local Government Area. It 

is considered unlikely that there would be potential contamination associated with past agricultural land 

use at the site, which has involved grazing and an isolated patch of small scale vegetable production. No 

intensive agricultural land use likely to result in land contamination is known to have occurred within the 




99

(Source: Tulau, 1997b). (Not to scale) 

Figure 6.6 Soil landscapes at Bega, NSW 

Hydrology and drainage 

The proposal is in the Bega River catchment in the Southern Rivers Catchment Authority. The Bega 

River is about 400 metres north of the proposal and wraps around to the west of Bega, where it is about 

380 metres west of the proposal. 

Due to the undulating nature of the landscape, the proposal footprint contains a number of drainage lines 

which run in the gullies between the crests of hills. A contour assessment identifies that there are about 

14 drainage lines along the alignment, with the distance between drainage lines being between 250 and 

400 metres. There is potential for more drainage lines to be found during detailed drainage design. 

Three wetlands or natural lagoons are located west of the proposal (see Figure 6.1). The largest and 

nearest of these wetlands is about 100 metres from the proposal. This wetland is located to the north 

west of the Ravenswood and Charlotte Streets intersection. 

Two smaller wetland or natural lagoon areas are located: 

� 200 metres west of the proposal in the vicinity of Rawlinson Street. 

21/18937/157350 



100

� 250 metres west of the proposal in the vicinity of Gowing Avenue. 

The wetlands or natural lagoons are associated with Freshwater wetland endangered ecological 

communities. These communities are considered to be sensitive to potential hydrological impacts. Refer 

to section 6.10.2 for assessment of this impact. 

Flooding 

Down slope of the proposal footprint, there are three wetlands or natural lagoons (discussed above) 

which form part of the Bega River floodplain and its tributary gullies. The proposed bypass is located 

outside of the extent of the 100 year average recurrence interval flood for the Bega River. However land 

in the vicinity of the Ravenswood and Charlottes streets and the Applegum Close and Ravenswood 

Street connection works experience localised flooding. 

The existing highway is currently located within the 10 and 100 year average recurrence interval flood 

extent for the Bega River in the vicinity of Kisses Lagoon, which is located about 250 metres east of the 

proposed northern roundabout. 

Water quality 

Water quality within Bega Valley LGA is considered to be generally of a good quality, largely due to 70 

per cent of the shire containing native forest (Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the 

Environment 2009). 

Water quality in the vicinity of the proposal has the potential to be of a lower quality as a result of nearby 

urban development and, in particular, the presence of rural land uses along much of the western edge of 

Bega. These rural land uses have the potential to reduce water quality as a result of the following 

sources: 

� Runoff from cleared, non-vegetated land, resulting in erosion and sedimentation of waterways. 

� Nutrient-rich water from livestock production. 

� Nutrient rich water from poorly maintained septic tanks. 

� Oils and other petroleum products from roads and sealed areas. 

� Spill over from farm dams, which may contain nutrients and other farm chemicals. 

Runoff from urban areas is also considered to impact upon water quality. Potential pollutants from run off 

from urban areas include, but are not limited to: 

� Rubbish/litter. 

� Oils and other petroleum products from roadways. 

� Nutrients from fertilisers used in domestic gardens. 

� Chemicals from underground oil or petrol tanks or septic tanks (either currently in use or disused but 

still present). 

Groundwater 

The Regional State of the Environment Report 2008 (Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and 

the Environment 2008) states that groundwater in the Bega Valley Shire is generally of good to moderate 

quality and low yield (DLWC 1999), with a steadily decreasing water table (DWE 2008). Good quality 

groundwater fit for human consumption with minimal treatment can generally be found along the length 

21/18937/157350 



101

of the Bega Valley LGA to about 20 kilometres inland. Groundwater suitable for some livestock, limited 

domestic and industrial uses can be found closer to the coast. Groundwater salinity in the Bega Valley 

ranges from low to moderate (DLWC 1999). Bega Valley Shire Council supplies 3.8 gigalitres per year of 

water to its customers (DWE 2006) of which 2.1 gigalitres per year is groundwater sourced from 11 

council bores (Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment 2009). Six bores 

supplying drinking water are located about 380 metres to the west of the northern extent of the proposal 

footprint, adjacent to the Bega River. 

A search of NSW Natural Resources Atlas (NSW Government 2010) for groundwater bores has 

indicated that three existing bores (two privately owned and for domestic stock, one details unknown) are 

located in the vicinity of the proposal. Two of these boreholes have data indicating groundwater is 

present as shallow as 4.6 metres below the surface. These bores are located to the west of the proposal 

footprint further down slope. The presence of groundwater along the proposal alignment is currently 

unknown and would be investigated further during detailed design. 


Construction 

Soils 

Impacts to soil and landscapes within the proposal footprint would primarily result from earthworks during 

the construction phase. A Preliminary Erosion and Sedimentation Assessment for the proposal was 

completed in accordance with the RTA’s Erosion and Sedimentation Management Procedure (2009). 

The assessment identified that the proposal is high risk due to: 

� The scale of the proposed earthworks including a number of permanent and temporary sediment 

basins requiring installation and maintenance. 

� The high erosion hazard of the areas to be disturbed. 

� The potential for sediment laden runoff to impact sensitive wetland systems and the Bega River. 

Excavation 

The proposal would require a substantial amount of cut and fill to achieve planned design levels. In the 

middle section of the proposal site, near Auckland and Charlotte streets, and also in the northern portion 

near Brogo Street, the works would involve cuts of about 10 to 12 metres into the hillsides. Nine further 

areas would require cuts of about six metres or less. Excavation in these areas would remove vegetation 

that currently stabilises soils and would expose soils to weathering processes, increasing the risk of 

erosion and sedimentation. Large cut excavations also have the potential to destabilise landforms, 

particularly on cutting faces. Removal of vegetation can expose the topsoil layer to erosive forces, 

including water and wind, which can induce erosion and subsequent loss of this valuable soil resource. 

Topsoil loss can reduce agricultural value and slow rehabilitation and the re-establishment of native 

ecosystems (DLWC 2000). 

Excess excavated material would require temporary stockpiling. Inadequately stabilised stockpile 

material could erode in periods of high rainfall or windy conditions. 

21/18937/157350 



102

Fill and compaction 

The fill requirements of the proposal have the potential to impact on soils and landforms. There are about 

12 areas along the proposal that would require filling, including one to a depth of about 10 metres. Three 

fill areas are about seven to eight metres deep and the remaining eight fill areas are about six metres or 

less. 

Filling of local natural depressions and the creation of sediment detention basins has the potential to 

change the distribution, quantity and quality of water in the local catchment. Loose fill may also increase 

the potential for erosion, sedimentation and mass movements of soils. This may in turn influence the 

vegetation and habitat of adjacent areas, as they become wetter or drier. 

Areas of fill would be compacted. This compaction and increase of sealed road surfaces would reduce 

the potential for water infiltration in the area and increase the amount and velocity of runoff. This would 

increase the erosive potential of drainage on the site. 

Areas of soil within the proposal site would be at risk of compaction from the movement of large 

machinery such as excavators, rollers and trucks. Heavy machinery can disturb the surface of the soil 

which increases the potential for erosion; however the weight of machinery can also result in the 

compaction of the deeper soil structure. Short term impact on soils is likely to be high, however it would 

be localised. Provided stabilisation strategies are effectively implemented, medium to long term impacts 

would be low stabilisation and revegetation would act to resist soil erosion to the same extent that 

existing vegetation now functions. There is some risk of increased impacts from stormwater runoff 

however the detailed design would include formalised drainage structures to address the potential 

impacts from runoff such as scouring. 


Existing drainage lines would be impacted during construction as a result of the proposal cutting across 

them and restricting the movement of water to the Bega River. The majority of water within these 

drainage lines would be captured in sedimentation basins for treatment. Water within smaller drainage 

lines (ie those with smaller catchments) would not be directed to sedimentations basins but would be 

managed through sedimentation fencing and other appropriate controls. Wherever possible, treated 

water from sedimentation basins would be discharged back into drainage lines, to reduce the impacts on 

downstream flows. 

However, to minimise demands on other water supplies, water from the sedimentation basins would be 

reused on site where possible. 

Flooding 

Flood impacts on construction activities are generally considered low as the works are located outside 

the 100 year average recurrence internal flood. However land in the vicinity of the Ravenswood and 

Charlottes streets and the Applegum Close and Ravenswood Street connection may be affected by 

flooding if heavy rainfall occurs during construction. 

Localised flooding may occur at other areas due to topography and earthworks. These impacts are 

considered to be minor as adequate drainage would be implemented on site prior to construction 

(through implementation of the Soil and Water Management Plan). 

21/18937/157350 



103

Water quality 

The proposed construction activities have the potential to degrade water quality within surrounding 

waterways, both in the immediate area and downstream. During construction there is potential for a wide 

range of pollutants to enter nearby drainage lines, particularly during high rain events. These include: 

� Sediments. 

� Soil nutrients. 

� Construction waste. 

� Fuels spilt during refuelling of plant and equipment. 

� Hydraulic and lubricating oil leaking from plant and equipment. 

� Rinse water from plant washing. 

� Concrete slurries. 

Introduction of the above pollutants from the proposal into the surrounding environment, if uncontrolled, 

could potentially have the following impacts on water quality: 

� Increased sediment load and organic matter resulting in adverse impacts to aquatic fauna and flora 

found on the bed of rivers, creeks and other water bodies. 

� Reduction in photosynthetic productivity of water bodies from increasing turbidity. 

� Reduction in channel habitat from sediment deposition. 

� Gross pollutants entering receiving creeks. 

� Reduction in water quality due to influx in man-made substances resulting in adverse impacts to 

aquatic flora and fauna. 

Impacts on water quality during construction would be minimal with the implementation of mitigation 

measures outlined in section 6.10.3. 

Groundwater 

Potential impacts to groundwater may include: 

� Intersecting groundwater during excavations, eg cuttings. 

� Potential use of groundwater sources for construction. 

� Pollution of groundwater supplies through spills. 

The potential for these impacts to occur is considered low to moderate. Geotechnical investigations are 

being undertaken to confirm the depth of groundwater. These results would be used to inform a 

groundwater management plan for the protection of groundwater quality. 

Bega Valley Shire Council and the NSW Office of Water (DECCW) would be consulted regarding the 

groundwater management plan to protect groundwater supplies and local bores. 

Operation 

Soils 

Disturbed areas during construction would be rehabilitated and landscaped, therefore the risk of soil 

erosion during operation would be low. 

21/18937/157350 



104

The sealed road surface would reduce water infiltration and increase the amount and velocity of runoff, 

thereby increasing its erosive potential. However, the severity of erosion caused by increased runoff 

would be minimised by formalised drainage that would be designed to prevent scour. 

Maintenance activities during operation that could disturb soils and landforms are clearing of culverts and 

table drains and vegetation management including slashing and clearing of sight lines and clear zones. 

Disturbance to soils and landforms caused by maintenance activities would be minimised by adherence 

to relevant RTA specifications. 


The proposal would increase the volume and rate of stormwater runoff due to an increase in paved and 

impervious areas associated with the construction of the proposal. 

This increase in runoff presents the following risks unless safeguards are provided: 

� Flooding of neighbouring properties. 

� Increased runoff due to the additional paved or impervious areas resulting in scouring of receiving 

creeks/waterways. 

The above impacts would be minimised through the conversion of a number of the construction 

sedimentation basins in to permanent stormwater detention basins. These basins would collect 

stormwater in order to allow for it to be treated while also controlling discharges of stormwater to ensure 

that existing drainage lines are not subject to high flows. 

Overall, the drainage and hydrology impacts during operation are considered to be minor as the drainage 

system would be designed to a level that would prevent any substantial impacts to both the new roadway 

and to the surrounding area. 

Flooding 

The proposal would be above the 1 in 100 average recurrence interval flood event. To make allowance 

for climate change, the modelled storm intensity for the proposal would be increased by six per cent and 

incorporated into the detailed design. 

The proposal would provide flood free access from rural properties on the western side of the corridor via 

both the High and Ravenswood street overbridges. Detailed design for the proposed works at 

Ravenswood and Charlottes streets and at the Applegum Close and Ravenswood Street connection 

would be undertaken to maintain the existing flood regime. This would take into account afflux to avoid 

flooding impacts on adjacent properties and to maintain current flows. 

Water quality 

Water quality impacts during operation would largely be a result of accidental spills and leaks from 

vehicles using the bypass. The potential impact of a spill or leakage is considered to be minor as the 

drainage system for the proposal would be designed in a way to capture and treat oil or chemical spills. 

The design of the proposed bypass would allow for the of capture spills 20,000 litres which is considered 

adequate for similar roads with higher volumes and higher risk (Hume Highway) This would enable runoff 

from the roadway to be treated prior to being released, therefore minimising impacts to water quality. 

21/18937/157350 



105

Groundwater 

Cuttings made during construction may intersect/expose current groundwater layers. This would 

potentially be an ongoing impact on groundwater flows and water quality. Geotechnical investigations 

would inform detailed design and the groundwater management plan to manage impacts on groundwater 

during operation. 


Pre-construction 

� Detailed design of the proposal would: 

– Be undertaken in line with RTA’s Code of Practice for Water Management and the RTA's Water 

policy. 

– Protect nearby natural wetlands and their associated feeder drainage lines. Changes to the 

quantity and quality of run off to these wetlands would be minimised. 

– Design the system to drain the road pavement for a 10 year average recurrence interval flood, 

with an assessment of a 100 year average recurrence interval flood to be undertaken during 

detailed design to ensure no nuisance flooding would occur. 

– The detailed design at Ravenswood and Charlottes streets and at the Applegum Close and 

Ravenswood Street connection would take into account afflux to avoid flooding impacts on 

adjacent properties and would be undertaken to maintain the existing flood regime and current 

flows. 

– To account for climate change the modelled storm intensity would be increased by six per cent 

and incorporated into the detailed design. 

– Ensure that the drainage system would capture and adequately treat oil or chemical spills of 

20,000 litre capacity. 

– Consider runoff and scouring and include provision of short term construction controls 

(construction sediment basins) and long term drainage design (eg permanent stormwater 

detention basins). 

� The location and sizing requirements for the temporary sediment retention basins would be based on 

the guidelines and procedures set out in the publication entitled Soils and Construction – Managing 

Urban Stormwater Volume 1 (Landcom 2004) and Volume 2D (DECC 2008). 

� A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be prepared prior to the 

commencement of construction and would incorporate a Soil and Water Management Plan. This 

plan would: 

– Incorporate specifications outlined in Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils & Construction, Volume 

1 (Landcom 2004) and Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction, Volume 2D, Main 

Road Construction (DECC 2008). 

– Include an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan and a maintenance schedule for on-going 

maintenance of temporary and permanent sedimentation controls. 

� Geotechnical investigations would be undertaken to determine the presence and depth of 

groundwater in the vicinity of the proposal. 

21/18937/157350 



106

� A groundwater management plan would be prepared for the protection of groundwater during 

construction and operation of the proposal. Bega Valley Shire Council and the NSW Office of Water 

(DECCW) would be consulted regarding the groundwater management plan. 

Construction 

� Works would be undertaken in accordance with the RTA’s specifications included but not limited to 

G38 Soil and Water Management (Soil and Water Management Plan), R44 Earthworks (Cut, Fill, 

Imported Fill and Imported Selected Material) and R50 Stabilisation of Earthworks. 

� Construction would be managed in accordance with the Blue Books 1 and 2D; Managing Urban 

Stormwater, Soils & Construction, Volume 1 (Landcom 2004) and Managing Urban Stormwater, 

Soils and Construction, Volume 2D, Main Road Construction (DECC 2008). 

� Existing natural channels and vegetation would be maintained where possible by installing protection 

devices such as energy dissipaters to reduce flow velocity and potential scouring. 

� Weather forecasts would be checked daily to ensure that high risk soil and erosion activities are not 

undertaken immediately prior to or during high rainfall or wind events. 

� An accredited soil conservationist would be engaged to regularly inspect works throughout the 


� Clearing of vegetation and stabilisation/revegetation activities would be carried out progressively to 

limit the time disturbed areas are exposed to erosion processes. 

� A rehabilitation plan would be prepared for areas disturbed during the works. This would identify 

appropriate methods for stabilising and progressively revegetating disturbed soils to resist erosion 

and weed invasion. 

� Management of drainage lines to be addressed prior to any construction works beginning on site. 

� Stockpiles and compounds would need to be placed in higher areas, away from flood prone land. 

� Any chemicals, including hydrocarbons and herbicides, would be stored in a bunded, hard stand 

area, at the site compound away from any water courses or natural depressions or drainage lines. 

� A site specific spill containment/contamination management plan would be developed and 

communicated to all staff prior to the commencement of the works. This would include an emergency 

spill kit to be kept on site at all times and staff would be trained for its use. 

� Fuelling of machinery would only take place appropriately bunded areas. 

� If a spill occurs, the RTA’s Environmental Incident Classification and Management Procedure would 

be followed and the RTA senior environmental officer notified as soon as possible. 

� All sediment basins to be used as part of the proposal would be monitored throughout the 


Operation 

� Outlet dissipaters would be constructed as required to reduce flow velocities to acceptable levels at 

discharge locations. Drainage paths between culverts would be rock lined to minimise scouring. 

� Drainage systems would be checked at regular intervals and maintained to ensure they are 

operating at full capacity (eg clearance of debris from drainage lines). 

21/18937/157350 



107

6.11 Land use and property 


Land use 

The proposal is mainly on land that has been reserved since the 1960s for the construction of a bypass. 

This land is currently vacant and is mainly vegetated by pasture grass. The RTA owns the majority of this 

land, due to progressively purchasing property over the years. There are no buildings in the bypass 

reservation and the southern end is currently used for grazing. There are some small areas at the 

northern and southern end that are outside the existing road reservation which the RTA would need to 

acquire (see section 3.8). 

Land use around the proposal footprint is mainly residential and rural development. To the east the land 

is mainly residential where north of Boundary Road. Non-residential land uses in this area include: 

� Bega West Public School on the corner of Rawlinson and Ravenswood streets (it is understood that 

this school may be relocated in the future). 

� Stockfeed business on Boundary Road. 

� Country Energy and Bega Shire Council properties on Mather Street. 

A small area of land north of Boundary Road and land south of Boundary Road is currently used for rural 

purposes. 

The western side of the proposal footprint is characterised by rural land uses. Rural residential properties 

are located along Ravenswood Street. The residential area of West Bega is located in the northern 

extent of the proposal footprint. 

Future land uses 

Two development applications have recently been approved near the proposal (refer to Figure 6.2 and 

Figure 6.3): 

� A seniors living development located west of the bypass reservation and south of Fairview Street. 

� A rural residential subdivision located west of the bypass reservation between Applegum Road and 

Finucane Lane. 

Zoning 

The proposal is in the Bega Valley local government area and land use is controlled by the Bega Valley 

Local Environmental Plan 2002. Much of the bypass corridor is zoned 9(c) Arterial Road Reservation. 

Where the proposal is not zoned 9(c) Arterial Road Reservation zone, the following zones apply: 

� 6(a) (Existing Open Space Zone) at the northern end of the proposal. 

� 2(f) (Future Urban Zone) at the southern end of the proposal. 

Bega Valley Shire Council is currently undertaking a review of its Local Environmental Plan. As part of 

the review, a ‘Land Use Planning Strategy’ (Bega Valley Shire Council 2008) was prepared to identify 

any possible re-zonings required for the growth of Bega. 

The following potential changes to zoning are near the proposal: 

21/18937/157350 



108

� Land located between High Street and Finucane Lane: currently zoned for future urban 

development. This land is recommended to be rezoned to RU2 Rural Landscape. Despite the 

proposed rezoning this land is still intended to be reserved for potential future urban growth. 

� Land to the south of Finucane Lane: currently zoned for future urban development however due to 

the number of 2 hectare lots in this area it is recommended to be rezoned R5 Large Lot Residential. 

� Land on the southern side of Boundary Road: currently zoned for future urban development however 

in order to generate buffer between uses to the east, it would be rezoned R5 Large Lot Residential 

with a minimum size of one hectare. 

� Land located to the east of the highway in the vicinity of the Finucane Lane intersection: currently 

zoned for future urban development, however to be rezoned industrial. 

The above zoning changes are still under consideration and a new LEP has not yet been gazetted. 

However potential impacts on the proposed re-zonings have been assessed. 


Residential properties 

As the proposal would be located mostly within the existing road reservation, impacts to residential land 

uses are considered to be minimal. At this time only two residential properties would be completely 

acquired. Some partial acquisitions would also be required (see section 3.8). This acquisition would have 

minimal impact as it would not severe any properties with partial acquisition limited to the edge of 

property boundaries. The acquisitions would be undertaken in accordance with the RTA’s land 

acquisition policy, with compensation to be negotiated in line with Land Acquisition (Just Terms 

Compensation) Act 1991. 

Impacts on residential land uses would largely be limited to a reduction in amenity (noise, air quality and 

visual impacts) during both the construction and operation stages of the proposal. These impacts are 

discussed in the relevant sections of this REF. 

Use of land for rural purposes 

The proposal would impact on a small amount of rural land located at the southern end of the proposal to 

the north of Finucane Lane. This land is currently used for grazing purposes. The proposal would result 

in part of this land being acquired and therefore result in a loss of agricultural land. The impact of this 

loss is considered to be minimal due to the relatively small size of the acquisition and due to the owner 

being compensated for the loss. The land being acquired would also be isolated to the edge of properties 

avoiding severance of land. 

Some sedimentation basins (construction and operation) may be required outside the bypass corridor on 

private property. This would be subject to ongoing consultation with landowners during the detailed 

design phase. 

Other major land uses 

No other land uses would be directly impacted upon. Impacts to other land uses such as the Bega West 

Public School would relate to amenity (noise, air quality and visual). A discussion of these impacts can 

be found in the relevant sections of this REF. 

21/18937/157350 



109

Future developments 

The proposal would not directly impact upon any future land uses that are currently proposed in the 

vicinity of the bypass. Impacts to these future developments would largely be related to indirect impacts 

such as noise and vibration, air quality and visual impacts. These impacts are considered in the relevant 

sections of this REF. 


� All property acquisition would be undertaken in accordance with the RTA’s Land Acquisition Policy. 

� Compensation would be negotiated in accordance with the Land Acquisition (Just Terms 

Compensation) Act 1991. 

� The RTA would liaise and consult with landowners and tenants individually whose property would be 

acquired on an ongoing basis regarding the status and timing of acquisition. 

6.12 Socio-economic 

A socio-economic assessment was undertaken by GHD in September 2010 to assess the socioeconomic 

impacts of the proposal. A copy is in Appendix H and is summarised in this section. 

The socio-economic profile is for the Bega township and examines the characteristics of the Bega Valley 

LGA. It analyses data from the 2006 Census (ABS 2007) and incorporates findings from interviews 

undertaken with business leaders, community representatives and other key informants in the Bega 

township. 


In 2006 the population of Bega was 4537, an increase of 152 people or 3.4 per cent from 2001. This 

population growth is consistent with the population growth rate of NSW, but higher than the growth rate 

of the Bega Valley LGA, which was two per cent over the same period. Indigenous people made up 60 

per cent of the growth and 79.6 per cent were female (ABS 2007). 

Both the Bega township and the Bega Valley LGA have an ageing population. Residents over 55 make 

up 33.4 per cent of residents in the Bega Valley LGA and 30.8 per cent for the Bega township. This is 

high when compared to the NSW average of 24.8 per cent. The median age of Bega Valley LGA and 

Bega township residents is 45 and 40 respectively, with the NSW median age of 37 (ABS 2007). 

Evidence suggests the Bega township population is ageing faster then the LGA. Bega council has 

identified this issue in the Bega Valley Shire Council 2006-2011 Social Plan which predicts an ‘acute 

increase in the proportion of aged residents living in the community in the coming years’ (Bega Valley 

Shire Council 2006). 

Just over half (51.7 per cent) of the population within the Bega township has full-time employment, this is 

higher than the Bega Valley LGA, but is lower than the 60.8 per cent in NSW. The proportion of people in 

part-time employment in Bega (33.6 per cent) and Bega Valley LGA (35.9 per cent) is higher than for 

NSW (27.2 per cent) (ABS 2007). 

Unemployment in Bega has dropped from 9.6 per cent in 2001 to 8.3 per cent in 2006. This drop in 

unemployment is likely as a result of the aging population contributing to a decreasing labour force. 

21/18937/157350 



110

The main employment sources in the Bega township include dairy product manufacturing (9.5 per cent), 

supermarket and grocery stores (4.8 per cent), hospitals (4.7 per cent), school education (4.2 per cent) 

and cafes, restaurants and takeaway food services (3.7 per cent). The average weekly income in Bega 

of $350 per individual and $882 per family is less than the NSW average. Factors influencing this may 

include the occupation of residents, lower living costs in the region, or a large portion of the population 

being in part-time employment or retired (ABS 2007). 

The main industries contributing to the Bega Valley economy are the dairy, timber and tourism industries. 

The types of businesses operating in Bega town are similar to those found in other regional locations 

throughout NSW. These include retail outlets, professional services, manufacturing, tourism, agricultural 

and recreational businesses such as registered clubs. In the Bega CBD, the local business directory and 

yellow pages indicate that at least 76 retail, eatery, accommodation and grocery businesses operate. 

In the Bega township, a number of businesses are located along the section of the existing Princes 

Highway that would be bypassed by the proposal. These include service stations, retail outlets, 

restaurants and takeaway food outlets, hotels, motels, and commercial offices. 

The main form of transport in the Bega Valley LGA is private motor vehicle use with 94 per cent of 

residents owning one or more vehicles (Bega Valley Shire Council 2006). Ownership is lower in the Bega 

township, at 82 per cent. The use of public transport to travel to work is very limited, with a total of only 

1.6 per cent of Bega residents travelling to work by bus or train (Bega Valley Shire Council 2006). The 

Bega Valley Local Transport Information Guide (Bega Valley Shire Council 2009) notes that there are 

currently three different local bus services in operation, as well as the state government CountryLink bus 

service which connects Bega to Sydney and Eden. Four different taxi services also operate in the shire. 

The corridor for the proposed bypass traverses undulating landscape that generally has an urban edge 

to the east and a rural edge to the west. Bega CBD currently has all Princes Highway through traffic, 

including heavy vehicles, travelling through the township. This is currently resulting in reduced amenity 

due to localised noise and air quality impacts. 


Issues such as air quality and dust, traffic and access, land use, noise and vibration and visual amenity 

would impact the local community and road users throughout construction and operation of the bypass. 

These issues have been outlined and assessed in other sections of this report. These can be found at: 

� Noise and vibration (section 6.2). 

� Visual impacts (section 6.3). 

� Traffic and access (section 6.4). 

� Air quality and dust (section 6.6). 

� Land use and property (section 6.11). 

Other socio-economic impacts that may occur throughout construction and operation of the proposal are 

outlined below. 

21/18937/157350 



111

Construction 

Access 

Construction of the bypass would mainly be undertaken away from the existing Princes Highway, largely 

avoiding disruption to existing access to and from Bega. Some minor traffic delays may occur throughout 

construction of the connections of the bypass to the existing highway. 

It is expected that construction of the High Street bridge and Ravenswood Street bridge overpasses 

would be constructed at the beginning of the construction period. This would maintain access between 

the western side of the bypass and Bega throughout the construction period. The construction of these 

bridges and upgrades to existing local roads may require some traffic detours and delays, however 

access between Bega and the western side of the bypass would be maintained throughout construction. 

All access to private properties would be maintained throughout the construction period. 

Further assessment of traffic and access for the proposal is outlined in section 6.4.2. 

Amenity 

The properties currently adjoining the proposed bypass experience an agricultural atmosphere/outlook 

with minimal disturbance from traffic or urban life. The proposal would impact this general amenity 

throughout construction. Changes to amenity from construction activities would include: 

� Increases in noise. 

� Potential dust disturbance. 

� Loss of rural outlook. 

� Increase in construction traffic. 

These issues have been assessed in the sections outlined above. 

The general amenity within the Bega township would not be impacted throughout the construction period 

as the works would take place at the western edge of the town, away from the CBD. 

Business impacts 

It is anticipated that a workforce of around 150 people would be required during construction of the 

project. This number would vary depending on the stages of construction. Some of this workforce could 

be existing residents of Bega or surrounding localities, with the remainder brought in from other 

locations. This influx of the construction workforce may have the following impacts on local businesses: 

� Construction workers not local to the area would require accommodation throughout the construction 

period. 

� Take away shop, cafes, and other food outlets may experience an increase in trade from 

construction workers. 

� Service stations may experience an increase in trade. 

� Entertainment facilities may experience an increase in trade. 

These impacts on local businesses are expected to be short-term positive impacts contributing to 

economic stimulus. 

21/18937/157350 



112

As most construction work would be located in the bypass corridor, and away from the town centre, 

businesses are not expected to be affected by any amenity changes during construction. 

Operation 

Access 

During operation, access between the Bega CBD and the properties located on the western side of the 

bypass corridor would be altered from the existing arrangement. The proposed new access 

arrangements are outlined in section 6.4. Changes to access would result in extended travel distances 

and time for some land owners on the western side of the reservation. However, these changes would 

improve road safety while still maintaining safe access into Bega. 

Access to and from the Bega CBD would be maintained as a result of the bypass from both the southern 

and northern approaches. 

Land in the vicinity of Applegum Close and Ravenswood Street is subject to some localised flooding. The 

proposal would involve the construction of a flood-free access to Bega, therefore improving access from 

these properties in the event of localised flooding. 

The Bega-Tathra bus route operates in the Bega township, including services to Bega West, High St, 

Fairview St and Ravenswood St. Local bus routes may require some rerouting to continue to service the 

areas during operation of the bypass. RTA would consult with local and regional bus providers and Bega 

Valley Shire Council regarding bus access and routes. 

Amenity 

The general amenity of the Bega CBD is expected to improve during operation of the bypass, by 

removing through traffic, in particular heavy vehicles, from within the CBD. This would result in a 

reduction of noise and air pollution (discussed in sections 6.2 and 6.6 respectively) and improved safety 

for motorists and pedestrians. 

The amenity for residents adjacent to the bypass is expected to be impacted as a result of the operation 

of the bypass. It is expected that the bypass would carry about 1900 vehicles per day in each direction. 

Of this between 12 – 14 per cent of this traffic would be heavy vehicles. As a result of this it is expected 

that residents adjacent to the bypass would experience an increase in traffic noise, an impact to air 

quality, and an impact to the visual amenity. The level of the impact would vary depending on the 

distance from the bypass to the properties. These issues have been assessed in the sections outlined 

above. 

Business impacts 

The improved amenity could potentially make Bega CBD more attractive as a destination for shopping, 

dining, accommodation and service provision and a stop for motorists travelling along the Princes 

Highway. 

Discussions with local businesses, including retail, takeaways, restaurants, service stations and 

accommodation providers indicate that impacts are expected to be short-term in nature. While passing 

trade may reduce, no major impacts to businesses are expected in the long-term, due to the improved 

local amenity, continued local demand and modified business operations. Tourism Research Australia 

identifies that Bega is not a destination, but a stopping point on the way to a destination (Tourism 

Research Australia 2008). Given that there are no other major town centres within the surrounding areas 

21/18937/157350 



113

along the Princes Highway and the Bega CBD is only about two kilometres from the proposed southern 

access from the bypass and about one kilometre from the proposed northern access, it is expected that 

this feature of tourism would still apply to the town. 

The bypass has the potential to impact upon food services located in the Bega CBD, as they currently 

receive a large component of their business from passing trade (ie through traffic). However, as identified 

above, Bega is expected to retain through trade from tourists stopping on their way to destinations. 

Businesses providing food services may also be able to adapt trading practices to take advantage of the 

improved amenity, such as outdoor dining, within the Bega CBD. 

Two service stations located on the existing Princes Highway would be bypassed. Impacts on the 

operation of these service stations are considered to be minimal as they currently do not have the 

facilities to service larger vehicles (eg heavy vehicles). In addition previous bypass studies (Parolin and 

Garner 1994) have identified that most service stations depend on the services of local customers rather 

than passing trade. A third service centre located to the north of Bega would not be impacted by the 

proposal. 

Minimal impacts are expected on the accommodation sector as a result of the bypass. While Bega is not 

considered a holiday destination, its location in relation to stops for long haul travellers and improved 

amenity from the bypass would likely see an ongoing demand for accommodation in the town. 

Community impacts 

The bypass is not expected to impact on the social profile of the town during the operation of the 

proposal. 

Improvements to the amenity of the Bega township are expected after the bypass. This improved 

amenity is expected to increase opportunities for walking, cycling and outdoor dining. Safer and more 

attractive pedestrian areas provide a venue for formal and incidental interaction in the community, and 

the potential to increase community identity and cohesion. 

The bypass would create the opportunity for main street development initiatives to further build on these 

changes to enhance community assets and identity. 

The proposal would maintain connectivity between the east and western parts of the Bega township 

through two over passes and provision for cyclists and pedestrians. 

Community consultation has suggested that the Bega community have been aware of this proposed 

bypass for many years and are eager to see this proposal completed due to the socio-economic benefits 

it would provide to the town. 


Construction 

� Relevant stakeholders would be provided with sufficient information to enable them to understand 

the likely nature, extent and duration of vibration, dust and noise impacts. 

� A community information and consultation program would be undertaken to ensure local 

communities are aware of the construction programs and activities, and are able to communicate 

with the project team. 

21/18937/157350 



114

� Measures outlined in sections 6.2.4, 6.3.4, 6.4.3, 6.6.3, and 6.11.3 would be implemented to address 

amenity-related socio-economic impacts. 

Operation 

� Develop a signage strategy to provide appropriate signage on approach to Bega and near 

interchanges to identify Bega as a stopping destination. 

� The RTA would liaise with the local chamber of commerce and Bega Valley Shire Council in 

developing the signing strategy. 

� Measures outlined in sections 6.2.4, 6.3.4, 6.4.3, 6.6.3 and 6.11.3 would be implemented to address 

amenity related socio-economic impacts. 

6.13 Demand on resources 


The activities proposed require the use of a number of resources, including 

� Direct resource use, such as: 

– Resources associated with the operation of construction machinery, and motor vehicles (this 

includes a variety of resources, the major one being fossil fuels). 

– Material required for road surface and bridge construction (road base, guard rails, paints, 

solvents, asphalt, spray seal, sand, concrete, aggregate, steel etc). 

– Fill required to meet design levels. 

– Construction water (for concrete and dust suppression). 

Initial estimates of materials required by the proposal are: 

� 42,000 tonnes of dense grade road base. 

� 65,000 square metres of spray seal. 

� 6,000 cubic metres of concrete (in situ). 

� 55,000 tonnes of select fill. 

The materials required during the proposed construction works are not currently restricted resources, 

however materials such as metals and fuels are considered non-renewable and should be used 

conservatively. 

The proposal is expected to generate a surplus of about 5000 cubic metres of excess soil and rock. 

Other fill material required for the construction of the reinforced earth walls and the road pavement would 

be sourced from appropriately licensed facilities. Excess cut would be disposed of in accordance with 

safeguards and mitigation measures outlined in section 6.14.3. 

As outlined in section 3.5.4, the amount of water required during the construction phase is currently 

unknown. The impacts on water supplies during construction would be reduced through the use of water 

from sedimentation basins when possible. Potable water would only be used in the event water in the 

sedimentation basins is not available either due to its quality or the amount available. Water sources for 

the construction phase would be determined during detailed design, including any approvals required 

under all relevant legislation. 

21/18937/157350 



115


Measures to address waste minimisation would also address the resource impacts of the proposal and 

are identified below in section 6.14. In addition, the following measures would be implemented: 

� Water captured in construction sediment basins would be reused for dust suppression, watering of 

landscaped areas and any other suitable construction activity where feasible. 

� Procurement would endeavour to use materials and products with a recycled content where that 

material or product is costs and performance effective. 

� Excavated material would be reused on-site for fill where feasible. 

� Any additional fill material required would be sourced from appropriately licensed facilities. 

6.14 Waste management 

6.14.1 Policy setting 

The RTA is committed to ensuring responsible management of unavoidable waste and to promoting the 

reuse of such waste through appropriate measures in accordance with the resource management 

hierarchy principles embodied in the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act, 2001 (WARR Act). 

The resource management hierarchy principles in order of priority as outlined in the WARR Act are: 

� Avoidance of unnecessary resource consumption. 

� Resource recovery (including reuse, reprocessing, recycling and energy recovery). 

� Disposal. 

By adopting the above principles, RTA encourages the most efficient use of resources and reduces cost 

and environmental harm in accordance with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, as 

outlined in section 8.2 of this REF. 


Proposal activities have the potential to generate waste from: 

� Excavation along the proposed alignment (including materials such as soil, rock fines and clay). 

� Excavation of pavement materials where existing paved local roads are intersected. 

� Vegetation (native, exotic and noxious) located along the road verges and within the new alignment. 

� Site preparation, specifically the removal of existing rubbish dumped on the proposal site near 

Applegum Close. 

The proposal would be expected to produce the following wastes, some of which would be able to be 

recycled or reused: 

� Vegetation as a result of clearing. 

� Soil and rocks excavated that cannot be reused onsite. 

� Pavement materials, from the sections of the existing alignment of the Princes Highway and local 

roads (eg High, Brogo and Fairview streets) that would be excavated. 

� Roadside materials (guide posts, guard rails etc). 

21/18937/157350 



116

� Paper and office waste from project management. 

� General waste from staff (lunch packaging, portable toilets etc). 

The largest quantities of waste expected would be from excavation and clearing activities. There is good 

potential to reuse these materials onsite: mulched vegetation can be used in sediment erosion controls, 

stabilisation and rehabilitation and excavated material can be used onsite as fill, for landscaping or in 

earthen mounds designed to reduce noise impacts to adjacent landholders. 

Therefore, the impacts of waste generation at the site are considered to be low, given the opportunities 

to reuse and recycle materials. 


� Resource management hierarchy principles would be followed: 

– Avoid unnecessary resource consumption as a priority. 

– Avoidance is followed by resource recovery (including reuse of materials, reprocessing, and 

recycling and energy recovery). 

– Disposal is undertaken as a last resort (in accordance with the WARR Act). 

� A Waste Management Plan would be prepared which would include the following: 

– Identify all potential waste streams associated with the works. 

– Identify opportunities to minimise the use of resources, and to reuse and recycle materials. 

– Outline methods of disposal of waste that cannot be reused or recycled at appropriately licensed 

facilities. 

� Cleared weed free vegetation would be chipped and reused onsite to stabilise disturbed soils where 

possible. Weedy mulch would either be composted to ensure propagules and seeds are sterilised or 

would not be reused. 

� Cleared vegetation would not be burned at the site. 

� Excess excavated material would be disposed of at an appropriate facility or reused appropriately for 

fill on the proposal site, or on other RTA projects, or as otherwise provided for by waste legislation. 

Weedy material would not be reused unless appropriately treated. 

� Garbage receptacles would be provided and recycling of materials encouraged. Rubbish would be 

transported to an appropriate waste disposal facility. 

� All wastes would be managed in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 

1997 (POEO Act). 

� Toilets (eg portable toilets) would be provided for construction workers. 

� Site inductions would occur and be recorded by a Site Supervisor to ensure staff have a thorough 

knowledge of all key environmental/safety issues, including waste disposal protocols. 

6.15 Hazards and risks 

Hazards and risks associated with the proposal are discussed in terms of construction and operational 

phases. 

21/18937/157350 



117

6.15.1 Construction hazards and risks 

Potential impacts 

Hazards and risks likely to be associated with construction include: 

� Spills or leakage of contaminants such as fuels, chemicals and hazardous substances entering 

surface and groundwater or contaminating soils. 

� Discharge of turbid runoff, resulting in pollution of waterways and vegetation. 

� Biosecurity risks from the spread of disease, weeds or other pathogens such as phytophthera (a 

plant root rot fungus) through materials brought to the site or by movement of machinery around the 

site. 

� Bushfire risk as a result of sparks from machinery or hotworks, particularly during summer months. 

Safeguards and management measures 

In addition to safeguards and measures identified in previous sections of this REF, particularly Sections 

6.1.4, 6.10.3, 6.13.2, and 6.14.3, the below measures would be implemented: 

� Designated washdown and hygiene stations would be provided in appropriately bunded areas at the 

proposal site and construction equipment and machinery would be washed prior to entering and 

leaving the proposal site. 

� The Construction Environmental Management Plan would include provisions to minimise the 

potential for ignition or spread of fire. 

� Construction machinery would be kept in good working order. 

6.15.2 Operational hazards and risks 

This includes hazards and risks associated with the use of the highway by motor vehicles, and those 

associated with the maintenance and management of the asset. 

Existing environment 

General hazards and risks associated with the operation of the existing highway alignment include: 

� Crashes due to the close proximity of high numbers of pedestrians and local vehicular traffic. 

� Contamination of local soils, surface water and groundwater, from hydrocarbon residues. 

� General pollution of the local environment from littering motorists. 

� Damage to public and private property due to the close proximity of a number of houses and a 

school in the event of an accident where a vehicle may veer from the highway. 

Potential impacts 

Operational hazards and risks involving a conflict between vehicles and pedestrians including those 

identified above would be minimised to a large extent by the proposed alignment that minimises frontage 

to houses and the main street of Bega (Carp Street) and congested intersections. The proposal achieves 

this and would result in: 

� Improved road safety for through traffic by upgrading the highway to current design standards. 

� Improved road safety in the town by removing conflicts between local and through traffic. 

21/18937/157350 



118

� Improved amenity in the town by removing heavy vehicle through traffic and reducing traffic noise 

levels. 

The development of the concept design for the proposal has considered operational hazards and risks 

that have been assessed (and mitigation measures provided) in earlier sections of this chapter including: 

� Contamination of local soils, surface water and groundwater due to fuel and oil spills during 

operation and maintenance activities (refer section 6.10). 

� Creation of hard surface areas (road pavement) in closer proximity to drainage lines that flow into 

wetland areas offsite, which has the potential to increase turbid runoff and sedimentation (refer 

section 6.10). 

� Noise impacts on neighbouring residents previously not impacted by existing operational traffic noise 

(refer section 6.2). 

� Potentially higher incidences of native fauna roadkill due to realignment through pasture and open 

woodland fauna habitat (refer section 6.1). 

Additionally, biosecurity risks for locally important agriculture like the dairy industry may be present 

during operation in the event of crashes involving vehicles carrying animals or animal based products (eg 

milk) that could contain and spread diseases. The potential for such incidents to occur and for 

subsequent impacts to biosecurity would be reduced through a safe road design that minimises potential 

for accidents. This risk is present along all roads within the region. 

Bushfire risks would be present during the operational phase. The proposed infrastructure is not 

considered prone to damage by bushfire. However, operation of the proposal could result in ignition of 

bushfires as a result of inappropriate disposal of cigarette butts. Once plantings from revegetation are 

established, there is a minor risk of increased potential for fire, although this risk would be minimised by 

regular maintenance of vegetation (slashing) along the road verges. 

Safeguards and management measures 

In addition to the safeguards listed in other sections within this chapter: 

� A safety audit of the design would be undertaken prior to construction. 

� Maintenance activities would be undertaken in accordance with relevant RTA specifications. 

6.16 Cumulative environmental impacts 


There is a requirement under Clause 228(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 

2000 to take into account any cumulative environmental impacts with other existing or likely future 

activities. 

Road upgrades 

At present there are a number of other road upgrades occurring between Nowra and Eden on the NSW 

south coast, however, no additional large scale road works are scheduled for the local area. 

21/18937/157350 



119

Local developments 

A large redevelopment of the Bega civic and retail space, including works along Zingel Place and 

Auckland Streets, is proposed. The works would involve the redevelopment of the existing town hall, 

Woolworths and RSL Club. The works are located two blocks east of the proposed bypass alignment, 

however, cumulative visual, noise and traffic impacts could occur if construction timetables overlap with 

the bypass construction timetable. 

Several subdivisions are proposed adjacent to the southern end of the proposed bypass route: one on 

the eastern side of the existing highway, and two on the western side of the existing highway, near 

Finucane Lane. If undertaken concurrently with the Bega Bypass, these projects could contribute to 

cumulative visual, noise, traffic and biodiversity impacts. 


Cumulative biodiversity impacts 

Resources for flora and fauna are concentrated at the southern end of the route. This location coincides 

with proposed subdivision development. Mature and hollow-bearing trees and farm dams in this area 

provide habitat for some woodland species, including threatened microbats. These features can provide 

‘stepping stones’, assisting connectivity in fragmented landscapes. 

About 12 hectares of native dominated pasture (although this occurs as a mosaic within exotic 

dominated areas) and six hollow-bearing trees would be cleared for the development of the bypass. 

Residential and industrial development at the southern end of the proposed bypass is likely to be more 

flexible in retaining habitat features but modification of habitat and gradual degradation of its value to 

native flora and fauna over time is likely. Measures have been included in section 6.1.4 of this REF to 

address the biodiversity impact of the proposed bypass. 

Cumulative social impacts 

For residents and motorists in the western section of Bega, the combined impacts of the bypass activities 

including visual, noise and access impacts during construction may adversely affect amenity. This would 

be short-term and expected to be justified by the long-term positive cumulative impacts. 

Positive cumulative impacts 

Positive cumulative impacts would be experienced by motorists using the Princes Highway, residents of 

Bega and businesses. The Bega bypass would have positive cumulative impacts with ongoing upgrades 

on the Princes Highway, including: 

� Safer travelling conditions. 

� Improved travel times. 

� Support the region’s economy by allowing the Princes Highway between the Snowy Mountains 

Highway and the Victorian border to be used by B-double heavy vehicles in both directions. 


It is considered that the potential for adverse cumulative impact is most effectively addressed by the 

application of the individual impact area safeguards recommended in this REF. 

21/18937/157350 



120

6.17 Summary of beneficial effects 

The beneficial effects of the proposal would include: 

� Improvement in the efficient movement of freight on the South Coast. 







� Improve travel times on the highway (proposed 100 km/h speed limit compared to 50 km/h, 60 km/h 

and 80 km/h speed limits). 

6.18 Summary of adverse effects 

Adverse effects of the proposal would include: 

� Noise and vibration impacts to properties adjacent to the bypass during construction and operation. 

� Potential for minor air quality impacts to properties adjacent to the bypass during both construction 

and operation. 

� Impacts to Aboriginal cultural heritage. 

� Temporary disruptions to traffic flow and access. 

� Changes to access for properties in Applegum Close, Ravenswood Street, Fairview Street and 

Brogo Street. 

� Temporary increased risk for spills and contamination during construction. 

� Temporary increased risk of occurrence of erosion and sedimentation. 

� Potential for increased risk of degradation of water quality and adverse impacts on aquatic habitats. 

� Visual impacts associated with new infrastructure in an existing rural environment. 

� Clearing of native vegetation, including around 6.95 hectares of Lowland grassy woodland 

endangered ecological community. 

� Removal of potential habitat for threatened fauna. 

21/18937/157350 



121

7. Environmental management 

This chapter describes how the proposal will be managed to reduce potential environmental impacts 

throughout detailed design, construction and operation. A framework for managing the potential impacts 

is provided with reference to environmental management plans and relevant RTA QA specifications. A 

summary of site-specific environmental safeguards is provided as detailed in chapter 6 and the licence 

and/or approval requirements required prior to construction are also listed. 

7.1 Environmental management plans (or system) 

Throughout this REF, a number of safeguards and management measures have been identified in order 

to minimise adverse environmental, social and economic impacts that could potentially arise from the 

proposal. These management measures would be incorporated into the detailed design and 

implemented during the construction and operation of the proposal. 

The identified safeguards and management measures would be incorporated into the detailed design 

phase and contractual arrangements, to be implemented in the construction and operation phases of the 

proposal. A project environmental management plan and a construction environmental management plan 

would be prepared to describe these safeguards and management measures, how they would be 

implemented and who would be responsible for their implementation. 

The plans would be prepared prior to construction of the proposal and must be reviewed and certified by 

the RTA Senior Environmental Officer, Southern Region, prior to the commencement of any on-site 

works. These plans would be working documents, subject to ongoing change and updated as necessary 

to respond to specific requirements. The Construction Environmental Management Plan and project 

environmental management plan would be developed in accordance with the specifications set out in the 

RTA QA Specification G36 – Environmental Protection (Management System), RTA QA Specification 

G38 – Soil and Water Management (Soil and Water Plan) and RTA QA Specification G40 – Clearing and 

Grubbing. 

7.2 Summary of safeguards and management measures 

Environmental safeguards outlined in this document would be incorporated into the detailed design 

phase of the proposal and during construction and operation of the proposal. These safeguards would 

minimise any potential adverse impacts arising from the proposal on the surrounding environment. All 

safeguards described in this REF and the decision report would be incorporated into the construction 

environmental management plan. These are summarised in Table 7.1. 

Table 7.1 Summary of site specific environmental safeguards 

Impact Environmental safeguards 

General � Bega Valley Shire Council would be consulted in accordance with the requirements 

of ISEPP. 

21/18937/157350 

� The RTA would continue to liaise with utility authorities to minimise impacts to their 

infrastructure. 



122


Ecology � Prior to commencement of construction the works area and ‘no go’ areas would be 

clearly delineated. 

Noise and vibration Construction 

21/18937/157350 

� Equipment and material movements would be programmed to minimise traffic across 

the site. 

� Weed management controls would be implemented for existing infestations, 

construction works and maintenance works. Noxious weeds (Blackberry, Fireweed, 

African lovegrass, Paterson’s curse) would be controlled in accordance with any 

applicable management plans produced by the Bega Valley Shire Council. 

� The Freshwater wetland EEC located south of the Ravenswood Street overpass 

would be fenced as a no-go zone prior to and during all construction works. 

� Drainage and the Soil and Water Management Plan would be designed to protect 

nearby Freshwater Wetlands identified on Figure 6.1 and their associated feeder 

drainage lines. Drainage design would minimise changes to the quantity and quality 

of runoff to these lagoons. 

� RTA would consult with Industries and Infrastructure (Primary Industries Fisheries 

and Aquaculture) regarding aquatic fauna connectivity along the flood channel at the 

Applegum Close and Ravenswood Street connection. 

� Where clearing of fauna habitat is required, staged-clearing protocols would be put in 

place to minimise risks to resident fauna. These protocols would consider the timing 

and method of felling. 

� Where mature or hollow-bearing native trees would be removed, each lost hollow 

would be mitigated by the installation of a nest box (eg at a ratio of 1:1). 

� Disturbed areas would be rehabilitated as soon as practical after works using locally 

occurring native species where appropriate. 

� A Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan would be prepared and 

implemented to manage and mitigate adverse noise and vibration disturbance, 

taking into consideration DECCW’s Interim Construction Noise Guideline, 2009. The 

following measures would be included in the Construction Noise and Vibration 

Management Plan. 

Noise mitigation 

� The construction areas would be configured to minimise noise impacts to the 

surrounding community. The following would be considered: 

- Construction compounds would be laid out in such a way that the primary noise 

sources are at a maximum distance from residences, with solid structures 

(sheds, containers, etc) placed between sensitive noise receivers and noise 

sources and as close to the noise sources as is practicable. 

- Compressors, generators, pumps and any other fixed plant would be located as 

far away from residences as practicable and behind site structures. 

� Material dumps, loading and unloading areas would be located as far as practicable 

from the nearest residences. 

� Equipment would be selected to minimise noise emissions. Equipment would be 

fitted with appropriate silencers and be in good working order where possible. 

Machines found to produce excessive noise compared to normal industry 

expectations would be removed from the site or stood down until repairs or 

modifications can be made. 

� To reduce the annoyance associated with reversing alarms, broadband reversing 

alarms (audible movement alarms) would be used for site equipment where possible. 



123


21/18937/157350 

Satisfactory compliance with occupational health and safety requirements would 

need to be achieved and a safety risk assessment may need to be undertaken to 

determine that safety is not compromised (refer to Appendix C of the Interim 

Construction Noise Guideline). 

� General construction activities would be limited to the recommended construction 

hours wherever feasible and reasonable. 

� All site workers would be directed to take practical and reasonable measures to 

minimise the impact to local residences during the course of their activities. This 

would include: 

- Avoid the use of loud radios. 

- Avoid shouting and slamming doors. 

- Where practical, machines would be operated at low speed or power and 

switched off when not being used rather than left idling for prolonged periods. 

- Keeping truck drivers informed of designated vehicle routes, parking locations 

and delivery hours. 

- Minimise reversing. 

- Avoid dropping materials from height. 

- Avoid hard impact noise such as metal to metal contact. 

- Keep engine covers closed while equipment is operating. 

Vibration mitigation 

� The contractor would undertake a dilapidation survey for buildings within 50 metres 

of construction works. A copy of the report would be provided to the landholder. 

� Vibration monitoring would be undertaken in accordance with a procedure outlined in 

the Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan. 

Community relations 

� The community would be kept informed of the project through regular updates 

including of the construction program and progress. 

� Affected residents would be given prior notification of nearby works and noisy or 

vibration generating activities. 

� The RTA’s Environmental Noise Management Manual 2001, Practice Note vii – 

Roadworks Outside of Normal Working Hours would be followed for any work 

outside of the standard working hours. This would include notifying the local 

community of any works planned to be undertaken outside standard construction 

hours. 

� A community liaison phone number and site contact would be provided so that noise 

and/or vibration related complaints, if any, can be received and addressed in a timely 

manner. 

Operation 

� Feasible and reasonable noise attenuation measures would be determined during 

detailed design for impacted areas. 

� A post-construction noise monitoring program would be undertaken to confirm that 

the noise level targets are achieved. The noise monitoring program (including 

simultaneous traffic counts) would be undertaken within 12 months of opening once 

traffic flows have stabilised. 



124


Landscape 

character and 

visual amenity 

21/18937/157350 

� Detailed design would be guided by the urban design principles for the proposal. 

� An appropriate planting and landform design would be developed to highlight and 

celebrate the key arrival and exit points to/from Bega and to integrate the highway 

into its rural setting. 

� Cut and fill batters would be designed to minimise visible cut faces; maintain smooth 

transitions between cut and fill and to incorporate appropriately grouped tree planting 

wherever practicable. 

� Soft landscape elements would be implemented wherever practicable to blend the 

proposal with the rural character, particularly native tree plantings and native grasses 

that reflect grazing character. 

� Structures (eg. High Street and Ravenswood Street bridges) would be designed to 

best suit surrounding landscape character. 

� Materials, finishes and colours for structures including any noise walls would aim to 

create a consistent form and to blend with the rural character of the surrounding 

landscape. 

� Landscaping would be used to minimise the visual impact of any noise walls or noise 

mounds. 

� Batter and landscaping maintenance would be incorporated into the overall 

maintenance program for the bypass. 

� If noise walls or noise mounds are required, RTA regional environmental staff would 

be consulted to advise on any additional environmental assessment required. 

Traffic and access � A detailed Traffic Management Plan would be prepared in accordance with the 

RTA’s Traffic Control at Work Sites Manual 2003 and RTA Specification G10 - 

Control of Traffic, and approved by the RTA prior to implementation to provide a 

comprehensive and objective approach to minimise any potential impacts on road 

network operations during construction. 

� The Traffic Management Plan would include such measures as provision of safe 

access points to work areas from the adjacent road network, safety barriers where 

necessary, impose temporary speed restrictions when necessary, maintain adequate 

sight distance and display prominent warning signage. 

� Construction traffic would enter/exit the construction zone only in areas designated 

for this purpose in the Traffic Management Plan. 

� Approval for road occupancy would be obtained for any lane closures or road traffic 

changes. 

� Movement of spoil would occur within the site where practicable, to minimise the 

number of trucks on the surrounding road network. 

� The community would be kept informed about upcoming road construction activities, 

including through advertisements in the local media and by prominently placed 

advisory notices. 

� Any disruption to access would be notified in advance in accordance with RTA’s 

Draft community involvement and communications resource manual, 2008. 

� Property access would be maintained at all times where feasible. Where changes to 

access arrangements are necessary, the RTA would advise owners and tenants and 

consult with them on alternate access arrangements. 



125


Greenhouse 

emissions 

21/18937/157350 

� Property access points would be separated from work areas (for example, through 

the installation of fencing) to ensure safety. 

� RTA would consult with local and regional bus companies and Bega Valley Shire 

Council prior to construction to minimise impacts on bus transport. 

Construction 

� Alternative fuels and power sources (such as biodiesels and ethanol blends) would 

be used wherever practicable. 

� Transport of materials would be scheduled and loads optimised to minimise trips 

required and associated emissions. 

� Construction equipment, plant and vehicles would be appropriately sized. 

� Equipment and plant would be regularly serviced to ensure efficient performance. 

� Energy efficient vehicles, plant and equipment would be selected for works wherever 

possible. 

� The use of recycled steel content would be investigated. 

� The use of waste material in cement would be investigated (eg fly ash, granulated 

blast furnace slag), to minimise the quantity of cement required. 

Operation 

� Alternative power sources (eg solar power) would be investigated for operational 

lighting. 

Air quality � The Construction Environmental Management Plan would detail the materials, 

methods and monitoring arrangements to manage air quality. Any monitoring would 

comply with DECCW guidelines for the Sampling and Analysis for Air Pollutants in 

NSW. Any conditions of licences or approvals, in relation to maximum air pollutant 

levels, would be complied with. 

� Exposed surfaces would be watered regularly to minimise dust emissions. 

� Stabilisation of disturbed surfaces would take place as soon as practicable. 

� All construction plant and machinery would be fitted with emission control devices 

complying with Australian Design Standards. 

� Construction plant and equipment would be maintained in a good working condition 

in order to limit impacts on air quality. 

� Plant and machinery would be turned off when not in use. 

� No burning of any timbers or other combustible materials would occur. 

� Work activities would be reprogrammed if the mitigation measures are not 

adequately restricting dust generation. 

� During periods of high winds, dust generating activities would cease. 

� Stockpiled materials would be covered or stored in areas not subject to high wind. 

� Construction facilities and site sheds would be designed and operated to minimise 

the emission of dust, smoke, and other substances. 

� Local residents would be advised of hours of operation and duration of works and 

supplied with a contact name and number for queries regarding air quality. 

Climate change � Material that may expand or contract as a result of decreased rainfall would not be 

used for construction of the road structural foundation. 

� Detailed design, including for drainage and flood immunity, would take into 



126


Aboriginal cultural 

heritage 

Non-Aboriginal 

historic heritage 

Soils, hydrology, 

drainage and water 

quality 

21/18937/157350 

consideration the effect of climate change on the project. 

� Clearing of biomass (vegetation) would be minimised wherever possible. 

� Energy efficient street lighting would be used wherever possible. 

� A section 90 permit has been received for the entire proposal footprint. The proposal 

would be carried out in accordance with the conditions of this permit and with the 

following safeguards. 

- Excavation and construction works would be confined to the minimum area 

required to limit impacts in culturally significant areas. 

- Indirect impacts to nearby wetlands would be mitigated by safeguards and 

measures outlined in section 6.10.3 to minimise erosion, sedimentation and 

water quality impacts. 

- Any future Aboriginal community consultation and assessment would be 

undertaken in accordance with the RTA’s Procedure for Aboriginal Cultural 

Heritage Consultation and Investigation. 

� If any relics are uncovered during construction, works in the vicinity of the relic would 

immediately cease and the RTA’s Senior Environmental Officer and the RTA Senior 

Environmental Specialist (Heritage) would be contacted for advice on how to 

proceed. 

Pre-construction 

� Detailed design of the proposal would: 

- Be undertaken in line with RTA’s Code of Practice for Water Management and 

the RTA's Water policy. 

- Protect nearby natural wetlands and their associated feeder drainage lines. 

Changes to the quantity and quality of run off to these wetlands would be 

minimised. 

- Design the system to drain the road pavement for a 10 year average recurrence 

interval flood, with an assessment of a 100 year average recurrence interval flood 

to be undertaken during detailed design to ensure no nuisance flooding would 

occur. 

- The detailed design at Ravenswood and Charlottes streets and at the Applegum 

Close and Ravenswood Street connection would take into account afflux to avoid 

flooding impacts on adjacent properties and would be undertaken to maintain the 

existing flood regime and current flows. 

- To account for climate change the modelled storm intensity would be increased 

by six per cent and incorporated into the detailed design. 

- Ensure that the drainage system would capture and adequately treat oil or 

chemical spills of 20,000 litre capacity. 

- Consider runoff and scouring and include provision of short term construction 

controls (construction sediment basins) and long term drainage design (eg 

permanent stormwater detention basins). 

� The location and sizing requirements for the temporary sediment retention basins 

would be based on the guidelines and procedures set out in the publication entitled 

Soils and Construction – Managing Urban Stormwater Volume 1 (Landcom 2004) 

and Volume 2D (DECC 2008). 

� A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be prepared prior to 

the commencement of construction and would incorporate a Soil and Water 

Management Plan. This plan would: 

- Incorporate specifications outlined in Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils & 



127


21/18937/157350 



Construction, Volume 1 (Landcom 2004) and Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils 

and Construction, Volume 2D, Main Road Construction (DECC 2008). 

- Include an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan and a maintenance schedule 

for on-going maintenance of temporary and permanent sedimentation controls. 

� Geotechnical investigations would be undertaken to determine the presence and 

depth of groundwater in the vicinity of the proposal. 

� A groundwater management plan would be prepared for the protection of 

groundwater during construction and operation of the proposal. Bega Valley Shire 

Council and the NSW Office of Water (DECCW) would be consulted regarding the 

groundwater management plan. 

Construction 

� Works would be undertaken in accordance with the RTA’s specifications included but 

not limited to G38 Soil and Water Management (Soil and Water Management Plan), 

R44 Earthworks (Cut, Fill, Imported Fill and Imported Selected Material) and R50 

Stabilisation of Earthworks. 

� Construction would be managed in accordance with the Blue Books 1 and 2D; 

Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils & Construction, Volume 1 (Landcom 2004) and 

Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction, Volume 2D, Main Road 

Construction (DECC 2008). 

� Existing natural channels and vegetation would be maintained where possible by 

installing protection devices such as energy dissipaters to reduce flow velocity and 

potential scouring. 

� Weather forecasts would be checked daily to ensure that high risk soil and erosion 

activities are not undertaken immediately prior to or during high rainfall or wind 

events. 

� An accredited soil conservationist would be engaged to regularly inspect works 

throughout the construction phase. 

� Clearing of vegetation and stabilisation/revegetation activities would be carried out 

progressively to limit the time disturbed areas are exposed to erosion processes. 

� A rehabilitation plan would be prepared for areas disturbed during the works. This 

would identify appropriate methods for stabilising and progressively revegetating 

disturbed soils to resist erosion and weed invasion. 

� Management of drainage lines to be addressed prior to any construction works 

beginning on site. 

� Stockpiles and compounds would need to be placed in higher areas, away from flood 

prone land. 

� Any chemicals, including hydrocarbons and herbicides, would be stored in a bunded, 

hard stand area, at the site compound away from any water courses or natural 

depressions or drainage lines. 

� A site specific spill containment/contamination management plan would be 

developed and communicated to all staff prior to the commencement of the works. 

This would include an emergency spill kit to be kept on site at all times and staff 

would be trained for its use. 

� Fuelling of machinery would only take place appropriately bunded areas. 

� If a spill occurs, the RTA’s Environmental Incident Classification and Management 

Procedure would be followed and the RTA senior environmental officer notified as 

soon as possible. 

� All sediment basins to be used as part of the proposal would be monitored 

128


Land use and 

property 

21/18937/157350 

Operation 

Socio-economic Construction 

Demand on 

resources 

Waste 

management 

throughout the construction phase. 

� Outlet dissipaters would be constructed as required to reduce flow velocities to 

acceptable levels at discharge locations. Drainage paths between culverts would be 

rock lined to minimise scouring. 

� Drainage systems would be checked at regular intervals and maintained to ensure 

they are operating at full capacity (eg clearance of debris from drainage lines). 

� All property acquisition would be undertaken in accordance with the RTA’s Land 

Acquisition Policy. 

� Compensation would be negotiated in accordance with the Land Acquisition (Just 

Terms Compensation) Act 1991. 

� The RTA would liaise and consult with landowners and tenants individually whose 

property would be acquired on an ongoing basis regarding the status and timing of 

acquisition. 

� Relevant stakeholders would be provided with sufficient information to enable them 

to understand the likely nature, extent and duration of vibration, dust and noise 

impacts. 

� A community information and consultation program would be undertaken to ensure 

local communities are aware of the construction programs and activities, and are 

able to communicate with the project team. 

Operation 

� Develop a signage strategy to provide appropriate signage on approach to Bega and 

near interchanges to identify Bega as a stopping destination. 

� The RTA would liaise with the local chamber of commerce and Bega Valley Shire 

Council in developing the signing strategy. 

� Water captured in construction sediment basins would be reused for dust 

suppression, watering of landscaped areas and any other suitable construction 

activity where feasible. 

� Procurement would endeavour to use materials and products with a recycled content 

where that material or product is costs and performance effective. 

� Excavated material would be reused on-site for fill where feasible. 

� Any additional fill material required would be sourced from appropriately licensed 

facilities. 

� Resource management hierarchy principles would be followed: 

- Avoid unnecessary resource consumption as a priority. 

- Avoidance is followed by resource recovery (including reuse of materials, 

reprocessing, and recycling and energy recovery). 

- Disposal is undertaken as a last resort (in accordance with the WARR Act). 

� A Waste Management Plan would be prepared which would include the following: 

- Identify all potential waste streams associated with the works. 

- Identify opportunities to minimise the use of resources, and to reuse and recycle 

materials. 



129


Hazards and risks Construction 

21/18937/157350 

- Outline methods of disposal of waste that cannot be reused or recycled at 

appropriately licensed facilities. 

� Cleared weed free vegetation would be chipped and reused onsite to stabilise 

disturbed soils where possible. Weedy mulch would either be composted to ensure 

propagules and seeds are sterilised or would not be reused. 

� Cleared vegetation would not be burned at the site. 

� Excess excavated material would be disposed of at an appropriate facility or reused 

appropriately for fill on the proposal site, or on other RTA projects, or as otherwise 

provided for by waste legislation. Weedy material would not be reused unless 

appropriately treated. 

� Garbage receptacles would be provided and recycling of materials encouraged. 

Rubbish would be transported to an appropriate waste disposal facility. 

� All wastes would be managed in accordance with the Protection of the Environment 

Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act). 

� Toilets (eg portable toilets) would be provided for construction workers. 

� Site inductions would occur and be recorded by a Site Supervisor to ensure staff 

have a thorough knowledge of all key environmental/safety issues, including waste 

disposal protocols. 

� Designated washdown and hygiene stations would be provided in appropriately 

bunded areas at the proposal site and construction equipment and machinery would 

be washed prior to entering and leaving the proposal site. 

� The Construction Environmental Management Plan would include provisions to 

minimise the potential for ignition or spread of fire. 

� Construction machinery would be kept in good working order. 

Operation 

7.3 Licensing and approvals 

� A safety audit of the design would be undertaken prior to construction. 

� Maintenance activities would be undertaken in accordance with relevant RTA 

specifications. 

The proposal would potentially require the following licences and/or approvals from relevant statutory 

agencies as outlined in Table 7.2. 

Table 7.2 Summary of licensing and approval required 

Requirement Timing 

Under section 90 of the National Parks and Wildlife 

Act 1974 a person must not knowingly destroy, 

damage or deface or knowingly cause or permit the 

destruction, damage or defacement of an Aboriginal 

object or Aboriginal Place without first obtaining the 

consent of the Director-General of the NSW 

DECCW. Consents which enable a person to 

impact an Aboriginal object are issued by the NSW 



Section 90 permit was obtained from DECCW 

in August 2010. 

130

Requirement Timing 

DECCW upon review of a section 90 Aboriginal 

Heritage Impact Permit application. 

The archaeological deposits within the corridor are 

considered to be of low archaeological significance. 

The Fisheries Management Act 1994 requires 

public authorities, including local government and 

state authorities, to notify the Minister for Fisheries 

of any proposal to undertake reclamation works. 

21/18937/157350 



The RTA would give written notification to the 

Minister for Fisheries for dredging or 

reclamation work and consider any responses 

in accordance with Section 199 of the Fisheries 

Management Act 1994. 

131

8. Conclusion 

8.1 Justification 

The proposal is consistent with: 

� The NSW State Plan – Investing in a Better Future 2010. 

� The South Coast Regional Strategy 2006 – 2031. 

The Princes Highway is a critical north-south link between Sydney, Wollongong and the communities 

along the south coast down to the Victorian border. The railway does not extend south of Bomaderry in 

the Shoalhaven local government area and the Princes Highway is therefore the primary land transport 

route servicing the south coast. 

The Princes Highway through Bega is therefore an important freight route and is designated as a 25 

metre B-double route and a 4.6 metre high vehicle route. This B-double route is currently restricted to 

southbound travel only through Bega. The proposal would improve accessibility to the south coast and 

freight efficiency by allowing B-doubles to bypass Bega and removing through traffic from Bega CBD. 

The proposal would improve road safety by upgrading the Princes Highway to current RTA road design 

standards and reducing conflicts between through and local traffic in the Bega CBD. 

The proposal addresses the following objectives: 

� Provide continuous 25 metre B-double access on the Princes Highway between the Snowy 

Mountains Highway and the Victorian border, improving efficiency of freight movement on the South 

Coast. 



� Improve travel times on the highway (proposed 100 km/h speed limit compared to 50 km/h, 60 km/h 

and 80 km/h speed limits). 



� Maintain the town’s east-west connectivity (including for pedestrians and cyclists). 



8.2 Ecologically sustainable development 

The Council of Australian Governments National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development 

(Council of Australian Governments, 1992) defines ecologically sustainable development (ESD) as 

“using, conserving and enhancing the community's resources so that ecological processes, on which life 

depends, are maintained, and the total quality of life, now and in the future, can be increased” (Council of 

Australian Governments, 1992). 

Section 6(2) of the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991 outlines the principles of ESD 

that must be considered. These principles include: 

21/18937/157350 



132

� The precautionary principle. 

� Intergenerational and intragenerational equity. 

� Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity. 

� Improved valuation and pricing of environmental resources. 

These principles have been incorporated into the concept design and environmental assessment of the 

proposal. The integration of these principles is discussed below. 

8.2.1 Precautionary principle 

This principle states that “if there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty 

should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation”. 

Evaluation and assessment of alternative options have aimed to reduce the risk of serious and 

irreversible impacts on the environment. Community consultation considered issues raised by the 

community and a range of specialist studies were undertaken for key issues to provide accurate and 

impartial information to assist in the evaluation of options. 

The detailed assessment of potential environmental impacts in the preparation of the concept design has 

sought to minimise impacts on the urban and natural amenity of the study area while maintaining 

engineering feasibility and safety for all road users. A number of safeguards have been proposed to 

minimise potential impacts. These safeguards would be implemented during construction and operation 

of the proposal. No safeguards have been postponed as a result of lack of scientific certainty. 

A Construction Environment Management Plan would be prepared prior to commencing construction. 

This requirement would ensure that the proposed upgrade achieves a high-level environmental 

performance. No mitigation measures or management mechanisms would be postponed as a result of a 

lack of information. 

8.2.2 Intergenerational equity 

The principle states, “the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of 

the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations”. 

The proposal would benefit future generations by ensuring that the proposed bypass does not give rise 

to long term adverse impacts on the environment and potential impacts would be minimised by 

implementation of appropriate safeguards. This would ensure that the principle of intergenerational 

equity is not compromised. 

Should the proposal not proceed, the principle of intergenerational equity may be compromised, as future 

generations would inherit a lower level of service by the road transport network. Travel times and the 

number of accidents would both increase along this section of the highway as the volume of traffic 

increases over time. 

The proposal would benefit future generations by ensuring that road safety is improved, with this being a 

positive benefit for all road users. 

21/18937/157350 



133

8.2.3 Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity 

This principle states that the “diversity of genes, species, populations and communities, as well as the 

ecosystems and habitats to which they belong, must be maintained and improved to ensure their 

survival”. 

A thorough assessment of the existing local environment has been undertaken in order to identify and 

manage any potential impacts of the proposal on local biodiversity. Specific design efforts have been 

taken to minimise impacts upon the local biodiversity. 

The proposal is not considered to have a significant impact on biological diversity and ecological 

integrity. An ecological assessment and appropriate site-specific safeguards are provided in section 6.1 

and Appendix C of this REF. Site-specific safeguards include consideration of design impacts upon 

biodiversity, vegetation management and weed management. 

8.2.4 Improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms 

This principle requires that “costs to the environment should be factored into the economic costs of a 

project”. 

The REF has examined the environmental consequences of the proposal and identified mitigation 

measures for areas which have the potential to experience adverse impacts. Requirements imposed in 

terms of implementation of these mitigation measures would result in an economic cost to the RTA. The 

implementation of mitigation measures would increase both the capital and operating costs of the 

proposal. This signifies that environmental resources have been given appropriate valuation. 

The concept design for the proposal has been developed with an objective of minimising potential 

impacts on the surrounding environment. This indicates that the concept design for the proposal has 

been developed with an environmental objective in mind. 

8.3 Conclusion 

The proposal involves the construction of a Bega bypass consisting of a 3.5 kilometre, generally twolane, 

undivided highway largely along an existing road reservation to the west of the existing Bega 

township. The proposed Bega bypass would start at the southern end of the Bega River Bridge and finish 

near Finucane Lane to the south of Bega, where it reconnects to the existing highway. The proposed 

bypass would have a speed limit of 100 km/h. 

The proposal would reduce the number of heavy vehicles and through traffic from within the Bega CBD, 

which would improve road safety, pedestrian and cyclist amenity and traffic conditions, as well as 

improving noise and air quality in Bega. The bypass would also support the region’s economy by 

allowing the Princes Highway between the Snowy Mountains Highway and the Victorian border to be 

used by B-double heavy vehicles in both directions. 

A bypass of Bega has been considered since the 1940s and placed onto the Bega planning scheme in 

the 1960s. A number of options have been considered for the proposal and the options consideration 

process included input from the community and other stakeholders. The identification of the preferred 

option took into account social, environmental and economic factors. The potential impacts of the 

proposal have been further assessed against the principles of ecologically sustainable development as 

outlined in section 8.2. 

21/18937/157350 



134

As described and assessed in chapter 6 and outlined in sections 6.17 and 6.18 of this REF, the proposal 

would result in both positive and negative impacts, however the safeguards in chapter 7 of this REF 

would manage and mitigate the identified negative impacts The beneficial impacts including improved 

traffic efficiency and road safety are considered to outweigh the adverse impacts associated with the 

proposal. 

The description of the proposal and associated environmental impacts is in accordance with clause 228 

of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the Threatened Species Conservation 

Act 1995 (TSC Act), the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act), and the Australian Government’s 

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). 

This REF finds that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on the environment and therefore 

approval is not required to be sought under Part 3A of the EP&A Act. There would be no significant 

impact on threatened species as defined by the TSC Act and/or FM Act, in accordance with Section 5A 

of the EP&A Act and therefore no requirement for a Species Impact Statement. The proposal would not 

significantly impact a matter of national environmental significance or Commonwealth land and therefore 

a referral to the Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 

(DEWHA) for a decision by the Commonwealth Minister for Environment Protection, Heritage and the 

Arts is not required under the EPBC Act. 

21/18937/157350 



135

9. Certification 

This Review of Environmental Factors provides a true and fair review of the proposal in relation to its 

potential effects on the environment. It addresses to the fullest extent possible all matters affecting or 

likely to affect the environment as a result of the proposal. 

Katrina Smallwood 

Senior Environmental Scientist 

Date: September 2010 

I have examined this Review of Environmental Factors and the certification by Katrina Smallwood and 

accept the Review of Environmental Factors on behalf of the RTA. 

Nick Boyd 

Project Development Manager 

Date: September 2010 

21/18937/157350 



136

10. References 

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2007. 2006 Census Quickstats. www.censusdata.abs.gov.au 

(accessed 27 th November 2009) 

Australian Soil Resource Information System 2010, CSIRO maps, retrieved June 8, 2010, from 

www.asris.csiro.au/index_ie.html. 

Bega Valley Shire Council 2006, Bega Valley Social Plan 2006-2011. 

Bega Valley Shire Council 2009. Bega Valley Local Transport Information Guide, 

http://www.begavalley.nsw.gov.au/Community/transport/transport.htm#08 (accessed 30 th November 

2009) 

Council of Australian Governments (CoAG) 1992, National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable 

Development. 

Cropper, H 1993, Management of Endangered Plants, Melbourne, CSIRO Publishing. 

DECCW 2005. Interim community consultation requirements for applicants. 

Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) 2008, Volume 2D Main Road Construction’ in 

Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction, DECC in association with the Sydney Metropolitan 

Catchment Management Authority. 

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) 2010, contaminated land record, 

retrieved June 8, 2010, from www.environment.nsw.gov.au/prclmapp/searchregister.aspx. 

DLWC 1999, Groundwater Quality Protection Policy, Department of land and Water Conservation, 

Sydney 

Department of Land and Water Conservation (DWLC) 2000, Soil and Landscape issues in Environmental 

Impact Assessment Technical Report No. 34. 

Department of Water and Energy NSW 2006. 2005/06 Water Supply and Sewage Benchmarking Report 

on line http://www.deus.nsw.gov.au/Publications/dwe_nsw_water_supply_and_sewerage_ 

benchmarking_report_2005-06.pdf 

DWE, 2008, Bore Location Information supplied in GIS format, Department of Water and Energy. 

Eco Logical 2006, Far South Coast Koala Management Framework Project No. 114-001, prepared for 

NSW Department of Environment and Conservation. 

Kayandel Archaeological Services 2009, RTA Bega Bypass: Aboriginal Cultural Assessment and 

Archaeological Survey Report. August 2009. 

Landcom 2004, Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction, Volume 1, 4th Edition. 

NSW Government 2010. NSW Natural Resource Atlas website. http://www.nratlas.nsw.gov.au, Accessed 

21 July 2010 

Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment 2008. Regional State of the 

Environmental Report 2008 

21/18937/157350 



137

Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment 2009. Regional State of the 

Environmental Report 2009 

Parolin, B., Garner, B, 1996. Evaluation of the economic impacts of bypass roads on country towns: Final 

project report. School of Geography, University of NSW. Prepared for the NSW Roads and Traffic 

Authority 

Parsons Brinkerhoff 2009, Bega Bypass - Planning and Engineering Options Study. 

RTA 2008. Procedure for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Consultation and Investigation. August 2008. 

Retrieved 25 August 2010 from 

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/environment/downloads/rtapachi_brochure_web.pdf 

RTA 2009. Environmental Impact Assessment Guidance Note - Guidelines for Landscape Character and 

Visual Impact Assessment. 

RTA 2009b. HW1 – Princes Highway Bega Bypass Drilling Investigation of Cuttings Stage 1. Report No: 

G4055, December 2009. 

Roger, E, Laffan, S and Ramp, D 2010, Road impacts a tipping point for wildlife populations in 

threatened landscapes, Population Ecology, published online April 2010, DOI 10.1007/s10144-010-0209- 

6. 

SEEC 2010, Erosion and Sediment Management Report – for Bega Bypass HW1 Princes Highway. 

Strategic Environmental and Engineering Consulting, Bowral. 

Tourism Research Australia 2008. Tourism Profiles for Local Government Areas in Regional Australia, 

Tourism Australia March 2008. 

Tulau, MJ 1997a, Soils Landscapes of the Bega – Goalen Point 1:100 000 Sheet Report, Sydney, 

Department of Land and Water Conservation. 

World Resources Institute and World Business Council for Sustainable Development 2004. Greenhouse 

Gas Protocol - A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard, Revised edition, March 2004. 

Personal communications 

T. McDermott, Bega Valley Shire Council, pers comm. January 2010 

Lenore Taylor, via Nick Boyd, pers comm. 7 June 2010 via Nick Boyd, 7 June 2010 

21/18937/157350 



138

11. Terms and acronyms used in this REF 

AADT Annual average daily traffic 

Aboriginal Heritage Includes Aboriginal sites (places of evident Aboriginal occupation) and places 

of contemporary, spiritual and/or mythological importance according to 

Aboriginal culture. 

Acoustic Relating to hearing, noise and sound. 

Air Quality A measure of the pollutants in the air. 

AHIMS Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System 

am Ante Meridiem 

ARI Average Recurrence Interval 

AS Australian Standard 

AS/NZS Australian Standard/New Zealand Standard 

Bega CBD The commercial/retail area of Bega. 

Bega township The whole built-up area of Bega. 

B-double A truck with a double trailer 

Biodiversity The number, variety and genetic variation of different organisms found in a 

habitat or ecosystem. 

BWPS Bega West Public School 

CBD Central Business District 

CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan 

Ch Chainage. The location along a road from a start point (in metres). 

CoAG Council of Australian Governments 

o C Degree Celsius 

CO2-e Carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (emissions of other greenhouse 

emissions are multiplied by their Global Warming Potential so that their effects 

can be compared to emissions of carbon dioxide) 

Conservation The protection, preservation, management or restoration of wildlife and of 

natural resources such as forests, soil and water. 

CoRTN United Kingdom Department of Transport ‘Calculation of Road Traffic Noise’ 

(CoRTN) algorithm 

Cumulative Impact A substantial impact created by accumulation or successive additions of 

individual impacts, which may not themselves be substantial. 

DA Development Application 

dB Decibel is the logarithmic unit used for expressing the sound pressure level 

(SPL) or power level (SWL) in acoustics. 

21/18937/157350 



139

dB(A) Frequency weighting filter used to measure ‘A-weighted’ sound pressure 

levels, which conforms roughly to the human ear response, as our hearing is 

less sensitive at very low and very high frequencies. 

DECCW NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water 

DEWHA Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, heritage and the 

Arts 

DIN German Standard 

Ecological 

Community 

21/18937/157350 

An assemblage of populations of different species, interacting with one 

another. 

Ecology A branch of biology dealing with the relations and interactions between 

organisms and their environment, including other organisms. 

Ecosystem A natural unit consisting of all organisms in an area functioning together with 

all the non-living physical factors of the environment. 

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment 

ENMM Environmental Noise Management Manual (RTA) 

Emission The release of material into the environment (eg dust). 

EP&A Act Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 

EPBC Act Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 

ESD Ecologically sustainable development. Development that meets the needs of 

the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet 

their own needs. It involves using, conserving and enhancing the community’s 

resources so that ecological processes are maintained, and the total quality of 

life can be increased. 

Fauna The animal life occurring in an area. 

FM Act Fisheries Management Act 1994 

Flora The plant life occurring in an area. 

Greenhouse 

emissions 

GHD GHD Pty Ltd 

Emissions that accumulate within the Earth’s atmosphere (eg: primarily water 

vapour, carbon dioxide and methane) which contribute to global climatic 

change/global warming (ie the ‘greenhouse effect’). 

Habitat The natural environment of an organism. 

HV Percentage of heavy/commercial vehicle traffic. 

Hydrology The science dealing with water on the land or under the surface and its 

properties, distribution and other characteristics. 

Hz Hertz 

ISEPP State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 

ISO International Standards Organisation 

KFH Key fish habitat 

km Kilometres 



140

km/h Kilometres per hour 

LA10 

LAeq(period) 

LAeq(15hr) 

LAeq(9hr) 

LAeq(1hr) 

21/18937/157350 

A statistical sound measurement used to define noise levels, which are 

exceeded 10 percent of the time – about equivalent to the range of maximum 

noise levels. 

Equivalent sound pressure level: the steady sound level that, over a specified 

period of time, would produce the same energy equivalence as the fluctuating 

sound level actually occurring. 

The LAeq noise level for the period 7am to 10pm. 

The LAeq noise level for the period 10pm to 7am. 

The highest hourly LAeq noise level during the day and night periods 

LALC Local Aboriginal Land Council 

LEP Local environmental plan 

Level of service A qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream 

and their perception by motorists and/or passengers. 

LGA Local government area 

LSCREP Lower South Coast Regional Environmental Plan (No 2) 

L Litre 

m Metres 

m/s Metres per second 

Magnitude The scale, form and character of a development proposal. In the case of 

visual assessment also how far the proposal is from the receptor. Combined 

with sensitivity provides a measurement of impact. 

Migratory Species A species that makes regular or seasonal journeys in response to changes in 

food availability, habitat or weather. Common in birds. 

mm Millimetres 

mm/s Millimetres per second 

Mitigation Limit the intensity of impacts or prevent impacts. 

MVKT Million vehicle kilometres travelled 

National Heritage Areas of natural, cultural and/or historic places that are of outstanding national 

value to the Australian nation as outlined by the Environment Protection and 

Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. 

NCA Noise catchment area 

NPW Act National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 

Noise Pollution Unwanted or harmful environmental noise. 

NSW New South Wales 

Overbridge Bridge travelling over the proposed bypass 

PEMP Project Environmental Management Plan 

pm Post Meridiem 



141

Proposal The proposed Bega bypass. 

Proposal footprint The proposal boundary that was considered to be directly impacted by the 

proposal and construction activities. 

POEO Act Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 

Rating background 

level 

21/18937/157350 

The overall single-figure background noise level measured in each relevant 

assessment period during or outside the recommended standard hours. 

RBL Rating background level 

REF Review of Environmental Factors 

RTA NSW Roads and Traffic Authority 

RTA QA 

Specification 

Specifications developed by the RTA for use with roadworks and bridgeworks 

contracts let by the RTA or local councils. 

SEPP 44 State Environmental Planning Policy No 44 – Koala Habitat Protection 

Sensitivity The sensitivity of a landscape character zone or view and its capacity to 

absorb change. Combined with magnitude provides a measurement of impact. 

Study area The proposal footprint and surrounding area that is likely to be directly or 

indirectly affected by the proposal (approximately 2 kilometre buffer was 

considered). 

Threatened 

Species 

Species of flora and fauna that are listed as endangered species or vulnerable 

species under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. 

TSC Act Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 

Vegetative 

Community 

The plant species composition of a specific area. 

Vibration An instance of vibratory motion; oscillation; quiver; tremor. 

View The sight or prospect of some landscape or scene. 

Visual envelope The extent of the area that the proposal would be visible from. 

Visual impact The impacts on the views from residences and other public places. 

Visual impact rating Visual Impact Rating is determined by cross referencing sensitivity with 

magnitude. 

Visual receptors The public or community at large who would have views of the subject site 

either by virtue of where they live and/or work or from transport routes, paths, 

lookouts and the like. 

WARR Act Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 

Wetland A lowland area that is saturated with moisture or water, especially when 

regarded as the natural habitat of wildlife. 

World Heritage A specific site that is of outstanding natural and/or cultural significance and 

has been nominated and confirmed for inclusion on the World Heritage list 

administrated by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee. 



142

21/18937/157350 

Appendix A 

Environmental Checklists 

Consideration of the Clause 228 factors under the EP&A Act 

Matters of national environmental significance under the 

EBPC Act 



Clause 228 Checklist 

The following factors, listed in Clause 228(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 

2000, are required to be considered to assess the likely impacts of the proposal on the natural and built 

environment. 

Factor Impact 

a. Any environmental impact on a community? 

The proposal would result in short-term negative impacts to the local community as a 

result of construction noise and traffic as discussed in sections 6.2 and 6.4. Potential 

traffic impacts include an increase in the volume of heavy vehicles, changes in speed 

limits and local traffic changes. Construction noise impacts would be managed by 

adopting reasonable and feasible noise management measures identified in the 

DECCW Interim Construction Noise Guideline in order to reduce noise levels as much 

as possible during construction. 

Long-term positive impacts would increase road safety, travel efficiencies and reduce 

vehicle numbers within the main street of Bega. The proposal provides capacity for the 

road to accommodate future traffic increases and provides better access particularly for 

heavy vehicles, than is provided by the existing alignment. 

b. Any transformation of a locality? 

The proposal would result in substantially less traffic in the centre of Bega; through 

traffic would be routed west of the town. This would increase amenity and safety in the 

Bega CBD. The roundabout proposed at the northern end of the route would change 

the character at the entrance of the town. 

The traffic alterations may affect the level of tourism and trade within the town, as a 

result of less passing traffic through Bega. However, amenity in the town centre would 

be improved as a result of reduced vehicle numbers and trade may be enhanced. 

Residences on the western edge of Bega, where the bypass would be located, would 

be subject to increased visual, and noise impacts. No transformation of the locality is 

anticipated as a result of the proposal. 

c. Any environmental impact on the ecosystems of the locality? 

The proposal would include the removal of approximately 12 hectares of nativedominated 

pasture including 6.95 hectares of Lowland Grassy Woodlands endangered 

ecological community. In the northern section, drainage lines feed into Freshwater 

wetland endangered ecological communities. Mitigation measures require that natural 

hydrological regimes are retained as much as possible and water quality risks (from 

chemical spills or sediment) are managed. In the southern section, resources that would 

be removed include mature hollow-bearing trees, which are a declining resource under 

pressure from development in the locality. Loss of hollows would be mitigated by 

installation of nest boxes.. 

The loss of this vegetation is not considered to result in significant impacts to any 

threatened species (refer to section 6.1). Mitigation measures include noxious weed 

control and revegetation of disturbed areas. 

21/18937/157350 



Short-term 

negative 

Long-term 

positive and 

negative 

Long-term 

positive 

Long-term 

negative 

Long-term minor 

negative

Factor Impact 

d. Any reduction of the aesthetic, recreational, scientific or other 

environmental quality or value of a locality? 

There would be a minor reduction in the aesthetic quality of the locality due to the 

removal of vegetation and increase in road infrastructure on the western side of Bega in 

an area that is currently undeveloped. Mitigation measures would be implemented to 

reduce visual and noise impacts. Revegetation of disturbed soils would be undertaken 

as part of the works program. The amenity of the Bega CBD and the existing highway, 

would be improved after the bypass is in operation, as a result of less traffic, enhanced 

safety and reduced noise in these areas. 

e. Any effect on a locality, place or building having aesthetic, 

anthropological, archaeological, architectural, cultural, historical, scientific or 

social significance or other special value for present or future generations? 

The proposal would destroy Aboriginal artefacts within the soil profile in the proposal 

footprint. The archaeological deposit is assessed to be of low scientific significance and 

does not surpass significance thresholds which would act to preclude impacts. A 

Section 90 consents has been be obtained for the Aboriginal heritage items. Refer to 

sections 6.7.1 and 6.9 for heritage impact assessments. 

The view to the Bega River and associated wetlands was considered of potential 

significance. Measures to retain the drainage line hydrology feeding natural lagoons are 

proposed however, substantial cut and fill works would affect the ridgelines overlooking 

the wetlands. Visual amenity impact mitigation and rehabilitation measures to restore 

disturbed areas are part of the proposal. 

There are no identified non-Aboriginal heritage items located within the proposal 

footprint. Most of the adjacent residences are of modern construction. Any buildings in 

the area of any potential heritage significance would not be impacted by the proposal. 

f. Any impact on the habitat of protected fauna (within the meaning of the 

National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974)? 

Native fauna would be impacted through removal of habitat including six hollow-bearing 

trees. If hollow bearing trees are not able to be retained then nest boxes would be 

installed in remaining trees to mitigate the loss of hollows. The site is already 

fragmented for all but highly mobile fauna such as bats and birds. Further fragmentation 

of habitat as a result of vegetation removal is unlikely to have a significant impact to 

local fauna. Refer to section 6.1 for an assessment of impacts to fauna habitat. 

g. Any endangering of any species of animal, plant or other form of life, 

whether living on land, in water or in the air? 

The proposal would remove habitat for a number of species. Assessments of 

Significance have been undertaken for a number of threatened species known to be 

present in the locality (refer to section 6.1). 

These assessments found that there would be no significant impact to any of these 

species and therefore the species would not be endangered as a result of the works 

(refer to Appendix C). No Assessments of Significance were considered to be 

warranted for threatened flora species. 

Impacts to non-listed native fauna have been assessed. It is considered unlikely that 

high rates of roadside fatality would occur for wombats, or other fauna such as 

kangaroos and wallabies. 

21/18937/157350 




negative 


negative 

Long-term 

negative 

Nil

Factor Impact 

h. Any long-term effects on the environment? 

The proposal would have a positive long-term impact through improved reduced vehicle 

numbers through the Bega CBD and the capacity for the road to better accommodate 

heavy vehicles as well as increased vehicle numbers. It would have a positive long-term 

impact on road safety by reducing the number of traffic movements and directing 

through traffic away from the centre of Bega. It would thereby improve the amenity of 

the centre of Bega, for businesses, residents and tourists alike. 

Long-term negative impacts include an increase in the amount of road infrastructure in 

Bega in what is now pasture overlooking the Bega River and natural lagoons. The 

proposal would also impact on biodiversity through the removal of approximately 12 

hectares of native-dominated pasture and clearing of Lowland Grassy Woodland 

endangered ecological community. Six hollow-bearing trees would be removed however 

hollows lost would be mitigated by installation of nest boxes.. 

i. Any degradation of the quality of the environment? 

The proposal would remove approximately 12 hectares of native-dominated pasture 

and six hollow-bearing trees. The site would be rehabilitated post-construction which 

would reduce the risk of long-term degradation to the environment. Mitigation measures 

would be implemented to control and prevent spread of noxious weeds during 

construction. 

Water quality could be reduced as a result of pollutants such as sediment, soil nutrients 

and waste entering drainage lines, particularly during high rain events. Spillage of fuel 

during refuelling and leakage of hydraulic and lubricating oil from plant and equipment 

or rinse water from plant washing and concrete slurries would also have the potential to 

enter drainage lines. Mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce impacts to 

water quality. Theses are provided in section 6.10.3. 

Air quality and noise impacts would be associated with the construction phase. Noise 

attenuation forms part of the proposal for dwellings which would be adversely affected 

by noise from the operational bypass. 

j. Any risk to the safety of the environment? 

There is potential for traffic safety to be reduced during construction however as the 

bypass has only two major tie in points with the existing Princes Highway alignment, 

these are considered manageable. Traffic management measures include the 

development of a Traffic Management Plan to address safety risks. 

The proposal would increase the long-term safety of the road by reducing the number of 

turning movements, separating through traffic and thereby reducing overall vehicle 

numbers in the centre of Bega. 

k. Any reduction in the range of beneficial uses of the environment? 

There would be a minor impact on agricultural and residential land uses in the road 

corridor, however the majority of this land has been vacant for some time. The plans to 

develop this bypass are well known and have been well communicated to the 

community. 

l. Any pollution of the environment? 

The proposal would result in minor short term air pollution from plant and machinery 

required for construction and potential dust generation. Air quality could be reduced in 

the long term from current conditions on the western edge of the town, which is 

currently undeveloped agricultural land. 

There is a potential for chemical and fuels spills to occur during construction which 

includes pollution events at waterways. The risk of spills would be managed through the 

implementation of a spill management plan to include the use of spill kits, worker 

training and erosion and sediment controls. 

21/18937/157350 



Long-term 

positive and 

negative 

Short term 

negative, 

Long term nil 

Potential shortterm 

negative 

Long-term 

Positive 


negative 

Short-term and 

long-term minor 

negative

Factor Impact 

m. Any environmental problems associated with the disposal of waste? 

It is not anticipated that there would be any contaminated waste as a result of the 

proposal. Other waste streams generated during construction are common and would 

pose no difficulty in their disposal. Waste would be recycled wherever possible. This 

includes the reuse of excess cut material. 

n. Any increased demands on resources (natural or otherwise) that are, or 

are likely to become, in short supply? 

All resources required for the proposal are readily available and are not in short supply. 

o. Any cumulative environmental effect with other existing or likely future 

activities? 

Traffic efficiencies and the increased safety for motorists on the new bypass and within 

the town centre, where traffic pressure would be decreased, constitute long-term 

cumulative benefits of the proposal. The proposal is also part of a series of upgrades to 

the Princes Highway to improve safety on the NSW road network. 

Local developments proposed include Bega civic space and retail development in the 

centre of Bega, two blocks east of the proposed bypass route, as well as residential and 

industrial developments proposed at the southern section of the route. 

Should construction timetables overlap, there would be cumulative noise, visual, air 

quality and traffic/access impacts for the community in these areas. Particularly relevant 

to the southern section, increased development places increasing pressure on remnant 

vegetation which provides important resources (water sources, hollows) for the wide 

ranging fauna able to utilise these fragmented landscapes. Mitigation measures have 

been provided throughout this REF to minimise any potential impacts of the proposal. 

21/18937/157350 



Nil 

Nil 

Long-term 

negative and 

positive

Matters of National Environmental Significance 

Under the environmental assessment provisions of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity 

Conservation Act 1999, the following Matters of National Environmental Significance are required to be 

considered to assist in determining whether the proposal should be referred to the Australian 

Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. 

Factor Impact 

a. Any impact on a World Heritage property? 

The proposal would not have any impact on a World Heritage property. There are 

no World Heritage properties within 10 kilometres of the proposal site. 

b. Any impact on a National Heritage place? 

The proposal would not have any impact on a National Heritage place. There are 

no National Heritage places within 10 kilometres of the proposal site. 

c. Any impact on a wetland of international importance? 

The proposal would not have any impact on a wetland of international importance. 

There are no wetlands of international importance within 10 kilometres of the 

proposal site. 

d. Any impact on a listed threatened species or communities? 

There is some potential for impact to green and golden bell frog (Litoria aurea), 

should a population occur in the study area. Potential effects include habitat 

degradation of wetlands downstream from the proposal. An EPBC Assessment of 

Significance was undertaken in respect of the green and golden bell frog (refer 

Appendix C). Given the low potential for a population of green and gold bell frog to 

occur in the vicinity of the proposal site, and the mitigation measures to minimise 

degradation processes (such as storm water and sedimentation control – refer to 

section 6.10.3 of this report) that could impact marginal habitat of this species, it 

was considered unlikely that the proposal would have a substantial impact on the 

species. 

e. Any impacts on listed migratory species? 

There is potential for impact to great egrets (Ardea alba), which utilise the wetlands 

downslope of the proposal. Degradation of habitat could occur from the effects on 

water quality, erosion and sedimentation as well as hydrological changes, during 

construction and operation of the proposal. The works may also exacerbate 

existing weed infestations. Standard impact mitigation measures would reduce 

effects to great egret, including weed control and erosion and sediment controls 

(refer to section 6.1.4 of this report). An EPBC Assessment of Significance was 

undertaken in respect of the great egret (refer Appendix C), which concluded the 

proposal was unlikely to have a substantial impact on this species. 

f. Any impact on a Commonwealth marine area? 

The proposal would not have any impact on a Commonwealth marine area. No 

Commonwealth marine areas occur within or within 10 kilometres of the proposal 

site. 

g. Does the proposal involve a nuclear action (including uranium 

mining)? 

The proposal does not involve a nuclear action. 

21/18937/157350 



Nil 

Nil 

Nil 

Negligible 

Negligible 

Nil 

Nil

Factor Impact 

h. Additionally, any impact (direct or indirect) on Commonwealth land? 

There are two areas of Commonwealth land within 10 kilometres of the proposal 

site, however neither occur within the proposal site. The proposal would therefore 

not directly impact Commonwealth land, and is unlikely to indirectly impact 

Commonwealth land. 

21/18937/157350 



Nil

GHD 

133 Castlereagh St Sydney NSW 2000 

- 

T: 2 9239 7100 F: 2 9239 7199 E: sydmail@ghd.com.au 

© GHD 2010 

This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose 

for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. 

Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited. 

Document Status 

Rev 

No. 

Author 

21/18937/157350 

B James 

A Webb 

Reviewer Approved for Issue 

Name Signature Name Signature Date 

K Smallwood 

B Marshall 



M Roser 

15.09.10

Bega - RTA - NSW Government

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?