Monorail Removal Project - Review of Environmental Factors (REF)

More documents

Recommendations

Info

This indicates that the proposal would have only a minor impact in terms of the loss of a form oftransport infrastructure. Alternative forms of transport and other infrastructure, such as the lightrail, buses, ferries, pedestrian walkways and cycleways, would continue to be available andwould mitigate the significance of the long term impacts of the proposal. It is not considered thatthe removal of the Monorail would impact on how people experience Sydney.However, people with mobility impairments may experience this impact to a greater extent. Thecontinued increase in accessibility of other forms of public transport and footpaths in Sydneywould mitigate this impact to some extent. Further consultation with the Transport for NSWAccessible Transport Advisory Committee during development of the detailed methodology;provision of adequate notification before works commence; and the provision of advice onalternative arrangements to address accessibility, would also mitigate impacts.Analysis of historic public opinion, recent community consultation and Monorail user datasuggests that the role of and value placed on the Monorail by Sydney residents and businessesis not substantial. Anecdotal evidence indicates the use of the Monorail as an activity duringschool holidays for Sydney families with children. Alternatives such as the light rail and CBDheavy rail, buses and ferries would continue to be available.Further information on the potential long term impacts of the proposal in terms of transport andaccess is provided in section 7.3.11.Any increase in street level activity, including pedestrian activity between Darling Harbour andthe CBD as a result of the Monorail removal, would have the potential for a positive socialimpact by increasing surveillance and safety.Economic impactsThe level of trade for some businesses, particularly those in close proximity to the Monorailstations, may experience a decline in customers. Any businesses that rely on passing trade toand from Monorail stations are expected to experience the greatest potential negative economicimpact. The land use survey undertaken to inform this assessment indicates that many retailspaces adjacent to some Monorail stations are already vacant and there is a relatively lownumber of supporting businesses around Monorail stations (refer section 11.2.3). This isparticularly true for the retail spaces adjacent to City Centre Station. Chinatown Station also hassome vacancies in retail spaces and many of the retail outlets only operate in the evening whenthe Monorail does not service this station. As the number of residents, visitors and workers whouse the Monorail each day is relatively small (compared with the number of residents, visitorsand workers on any day), this is considered to be a minor economic impact.Any increase in street level pedestrian activity after the removal of the Monorail has the potentialto have a minor positive impact on street level businesses.Although the Monorail provides a means of access and/or is promoted as a means of access tosome businesses (e.g. tourist attractions at Darling Harbour or the Exhibition Centre carpark),these businesses also promote other means of access. This factor, together with the relativelylow numbers of daily Monorail customers, means that the loss of the Monorail is unlikely toresult in a significant impact to these businesses.11.4 Mitigation measuresThe following management and mitigation measures would be implemented to minimise socioeconomicimpacts:• Community and stakeholder consultation would continue to be undertaken in accordancewith the Community and Stakeholder Engagement Strategy.112 | GHD | Transport for NSW - Monorail Removal Project REF
• Further consultation with relevant stakeholders would be undertaken during developmentof the detailed methodology.• Further consultation with the Transport for NSW Accessible Transport AdvisoryCommittee would be undertaken during development of detailed methodology• Potentially impacted stakeholders, and those with an interest in the proposal, wouldcontinue to be consulted in accordance with the Community and StakeholderEngagement Strategy described in section 6. This would include notifications and adviceregarding alternative arrangements to address accessibility.• Contact details for a 24-hour project response line, project infoline and email addresswould be provided for ongoing stakeholder contact throughout the proposal• A plan to record, relocate or decommission public artworks attached to the Monorail(depending on their form) would be developed and implemented.GHD | Transport for NSW - Monorail Removal Project REF | 113
Page 1:
Monorail Removal ProjectReview of E
Page 4 and 5:
This report has been prepared by GH
Page 6 and 7:
6. Community and stakeholder consul
Page 8 and 9:
Table 8.2 Listed heritage items wit
Page 11 and 12:
Glossary of termsTermArterial roadB
Page 13 and 14:
Executive summaryOverviewThis revie
Page 15 and 16:
landowner. The concrete and reinfor
Page 17 and 18:
What were the key issues raised?Key
Page 19 and 20:
approval under the Heritage Act, wo
Page 21 and 22:
BeforePhotomontage 2 - View along P
Page 23:
espond to community feedback in a s
Page 27 and 28:
1. Introduction1.1 OverviewIn March
Page 29 and 30:
1.3 Purpose of the REFFor an activi
Page 31:
NORTHSYDNEYMilsonsPointPort Jackson
Page 34 and 35:
Station Location Ownership Position
Page 36 and 37:
300PYRMONTHarboursideMurray StreetI
Page 38 and 39:
(3) Development for the purposes of
Page 40 and 41:
3.4.2 Roads Act 1993Under section 1
Page 42 and 43:
Protected matterMatter located with
Page 45:
Part B The proposalGHD | Transport
Page 48 and 49:
As a result of these factors, the N
Page 50 and 51:
would be difficult to increase the
Page 52 and 53:
Further information on these work c
Page 54 and 55:
Figure 5.2 Concept for phase 1 of w
Page 56 and 57:
• Subject to finalising the detai
Page 58 and 59:
• Phase 3 - Removal work• Phase
Page 60 and 61:
• Phase 5 - Make good at street l
Page 62 and 63:
ParameterPhase 5 Make good at stree
Page 64 and 65:
• removal of contractor’s equip
Page 66 and 67:
Work phasePhase 3 - Removalworks ab
Page 68 and 69:
5.8.2 Work hoursBackgroundThe ‘In
Page 70 and 71:
Work component/task Approximate dur
Page 72 and 73:
6.2 Consultation during REF prepara
Page 74 and 75:
Meeting type Agencies Date ofmeetin
Page 76 and 77:
ActivityWebsiteLetter to government
Page 79:
Part C Environmental impact assessm
Page 82 and 83:
also supported by passenger surveys
Page 84 and 85:
Figure 7.1 Local transport network
Page 86 and 87:
Table 7.2 Cycle infrastructure in t
Page 88 and 89: Maintenance Workshop. Traffic gener
Page 90 and 91: arrive at the site before 10pm and
Page 92 and 93: 7.3.10 Potential long term impactsT
Page 94 and 95: - Detours associated with road clos
Page 96 and 97: Table 8.1 Heritage items in the stu
Page 98 and 99: Table 8.2 Listed heritage items wit
Page 100 and 101: Map ref(figure8.1)Item name Address
Page 102 and 103: minimise potential impacts on herit
Page 104 and 105: • A detailed work method statemen
Page 106 and 107: • Darling Park Station.Noise moni
Page 108 and 109: As the work duration would be limit
Page 110 and 111: ReceiverExternal noisecriteria (dBA
Page 112 and 113: Table 9.6 Assessment of impacts of
Page 114 and 115: Table 9.8 Heritage listed buildings
Page 116 and 117: CriteriaL Aeq(15 min) noise level a
Page 118 and 119: Table 10.1Urban character areasUrba
Page 120 and 121: 10.2.2 Visual elements of the Monor
Page 122 and 123: Darling Drive facing westDarling Dr
Page 124 and 125: Table 10.2Long term visual impactsU
Page 126 and 127: Existing viewPotential view followi
Page 129 and 130: 11. Socio-economics and land use11.
Page 131 and 132: Table 11.1Overview of land uses in
Page 133 and 134: King StreetDarlingHarbourYork Stree
Page 135 and 136: There are approximately 20,000 busi
Page 137: Long term impactsThe main potential
Page 142 and 143: • resource use and materials• p
Page 144 and 145: Relevant sustainability targets and
Page 146 and 147: Approach to management of wasteThe
Page 148 and 149: continuous improvement and innovati
Page 150 and 151: • Methods for management of emiss
Page 152 and 153: There is potential for lead paint t
Page 154 and 155: The works undertaken as part of the
Page 157: Part D ConclusionGHD | Transport fo
Page 160 and 161: selected to undertake work would be
Page 162 and 163: IDnumberMitigation measureSensitive
Page 164 and 165: IDnumberMitigation measurepre-start
Page 166 and 167: IDnumberMitigation measureM.1 The p
Page 168 and 169: • development of a detailed waste
Page 171: 16. Reference listAustralian Bureau
Page 175: Appendix A Photographic inventoryGH
Page 178 and 179: Covered walkway from Convention Sta
Page 180 and 181: Galeries Victoria StationGaleries V
Page 183 and 184: Table B.1 Heritage items in the stu
Page 185 and 186: Map ref(figure8.1)Item name and add
Page 187 and 188: Map ref(figure8.1)Item name and add
Page 189:
Appendix C Clause 228 and ecologica
Page 192 and 193:
Clause 228 factor Summary of result
Page 195 and 196:
GHD133 Castlereagh St Sydney NSW 20
show all

Monorail Removal Project - Review of Environmental Factors (REF)

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?