Monorail Removal Project - Review of Environmental Factors (REF)

More documents

Recommendations

Info

IDnumberMitigation measureM.1 The potential for cumulative impacts would be further considered as the methodology developsand as further information regarding the location and timing of other potential developments isreleased.M.2 Transport for NSW would consult with the proponents of other major projects in the area, SHFA,City of Sydney and RMS to develop strategies to address potential cumulative traffic and transportimpacts.M.3 Works would be scheduled within the proposal site to minimise the potential for cumulative impactswith any other projects in the same area.140 | GHD | Transport for NSW - Monorail Removal Project REF
15. ConclusionThis section provides a conclusion to the REF, including a summary of the proposal justificationand the findings of the REF.15.1 Justification of the proposalThe Monorail was originally developed in conjunction with the redevelopment of the DarlingHarbour area, to provide access between Darling Harbour and its facilities, and the CBD.The NSW Government has committed to a precinct-wide renewal and expansion of theentertainment, convention and exhibition facilities at Darling Harbour. In 2011, the Governmentcalled for expressions of interest to build, operate and maintain a new convention, exhibitionand entertainment precinct at Darling Harbour (the Sydney International Convention, Exhibitionand Entertainment Precinct). In June 2012, the Government announced that the Monorail willneed to be removed to facilitate development of the precinct, as part of the Monorail is locatedwithin this precinct. Development of the precinct will involve removal of all existing facilitieslocated within the precinct, including the Monorail.This REF considers the potential impacts of the proposal to remove the Monorail (the SydneyMonorail Removal project). It has been prepared by GHD on behalf of Transport for NSW toassist with determination of the proposal under Part 5 of the EP&A Act.15.2 Summary of REF findingsThe REF has considered the potential impacts of the proposal. It has been prepared inaccordance with Part 5 of the EP&A Act, and in particular, the requirements of section 111 ofthe Act, and clause 228 of the Regulation. The REF has documented the potentialenvironmental impacts of the proposal, considering both potential positive and negative impacts,and recommending management and mitigation measures to protect the environment whererequired.15.2.1 Clause 228 considerationsClause 228 of the Regulation specifies the matters that must be taken into account, for thepurposes of Part 5 of the Act, when consideration is being given to the likely impact of anactivity on the environment. The potential impacts of the proposal have been considered insections 7 to 13 of the REF. The clause 228 matters and how they relate to the proposal areconsidered in Table C.1 of Appendix C. The consistency of the proposal with the objects of theEP&A Act is also considered in Appendix C.15.2.2 Ecologically sustainable developmentAs noted in section 12, Transport for NSW is committed to ensuring that its projects areimplemented in a manner that is consistent with the principles of sustainable development.These principles would be incorporated into the management systems for the proposal.Section 12 identifies that the main opportunities to incorporate sustainability principles into theproposal are:• reusing infrastructure that forms part of the Monorail• reusing existing structures where possible (such as stations)• maximising recycling and minimising waste to landfill where reuse is not possible• reducing quantity of Portland cement in footpath restoration works where possibleGHD | Transport for NSW - Monorail Removal Project REF | 141
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 and 138: Long term impactsThe main potential
Page 139: • Further consultation with relev
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 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?