Monorail Removal Project - Review of Environmental Factors (REF)

Table C.1 Clause 228 considerationsClause 228 factor Summary of results Potentialimpact(a) Any environmentalimpact on a community(b) Any transformation of alocality(c) Any environmentalimpact on the ecosystemsof the locality(d) Any reduction of theaesthetic, recreational,scientific or otherenvironmental quality orvalue of a locality(e) Any effect on a locality,place or building havingaesthetic, anthropological,archaeological,architectural, cultural,historical, scientific orsocial significance or otherspecial value for present orfuture generationsf) Any impact on the habitatof protected fauna (withinthe meaning of the NationalParks and Wildlife Act1974)(g) Any endangering of anyspecies of animal, plant orother form of life, whetherliving on land, in water or inthe air(h) Any long-term effectson the environmentThe proposal has the potential to result in amenity relatedimpacts in the vicinity of the works. These impacts wouldbe managed through the implementation of the proposalenvironmental management plan. No long termenvironmental impacts are predicted.Both positive and negative impacts to the aesthetics andcharacter of the study area were identified. In the shortterm, the proposal would result in impacts as a result ofremoval works and the presence of machinery and plant. Inthe long term, removal of the Monorail would provide apositive visual impact on the locality.No ecosystem impacts were identified.The proposal had the potential to impact on amenity in theshort term as a result of the removal activities. The limitednature of the proposed surface works would limit thepotential significance of these impacts. In the long term, nonegative impacts on the aesthetic, recreational, scientific orother environmental qualities of the study area werepredicted, with the exception of the positive change to thevisual character of the area.There are a number of heritage listed items along theproposal site and in the study area, including the Stateheritage listed Pyrmont Bridge. Works in the vicinity ofheritage items would be carefully managed to minimise thepotential for impacts to these items. If appropriatelymanaged, works on Pyrmont Bridge are unlikely to impacton the significance of the bridge. Removal of the Monorailstructure has the potential to positively impact on thebridge. An approval for works to the bridge has beensought under section 60 of the Heritage Act.No impacts on protected fauna within the meaning of theNational Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 were predicted.The proposal would not endanger any species of plant,animal or other form of life.The local community has identified the potential for localimpacts on amenity during the proposal. The REF includesrecommendations for management measures to addressthe issues identified. No long term impacts on theenvironment have been identified.Short term –negativeLong term –noneShort term –negativeLong term –positiveNoneShort term –minor negativeLong term –none, other thanpotential changein characterShort term –none ifmanagementmeasuresapplied.Mitigationsmeasures arerecommendedby the REFLong term –positiveNoneNoneMitigationmeasuresrecommendedby the REF inrelation to shortterm impacts.GHD | Report for Transport for NSW - Monorail Removal Project, 21/21903