Regional Rail Fleet Project Dubbo Maintenance Facility · 2019-05-21 · Regional Rail Fleet Project Transport for NSW . Document control Status: Final for public display . ... 3.3

Regional Rail Fleet ProjectDubbo Maintenance FacilityReview of Environmental Factors Volume 1

August 2018

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors Regional Rail Fleet Project Transport for NSW

Document control

Status: Final for public display

Date of issue: 1 August 2018

Version: 4.0

Document authors: Jacobs (Group) Australia Pty Ltd

Document reviewers: TfNSW

© Transport for NSW

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors i

Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Overview of the Proposal ................................................................................. 1

1.2 Location of the Proposal .................................................................................. 2

1.3 Purpose of this Review of Environmental Factors ............................................ 2

2 Need for the Proposal ................................................................................... 5

2.1 Strategic justification ........................................................................................ 5

2.2 Site selection ................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Maintenance facility design options ................................................................. 7

3 Description of the Proposal .......................................................................... 9

3.1 Overview of the Proposal ................................................................................. 9

3.2 Components of the Proposal ......................................................................... 11

3.3 Land requirements and property acquisition .................................................. 20

3.4 Engineering constraints ................................................................................. 22

3.5 Design standards ........................................................................................... 22

3.6 Construction activities .................................................................................... 22

3.7 Train completion works .................................................................................. 28

3.8 Operation and maintenance .......................................................................... 28

4 Statutory considerations ............................................................................ 31

4.1 Commonwealth legislation ............................................................................. 31

4.2 NSW legislation and regulation ...................................................................... 31

4.3 State Environmental Planning Policies .......................................................... 34

4.4 Local environmental planning instrument and development controls ............. 34

4.5 NSW Government policies and strategies...................................................... 37

4.6 Ecologically sustainable development ........................................................... 38

5 Community and stakeholder consultation ................................................. 39

5.1 Stakeholder consultation during concept design ............................................ 39

5.2 Consultation requirements under the ISEPP .................................................. 39

5.3 Consultation strategy ..................................................................................... 40

5.4 Public display ................................................................................................ 41

5.5 Aboriginal community involvement ................................................................ 42

5.6 Ongoing consultation ..................................................................................... 42

6 Environmental impact assessment ............................................................ 43

6.1 Traffic and transport ...................................................................................... 43

6.2 Landscape and visual amenity ....................................................................... 56

6.3 Noise and vibration ........................................................................................ 69

6.4 Aboriginal heritage ....................................................................................... 101

6.5 Non-Aboriginal heritage ............................................................................... 103

6.6 Property, land use and socio-economic ....................................................... 110

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors ii

6.7 Biodiversity .................................................................................................. 123

6.8 Contamination, landform, geology and soils ................................................ 134

6.9 Hydrology, flooding and water quality .......................................................... 139

6.10 Air quality .................................................................................................... 150

6.11 Waste reduction and resource recovery ...................................................... 157

6.12 Climate change ........................................................................................... 159

6.13 Cumulative impacts ..................................................................................... 165

7 Environmental management ..................................................................... 167

7.1 Environmental management plans .............................................................. 167

7.2 Mitigation measures .................................................................................... 167

8 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 175

9 References ................................................................................................. 177

Appendices Appendix A Consideration of matters of national environmental significance

Appendix B Consideration of clause 228

Appendix C Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Heritage Assessment

Appendix D Traffic Impact Assessment

Appendix E Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Appendix F Noise and Vibration Assessment

Appendix G Biodiversity Assessment Report

Appendix H Phase 1 Preliminary Site Investigation Report

Appendix I Air Quality Impact Assessment

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors iii

Figures Figure 1-1 The Proposal ..................................................................................................... 3 Figure 1-2 The Dubbo Regional context ................................................................................ 4 Figure 2-1 MCA process logic chain ...................................................................................... 6 Figure 3-1 Dubbo maintenance Facility site layout (subject to detailed design) ................... 10 Figure 3-2 Typical rail maintenance facility interior .............................................................. 11 Figure 3-3 Typical train wash building interior ..................................................................... 12 Figure 3-4 Access road intersection with Wingewarra Street ............................................... 15 Figure 3-5 Internal road, car parking and loading dock layout ............................................. 17 Figure 3-6 Proposed land acquisition .................................................................................. 21 Figure 3-7 Indicative project schedule ................................................................................. 24 Figure 4-1 LEP zoning map................................................................................................. 36 Figure 5-1 Planning approval and consultation process for the Proposal ............................ 41 Figure 6-1 Proposal Site access 1 on White Street (eastern) .............................................. 45 Figure 6-2 Proposal Site access 2 on White Street (western) .............................................. 45 Figure 6-3 Proposal Site internal access road ..................................................................... 46 Figure 6-4 Passenger services to Dubbo Station ................................................................ 47 Figure 6-5 Viewpoints assessed in the visual impact assessment ....................................... 57 Figure 6-6 Character of surrounding industrial/business area ............................................. 59 Figure 6-7 View from the Proposal Site looking west........................................................... 60 Figure 6-8 View from the Proposal Site looking south ......................................................... 60 Figure 6-9 View from the Proposal Site looking north .......................................................... 61 Figure 6-10 Receivers, noise monitoring locations and noise catchment area .................... 72 Figure 6-11 Location of non-Aboriginal heritage items near the Proposal Site .................. 107 Figure 6-12 Boradze depot located to the north west of the Proposal Site ........................ 108 Figure 6-13 Study area for the socio-economic assessment ............................................. 112 Figure 6-14 Social infrastructure near the Proposal .......................................................... 118 Figure 6-15 Fuzzy Box Woodland (PCT 201) .................................................................... 126 Figure 6-16 Derived grassland (PCT 796) ......................................................................... 126 Figure 6-17 Plant community types identified within the Proposal Site .............................. 127 Figure 6-18 Remnant Fuzzy Box (Eucalyptus conica) at the Proposal Site ....................... 129 Figure 6-19 Drums in fenced area near ARTC entrance ................................................... 135 Figure 6-20 Stockpile of rail sleepers and other waste materials in centre of site .............. 136 Figure 6-21 Earthen fill bund and materials stockpiles ...................................................... 136 Figure 6-22 Location of monitoring bores, water table contours and GDEs ....................... 142 Figure 6-23 Indicative groundwater dewatering and drawdown areas ............................... 146 Figure 6-24 Representative air quality receiver locations .................................................. 153

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors iv

Tables Table 3-1 Dubbo Maintenance Facility track functionality .................................................... 13 Table 3-2 Indicative construction and commissioning program and activities ...................... 23 Table 4-1 Other legislation applicable to the Proposal ......................................................... 32 Table 4-2 Relevant land use zones and zone objectives ..................................................... 35 Table 4-3 NSW Government policies and strategies applicable to the Proposal .................. 37 Table 5-1 Infrastructure SEPP consultation requirements ................................................... 39 Table 6-1 LoS criteria for intersections ................................................................................ 44 Table 6-2 Existing intersection performance ....................................................................... 50 Table 6-3 Intersection performance during construction (2020) ........................................... 52 Table 6-4 Induced train movement passing through railway level crossings ........................ 54 Table 6-5 Intersection performance with and without the Proposal in 2024 ......................... 54 Table 6-6 Landscape character and visual impact grading matrix ....................................... 57 Table 6-7 Viewpoints from around the Proposal Site ........................................................... 62 Table 6-8 Visual impact assessment for construction .......................................................... 65 Table 6-9 Visual impact assessment during operation ........................................................ 66 Table 6-10 Unattended noise monitoring results ................................................................. 71 Table 6-11 Ambient noise levels at monitoring location NM3 (Maple Court) ........................ 73 Table 6-12 Noise catchment areas ...................................................................................... 73 Table 6-13 Development of construction noise management levels .................................... 73 Table 6-14 Noise management levels for non-residential land uses .................................... 74 Table 6-15 Construction noise management levels ............................................................. 75 Table 6-16 Acceptable vibration dose values for intermittent vibration (m/s1.75) 1-80 Hz...... 76 Table 6-17 Vibration velocity for the evaluation of the effects of short term vibration (DIN) . 76 Table 6-18 Airborne residential noise trigger levels for rail line realignment ........................ 77 Table 6-19 Vibration criteria for rail traffic ............................................................................ 77 Table 6-20 Intrusiveness criteria for the Proposal ............................................................... 78 Table 6-21 Amenity noise levels – recommended noise levels ............................................ 78 Table 6-22 Predicted construction noise impacts at surrounding residential receivers ........ 80 Table 6-23 Predicted construction noise impacts at commercial receivers .......................... 85 Table 6-24 Predicted construction noise impacts at industrial receivers .............................. 86 Table 6-25 Predicted construction noise impacts at educational receivers .......................... 88 Table 6-26 Predicted construction noise impacts at place of worship (Salvation Army) ....... 89 Table 6-27 Predicted Lmax construction noise levels during night-time period ...................... 90 Table 6-28 Recommended safe setback distances for relevant plant .................................. 91 Table 6-29 Estimated construction vibration levels (building damage) ................................ 91 Table 6-30 Estimated construction vibration levels (human comfort) ................................... 92 Table 6-31 Maximise service frequency on project line ....................................................... 92 Table 6-32 Modelling predictions and measured noise levels .............................................. 93 Table 6-33 Summary of rail noise impacts at most affected residential receivers ................ 93 Table 6-34 Summary of rail noise impacts at most affected non-residential receivers ......... 94 Table 6-35 Airborne residential noise trigger levels for rail line realignment ........................ 94

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors v

Table 6-36 Predicted operational noise levels at residential receivers ................................. 96 Table 6-37 Listed heritage items within 500 metres of the Proposal Site ........................... 105 Table 6-38 Threatened ecological communities confirmed within the Proposal Site .......... 128 Table 6-39 Threatened flora species and their likelihood of occurrence ............................ 130 Table 6-40 Threatened fauna species with potential to be impacted ................................. 130 Table 6-41 Predicted loss of native vegetation from the Proposal ..................................... 131 Table 6-42 Initial contamination conceptual site model ..................................................... 138 Table 6-43 Median water quality Macquarie River ............................................................. 140 Table 6-44 Groundwater levels ......................................................................................... 143 Table 6-45 Groundwater bore details ................................................................................ 143 Table 6-46 Adopted pollutant background atmospheric concentrations ............................. 155 Table 6-47 Unmitigated risk of dust impacts risk ratings for the Proposal .......................... 156 Table 6-48 BOM weather station locations ........................................................................ 160 Table 6-49 Regional temperature summary for Trangie and Dubbo Airport ....................... 161 Table 6-50 Dubbo climate change projections .................................................................. 163 Table 6-51 Climate change projections for Dubbo - other climate variables ...................... 164 Table 7-1 Proposed mitigation measures .......................................................................... 167

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors vi

Abbreviations Term Meaning

ACM asbestos containing materials

AHD Australian Height Datum

AHIMS Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System

Approved Methods Approved Methods for Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW (EPA, 2016)

AQI Air Quality Index (EPA)

ARI average recurrence interval

ARTC Australian Rail Track Corporation

ASA Asset Standards Authority (refer to Definitions)

ASS acid sulfate soils

BAM biodiversity assessment method

BC Act Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW)

BCA Building Code of Australia

BTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene

CBD central business district

CCRA Climate Change Risk and Adaptation

CCTV closed circuit television

CEMP construction environmental management plan

CLM Act Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 (NSW)

CNVG Construction Noise and Vibration Guideline (TfNSW, 2018)

CNVMP construction noise and vibration management plan

CPTED crime prevention through environmental design

DBYD dial before you dig

DDA Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Commonwealth)

DoE Department of the Environment and Energy (Commonwealth)

DP&E Department of Planning and Environment (NSW)

DPI Department of Primary Industry (NSW)

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors vii

Term Meaning

EEC endangered ecological community

EMS environmental management system

EPA Environment Protection Authority

EP&A Act Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)

EP&A Regulation Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW)

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth)

EPI environmental planning instrument

EPL environment protection licence

ESD ecologically sustainable development (refer to Definitions)

FM Act Fisheries Management Act 1994 (NSW)

GDE groundwater dependent ecosystem

GHG greenhouse gas

Heritage Act Heritage Act 1977 (NSW)

HV high voltage

HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning

ICNG Interim Construction Noise Guideline (Department of Environment and Climate Change, 2009).

Infrastructure SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (NSW)

JSIP Jobs Skills and Industry Participation

JSIPAG Jobs Skills and Industry Participation Advisory Group

LEP local environmental plan

LGA local government area

LoS level of service

LV low voltage

LA1 The LA1 level is the noise level which is exceeded for one per cent of the sample period. During the sample period, the noise level is below the LA1 level for 99 per cent of the time.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors viii

Term Meaning

LA10 The LA10 level is the noise level that is exceeded for 10 per cent of the sample period. During the sample period, the noise level is below the LA10 level for 90 per cent of the time. The L A10 is a common noise descriptor for environmental noise and road traffic noise

LA90 Equivalent continuous sound level (LA90) is the average energy of the varying noise over the sample period and is equivalent to the level of a constant noise which contains the same energy as the varying noise environment. This measure is also a common measure of environmental noise and road traffic noise.

Leq 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 sound weighting of the noise measurement is commonly added, for example LAeq or LCeq.

LAmax The maximum noise level over a sample period is the maximum level, measured on fast response, during the sample period.

MCA multi criteria analysis

NARCLIM NSW and ACT Regional Climate Modelling project

NCA noise catchment area

NES national environmental significance

NHL National Heritage List

NMX noise management location

NML noise management level

Noxious Weeds Act Noxious Weeds Act 1993 (NSW)

NPW Act National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW)

NSW New South Wales

OEH Office of the Environment and Heritage

OOHW out of hours works

PAH polyaromatic hydrocarbons

PCT plant community type

PMx particulate matter (dust)

PSI Preliminary Site Investigation

PoEO Act Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW)

RailCorp (former) Rail Corporation of NSW

RAP remediation action plan

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors ix

Term Meaning

RBL rating background level (refer to definitions)

REF Review of Environmental Factors (this document)

RNP Road Noise Policy (EPA, 2011)

Roads Act Roads Act 1993 (NSW)

Roads and Maritime Roads and Maritime Services (NSW)

SEPP State environmental planning policy

SHI State Heritage Inventory

SHR State Heritage Register

SoHI statement of heritage impact

TfNSW Transport for NSW

TMP traffic management plan

TPZ tree protection zone

TSP total suspended particulates

UDP urban design plan

VDV vibration dose value

VOC volatile organic compound

VP viewpoint

WARR Act Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 (NSW)

WHL World Heritage List

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors x

Definitions Term Meaning

Asset Standards Authority

The ASA is an independent body within TfNSW, responsible for engineering governance, assurance of design safety, and ensuring the integrity of transport and infrastructure assets.

average recurrence interval

The likelihood of occurrence, expressed in terms of the long-term average number of years, between flood events as large as or larger than the design flood event. For example, floods with a discharge as large as or larger than the 100-year ARI flood will occur on average once every 100-years.

Contractor The entity appointed by TfNSW to design, build, finance and maintain the new train fleet and a new maintenance facility.

decanting The removal of waste liquids from trains.

detailed design Detailed design broadly refers to the process that the Contractor undertakes (should the Proposal proceed) to refine the concept design to a design suitable for construction (subject to TfNSW acceptance).

ecologically sustainable development

As defined by clause 7(4) Schedule 2 of the EP&A Regulation: ‘Development that uses, conserves and enhances the resources of the community so that ecological processes on which life depends are maintained, and the total quality of life, now and in the future, can be increased’.

feasible A work practice or abatement measure is feasible if it is capable of being put into practice or of being engineered and is practical to build given project constraints such as safety, maintenance and cost requirements.

ISCA IS Rating Tool The Infrastructure Sustainability (IS) rating scheme for infrastructure is developed and administered by the Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia (ISCA). The tool is Australia’s rating system for evaluating sustainability across planning, design, construction and operation of infrastructure development.

noise sensitive receiver

In addition to residential dwellings, noise sensitive receivers include, but are not limited to, hotels, entertainment venues, pre-schools and day care facilities, educational institutions (e.g. schools, TAFE colleges), health care facilities (e.g. nursing homes, hospitals), recording studios and places of worship/religious facilities (e.g. churches).

NSW Trains From 1 July 2013, NSW Trains became the new rail provider of services for regional rail customers.

out of hours works Defined as works outside standard construction hours (i.e. outside of 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday, 8am to 1pm Saturday and no work on Sundays/public holidays).

the Proponent A person or body proposing to carry out an activity under Part 5, Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act - in this instance, TfNSW.

the Proposal The construction and operation of the Dubbo Maintenance Facility.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors xi

Term Meaning

rail possession Rail possession is the term used to indicate that they have taken possession of the track (usually a block of track) for a specified period, so that no trains operate for a specified time. This is necessary to ensure the safety of workers and rail users.

rating background level

RBL refers to the median value of monitored background noise levels measured over each period.

reasonable Selecting reasonable measures from those that are feasible involves making a judgment to determine whether the overall benefits outweigh the overall adverse social, economic and environmental effects, including the cost of the measure.

sensitive receivers Land uses which are sensitive to potential noise, air and visual impacts, such as residential dwellings, schools and hospitals.

train completion works

The train completion works stage of the Proposal would comprise the fit out and finishing of trains received from the manufacturer. Activities would include the installation of interior fixtures, signage, electrical equipment and train control systems. Trains would also be tested and commissioned as part of this stage.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors xii

Executive summary Overview Transport for NSW (TfNSW) is the government agency responsible for the delivery of major transport infrastructure projects in NSW and is the proponent for the Dubbo Maintenance Facility (the Proposal). The Proposal is part of the Regional Rail Fleet Project.

This Review of Environmental Factors (REF) has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Proposal under the provisions of Division 5.1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

Description of the Proposal The key features of the Proposal are summarised as follows:

• Maintenance facility elements:

A maintenance facility building comprising three tracks to undertake maintenance activities, partly housed within a covered enclosure. The size of the building would be approximately 220 metres by 30 metres.

Wheel lathe – a separate building allowing for train wheels to be periodically machined using an underfloor wheel lathe.

Train wash – an enclosed structure comprising automated wash equipment for train sets with nearby waste water treatment plant.

• Administration building – a building comprising office facilities, kitchen, dining area and amenities.

• Security building.

• Storage area, loading dock and fuel delivery area – used for the delivery and storage of plant, equipment and fuel.

• Rail infrastructure works:

Realignment of the Main Western Line through the site.

Six maintenance rail tracks (three tracks within the maintenance facility building and three external).

A connection to the Main Western Line on the western side of the site.

Decanting and provisioning infrastructure.

• Road vehicle infrastructure:

Access roads throughout the site.

Staff car park.

• Power supply including a substation, and utility adjustments.

• Relocated detention basins.

• Earthworks.

Subject to approval, construction is expected to commence in 2019 and take around 30 months to complete. A detailed description of the Proposal is provided in Chapter 3 of this REF.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors xiii

Need for the Proposal The NSW Government has committed to replacing the existing passenger train fleet currently operating on the Regional Rail network.

As part of the procurement of the new Regional Rail Fleet, the development of a purpose built maintenance facility is required to provide a dedicated locality for the maintenance of the new Regional Rail Fleet.

The objectives of the Proposal are to deliver a new maintenance facility that would:

• Cater for future Regional Rail Fleet capacity requirements.

• Support commissioning of trains.

• Support operation of trains.

• Support train condition monitoring and maintenance requirements.

• Service the Regional Rail Fleet in a regional location.

Design options considered In 2015 a strategic options review of the NSW regional network was undertaken to consider potential maintenance facility locations that would support efficiency and improvement to the regional passenger rail network. To decentralise maintenance centres away from Sydney, a number of sites were considered on the Western, Southern, North Coast, and North Western NSW regional train lines. These sites were then considered in a preliminary desktop review of potential environmental, social, engineering, operational and economic considerations.

As a result, 14 sites were identified as suitable for further analysis. Each of the sites was further evaluated using a multi criteria analysis (MCA) which considered a range of economic, financial, technical, environmental and social criteria. This process further reduced the number of potential sites to eight for further analysis. The following stage further refined the analysis categories. Subsequently, Dubbo was ranked as the most suitable location for the regional maintenance facility and has been identified as the preferred location for the maintenance facility.

The existing regional fleet is serviced at three locations, namely Sydenham, Eveleigh and Broadmeadow. The existing facilities would not meet the NSW Government objective to service the new fleet in a regional location. Sydenham would continue to be used for stabling, servicing and unplanned minor maintenance of the new regional fleet. As such, the ‘do nothing’ option was not considered any further.

Following the identification of Dubbo as the preferred location, several design options for the new maintenance facility were developed and considered based on a number of key elements including gradients within the site and yard length. The outcome of this assessment identified that a number of the options were not feasible due to insufficient length being available for the maintenance yard or unsuitable gradients. The final preferred concept design of the new maintenance facility which best meet key criteria is described in this REF as the Proposal.

Statutory considerations The EP&A Act provides for the environmental impact assessment of development in NSW. Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act generally specifies the environmental impact assessment requirements for activities undertaken by public authorities, such as TfNSW, which do not require development consent under the EP&A Act.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors xiv

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (the Infrastructure SEPP) is the primary environmental planning instrument relevant to the Proposal. The Infrastructure SEPP is the key environmental planning instrument which determines that this Proposal is permissible without consent and therefore is to be assessed under Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act.

Clause 79 of the Infrastructure SEPP allows for the development of ‘rail infrastructure facilities’ by or on behalf of a public authority without consent on any land. Clause 78 defines ‘rail infrastructure facilities’ as including ‘facilities for the assembly, maintenance and stabling of rolling stock’.

As TfNSW is a public authority and the proposed activity falls within the definition of rail infrastructure facilities under the Infrastructure SEPP, the Proposal is permissible without consent. Consequently, the environmental impacts of the Proposal have been assessed by TfNSW under Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act.

This REF has been prepared to assess the construction and operational environmental impacts of the Proposal. The REF has been prepared in accordance with clause 228 of the Environment Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (the EP&A Regulation).

In accordance with section 5.5 of the EP&A Act, TfNSW, as the proponent and determining authority, must examine and take into account to the fullest extent possible all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment by reason of the proposed activity.

Chapter 6 of this REF presents the environmental impact assessment for the Dubbo Maintenance Facility, in accordance with these requirements.

Community and stakeholder consultation Under the Infrastructure SEPP, consultation is required with local councils or public authorities in certain circumstances, including where Council-managed infrastructure is affected. Consultation has been undertaken with Dubbo Regional Council, ARTC, Roads and Maritime and other stakeholders during the development of design options and the preferred option. Consultation with these stakeholders would continue through the detailed design and construction of the Proposal.

TfNSW is also proposing to undertake the following consultation activities for the Proposal:

• Place local newspaper advertisements to inform the community about the Proposal and invite feedback.

• Send out a direct notification to nearby residents and businesses.

• Host community drop in sessions:

Thursday 16 August 2018 from 4:00pm to 8:00pm at the Western Plains Cultural Centre (76 Wingewarra Street, Dubbo)

Saturday 18 August 2018 from 9:00am to 12:00pm at the Dubbo Regional Theatre (155 Darling Street, Dubbo)

• Place the Proposal on public display at the following locations:

Dubbo Regional Council (corner of Church and Darling Streets, Dubbo)

Dubbo Library (Corner Macquarie and Talbragar Streets, Dubbo)

TfNSW Office at Level 5, Tower A, Zenith Centre, 821 Pacific Highway, Chatswood

Online at https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects/current-projects/regional-rail

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors xv

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects/current-projects/regional-rail

Community consultation activities for the Proposal would be undertaken during the public display period of this REF. The REF would be displayed for a period of approximately three weeks. Further information about these specific activities is included in Section 5.4 of this REF.

A Project Infoline (1800 684 490) is also available for members of the public to make enquiries.

TfNSW would review and assess all feedback received during the public display period, prior to determining whether or not to proceed with the Proposal.

Should the Proposal proceed to construction, the community would be kept informed throughout the duration of the construction period.

Environmental impact assessment This REF identifies the potential environmental benefits and impacts of the Proposal and outlines mitigation measures to reduce the identified impacts.

The following key impacts have been identified should the Proposal proceed:

• Traffic and transport – impacts would primarily occur during the construction of the Proposal. The access road intersection with Wingewarra Street would be upgraded to a left in/left out intersection as part of the Proposal for operation. Operation of the Proposal would also result in increases to closures at rail level crossings at Fitzroy Street, Wheelers Lane and Sheraton Road.

• Landscape and visual character– impacts would include introducing larger buildings to the site. While they are larger, they are not dissimilar in scale to the existing buildings within the industrial area adjacent to the Proposal.

• Noise and vibration – construction of the project would result in minor exceedances of the construction noise criteria and disturbance to nearby residents and commercial premises. Rail operations would occur within noise management levels, however maintenance facility activities may lead to minor exceedances of daytime, evening and sleep disturbance criteria.

• Air quality – during construction of the project, the primary air quality impact risk would be airborne dust. Operational air quality impacts are anticipated to be negligible.

• Property, land use and socio-economic – construction of the Proposal would impact on the local amenity (i.e. air quality, noise, traffic and visual impact). However, the Proposal would have a positive long-term benefit to the quality of regional rail travel as well as provide long-term, Dubbo-based employment opportunities and opportunities for local businesses.

• Biodiversity – about 9.2 hectares of derived grassland of the NSW south western slopes would be cleared for the Proposal. This derived grassland would have supported the Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial Soils of the South Western Slopes, Darling Riverine Plains and Brigalow Belt South Bioregions which is listed as an endangered ecological community (EEC) under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act).

• Hydrology, flooding and groundwater – The preliminary flood impact assessment identified there would be a minor increase in flood levels on external properties and significant impact of flood levels within the Proposal Site and a section of the existing railway. A detailed flood impact assessment would be undertaken at subsequent design stages to quantify external flood impacts and mitigation measures would be included in the design to mitigate adverse impacts on people and external properties.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors xvi

The following environmental issues were also considered during the REF including: Aboriginal heritage, non-Aboriginal heritage, contamination, landform, geology and soils, air quality, climate change and sustainability, waste and resources management and cumulative impacts. Further information regarding these impacts is provided in Chapter 6. Impacts associated with these issues are considered relatively minor and able to be managed through the implementation of standard mitigation measures provided in Chapter 7.

Conclusion This REF has been prepared having regard to sections 5.5 to 5.7 of the EP&A Act, and clause 228 of the EP&A Regulation, to ensure that TfNSW takes into account to the fullest extent possible, all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment as a result of the Proposal.

The detailed design of the Proposal would also take into account the principles of ecologically sustainable development (ESD).

Should the Proposal proceed, any potential associated adverse impacts would be appropriately managed in accordance with the mitigation measures outlined in this REF. This would ensure the Proposal is delivered to maximise benefit to the community and minimise any adverse impacts on the environment. Any changes that could result in additional environment impact would be the subject of additional environmental impact assessment.

In considering the overall potential impacts and proposed mitigation measures outlined in this REF, the Proposal is unlikely to significantly affect the environment including critical habitat or threatened species, populations, ecological communities or their habitats. Accordingly, an Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the Proposal.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors xvii

1 Introduction Transport for NSW was established in 2011 as the lead agency for the integrated delivery of public transport services across all modes of transport in NSW. Transport for NSW is the proponent for the Dubbo Maintenance Facility (the Proposal), to be delivered by the Infrastructure and Services Division as part of the Regional Rail Fleet Project.

1.1 Overview of the Proposal

1.1.1 Regional Rail Project In March 2015, the NSW Government committed $35 million in funding to replace the existing passenger train fleet currently operating on the regional network.

The existing fleet operating on the regional network comprises three train types: XPT, XPLORER and Endeavour. The existing 60 XPT passenger cars (and 19 diesel locomotives) currently operate within the regional network, servicing customers between Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and the regional towns of Dubbo, Bathurst, Orange, Taree, Coffs Harbour, Grafton, Casino, Goulburn and Albury. The existing 23 XPLORER and 28 Endeavour trains serve other key regional destinations including Armidale, Moree, Griffith, Broken Hill, Canberra, the Hunter Valley and South Coast (between Kiama and Bomaderry).

The replacement of the Regional Rail Fleet includes the design, build, finance and maintenance of new train fleet, and the construction of a new maintenance facility in Dubbo.

Achieving sustainable outcomes are an important consideration of the Regional Rail Fleet Project. From a social perspective, the NSW Government has committed to boosting regional economic development by focusing on skills and job creation. Environmental objectives include achieving energy efficiency and reduced greenhouse gas emissions compared to the existing fleet, achieving climate resilience within the network, sustainable procurement (including engagement of environmentally and socially responsible suppliers) and the adoption of circular waste economy principles.

1.1.2 Dubbo Maintenance Facility As part of the procurement of the new Regional Rail Fleet, the development of a regional NSW maintenance facility is required to provide a dedicated space for the maintenance of the Regional Rail Fleet (the Proposal).

In August 2017, the NSW Government announced that the new maintenance facility would be built in Dubbo, subject to planning approval. This site was considered the preferred option due to its proximity to the existing railway network, minimal environmental and community impacts, and alignment with train operation requirements.

The proposed Dubbo Maintenance Facility would deliver long-term jobs to the Dubbo region including apprenticeships and traineeships.

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors 1

Definitions For the purposes of this assessment, the following definitions are used:

• The ‘Proposal’ refers to all the activities associated with the Dubbo Maintenance Facility during construction and operation. The Proposal is shown in Figure 1-1.

• The ‘Proposal Site’ refers to the area that would be impacted by the Proposal during construction and operation.

• The ‘study area’ refers to the Proposal Site and the wider area that may be indirectly impacted by the Proposal, which may vary slightly between specialist studies.

1.2 Location of the Proposal The Proposal would be located in Dubbo within the Dubbo Region local government area (LGA) (refer to Figure 1-1), approximately 300 kilometres north west of Sydney.

The Proposal Site is located approximately 700 metres east of Dubbo Station along the Main Western Line. The site is bordered by the rail corridor to the south, east and west, and to the north by industrial land uses, and residential properties. South of the rail corridor the area comprises low density residential properties. The Mitchell Highway is located approximately 600 metres south of the Proposal Site.

The existing nature of the Proposal Site comprises a grassed area with several lightly vegetated stands along the northern boundary. The site is currently used by ARTC, John Holland, BJ Engineering and Dubbo Regional Council as maintenance depot/materials storage areas.

The Dubbo Maintenance Facility would cover an area of approximately 25 hectares. The Proposal Site gently slopes from west to east at a gradient of 1.5 per cent.

1.3 Purpose of this Review of Environmental Factors This REF has been prepared by Transport for NSW to assess the potential impacts of the Dubbo Maintenance Facility Proposal. For the purposes of these works, Transport for NSW is the proponent and the determining authority under Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act.

The purpose of this REF is to describe the Proposal, to assess the likely impacts of the Proposal having regard to the provisions of section 5.5 of the EP&A Act, and to identify mitigation measures to reduce the likely impacts of the Proposal. This REF has been prepared in accordance with clause 228 of the EP&A Regulation.

This assessment has also considered the relevant provisions of other relevant environmental legislation, including the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act), Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act) and the Roads Act 1993 (Roads Act).

Having regard to the provisions of the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), this REF considers the potential for the Proposal to have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance (NES) or Commonwealth land, and the need to make a referral to the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Energy for any necessary approvals under the EPBC Act. Refer to Chapter 4 for more information on statutory considerations.


Figure 1-1 The Proposal


Figure 1-2 The Dubbo Regional context


2 Need for the Proposal This chapter discusses the need and objectives of the Proposal, having regard to the objectives of the Regional Rail Fleet Project and the specific objectives of the Proposal. This chapter also provides a summary of the options that have been considered during development of the Proposal and why the preferred option was chosen.

2.1 Strategic justification The XPT, XPLORER and Endeavour fleets are currently at or approaching their operational life expiry resulting in low levels of customer amenity and service reliability. The aging fleet and historical maintenance patterns of these trains have resulted in availability and reliability below target levels. Ongoing maintenance costs would increase significantly as the fleet continues to age, resulting in more frequent and higher levels of required maintenance.

The new Regional Rail Fleet would replace the entire NSW regional fleet including 60 XPT passenger cars (plus 19 diesel locomotives), 23 XPLORER and 28 Endeavour passenger cars. The new fleet would operate on the Western, Southern, North Coast, and North Western NSW region train lines and some interstate train lines. A new purpose-built train maintenance facility would be designed and constructed in regional NSW as part of the Proposal.

2.1.1 Objectives of the Proposal The specific objectives of the Proposal name are to deliver a new maintenance facility that would:





2.2 Site selection Dubbo was selected as the preferred location for the new maintenance facility after a comprehensive analysis of potential sites against a range of different criteria including operational, environmental, social, economic and construction considerations. The intent of the process was to find a site that would minimise the need for empty running trains, minimise capital and operating costs, reduce strain on the Sydney metropolitan network and encourage regional development.

2.2.1 Strategic site options In 2015 a strategic options review of the NSW regional network was undertaken to consider potential maintenance facility locations that would support efficiency and improvement to the regional passenger rail network. Potential locations were considered on the Western, Southern, North Coast, and North Western NSW regional train lines.

This review considered options within Sydney and options to de-centralise maintenance centres away from Sydney, and identified sites that warranted further investigation. Standard facility layouts were developed based on the provision of Level 2 (‘medium’ maintenance) servicing.


Potential sites were required to:

• Make best use of the existing network and TfNSW owned lands.

• Make allowances for the introduction of new rolling stock and any service requirements.

• Improve connection to Sydney in peak times.

• Modernise the regional passenger rail fleet maintenance.

Various locations across the regional network were identified for consideration as part of the 2015 strategic options review. These sites were then considered in a preliminary desktop review of potential environmental, social, engineering, operational and economic considerations.

2.2.2 Short listed options Based on the outcomes of the studies referenced above, TfNSW working groups discussed a range of sites and nominated around 18 sites, including sites in the metropolitan area.

During the next phase of the site selection process, the NSW Government determined that the maintenance centre should be located in a regional area. As a result, 14 sites were identified as suitable for further analysis. Each of the sites was further evaluated using a multi criteria analysis (MCA) by TfNSW which considered a range of economic, financial, technical, environmental and social criteria using the logic chain in Figure 2-1 below.

Figure 2-1 MCA process logic chain

The categories considered as part of the MCA were as follows:

• Train paths (scheduling and timing)

• Existing infrastructure

• Planning and environmental controls

• Local/regional content

• Accessibility

• Workforce capability

• Current network

• Supports customer model

• Land ownership


• Supports transitions.

These categories reflected the key objectives of meeting the delivery timelines, optimising value for money and operational performance; and evaluating workforce and local industry capability to ensure the location could support the desired regional development outcomes. This process further reduced the number of potential sites from 14 to a shortlist of eight ranked sites for further analysis.

As part of this next stage of the process, the analysis categories were further refined as follows:

• Train paths (scheduling and timing)

• Existing infrastructure (use of existing infrastructure)

• Accessibility (low risk of being compromised by adverse conditions)

• Economic analysis (maximising economic benefits for the community)

• Regional policy and investment (the degree to which the location aligns with regional policy and investment priorities).

The analysis of the eight short listed sites against the refined categories highlighted Dubbo as the preferred location for the maintenance facility.

2.2.3 Preferred option Dubbo was ranked as the most suitable location for the regional maintenance facility as a result of the MCA. Attributes supporting the top ranking included:

• Being a terminating location for regional services

• Having relevant supporting industry and training and educational facilities

• A high Aboriginal population, with associated opportunities for Aboriginal participation

• Excellent transport links with associated access benefits.

2.2.4 The ‘do nothing’ option The existing regional fleet is serviced at Sydenham, Eveleigh and Broadmeadow. The existing facilities would not meet the NSW Government objective to service the new fleet in a regional location. Sydenham would continue to be used for stabling, servicing and unplanned minor maintenance of the new regional fleet. In addition, the use of existing metropolitan facilities would not achieve the NSW Government requirement to base the maintenance facility in a regional location. As such, the ‘do nothing’ option was not considered any further.

2.3 Maintenance facility design options Following identification of Dubbo as the preferred location, several design options for the new maintenance facility were developed and considered based on the following key elements:

• Yard length

• Gradients within the facility, on the approach roads and on the surrounding rail corridor

• Location of existing main line

• Location of existing high voltage powerlines

• Vehicular access to and from the site


• Fill and cut quantities

• Environmental factors.

The options were considered during this phase to develop the most suitable design. A number of the options were ranked lowly due to insufficient length being available for the maintenance yard or unsuitable gradients within the facility, on the approach roads and on the surrounding rail corridor.

The final preferred concept design has the following key criteria:

• Provides sufficient yard length

• Provides suitable gradients within the facility and on approach roads

• Does not require relocation of the high voltage powerlines

• Provides a solution which is operationally viable

• Utilises already disturbed areas.


3 Description of the Proposal This chapter describes the Proposal and summarises key design parameters, construction method, and associated infrastructure and activities. The description of the Proposal is based on the concept design and is subject to detailed design.

3.1 Overview of the Proposal The proposed facility would include about three kilometres of railway, comprising six tracks each capable of stabling 200 metre trains, with three of these tracks being partly covered by the maintenance building. Operational access to the facility would be from Wingewarra Street. The site would cover an area of about 25 hectares and would be bounded by a perimeter fence.

The key features of the proposed maintenance facility are shown in Figure 3-1 and would comprise the following:

• Maintenance facility elements:

A maintenance facility building comprising three tracks to undertake maintenance activities, partly housed within a covered enclosure. The size of the building would be approximately 220 metres by 30 metres

Wheel lathe – a separate building allowing for train wheels to be periodically machined using an underfloor wheel lathe

Train wash – an enclosed structure comprising automated wash equipment for train sets with nearby waste water treatment plant

• Administration building – a building comprising office facilities, kitchen, dining area and amenities

• Security building

• Storage area, loading dock and fuel delivery area – used for the delivery and storage of plant, equipment and fuel

• Rail infrastructure works:

Realignment of the Main Western Line through the site

Six maintenance rail tracks (three tracks within the maintenance facility building and three external)

A connection to the Main Western Line on the western side of the site

Decanting and provisioning infrastructure.

• Road vehicle infrastructure:

Access roads throughout the site

Staff car park.

• Power supply including a substation, and utility adjustments

• Relocated detention basins

• Earthworks.


Figure 3-1 Dubbo maintenance Facility site layout (subject to detailed design)


Subject to planning approval, construction is expected to commence in 2019 and take around 30 months to complete.

3.2 Components of the Proposal

3.2.1 Maintenance facility building The maintenance facility building would include three tracks to undertake maintenance activities housed within a covered enclosure. The size of the building would be approximately 220 metres by 30 metres. The building would be recessed into an excavated cutting to a depth of approximately seven metres at the deepest part of the cutting.

The maintenance and standing tracks within the maintenance facility building would be approximately 200 metres in length which would allow for a full train to stand on each of the maintenance tracks. The maintenance tracks would be slightly elevated with recessed floors (approximately 0.8 metres below the rail level) and a full length pit beneath each of the maintenance tracks approximately 1.3 metres below the rail level within the maintenance facility building, adjacent stores and workshop areas. Additionally, a range of access ways, platforms and gantries would be located throughout the main area of the maintenance facility building to provide maximum accessibility for under-floor, at-floor and roof-level inspections.

Each of the three maintenance tracks within the maintenance building would be approximately 10 metres apart to provide space to operate various plant and machinery including work platforms, mobile bridge or gantry cranes, hoists and the movement of other plant such as fork lifts along the length of trains. It is anticipated that the northernmost maintenance track within the maintenance building would be utilised for heavy maintenance activities, while the remaining two maintenance tracks would be utilised for light maintenance, subject to detailed design. An example of a typical interior of a rail maintenance facility is shown in Figure 3-2 below.

Figure 3-2 Typical rail maintenance facility interior


3.2.2 Wheel lathe building The tread of train wheels (where they meet the rail) becomes worn during operation. To maintain optimum condition, the train wheels would be periodically machined using either an underfloor wheel lathe or milling machine. The wheel lathe would allow for the wheels to be maintained without the need to remove them from the train for machining.

The wheel lathe would typically comprise a heavy duty machine mounted in a pit, over which the train carriages would pass on retractable rails. The wheel lathe would support the train wheels on powered rollers, lifting the wheels clear of the rail section, leaving the wheel tread exposed for machining and re-profiling/smoothing.

The wheel lathe would be located within an enclosed facility to minimise noise impacts.

3.2.3 Automatic train wash The maintenance facility would include an automated train wash building. The automatic train wash building would be a separate structure on an external track north of maintenance facility building.

During washing, the trains would move through the automatic train wash building under their own power. Trains would travel slowly through the building with each wash taking a period of six minutes. The train wash would be capable of cleaning all external surfaces (sides, skirts, ends) of the train fleet. It is expected that the Regional Rail trains would be washed about every seven days.

An important component of the automatic train wash process is the wastewater treatment plant. This would recycle water used during the wash process. It is expected that up to 80 per cent of the wash water used in the automated train wash would be recycled.

An indicative photograph of the proposed automatic train wash building is provided in Figure 3-3.

Figure 3-3 Typical train wash building interior


3.2.4 Office and amenities building The main administrative building would be located south of the maintenance tracks. The main administration building would be a single storey building containing the train operations and planning office, as well as a kitchen, dining area, and amenities for the staff.

The administration building would be adjacent to the car park and in close proximity to the stores warehouse and loading dock.

3.2.5 Storage area, loading dock and fuel delivery area The single storey main storage, delivery and loading dock areas of the facility would be located to the south west of the main maintenance facility building. This area (18 metres x 10 metres) would be used for the storage of fleet maintenance equipment, including new bogies and other larger replacement equipment.

The fuel delivery area would be located west of the loading dock and covered by a canopy. The fuel storage tanks have a capacity of 20,000 litres and would be used to refuel trains.

3.2.6 Rail infrastructure works

Track removal The existing Main Western Line track would be removed between Fitzroy Street and Wheelers Lane. The connection from Dubbo Station to the Coonamble Line would be retained, but the connection from the Coonamble Line to the Main Western Line would also be removed. The track to be removed is identified in Figure 3-1.

New track works The Main Western Line would be realigned to the north of the maintenance facility site between the existing Fitzroy Street level crossing and Wheelers Lane. This new connection would provide access from Sydney to Dubbo Station and the Coonamble Line. The connections to the Main Western Line have been designed to allow for an exit speed of 70 kilometres per hour. The new track works are identified in Figure 3-1. The Dubbo Maintenance Facility would include about three kilometres of railway. The general arrangement of the facility would comprise six tracks with three tracks being covered by the main maintenance facility building and three external roads tracks. The proposed functionality of the tracks is outlined in Table 3-1 below. Table 3-1 Dubbo Maintenance Facility track functionality

Track Track description Functionality

1 Maintenance Facility Line 1 Light maintenance, short term, inspection and repair

2 Maintenance Facility Line 2 Light routine scheduled maintenance, medium term, corrective maintenance

3 Maintenance Facility Line 3 Heavy maintenance, lifting line for bogie and train body repairs

4 Yard Line 1 Stabling including decanting and resupply line

5 Yard Line 2 Train wash line

6 Yard Line 3 Wheel lathe line


Signalling New and relocated signals on the Main Western Line would be provided to control movements for the connection of the Dubbo Maintenance Facility site from the realigned Main Western Line.

Signalling for entry and exit of trains to and from the Dubbo Maintenance Facility site would be controlled by Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC). Once trains are no longer on the Main Western Line, further movements within the maintenance facility site would be undertaken through signalling controlled by the operators of the Dubbo Maintenance Facility.

Further details regarding the proposed signalling configuration for the operation of the maintenance facility would be finalised during detailed design.

Train network During the operation stage, maintenance may be carried out under two scenarios:

• Scenario 1: Trains to be serviced would carry passengers from Sydney to Dubbo Station, allow passengers to disembark from the train. The empty train would then pass through Fitzroy Street level crossing and enter the Proposal Site from the west. Once the maintenance activities are completed, the train would return to Dubbo Station to pick up passengers then travel to Sydney through Fitzroy Street level crossing again. This scenario would require trains to traverse the level crossing at Fitzroy Street four times per maintenance cycle.

• Scenario 2: Empty trains would travel directly to the maintenance facility. Once the maintenance activities are completed, the train would return to network. This would result in two crossings of Fitzroy Street per maintenance cycle.

3.2.7 Road vehicle infrastructure

Internal access roads During operations the main vehicular access to the maintenance facility site would be via Wingewarra Street. The internal access road layout is shown in Figure 3-5. The internal road network provides access to various facilities including an office, car parking, storage areas, truck loading docks, compound sites, fuel delivery sites, and emergency vehicle access. The internal road has been designed with the following features:

• The entrance access road would be approximately eight metres wide and the internal access roads would be approximately five metres wide. Internal pedestrian walkways are also provided.

• The internal road would not cross the proposed maintenance tracks.

• Accessible by B-double vehicles.

New site entry Operational access to the Proposal would be from Wingewarra Street (opposite Chelmsford Street). The access road intersection with Wingewarra Street would be upgraded to a left in/left out intersection as shown in Figure 3-4. The left in/left out intersection would restrict right turns into and out of the Proposal Site. Vehicles wishing to turn right into the Proposal Site would either undertake a U-turn by using the roundabout of Wingewarra Street and Fitzroy Street or detour via Hampden Street, right turn onto Wingewarra Street, and then left into the Proposal Site.


Figure 3-4 Access road intersection with Wingewarra Street


For traffic leaving the Proposal Site seeking to head west, vehicles would turn left onto Wingewarra Street, and then right onto Brigalow Avenue and then turn right at Mitchell Highway. Alternatively, they could reach the Mitchel Highway via Wheelers Lane.

Staff car parking A new staff car park would be constructed adjacent to the administration building which is shown in Figure 3-5. The parking area would provide approximately 50 car spaces, which would be sufficient for the proposed employees during the normal operation stage, including an adequate provision of Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) compliant parking spaces located as close as possible to the maintenance facility building. The car park would be connected to the new maintenance facility access road.

Access to BJ Engineering BJ Engineering is a private business which occupies a compound located adjacent to the site of the proposed Dubbo Maintenance Facility. This compound is also currently used by both ARTC and John Holland to maintain track equipment. The proposed realignment of the Main Western Line is expected to impact a portion of this area.

Existing access to the BJ engineering compound is via an unsealed access track and uncontrolled level crossing over the eastern side of the Proposed Site. Access would be retained either through the Dubbo Maintenance Facility or by providing an access track outside the facility boundary fence on the north side.

3.2.8 Power supply and utility adjustments

Maintenance facility power supply An onsite electrical substation is proposed to be constructed as part of the Proposal to provide electricity to the facility and to minimise the length of the cable runs. The electrical substation would be located near the carpark adjacent to the internal access road. The area for the electrical substation would be about 15 metres wide and 40 metres long and would include a 10 metre yard and a 30 metre one storey building. Two transformers are expected to be placed in the yard outside the substation building.

Other utility adjustments The construction of the Proposal would result in some impacts to existing service utilities including a sewer, a potable water main and high voltage power. Options are currently being considered for how to best manage these impacts and could involve either encasing the mains in concrete or diverting the mains. These options would be refined during the detailed design process.

The Proposal would also require permanent utility connections from the local utility supplier to the maintenance facility site for the following:

• Potable water supply

• Sewage

• Telecommunications.

The location and extent of impact on these services would be confirmed during detailed design, and in consultation with the respective utility service providers.


Figure 3-5 Internal road, car parking and loading dock layout


3.2.9 Landscaping To support the urban design and landscaping objectives for the Proposal a landscape plan would be prepared. Landscaping would be utilised at the site entrance and on exposed areas around the buildings to enhance the appearances of the approaches to the facility, soften the appearance of the building features, and to filter light spill including security lights, train headlights and warning lights on vehicles from the facility.

Tree planting is proposed at locations to provide visual screening to nearby sensitive receivers. Such locations could include the decommissioned alignment of the Main Western Line to screen the Proposal from residents located to the south of the Site. Progressive landscaping of the maintenance facility site would help to minimise erosion and accordingly reduce the requirement to implement additional environmental controls on exposed areas of land.

3.2.10 Noise mitigation The facility is proposed to be built into a cutting which would result in reduced impact of operations noise to surrounding residential receivers. Nevertheless, it is anticipated that noise mitigation measures such as walls or bunds may be required near the existing residential areas. The need for this is subject to a detailed noise assessment, including an assessment of the facility operations. This assessment would also consider the impact of reflected noise within the facility.

Further detail on noise mitigation measures is presented in Section 6.3.

3.2.11 Other components

Communication systems and security The control, information and communications technology services required for the new maintenance facility would include telephones, hand-held radios, intercoms, local area network/wide area network and a precise clock. To facilitate these services, the following would be provided:

• Backbone communications systems

• Radio systems

• Telephone systems

• Maintenance yard communications systems

• Control systems, including:

Main control systems and building management systems

Signalling and train control system

Security management

Condition monitoring systems.

• The security services for the new maintenance facility would consist of an access control system, intrusion detection, CCTV system, intercom, perimeter fence around the entire site, physical measures (doors, glazing, fencing, gates and barriers) and security personnel.

• To facilitate these services, the following provisions would be required in addition to those required for the control and communication systems discussed above:

Mounting space and structures (for cameras, sensors and intercoms), and


Lighting poles/mounting structures.

The final design of the security for the maintenance facility would be determined during the detailed design of the Project in accordance with the relevant Asset Standard Authority (ASA) and Transport for NSW standards. Access into the site would be controlled via a security gate.

Refuelling facility The Maintenance Facility would include a train refuelling facility and must store enough fuel for reliable of operation of the new Regional Rail Fleet. To allow for this requirement, the refuelling facility would include two tanks with a volume of 20,000 litres and an exhaust fluid tank of approximately 2,000 litres. Annual fuel usage on the site would be about 1.1 million litres per year.

Trains would be refuelled on the decanting and provisioning track north of the maintenance facility building. The tanks are likely to be above ground and the tanks and refuelling area would be bunded to avoid spills and covered to meet the relevant standards.

Train decanting and tanking facility The decanting and resupply track would allow for emptying of effluent tanks (decanting) and refilling of water tanks on-board the Regional Rail trains. The facilities which would be located on the site would include a pump to draw effluent out of the train tank system for storage in an appropriately sized vacuum tank to allow for discharge to the local sewer network or via onsite sewage treatment, subject to detailed design.

Fire protection systems The maintenance building would be fire protected by heat sensors and fire alarms linked to the sprinkler system in the administration area, store rooms and specific areas of the main hall to meet Building Code of Australia (BCA) requirements. A fire ring main would be installed around the buildings and administration area separate from the potable water supply to the building.

Lighting Outdoor lighting would be provided as part of the facility for both navigation and security purposes. Lighting across the site would include:

• General lighting of access roads and foot paths

• Lighting of access routes in the train standing areas

• External lighting of buildings for both access and security

• Security lighting of access gates

• General lighting of car parking areas

• General lighting of the external areas to allow for traffic and maintenance and train stabling activities during the night

• General security lighting suitable for use with CCTV cameras.

Lighting for general areas such as the car park and access roads would be designed to satisfy Australian Standards, while lighting within the rail maintenance facility would be in accordance with ASA Standards. Due to the 24-hour operation of the facility, lighting would be required to be on for all or most of the night and would be designed to minimise off site impacts to sensitive receivers. Potential lighting impacts associated with the Proposal have been considered and are discussed in Section 6.2 of this REF.


Stormwater drainage A 3.3 hectare portion of land on the eastern end of the site would be acquired by TfNSW from Dubbo Regional Council, as this land would be required for the construction of the Proposal. This land currently functions as a stormwater detention basin. As part of the Proposal the stormwater detention basin would be reinstated in the area, providing the same capacity as currently exists. The final design of the new detention basin would be determined during the detailed design of the Proposal in consultation with Dubbo Regional Council.

3.2.12 Sustainability Sustainability would be integrated into the planning, construction and operation of the maintenance facility. The facility would be certified under the ISCA Infrastructure Sustainability (IS) Rating Tool to provide an independent verification of the Proposal’s sustainability performance. The sustainability priorities for the Proposal include:

• Carbon and energy management

• Climate resilience

• Sustainable and ethical procurement

• Water management

These priorities have been identified as having the most material impact, and therefore require focus to ensure the delivery of sustainable outcomes. A selection of sustainable design initiatives proposed include:

• Solar photovoltaic and battery storage system

• Supplementing cement with recycled materials

• Installation of high performance thermal insulation and glazing

• Energy efficient heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems

• LED lighting

• Provide solar shading through building design

• Rainwater collection and re-use

• Reclaim and recycle water used in the train wash

• Use of landscape species which do not require significant quantities of water

Further sustainability initiatives would be explored during the detailed design process to improve the sustainable outcomes of the Proposal.

3.3 Land requirements and property acquisition The ownership of the Proposal Site is split between two parties: TfNSW and Dubbo Regional Council (refer to Figure 3-6). The 3.5 hectare portion of land owned by Dubbo Regional Council would be acquired by TfNSW as part of the Proposal. TfNSW is currently in discussions with Dubbo Regional Council regarding this acquisition.

3.3.1 Subdivision As described above, the Proposal would involve the acquisition of land owned by Dubbo Regional Council. Following the completion of the project some subdivision or boundary adjustments may be required. Where this is required, detailed Deposited Plans of subdivision would be developed and lodged for the subdivision of the land.


Figure 3-6 Proposed land acquisition


Once the reinstated detention basins have been completed and the land subdivided, the detention basins would be returned to Dubbo Regional Council’s ownership for ongoing management of the stormwater network.

3.4 Engineering constraints There are a number of constraints which have influenced the design development of the Proposal, these include:

• Existing structures: The existing main line and site boundaries limit the length of the facility.

• Utilities: An overhead transmission line runs along the northern boundary of the site.

• Drainage: Detention basins are located on the north-eastern side of the site.

• Other considerations: The topographic layout of the Proposal Site falls at a slope of approximately 1.5 per cent from east to west. This influences the vertical grades at which the facility can be designed and constructed.

• Sensitive receivers: Residential properties surround the site, both to the north and south.

3.5 Design standards The Proposal would be designed having regard to the following:

• Building Code of Australia and relevant Australian Standards

• ASA standards

• Guidelines for the Upgrade and Construction of New and Existing Train Stabling Yards and Turnback sidings (RailCorp, 2006)

• Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) principles

• Other TfNSW policies and guidelines

• Council standards where relevant.

3.6 Construction activities

3.6.1 Construction program and staging Subject to approval, early works associated with the construction of the Proposal are expected to commence in early 2019. Operation of the maintenance facility is scheduled to commence in 2021.

An indicative construction program and outline of the key construction activities for each of the proposed stages of construction is provided in Table 3-2. Based on the current construction program and activities, the total construction program for the Proposal would be approximately 30 months.

The construction activities presented in Table 3-2 are based on the current concept design and would be subject to confirmation by the nominated construction contractor (yet to be appointed). Any material changes to the construction methodology which could result in additional environmental impacts to those assessed in this REF would be the subject of additional environmental impact assessment.


Table 3-2 Indicative construction and commissioning program and activities

Stage Activities Target duration (approx.)

Enabling works Establishment of traffic management arrangements. Relocation of services and utilities including sewer and potable water main, where required.

4-6 months

Preconstruction works, site establishment and early works

Installation of environmental protection and water quality works. Establishment of construction compound sites. Vegetation clearing. Isolating work areas from the live rail corridor.

4-6 months

Main construction works Topsoil stripping. Earthworks, including construction of retaining walls and batter slopes. Construction of drainage works (pipes, flow channels, swales etc.). Main building construction. Construction of high voltage substation. Construct other facilities (train wash, decant, administration building, wheel lathe, water treatment plant). Services connections and reticulation: potable water, fire water, recycled water, sewer, power, and communications. Final maintenance facility site roads and car park, etc. Urban design and landscaping works.

12-15 months

Track removal and realignment

Track work laying – ballast, sleepers, rail. Signalling works. Main Western Line realignment.

8-10 months

Post construction testing and commissioning

Testing and commissioning of railway systems and signals.

4-6 months

Post construction demobilisation

Removal of temporary construction facilities. Rehabilitation and landscaping of the work sites and affected areas. Removal of temporary environmental controls once landscaping has been established.

3 months

Note: Some of the construction and commissioning activities would overlap between the stages.


Figure 3-7 Indicative project schedule


3.6.2 Plant and equipment An indicative list of plant and equipment that would be required is provided below. Additional equipment that would likely to be used would be identified during detailed design by the construction contractor.

• Chainsaw

• Compressor

• Trailer mounted wood chipper

• Excavators

• Dump trucks

• Bulldozers

• Water cart

• Truck mounted crane

• Angle grinder

• Welder

• Vibratory roller

• Concrete saw

• Skid steer loaders

• Rail saw

• Powered hand tools

• Compactors

• Hi rail tipper

• Track laying machine

• Ballast tamper

• Idling power units

• Scissor lifts

• Backhoes

• Delivery trucks

• Light vehicles

• Piling rigs

• Vibratory plate compactor

• Rail grinder

• Graders

• Circular saw

3.6.3 Working hours The majority of works required for the Proposal would be undertaken during standard NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) construction hours, which are as follows:

• 7:00am to 6:00pm Monday to Friday

• 8:00am to 1:00pm Saturdays

• No work on Sundays or public holidays

Work outside of the above hours is required in some cases to minimise disruptions to customers, pedestrians, motorists and nearby sensitive receivers; and to ensure the safety of railway workers and operational assets. This may include the following circumstances:

• Maintenance and repair of public infrastructure where disruption to essential services and/or considerations of worker safety do not allow work within standard hours

• The delivery of oversized plant or structures that police or other authorities determine requires special arrangements to transport along public roads.

Approval from TfNSW would be required for any out of hours work and the affected community would be notified as outlined in TfNSW’s Construction Noise and Vibration Strategy (2018) (refer to Section 6.3 for further details).


3.6.4 Rail closedowns Rail closedowns (also known as possessions) are periods when part of the rail network is temporarily shut down in order to facilitate maintenance, construction or emergency works within the rail corridor in a safe manner when trains are not operating. During these periods rail services and access to train services would be suspended and replacement buses would operate.

Rail closedowns are normally conducted at weekends or holiday periods as scheduled by the rail operator. These periods are traditionally quieter periods with lower patronage demand and, accordingly, it is expected that disruptions and impacts to the community would be less.

The local community (including residents and businesses) would be notified in advance of any out-of-hours works that are likely to be audible at adjacent sensitive receivers, including mid-week, night time and weekend rail closedowns.

Construction activities that are likely to be undertaken during a rail closedown would include (but are not limited to):

• Any civil works within three metres of the live track, including earthworks, drainage, signalling and track work.

• Installation of new mainline switch and crossings.

• Installation of under bore crossings.

• Alteration and installation of structures within three metres of the live track.

• Signalling commissioning.

The number of temporary rail closedowns required for the Project would be determined by Transport for NSW in consultation with ARTC, John Holland – Country Regional Network and NSW Trains, and the nominated Contractor during detailed design, however the overall number of temporary rail closedowns required are expected to be limited.

3.6.5 Workforce The following work force has been assumed for each stage based on comparable projects, subject to detailed design and appointment of a Contractor, as follows:

• During the main construction stage, approximately 200-250 construction staff would work in multiple shifts.

• During train completion works, 40-60 staff would work in multiple shifts.

• During operation, 40-60 full time equivalent maintenance staff would work on the site, with an additional 10 office staff.

3.6.6 Earthworks Due to the nature of the site being at a gradient of 1.5 per cent, it is expected that some levelling works would be required. It is anticipated that approximately 155,000 cubic metres of material would be excavated from the site and 3,000 cubic metres of fill would be placed on low points on the site. Where suitable, the materials excavated from the site would be reused. Any spoil not suitable for reuse would be disposed of in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements.


3.6.7 Source and quantity of materials The source and quantity of materials would be determined during the detailed design phase of the Proposal, and would consider the requirements of the ISCA IS rating tool.

Materials would be sourced from local suppliers, and the reuse of existing and recycled materials would be undertaken where practicable, with consideration for materials with low embodied energy/carbon footprints and sourced from legal, ethical and sustainable sources and suppliers.

3.6.8 Traffic access and vehicle movements During construction a number of construction vehicles and machinery would require access to the Proposal Site. It is expected that the construction vehicles would access the site via the Golden Highway/Cobbora Road and then along White Street. Construction access to the site would be via White Street. Construction traffic would include vehicles, light and heavy trucks, and would be greatest during the main earthworks and civil construction with vehicles transporting equipment, materials and spoil, and construction workers accessing the Proposal Site.

Within the Proposal Site the movement of construction plant and equipment would be within the Proposal Site and rail corridor.

The existing access from White Street (Access 1) to the west of the Proposal Site would be used during construction while the White Street (Access 2) to the east would be maintained as a secondary access point for the construction period.

The existing access from White Street (Access 1) may need to be widened to accommodate heavy vehicles. B-Doubles are restricted from turning into White Street from Cobbora Road, and would therefore access the Proposal Site via Myall Street, Welchman Street and White Street.

A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be prepared during the detailed design to appropriately manage haulage movements across or along the public roads.

Traffic and transport impacts associated with the Proposal are assessed in Section 6.1.

3.6.9 Construction traffic The construction traffic would comprise of light vehicles for commuting construction workers, and heavy vehicles for transporting the plant, equipment, facilities and construction materials.

It is assumed that the construction workers would normally access the site from 7:00am to 5:00pm (there may be multiple shifts during construction, so inbound/outbound trips may vary during the day). The number of car trips during peak times is estimated to be 135 inbound and outbound vehicles for the standard daytime shift.

The construction program and staging is yet to be determined. It is assumed that the heavy vehicle traffic generation during the construction period would primarily consist of delivery trucks, spoil trucks, dump trucks and concrete trucks accessing the site throughout the day. The maximum number of heavy vehicle trips during weekdays is likely to be in the order of 400 vehicle trips per day, comprising 200 in and 200 out, due to earthworks and spoil removal.

3.6.10 Ancillary activities A construction compound (for activities including stockpile sites and laydown areas) within the identified site boundary would be established. The construction compound would also accommodate a site office and amenities. The precise location of the compound would be


further developed during detailed construction planning. An indicative location of the construction compound is shown in Figure 3-1.

3.6.11 Public utility adjustments Services and utilities located within the construction footprint would be protected, upgraded or relocated, in consultation with the relevant asset owners. Indicative construction activities that would occur during services and utilities protection and relocation would include:

• Services and utilities location identification

• Potholing to confirm locations

• Construct a new services or utilities alignment either by open trenching or non-destructive excavation

• Lay the new services (duct, cable, pipe) as appropriate

• Reinstate the surface

• Commission the new service or utility

• Access to existing fire hydrants would be maintained until newly constructed fire hydrants are operational.

3.7 Train completion works As part of the Regional Rail Fleet Project, it is proposed that trains would have a final fit out of components at the Dubbo Maintenance Facility, followed by testing and commissioning.

Trains would be transported to Dubbo for final fit out which, subject to appointment of the Contractor, may include internal fixtures and fittings, electrical installation and signalling equipment.

The train completion works would be undertaken to allow the progressive introduction of the Regional Rail Fleet. Delivery of trains to Dubbo and the train completion works would be staggered due to the capacity of the maintenance facility site and time required to manufacture the fleet.

3.8 Operation and maintenance

3.8.1 Commissioning The commissioning phase of the Proposal would include specific activities to be undertaken to ensure that the operational requirements have been achieved to the required standards and that the facility meets the required asset life conditions. Inspections would be required for all infrastructure against the final design documentation and operational runs completed to ensure that all safety systems are fully functional and fail safe.

Items that would require inspection and specific commissioning plans prior to commencement of operation for the Proposal would include the following:

• Main line connection and functionality

• All track and signalling systems

• Automatic train wash operation, maintenance and structures

• Wheel lathe operation, maintenance and structures

• Amenities

• Stores and relevant safety systems


• All ancillary building, including sub stations, storage areas, cleaning pits

• Cranes and maintenance facility equipment, turn tables lifting jacks etc.

• Roads and designated walkways

• Full functionality testing of all elements of the maintenance facility.

3.8.2 Operations The main function of the facility is to provide a maintenance centre that supports the new Regional Rail Fleet throughout its lifecycle. The maintenance facility would operate on a 24-hour, seven days a week basis. The primary functions of the facility are to:

• Satisfy the Level 1 maintenance requirements (trip servicing and provisioning) of Regional Rail trains enabling fast turn-around times and prompt return of trains into service

• Satisfy the Level 2 and 3 maintenance requirements (light and heavy maintenance) of Regional Rail trains enabling the maintenance contractor to achieve the contract performance requirements

The following sections provide a summary of the operational activities associated with the Proposal.

Maintenance facility activities

Level 1 maintenance Typical maintenance at the new maintenance facility would consist of minor repairs (including the rectification of normal wear and tear on interior trim, panels, toilets, signage, window film etc.), interior cleaning of the train carriages, emptying of toilets, exterior washing and correction of vandalism and graffiti. These activities would be carried out on a 24-hour basis.

If issues requiring substantial work arise from the general maintenance and cannot be undertaken as a minor repair, an alternative train would be sourced in order to maintain passenger services.

Level 2 maintenance This includes planned routine maintenance examinations or maintenance of trains that are unfit for service due to graffiti and/or vandalism. Level 2 maintenance would also include other activities such as wheel lathe attention and replacement of defective major components such as bogies, compressors or train carriage couplers. These activities would be carried out on a 24-hour basis.

Level 3 maintenance After a number of years, major components such as bogies, couplers, gangways and compressors would need to be replaced or overhauled due to normal wear and tear. It is expected that this level of maintenance would be required to be undertaken at approximately six and twelve year intervals. These activities would be carried out on a 24-hour basis.

Train preparation In between regularly scheduled train services, trains would be prepared for the next service at the proposed maintenance facility. Train preparation activities would include:

• External and internal checks

• Crew cab checks


• Systems checks

• Braking tests

• Radio, Intercom and PA tests

• Driver and guard checks

• Fuelling

• Decanting (removal of toilet wastewater)

• Provisioning with water, food and other resources.

Proposed staffing The Dubbo Maintenance Facility would have about 40-60 employees with one daytime shift and one night shift, across a 24 hour period. The employees are expected to be split about 50/50 across both shifts. During the normal weekday day shift, this number could increase by a further 10 office staff.

Operating arrangement of fleet arrival and departure Currently three trains per day are scheduled to be stabled and maintained at the maintenance facility:

Train 1:

• Arrives from Dubbo Station to Maintenance Facility about 2:15pm

• Departs from Maintenance Facility to Dubbo Station about 1:45pm (next day)

Train 2:

• Arrives from Dubbo Station to Maintenance Facility about 10:00pm

• Departs from Maintenance Facility to Dubbo Station about 6:00am (next day)

Train 3:

• Arrives from Bathurst Station to Maintenance Facility about 11:45pm

• Departs from Maintenance Facility to Bathurst Station about 3:40am (next day)


4 Statutory considerations This chapter provides a summary of the statutory considerations relating to the Proposal including a consideration of NSW Government polices/strategies, NSW legislation (particularly the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), environmental planning instruments, and Commonwealth legislation.

4.1 Commonwealth legislation

4.1.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places. These matters are referred to as matters of national environmental significance (NES). The EPBC Act requires the assessment of whether the Proposal is likely to significantly impact on matters of NES or Commonwealth land. These matters are considered in full in Appendix A. The Proposal would not impact on any matters of NES or on Commonwealth land. Accordingly, a referral to the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment is not required.

4.2 NSW legislation and regulation

4.2.1 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 The EP&A Act establishes the system of environmental planning and assessment in NSW. This Proposal is subject to the environmental impact assessment and planning approval requirements of Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act. Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act specifies the environmental impact assessment requirements for activities undertaken by public authorities, such as TfNSW, which do not require development consent under Part 4 of the Act.

In accordance with section 5.5 of the EP&A Act, Transport for NSW, as the proponent and determining authority, must examine and take into account to the fullest extent possible all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment by reason of the Proposal.

Clause 228 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (EP&A Regulation) defines the factors which must be considered when determining if an activity assessed under Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act has a significant impact on the environment. Chapter 6 provides an environmental impact assessment of the Proposal in accordance with clause 228 and Appendix B specifically responds to the factors for consideration under clause 228.

Other NSW legislation and regulations Table 4-1 provides a list of other relevant legislation applicable to the Proposal.


Table 4-1 Other legislation applicable to the Proposal

Applicable legislation Considerations

Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 (CLM Act) (NSW)

Section 60 of the CLM Act imposes a duty on landowners to notify the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH), and potentially investigate and remediate land if contamination is above EPA guideline levels. The site has not been declared under the CLM Act as being significantly contaminated (refer Section 6.8).

Crown Lands Act 1987 (NSW) The Proposal does not involve works on any Crown land.

Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA Act) (Commonwealth)

The Proposal would be designed having regard to the requirements of this Act. The proposed staff car park would include disabled parking spaces.

Heritage Act 1977 (Heritage Act) (NSW) • Sections 57 and 60 (approval) where items listed on the State Heritage Register are to be impacted

• Sections 139 and 140 (permit) where relics are likely to be exposed

• Section 170 where items listed on a government agency Heritage and Conservation Register are to be impacted.

No State listed items of heritage or archaeology have been identified on the site of the Proposal. No Heritage Act approvals would be required prior to commencement of construction.

National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NPW Act) (NSW)

Sections 86, 87 and 90 of the NPW Act require consent from OEH for the destruction or damage of Indigenous objects. The Proposal is unlikely to disturb any Indigenous objects (refer to Section 6.4). However, if unexpected archaeological items or items of Indigenous heritage significance are discovered during the construction of the Proposal, all works would cease and appropriate advice sought.

Biosecurity Act 2015 (NSW) There is one priority weed that has been identified in the Proposal Site ((Saffron Thistle (Carthamus lanatus)). Appropriate management methods would be implemented during construction (refer Section 6.7.2).

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (PoEO Act) (NSW)

The construction of the Proposal comprises rail realignment works which satisfy the definition of a ‘scheduled activity’ under Schedule 1 of the PoEO Act. Accordingly, a new environment protection licence (EPL) is required for the construction of the Proposal. Operation of the Maintenance Facility would not require an EPL. New fleet train operations would continue to operate under existing network EPLs.

In accordance with Part 5.7 of the PoEO Act, TfNSW would also notify the EPA of any pollution incidents that occur onsite. This would be managed in the Construction Environmental Management Plan



(CEMP) to be prepared and implemented by the Contractor.

Roads Act 1993 (Roads Act) (NSW) Section 138 of the Roads Act requires consent from the relevant road authority for the carrying out of work in, on or over a public road. However, clause 5(1) in Schedule 2 of the Roads Act states that public authorities do not require consent for works on unclassified roads. However, where works are required on a local road, road occupancy licences would be obtained from the relevant Roads Authority prior to the commencement if works. As discussed in Section 6.1 access to the site for operations would be from Wingewarra Street. Some works would be required along Wingewarra Street to connect the new access road to the maintenance facility. Approval from Roads and Maritime would be required prior to the commencement of any road works on State roads, However Wingewarra Street is not a state classified road.

In addition, there are a number of local roads surrounding the Proposal which would be used as haulage routes during construction.

Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act) (NSW)

Approximately 9.2 hectares of derived native grassland that is expected to be removed would have supported the Fuzzy Box Woodland EEC in the past. In its current condition it is not consistent with the definition of the EEC due to the absence of Fuzzy Box trees.

The design has sought to avoid and minimise impacts to this area by retaining a portion of approximately 1.88 hectares in the southern part of the site, where the trees are present.

The assessments of significance found that the Proposal would be unlikely to significantly impact threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats, as defined by BC Act. Accordingly, a Species Impact Statement is not required.

For further details relating to the biodiversity assessment refer to Section 6.7.

Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 (WARR Act) (NSW)

TfNSW would carry out the Proposal having regard to the requirements of the WARR Act. Site-specific Waste Management Plans would be prepared for construction and operation.

Water Management Act 2000 (NSW) The Proposal does not currently propose water use from a natural source (e.g. aquifer, river – only from the reticulated water supply network), water management works, or controlled activities.

Excavation works are likely to encounter groundwater. TfNSW would liaise with DPI-Water for any aquifer



interference licence requirements.

Any alteration to the existing flood detention basins currently on the site would be undertaken in consultation with Dubbo Regional Council.

4.3 State Environmental Planning Policies

4.3.1 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP) is the primary environmental planning instrument which determines the permissibility of the Proposal and under which part of the EP&A Act the activity may be assessed.

Clause 79 of the ISEPP allows for the development of ‘rail infrastructure facilities’ by or on behalf of a public authority without consent on any land (i.e. assessable under Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act). Clause 78 defines rail infrastructure facilities as including elements such as ‘maintenance, repair and stabling facilities for rolling stock’.

Consequently, the proposed maintenance facility is consistent with the definition of development for the purpose of a railway or rail infrastructure facility under the ISEPP. Therefore, development consent is not required for the Proposal. However, the environmental impacts of the Proposal have been assessed under the provisions of Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act.

Part 2 of the ISEPP contains provisions for public authorities to consult with local councils and other agencies prior to the commencement of certain types of development. Section 5.2 of this REF discusses the consultation undertaken under the requirements of the ISEPP.

4.3.2 State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) provides a State-wide approach to the remediation of contaminated land for the purpose of minimising the risk of harm to the health of humans and the environment for works which require development consent. While consent for the Proposal is not required, the provisions of SEPP 55 have still been considered in the preparation of this REF.

Section 6.8 of this REF contains an assessment of the potential contamination impacts of the Proposal. It is unlikely that any large-scale remediation (Category 1) work would be required as part of the Proposal. The proposed land use (rail infrastructure) does not differ to the existing use and is, therefore, unlikely to be affected by any potential contaminants that may exist on the Proposal Site.

4.4 Local environmental planning instrument and development controls

The Proposal is located within the Dubbo Regional local government area (LGA). The provisions of the ISEPP mean that local environmental plans (LEPs), prepared by local councils for an LGA, do not apply. Notwithstanding, the provisions of the Dubbo Local Environmental Plan 2011 (Dubbo LEP) have been considered:

4.4.1 Dubbo Local Environmental Plan 2011 The Dubbo LEP is the governing plan for the Dubbo Regional LGA, including the locality of Dubbo. Table 4-2 summarises the relevant aspects of the Dubbo LEP applicable to the Proposal. Figure 4-1 shows the relevant section of the zoning map from the Dubbo LEP, with the indicative location of the Proposal.


Table 4-2 Relevant land use zones and zone objectives

Zone Zone objectives

IN2 Light Industrial • To provide a wide range of light industrial, warehouse and related land uses.

• To encourage employment opportunities and to support the viability of centres.

• To minimise any adverse effect of industry on other land uses. • To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to

meet the day to day needs of workers in the area. • To support and protect industrial land for industrial uses. • To recognise the Depot Road and McKenzie Street industrial

area as providing start up and transport related development opportunities.

RE1 Public Recreation • To enable land to be used for public open space or recreational purposes.

• To provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land uses.

• To protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.

• To provide for facilities and amenities to enhance the use of public open space.

RE2 Private Recreation • To enable land to be used for private open space or recreational purposes.

• To provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land uses.

• To protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.

SP2 Infrastructure (Railway) • To provide for infrastructure and related uses. • To prevent development that is not compatible with or that may

detract from the provision of infrastructure.

As noted in Table 4-2 above, the Proposal would be consistent with the objectives of both the IN2 Light Industrial and SP2 Infrastructure zones through including the provision of industrial land uses, encouraging increased employment opportunities, providing rail infrastructure related uses and recognising existing railway land and to enable future development for railway and associated purposes.

While it is acknowledged that the project does not meet the objectives of the land zoned RE1 Public Recreation and RE2 Private Recreation, it is noted that the area is not currently being used for recreational purposes. Public access to these areas is generally restricted due to the presence of the rail corridor, adjacent industrial properties and existing security fencing. Irrespective of the provisions of the Dubbo LEP, the Proposal is permissible without consent under the provisions of the ISEPP.


Figure 4-1 LEP zoning map


4.5 NSW Government policies and strategies Table 4-3 provides an overview of other NSW Government policies and strategies relevant to the Proposal. Table 4-3 NSW Government policies and strategies applicable to the Proposal

Policy/strategy Commitment Comment

Future Transport 2056 (TfNSW, 2018a)

Future Transport 2056 is an update of NSW’s Long Term Transport Master Plan. It is a suite of strategies and plans for transport to provide an integrated vision for the state.

A relevant component of Future Transport 2056 is the Regional NSW Services and Infrastructure Plan. The plan identifies desired customer outcomes for Regional NSW, service and infrastructure initiatives for Regional NSW, and the next steps for implementation for the plan.

Dubbo falls under the Central West and Orana region defined under the plan.

The Dubbo Maintenance Facility is identified as a priority initiative for the region under the plan.

State Infrastructure Strategy 2012–2032 (Infrastructure NSW, 2014)

The State Infrastructure Strategy 2014 (Infrastructure NSW, 2014) is a strategy to plan and fund the infrastructure that the NSW Government delivers. Public transport is viewed as critical to productivity, expanding employment opportunities by connecting people to jobs, and reducing congestion.

The investment in the new Regional Rail Fleet would assist in improving and maintaining access to regional Australia. To support the new fleet, the Proposal is required.

NSW: Making It Happen (NSW Government, 2015)

In September 2015, the NSW Government announced a series of State Priorities as part of NSW: Making It Happen (NSW Government, 2015). The State Priorities are intended to guide the ongoing actions of the NSW Government across the State, and guide resource allocation and investment in conjunction with the NSW Budget. NSW: Making it Happen focuses on 12 key ‘priorities’ to achieve the NSW Government’s commitments. These priorities range across a number of issues including infrastructure, the environment, education, health, wellbeing and safety in addition to Government services. One of the 12 priorities identified as part of NSW: Making It Happen relates to investment in building infrastructure. The ongoing development and investment in transport infrastructure is identified as part of the wider building infrastructure priority.

The Proposal assists in meeting the priority by improving public transport and encouraging greater use of public transport.


4.6 Ecologically sustainable development TfNSW is committed to ensuring that its projects are implemented in a manner that is consistent with the principles of ESD. The principles of ESD are generally defined under the provisions of clause 7(4) of schedule 2 to the EP&A Regulation as:

• The precautionary principle – If there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, a lack of full scientific uncertainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation

• Intergenerational equity – the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment are maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations

• Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity – the diversity of genes, species, populations and their communities, as well as the ecosystems and habitats they belong to, should be maintained or improved to ensure their survival

• Improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms – environmental factors should be included in the valuation of assets and services.

The principles of ESD have been adopted by TfNSW throughout the development and assessment of the Dubbo Maintenance Facility. Section 6.12 includes an assessment of the Proposal on climate change and sustainability, and Section 7.2 lists mitigation measures to ensure ESD principles are incorporated during the construction phase of the Proposal.


5 Community and stakeholder consultation Chapter 5 discusses the consultation undertaken to date for the Proposal and the consultation proposed for the future. This chapter discusses the consultation strategy adopted for the Proposal and the results of consultation with the community, relevant government agencies and stakeholders.

5.1 Stakeholder consultation during concept design Consultation has been undertaken with key land holders and rail operators including Dubbo Regional Council, ARTC, John Holland – Country Regional Network, NSW Trains and other relevant stakeholders during the development of design options and the preferred option.

5.2 Consultation requirements under the ISEPP Part 2, Division 1 of the ISEPP contains provisions for public authorities to consult with local councils and other public authorities prior to the commencement of certain types of development. Clauses 13 to 16 of the Infrastructure SEPP require that public authorities undertake consultation with councils and other agencies, when proposing to carry out development without consent. As the Proposal would impact on council related infrastructure and services and is located on flood liable land, consultation in accordance with ISEPP was carried out with Dubbo Regional Council.

Table 5-1 provides details of consultation requirements under the Infrastructure SEPP for the Proposal. Table 5-1 Infrastructure SEPP consultation requirements

Clause Provision Relevance to the Proposal

Clause 13 – Consultation with Councils – development with impacts on council related infrastructure and services

Consultation is required where the Proposal would result in: • substantial impact on stormwater

management services. • generating traffic that would place

a local road system under strain. • involve connection to or impact on

a council owned sewerage system.

• involve connection to and substantial use of council owned water supply.

• significantly disrupt pedestrian or vehicle movement.

• involve significant excavation to a road surface or footpath for which Council has responsibility.

The Proposal includes works that would require connections or impacts to the overland stormwater detention system. Consultation with Dubbo Regional Council has been undertaken and would continue throughout the detailed design and construction phases.

Clause 14 – Consultation with Councils – development with impacts on local heritage

Where works: • substantially impact on local

heritage item (if not also a State heritage item).

• substantially impact on a heritage conservation area.

There is no proposed impact to local heritage/heritage conservation area. Accordingly, consultation with Council is not required (refer to Section 6.5). However, the Dubbo LEP has incorrectly mapped the Macquarie River rail bridge as occurring within the Proposal Site.


Clause Provision Relevance to the Proposal

Clause 15 – Consultation with Councils – development with impacts on flood liable land

Where works: • impact on land that is susceptible

to flooding – reference would be made to Floodplain Development Manual: the management of flood liable land.

The Proposal is located on land that is susceptible to flooding. Consultation with Dubbo Regional Council has been undertaken and would continue throughout the detailed design and construction phases. Refer to Section 6.9.

Clause 16 – Consultation with public authorities other than Councils

For specified development which includes consultation with the OEH for development that is undertaken adjacent to land reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, and other agencies specified by the Infrastructure SEPP where relevant.

The Proposal is not located adjacent to land reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. Accordingly, consultation with the OEH on this matter is not required.

5.3 Consultation strategy The consultation strategy for the Proposal was developed to encourage stakeholder and community involvement and foster interaction between stakeholders, the community and the project team. The consultation strategy developed ensures stakeholders, customers and the community are informed of the Proposal and have the opportunity to provide input.

The objectives of the consultation strategy are to:

• Provide accurate and timely information about the Proposal and REF process to relevant stakeholders

• Raise awareness of the various components of the Proposal and the specialist environmental investigations

• Ensure that the directly impacted community are aware of the REF and consulted where appropriate

• Provide opportunities for stakeholders and the community to express their view about the Proposal

• Understand and access valuable local knowledge from the community and stakeholders

• Record the details and input from community engagement activities

• Build positive relations with identified community stakeholders

• Ensure a comprehensive and transparent approach.

Figure 5-1 presents an overview of the consultation and planning process and the current status of the Proposal.


Figure 5-1 Planning approval and consultation process for the Proposal

5.4 Public display The REF display strategy adopts a range of consultation mechanisms, including:

• Public display of the REF at various locations

• Distribution of a project update at Dubbo Station, and the surrounding community, outlining the Proposal and inviting feedback on the REF

• Advertisement of the REF public display in local newspapers with a link to the TfNSW website that includes a summary of the Proposal and information on how to provide feedback

• Consultation with Dubbo Regional Council, ARTC, NSW Trains and other stakeholders.


Community consultation activities for the Proposal would be undertaken during the public display of this REF. The display period of the REF would be advertised immediately prior to, or during the first week that the public display commences. The REF would be displayed for a period of approximately three weeks.

The REF would be placed on public display at the following locations:

• Dubbo Regional Council (corner of Church and Darling Streets, Dubbo)

• Dubbo Library (corner Macquarie and Talbragar Streets, Dubbo)

• TfNSW Office at Level 5, Tower A, Zenith Centre, 821 Pacific Highway, Chatswood

• Online at https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects/current-projects/regional-rail

Information on the Proposal would be available through the Project Infoline (1800 684 490) or by email1. During this time feedback is invited.

5.5 Aboriginal community involvement Aboriginal community consultation carried out to date has involved a site assessment on 25 October and 13 November 2017 and 13 February 2018 by OzArk archaeologists and two Aboriginal community representatives. The findings from the site assessment have been documented in the Aboriginal and Historic Heritage Assessment – Regional Rail Maintenance Facility (OzArk, 2018a) which is summarised in Section 6.4 and provided in Appendix C.

5.6 Ongoing consultation At the conclusion of the public display period for this REF, TfNSW would acknowledge receipt of feedback from each respondent. Following consideration of feedback received during the public display period, TfNSW would determine whether to proceed with the Proposal and if so, what conditions would be imposed on the project should it be determined to proceed.

Should TfNSW determine to proceed with the Proposal, a Determination Report would be made available on the TfNSW website and would summarise the key impacts identified in this REF, demonstrate how TfNSW considered issues raised during the public display period, and include a summary of mitigation measures proposed to minimise the impacts of the Proposal.

The project team would keep the community, councils and other key stakeholders informed of the process, identify any further issues as they arise, and develop additional mitigation measures to minimise the impacts of the Proposal. The interaction with the community would be undertaken in accordance with a Community Liaison Plan to be developed prior to the commencement of construction.

1 [email protected]


https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects/current-projects/regional-rail

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

6 Environmental impact assessment Chapter 6 of the REF provides a detailed description of the likely environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Proposal. For each likely impact, the existing environment is characterised and then an assessment is undertaken as to how the Proposal would impact on the existing environment.

This environmental impact assessment has been undertaken in accordance with clause 228 of the EP&A Regulation. A checklist of clause 228 factors and how they have been specifically addressed in this REF is included in Appendix A.

6.1 Traffic and transport An assessment has been prepared to identify the extent and magnitude of potential impacts of the Proposal on the traffic and transport characteristics of the study area. The assessment is documented in the Regional Rail Program – Dubbo Maintenance Facility Traffic Impact Assessment Report (Jacobs, 2018), which is provided in full in Appendix D. A summary of the assessment is also provided in this section.

6.1.1 Methodology The scope for the traffic and transport assessment includes:

• A review and assessment of the existing roads and traffic conditions in the study area.

• An estimate of the traffic generation, distribution and access routes for the development traffic.

• A review and assessment of future road and traffic conditions in the study area.

• Analysis of future intersection performance during both construction and operation stages.

• Identification of potential traffic or road safety concerns.

• Identification of any related impacts on road users.

• Identification of suitable mitigation measures to ameliorate any of the impacts.

Traffic survey Traffic surveys were undertaken over a 24-hour period using video cameras positioned at the four intersections on 20 February 2018, and another four intersections on 22 May 2018. Two tube count surveys from 19 February 2018 to 1 March 2018 were undertaken on Cobbora Road (to the west of White Street and the level crossing with railway) and White Street (to the south of Cobbora Road). Two intersections, Cobra Street/Fitzroy Street and Cobra Street/Wheelers Lane, were considered using historical traffic counts from survey undertaken in December of 2015.

Road modelling This study has used the Sidra intersection software package and Roads and Maritime level of service method to assess intersection performance. The following indicators have been used to measure the intersection operation:

• Level of service (LoS)

• Degree of saturation

• Average vehicle delay


• 95 percentile queue length

LoS is a common performance parameter used to describe the operation of an intersection. Levels of Service range from A (indicating good intersection operation) to F (indicating over-saturated conditions with long delays and queues). At signalised intersections, the LoS criteria are related to average intersection delay (seconds per vehicle). At priority controlled (give-way and stop controlled) and roundabout intersections, the LoS is based on the average delay (seconds per vehicle) for the most delayed movement (Table 6-1). Table 6-1 LoS criteria for intersections

LoS Average delay (seconds per vehicle)

Traffic signals, roundabout

Give way and stop signs

A Less than 14 Good operation Good operation

B 15 to 28 Good with acceptable delays and spare capacity

Acceptable delays and spare capacity

C 29 to 42 Satisfactory Satisfactory, but accident study required

D 43 to 56 Operating near capacity Near capacity and accident study required

E 57 to 70 At capacity. At signals, incidents would cause excessive delays. Roundabouts require other control mode.

At capacity; requires other control mode

F Greater than 71 Unsatisfactory with excessive queuing

Unsatisfactory with excessive queuing; requires other control mode

Source: Roads and Maritime Services Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, 2002

6.1.2 Existing environment This section provides a description of the existing road and transport network within and around the Proposal Site.

Existing site and internal access The Proposal Site is currently occupied by three different organisations including ARTC, Dubbo Regional Council and John Holland. John Holland operates the Country Regional Network land, which is the dominant part of site, and has one access from White Street to the north of the Proposal Site.

The access road is currently unsealed as shown in Figure 6-1. A second access is opened on the land currently used by Dubbo Regional Council as shown in Figure 6-2. This access is at the intersection of White Street and Welchman Street.


Figure 6-1 Proposal Site access 1 on White Street (eastern)

Figure 6-2 Proposal Site access 2 on White Street (western)

The existing internal access roads are shown in Figure 6-3. It should be noted that the internal road has a level crossing with the railway line to access the BJ Engineering Compound, which is currently used by both ARTC and John Holland to maintain track equipment. This level crossing is controlled by signs only (no flashing lights).

Existing rail transport The passenger services at Dubbo Station are shown in Figure 6-4. Passenger rail services from Central (Sydney) terminate at Dubbo where passengers can interchange to coaches for destinations west and north.

Dubbo is connected to regional freight railways:

• ARTC network from east (Merrygoen) to west (Narromine).

• Country Regional Network from north (Gilgandra) to south (Wellington).

In addition, there is a disused railway line to Molong. The proposed Inland Rail Link would not pass through Dubbo, but it is able to connect Dubbo via the existing ARTC network or Country Regional Network.

Local public transport Existing bus services around the Proposal includes Route 571 that runs along White Street to Welchman Street from Dubbo CBD to Orana Mall, and bus Route 575 that runs along Wingewarra Street from Dubbo CBD to Orana Mall. This service would provide public transport access to the site during construction and operation stages.

Active transport There are no dedicated formal cycling facilities around the Proposal. The wide road shoulders provide sufficient space for cyclists. As local access roads, Wingewarra Street, White Street and Welchman Street allow cyclists to ride on the wide shoulders.

Wingewarra Street, White Street and Welchman Street have dedicated footpaths, however, there is adequate room on roadside verge and the wide road shoulders for pedestrians.


Figure 6-3 Proposal Site internal access road


Figure 6-4 Passenger services to Dubbo Station

Road network performance

Roads and intersections The existing road network within the study area includes the following:

• Golden Highway (B84) is a State Road which runs in an east-west direction. It connects Newcastle to Dubbo, terminating at the Newell Highway in Dubbo. The section of Golden Highway to the east of Fitzroy Street uses Cobbora Road, and to the west of Fitzroy Street, Erskine Street. Erskine Street and the section of Cobbora Road to the west of the railway level crossing (immediately to the west of White Street) are four-lane, two-way undivided roads with a posted speed limit of 60 kilometres per hour. Sections of Cobbora Road to the east of White Street have only one traffic lane in each direction.

• Myall Street is a local collector road with a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour. It is divided into two road sections by its intersection with Cobbora Road. To the west of Cobbora Road, Myall Street is a two-lane, two-way road, that connects to the Dubbo Base Hospital and provides kerbside parking on both sides of the street. To the east of Cobbora Road, Myall Street is a four-lane, two-way divided road with a 10 metre wide central median. Myall Street is one of the key distributor roads within Dubbo.

• Mitchell Highway (A32) is a State Road with a posted speed limit of 60 kilometres per hour within Dubbo. It connects the north western towns of Narromine and Nyngan to Dubbo, as well as south eastern towns Orange and Bathurst to Dubbo. The section of Mitchell Highway from Macquarie Street to Wheelers Lane uses Cobra Street, and to the east of Wheelers Lane, uses Wellington Road. Cobra Street and Wellington Road are 22 metres wide kerb-to-kerb including kerbside parking. These two streets are one lane in each direction, two-way divided road with a four metre central median used for turning lanes.

• Wheelers Lane is a collector road that runs north-south with a posted speed limit of 60 kilometres per hour. It is a four-lane, two-way divided road with a 10 metre wide


central median. Bicycle lanes and kerbside parking are provided on either side of road. Wheelers Lane has a level crossing with the railway line to the north of Birch Street.

• Wingewarra Street and Birch Street are also collector roads within Dubbo. Wingewarra Street starts from Bligh Street to the east, and ends at the intersection with Alder Place. Starting from Alder Place, Birch Street goes eastbound and terminates at Sheraton Road. Both of these streets have a posted speed limit of 50 kilometre per hour and a two-lane, two-way road. The proposed access for the Proposal is located on Wingewarra Street.

• Fitzroy Street is a two-lane, two-way undivided local road with a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour. Its road reserve is around 20 metres wide with sufficient space for kerbside parking. Fitzroy Street crosses the east-west railway line at the northern edge of Dubbo Station, and this small portion of east-west railway line is shared by railway lines leading to Narromine, Gilgandra and Orange. Fitzroy Street is an important collector road for the Dubbo Town Centre.

• White Street is a two-lane, two-way undivided local road with a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour, which provides access for traffic from Cobbora Road to the Proposal and other industrial developments. It is noted that at the south eastern corner of the intersection of White Street and Cobbora Road, there are yellow signs ‘No B-Double Access to White Street, access via Myall and Welchman Streets’ for left-turning and right-turning traffic from Cobbora Road into White Street. Therefore, access of B-double vehicles to the Proposal can only be via Myall Street and Welchman Street. The proposed access for the Proposal during construction period is off White Street.

• Welchman Street is a two-lane, two-way undivided local road with a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour, which provides an alternative route to access the site for traffic from Myall Street during construction period.

• Hampden Street is a two-lane, two-way undivided local road with a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour, which provides kerbside parking for both sides. Hampden Street provides an alternative detour route for right turn inbound traffic of the Proposal Site during operation period due to the left-in and left-out design for the access of the Proposal Site on Wingewarra Street.

Ten key intersections have been identified that would be used to access the Proposal. The intersections are:

• Fitzroy Street / Cobbora Road / Erskine Street is a roundabout with two circulation lanes. The southern leg of the roundabout crosses the east-west railway line via a level crossing. The eastern leg also crosses the Main Northern Railway Line to Gilgandra is a level crossing. The northern and southern legs are both widened to provide two lanes for the approaches and exits.

• White Street / Cobbora Road which is a give-way intersection allowing right-turning movements into and out White Street. The intersection forms a staggered ‘T’ intersection with Mary Mackillop Avenue which is left-in and left-out. The western leg of the intersection immediately crosses the Main Northern Railway Line to Gilgandra via a level crossing, which is controlled by flashing signals and boom gates.

• Myall Street / Cobbora Road is a roundabout with two circulation lanes. The western leg of the roundabout links two local access roads including access to Dubbo Base Hospital. The eastern leg of the roundabout directly links Welchman Street.

• Cobra Street / Fitzroy Street is a roundabout with two circulation lanes and all approaches have been widened to two lanes with only one exit lane for all legs. This roundabout has a central island with a diameter of around 17 metres.


• Cobra Street / Wheelers Lane is a roundabout with two circulation lanes and two lanes for all approaches and exits. All legs have a wide central median. This roundabout has a central island diameter of about 32 metres.

• Wingewarra Street / Fitzroy Street is a roundabout with two circulation lanes and all approaches and exits have been widened to two lanes. This roundabout has a central island with a diameter of about 14 metres.

• Birch Street / Wheelers Lane is a roundabout with two circulation lanes and two lanes for all approaches and exits. All legs have central medians. This roundabout has a central island with a diameter of about 25 metres.

• Wingewarra Street / Hampden Street is a T intersection with traffic inbound/outbound Hampden Street giving way to through traffic on Cobra Street. There is a westbound right-turn bay on Cobra Street.

• Myall Street / Welchman Street is a T intersection with traffic inbound outbound Welchman Street giving way to through traffic on Myall Street.

• Wingewarra Street / Chelmsford Street which is an intersection directly connected with the proposed access of the Proposal Site. Currently the proposed access is used for the driveway of ARTC site, which is a full-movement intersection. The dominant traffic flows are through traffic on Wingewarra Street.

There are three level crossings within the study area including:

• Fitzroy Street is a two-lane and two-way road section intersected with four tracks at grade, controlled by boom gates and signals.

• Cobbora Road is a three-lane and two-way road section intersected with three tracks at-grade, controlled by boom gates and signals.

• Wheelers Lane is a two-lane and two-way road section intersected with one rail track, controlled by boom gates and signals.

Traffic survey The survey results show that the peak traffic hours are 8:15am-9:15am in the mornings and 4:30pm-5:30pm in the evenings.

The mid-block tube count (full classification) survey results on Cobbora Road show:

• The average weekday daily traffic volume on Cobbora Road is approximately 22,000 vehicles with 10,500 vehicles eastbound and 11,500 vehicles westbound.

• The weekly variation on Cobbora Road shows weekday daily traffic volumes are low with a fluctuation no more than three per cent. Friday has a slightly higher volumes and Monday slightly lower. However, Saturday and Sunday have significantly reduced traffic and accounts for 69 per cent and 53 per cent of the weekday average daily volume, respectively.

• The average weekday hourly traffic volume profile shows 8:00-9:00am and 3:00-4:00pm on Cobbora Road are the morning and evening peak periods, respectively.

• Heavy vehicles comprise approximately eight per cent of all vehicles.

The mid-block tube count (full classification) survey results on White Road show that:

• The average weekday daily traffic volume on White Street is approximately 1,627 vehicles with 872 vehicles northbound and 756 vehicles southbound.


• The weekly variation on White Street shows weekday daily traffic volumes are low with a fluctuation no more than four per cent. Wednesday has a slightly higher volume and Tuesday slightly lower. However, Saturday and Sunday have significantly reduced traffic and accounts for 45 per cent and 25 per cent of the weekday average daily volume, respectively.

• The average weekday hourly traffic volume profile shows 8:00-9:00am and 3:00-4:00pm on Cobbora Road are the morning and evening peak periods, respectively, and

• Heavy vehicles account for approximately 18 per cent of all vehicles.

In order to assess the proposed access design on Wingewarra Street, a traffic survey at the proposed access on Wingewarra Street was conducted on 22 May 2018, it showed that:

• The morning peak hour occurs at 8:15am to 9:15am with 1,177 vehicles per hour and the evening peak is 4:45pm to 5:45pm with 1,360 vehicles per hour.

• The intersection currently operates as a driveway for the ARTC site with full left and right turns into and out of the intersection.

• The traffic operation on Wingewarra Street exhibits tidal flow with westbound traffic dominated in morning peak and eastbound traffic dominated in evening peak.

Intersection performance Based on the above assessment criteria, Sidra intersection traffic modelling was undertaken to determine the performance of the intersections under existing layout and traffic conditions. The results are summarised in Table 6-2, whilst the Sidra lane summaries are provided in Appendix D.

Table 6-2 Existing intersection performance

Intersection Control Peak period

Degree of saturation

Average delay

(s) LoS

95% queue length

(m)

Most delayed

movement

Cobbora Road & Fitzroy Street

Roundabout AM 0.56 14 B 30 -

PM 0.50 13 A 25 -

Cobbora Road & White Street

Priority control

AM 0.62 367 F 11 Right turn on south leg White Street

PM 0.55 189 F 3 Right turn on south leg White Street

Cobbora Road & Myall Street

Roundabout AM 0.54 12 A 27 -

PM 0.35 12 A 15 -

Myall Street & Welchman Street

Priority control

AM 0.21 24 B 6 -

PM 0.26 19 B 7 -


Intersection Control Peak period

Degree of saturation

Average delay

(s) LoS

95% queue length

(m)

Most delayed

movement

Wingewarra Street & Fitzroy Street


PM 0.54 9 A 31 -

Cobra Street & Fitzroy Street


PM 0.94 23 B 135 -

Cobra Street & Wheelers Lane


PM 0.61 16 B 33 -

Birch Avenue & Wheelers Lane


PM 0.43 10 A 16 -

Cobra Street & Hampden Street

Priority control

AM 0.47 15 B 11 -

PM 0.46 19 B 12 -

Wingewarra Street & Chelmsford Street

Priority control

AM 0.41 20 B 6 -

PM 0.35 22 B 4 -

All of the intersections associated with access to the Proposal are under priority control, and therefore the modelled delay time for the worst movement is used for reporting the intersection LoS.

Of all intersections, only the intersection of Cobbora Road and White Street currently operates at LoS F during AM and PM peak, which is due to the right-turn movement from White Street onto Cobbora Road. Despite the long delay time (367 and 189 seconds for AM and PM peak periods, respectively), the 95th percentile queue length is short, and is 11 metres long for morning peak and three metres long for evening peak. This corresponds to only three cars and one car turning right during morning and evening peak periods, respectively. The intersection as a whole operates acceptably considering that there is such a low demand for the right turn and the overall performance of this intersection is acceptable with other movements having acceptable LoS.

The remaining intersections all operate at LoS A or B during morning and evening peak periods, and the queue length for the worst movement is up to 160 metres. These intersections currently have a good level of service.

Crash data A review of crash history was carried out for the study area. Crash data for the period 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2017 show that there were 37 reported crashes for this period ranging between five and ten crashes per year. These comprised no fatal crashes, three serious crashes, 21 injury crashes and 13 non-casualty crashes. Of the 37 reported crashes:

• Rear-end crashes were the most common crash type within the study area out of 37 crashes (32%)


• Eleven (30%) were crashes involving vehicles going off path

• Eight (22%) were crashes involving vehicles from adjacent directions

• Three (8%) were crashes involving vehicles from opposite directions

• Three (3%) were crashes involving vehicles performing a U-turn

• There were no fatalities or crashes involving pedestrians or cyclists

6.1.3 Potential impacts

Construction phase It is assumed that the heavy vehicle traffic generation during the construction period would primarily consist of delivery trucks, spoil truck, dump trucks and concrete trucks.

Traffic generation During the main construction stage it is expected that the Proposal would generate about 135 inbound cars and zero outbound in the morning peak and 135 outbound cars and zero inbound in the evening peak period. Heavy vehicle movements would peak at about of 400 vehicle trips per day, comprising of 200 in and 200 out. It is estimated that heavy vehicle movements would be about 40 vehicle trips per hour, comprising 20 in and 20 out.

During the realignment of the Main Western Line stage it is expected that the Proposal would generate about 48 inbound cars and zero outbound in the morning peak and 46 outbound and zero inbound in the evening peak period. Heavy vehicle movements are expected to be two in and two out (assumed to be 10% of the main construction stage).

Traffic forecast The traffic volume forecast for the Proposal was undertaken by combining the generated traffic of the Proposal during each stage with the growth in background traffic. The modelling found that traffic generated from the Proposal generally accounts for less than four per cent of the overall intersection traffic volumes. The largest traffic impact as a result of the Proposal would be at the intersection of Myall Street and Welchman Street during the peak construction phase, where the Proposal could generate up to seven per cent of the overall traffic volumes.

Network performance The traffic generated by the Proposal during the main construction stage and the Main Western line realignment stage would affect four key intersections. The intersection modelling results for the Proposal with construction traffic is shown in Table 6-3. Table 6-3 Intersection performance during construction (2020)

Intersection Peak period Existing LoS Peak construction phase

Average delay (s) LoS

Cobbora Road & Fitzroy Street

AM B 16 B

PM A 14 B

Cobbora Road & White Street

AM F 650 F

PM F 242 F


Intersection Peak period Existing LoS Peak construction phase

Average delay (s) LoS

Cobbora Road & Myall Street

AM A 14 B

PM A 12 A

Myall Street & Welchman Street

AM B 36 C

PM B 28 C

As shown in Table 6-3 with the exception of Cobbora Road and White Street all intersections would operate at acceptable LoS and no worse than LoS C. Cobbora Road and White Street is currently operating at LoS F and would continue to do so. The most delayed intersection is the right turn on the south leg at the intersection of Cobbora Road and White Street. It would be expected that some drivers may choose to use alternative routes to travel north to avoid delays turning right at this location. The modelling determined that the Proposal would otherwise not significantly increase the delay or queue lengths at affected intersections in the vicinity of the Proposal.

Road safety There is likely to be no significant impacts on road safety. Access is from a local road and traffic volumes are not significant. The proposed intersection treatment at Wingewarra Street/site access has been designed in accordance with relevant guidelines/standards. The analysis for the crash data during the past five years shows that the crash rates at the local intersections are relatively low.

Operational phase

Site access During operation, it is envisaged that approximately 20 maintenance staff vehicles would access the site per shift. Two heavy vehicles would access the site per day on average. To test the impact sensitivity that the number of employees would have on the surrounding road network, the assumption of 60 light vehicles (maintenance and administration staff) inbound and 60 light vehicles outbound both during AM peak and PM peak periods have been modelled.

Train network One of the potential impacts is the increased frequency of trains using level crossings and particularly at Fitzroy Street. Trains entering and exiting the maintenance facility would increase the number of trains using the Main Western Line. Trains entering the facility could potentially increase the number of times the Fitzroy Street crossing is used by trains. The level crossings on the Main Western Line are currently used four times a day for passenger services.

The increased number of trains passing through these level crossings are listed in Table 6-4.


Table 6-4 Induced train movement passing through railway level crossings

Railway level crossing

Main construction stage (2020)

Main Western Line realignment (2023)

Operation stage (2024)

Fitzroy Street 0 1-2 per month 4 times per day plus 4 per month

Wheelers Lane 0 1-2 per month 4 times per day plus 4 per month

Sheraton Road 0 1-2 per month 4 times per day plus 4 per month

Operations would only increase the number of trains using the Fitzroy Street crossing by four times per month. This is expected to have minimal impact on the road network.

Traffic forecast The modelling found that traffic generated from the Proposal generally accounts for less than four per cent of the overall intersection traffic volumes.

Network performance The traffic generated by the Proposal during operation in 2024 (assumed first full year of operation) would affect six intersections associated with the Proposal Site access on Wingewarra Street. The intersection modelling results for 2024 with and without the Proposal are shown in Table 6-5. Table 6-5 Intersection performance with and without the Proposal in 2024

Intersection Peak period

Existing LoS

Without Proposal With Proposal

Average delay (s) LoS Average

delay (s) LoS

Wingewarra Street & Fitzroy Street

AM B 19 B 20 B

PM A 11 A 11 A

Cobra Street & Fitzroy Street

AM B 125 F 128 F

PM B 99 F 105 F

Cobra Street & Wheelers Lane

AM A 16 B 16 B

PM B 19 B 19 B

Birch Avenue & Wheelers Lane

AM A 10 A 10 A

PM A 11 A 11 A

Cobra Street & Hampden Street

AM B 19 B 19 B

PM B 28 B 28 B

Wingewarra Street & Chelmsford Street

AM B 24 B 18 B

PM B 28 B 15 B


As shown in Table 6-5 without the proposed development in 2024 five intersections would operate with acceptable LoS with the exception of the roundabout of Cobra Street and Fitzroy Street, which would operate at LoS F due to a capacity constraint on its eastern approach. The eastern approach of the roundabout has only one lane for all movements. Considering more than 800 vehicles per hour peak demand in 2024 even without the proposed development on this one lane approach, this approach would operate at poor LoS F.

All intersections with the exception of Cobra Street and Fitzroy Street LoS would stay the same during operation of the Proposal. Cobra Street and Fitzroy Street is currently operations at LoS B and would reduce to LoS F due to the capacity constraint rather than the traffic induced by the Proposal.

Public transport The proposed rail maintenance facility would have little impact on the existing bus services. The existing bus route 571 has up to 10 services per day in each direction which uses White Street and Welchman Street. The existing bus route 575 has up to 11 services per day in each direction along Wingewarra Street and Hampden Street. The increase in traffic is unlikely to impact the network performance. The bus service may also reduce some of the demand for cars to the site.

Regional train services are not expected to be impacted by the development during construction or operation. Track work may require temporary rail closures during which time the passengers may need to be transported by coaches.

Road safety There is likely to be no significant impacts on road safety. Access is from a local road and traffic volumes are not significant. The proposed intersection treatment at Wingewarra Street/site access has been designed in accordance with relevant guidelines/standards. The analysis for the crash data during the past five years shows that the crash rates at the local intersections are relatively low.

6.1.4 Mitigation measures Having regard to the traffic impacts identified above, the following mitigation measures are proposed:

• A construction Traffic Management Plan would be developed for the project. The plan should identify and plan for risks with regards to traffic and transport. In particular, the plan should identify a strategy for the transport of oversized loads to the site.

• The right-turn movement from White Street to Cobbora Road currently experiences significant delay (even without the Proposal). The construction traffic management plan would require construction traffic to only turn left out of White Street onto Cobbora Road.

• It is recommended that all trucks use Welchman Street to access the site to reduce the risk of queuing across the level crossing in Cobbora Road.

Refer to Table 7-1 for a list of proposed mitigation measures.


6.2 Landscape and visual amenity An assessment was carried out to identify the extent and magnitude of potential visual impacts of the Proposal. The assessment is documented in the Proposed Regional Fleet – Maintenance Facility, Dubbo – Visual Assessment Report (Envisage, 2018), which is provided in Appendix E and summarised below.

6.2.1 Methodology For the assessment of landscape character and visual impact, the study area includes the area covered by the Proposal Site, and views from where the Proposal would be potentially seen as shown in Figure 6-5. The visual impact assessment was carried out in accordance with the Roads and Maritime’s Guidelines for Landscape Character and Visual Impact Assessment (2013).

Landscape character and Visual impact assessment For the purpose of the landscape character assessment, the Proposal Site is considered to be one landscape character unit (LCU) which corresponds to landscape character types in the area. This LCU is comprised of an existing industrial area.

Visual impact assessment is carried out to understand the day-to-day visual effects of a Proposal on people’s views. It is based on the assessment of a number of selected viewpoints (VP) that are rated according to the sensitivity of the view and the magnitude (physical size and scale) of the Proposal within that view. The locations and directions of the chosen viewpoints are representative of the range of VPs both within and beyond the maintenance facility.

Seven key VPs were identified within the Proposal visual envelope, as shown on Figure 6-5. The VPs are representative of the road users, residents and visitors to the properties located within and around the Proposal Site.

Both landscape character and visibility are assessed in a similar way and adopt the same matrix as part of the assessment process. This matrix assesses both the sensitivity of a site to change as well as the magnitude of the proposed change to identify a level of impact for the Proposal. These terms are defined below:

• Sensitivity refers to the qualities of an area, the type number and type of receivers and how sensitive the existing character of the setting is to the proposed change. For example, a pristine natural environment would be more sensitive to change than a built up industrial area

• Magnitude refers to the nature of the Proposal. For example, a large interchange would have a very different impact on landscape character than a localised road widening in the same area.

Table 6-6 summaries the ranking of the assessment of these two criteria and how they are combined to provide an overall impact assessment.


Table 6-6 Landscape character and visual impact grading matrix

Magnitude

Sens

itivi

ty

High Moderate Low Negligible

High High impact High-moderate impact

Moderate impact Negligible

Moderate High-moderate impact

Moderate impact

Moderate –low impact Negligible

Low Moderate impact

Moderate –low impact Low impact Negligible

Negligible Negligible impact

Negligible impact

Negligible impact Negligible

Figure 6-5 Viewpoints assessed in the visual impact assessment


6.2.2 Existing environment The flat topography and the industrial and private properties adjoining the Proposal Site reduce opportunities for the public to view the Proposal. Generally, the Proposal would not be visible to the public except within close proximity. From locations where the Proposal would be visible, it is seen in its industrial context, contained by rail lines and industrial buildings.

Landscape character The existing landscape character of the Proposal Site is characterised as an industrial area near the centre of Dubbo, east of Dubbo Station. Figure 6-6 shows the typical form of industries and businesses north of the Proposal Site. At night, the industrial/business area is lit with street lighting and security lighting at each premise, yet it is not brightly lit. In the night sky beyond the industrial area, flood lighting from nearby sporting fields (refer to Figure 6-7) was seen during the evening, with the light appearing brighter and much more intense than the lights of the industrial area. The sports fields are about one kilometre west of the Proposal.

Heights of the warehouses are generally 6-10 metres, with silos and other narrower structures reaching 20 metres or more. Lengths of warehouses are up to 150 metres. There are also vacant lots and large lots without buildings used for storage of materials. Generally, the industrial/business area is well-kept and neat in appearance, and is relatively flat, restricting views within the area to the viewer’s immediate location and their surroundings at close range.

The industrial and business development areas north of the Proposal comprise large fenced allotments with large warehousing/sheds, and hard-paved yards for vehicles and stock. There are several silos, storage tanks and stacks in the area.

The Proposal is bound by a residential area to the south (refer to Figure 6-8). The existing Main Western Line traverses the southern site boundary about 20 metres from the back fences of the residential properties. Within the industrial area, off White Street, is a small residential community centred on Darby Close (refer to Figure 6-9).

As described above, the Proposal is generally not visible to the public except and when it is it would be seen in its industrial context, as such the landscape character has been assessed as having a low sensitivity to change.


Figure 6-6 Character of surrounding industrial/business area


Figure 6-7 View from the Proposal Site looking west

Figure 6-8 View from the Proposal Site looking south


Figure 6-9 View from the Proposal Site looking north

General visibility The following seven VPs were identified for this visual impact assessment from which people would be likely to see the Proposal. These VPs include:

• VP1 – White Street/Welchman Street intersection (representative of Darby Close residential community).

• VP2 – Dubbo Amateur Theatre Society (representative of the southern residential area).

• VP3 – Bunglegumbie Street (representative of West Dubbo residential area).

• VP4 – Fitzroy Street Showground entrance.

• VP5 – Wheelers Lane.

• VP6 – Cobbora Road.

• VP7 – Wingewarra/Chelmsford Street intersection.

The VPs are shown on Figure 6-5 and described in Table 6-7.


Table 6-7 Viewpoints from around the Proposal Site

VP Description Photograph 1 Direct views from the residential

community of Darby Close of the Proposal are obstructed by shrubby vegetation along the site bound with White Street. However, 75 metres west and east of Darby Close along White Street there are views into the Proposal Site. Residents of Darby Close would see the Proposal at these locations as they access their homes. Views of the Proposal would be possible for short-time periods while travelling to and from Darby Close along White Street.

Existing view from Darby Close/

White Street intersection

Existing view from White Street/ Welchman Street

intersection

2 Five cul-de-sacs run off Wingewarra Street and Aspen Road south of the Proposal (Cedar Court, Mulga Court, Boronia Place, Hakea Place and Grevillea Close), with properties at the end of each cul-de-sac backing onto the Proposal. Views of the Proposal would be possible from within the backyards of about 22 private residential properties lining the railway corridor. Many of the homes have substantial tree plantings within their backyards to reduce views of the existing Main Western Line (located 20 metres from the back fence) and provide privacy. Public views are not possible from the cul-de-sacs. It would not possible to see into the Proposal from this public viewpoint. Public views are available, however, from the Dubbo Amateur Theatre Society (DATS) which also borders the Site to the south. The view from DATS would be generally representative of what could be expected to be seen from the residences described above.

Existing view from Mulga Circuit

Existing view from DATS


VP Description Photograph 3 There are elevated residential areas to

the west of the Proposal, which are over three kilometres away. At this distance, the Proposal would be barely distinguishable from surrounding industrial uses. The photograph to the right is the view of the Proposal Site from Bunglegumbie Rd, West Dubbo.

4 From Fitzroy Street, it would not

possible to see the Proposal from public viewpoints. Viewers would be located 800 metres from the Proposal and there are intervening buildings and vegetation in the view.

5 The Proposal would be visible from the

Wheelers Lane rail crossing east of the Proposal. From the crossing, a high number of potential public viewers would potentially see the Proposal. However, the use of the rail crossing is temporary, and views are not directed toward the Proposal. The Proposal would be barely distinguishable from surrounding rail and industrial activity.

6 The Proposal would be visible from the

Cobbora Road rail crossing to the north. From the crossing, a high number of potential public viewers would potentially see the Proposal. However, the use of the rail crossing is temporary, and views are not directed toward the Proposal. The Proposal would barely be distinguishable from surrounding rail and industrial activity.


VP Description Photograph 7 The intersection of Wingewarra and

Chelmsford Streets is on the southern side of the Proposal. From this VP, the entrance to the ARTC centre is visible. A narrow, distant view of the Proposal would be possible from this VP. The existing entrance to ARTC is informal, featuring a gravel road within a grassed open space and tall native trees. This VP would provide public views and private views for residents near the proposed site entrance


Construction phase

Landscape character During construction the Proposal would have a moderate-low level of impact on the landscape character. This would be due to construction activities (including transport deliveries, excavation equipment, piling rigs) potentially being visible over the construction period.

Visual impact During construction, the Proposal would be expected to temporarily reduce visual amenity for surrounding residents, adjacent businesses and road users nearby due to elements such as:

• Erection of fencing, barricades, gates and lighting to provide safe and secure worksites.

• The presence of construction machinery and materials storage.

• General construction activities within the construction footprint, such as vegetation clearing, earthworks, stockpiling materials and the parking/use of construction plant and vehicles.

• Additional construction vehicle movements and minor traffic disruption associated with construction traffic.

During the construction period, all viewpoints identified would be likely to have increased visual impacts as described in Table 6-8. As can be seen from this table the visual impacts range from low to high. The highest impacted area would be for VP2 due the close proximity of the Proposal. It would be expected that some residents would see large scale earth moving and construction activities in close proximity to backyard fences.


Table 6-8 Visual impact assessment for construction

Impact Comment

VP1 – White Street/Welchman Street (Darby Close residential community)

Sensitivity Moderate The construction site compound would be located near the site entrance on White Street. The construction compound buildings and stores would unlikely be visible above existing vegetation. Movement of vehicles and machinery into and out of the construction site would be visible during construction.

Magnitude Moderate

Overall impact Moderate

VP2 – DATS (southern residential area)

Sensitivity Moderate Earthworks and construction of the maintenance facility would occur very close to the adjoining residents of Cedar Court and Mulga Court. The decommissioning of the existing alignment of the Main Western Line would be the closest construction activity to all properties lining the southern site boundary.

Magnitude High

Overall impact Moderate-high

VP3 – Bunglegumbie Road, West Dubbo

Sensitivity Low The Proposal would be barely distinguishable from surrounding industrial uses.

Magnitude Low

Overall impact Low

VP4 – Fitzroy Street/Church Street Showground entrance

Sensitivity Low The Proposal would be barely distinguishable from surrounding industrial uses.

Magnitude Low

Overall impact Low

VP5 – Wheelers Lane rail crossing

Sensitivity Low The use of the rail crossing would be temporary, and views would not be directed toward the Proposal. The Proposal would also be barely distinguishable from surrounding rail and industrial activity.

Magnitude Low

Overall impact Low

VP6 – Cobbora Road rail crossing

Sensitivity Moderate The use of the rail crossing is temporary, and views are not directed toward the Proposal. The Proposal would barely be distinguishable from surrounding rail and industrial activity. Magnitude Moderate


VP7 – Wingewarra Street/Chelmsford Street

Sensitivity Moderate From this viewpoint, the construction would be close and directly in view of residents and road users.

Magnitude Moderate



Operational phase

Landscape character The impacts to the landscape character during operation would be:

• Relatively compatible with the adjoining industrial character.

• The Proposal elements would be larger, but not dissimilar in scale to the existing building form of the industrial area.

Overall, the Proposal would represent a moderate-low and acceptable level of change to the landscape character of the site and its surrounds.

Visual impact During the operation all viewpoints identified would be likely to have increased visual impacts as described in Table 6-9. The visual impacts range from negligible to moderate. The areas moderately impacted are located around VP2 and VP7 due the close proximity of the Proposal. For some residents, the Proposal would be very close (about 15 metres from backyard fences) and they would likely see the top of the maintenance building unless existing vegetation within their own property prevents views. There would also the visual changes of a new, wider, formalised entrance on Wingewarra Street to the south of the Site.

The view for adjoining residents would be expected to improve as the existing alignment of the Main Western Line is decommissioned and they would no longer see trains on the Main Western Line at close proximity.

Overall, the Proposal would represent a moderate and acceptable impact to private and public viewpoints. Table 6-9 Visual impact assessment during operation

Impact Comment

VP1 – White Street/Welchman Street (Darby Close residential community)

Sensitivity Moderate During operation very little of the Proposal would be visible. Most of the Proposal would be located centrally or on the southern side of site. The top of the maintenance facility may be visible from the White Street/ Welchman Street intersection. The facility would be located about 170 metres from the nearest Darby Close residence. At that distance, the existing vegetation along White Street would completely screen the building from Darby Close. The White Street site entrance would not be used routinely during operation as the main site access would be on the southern side of the Proposal. The realigned Main Western Line would be closer to residents. The track would be about 115 metres from the nearest Darby Close residence. However, even on the proposed raised embankment, the tracks would not be seen due to the screening provided by existing vegetation on White Street. It is possible that trains would be seen when they travel on the tracks. The maintenance lines and trains undergoing maintenance would not be visible as they would be located within the cutting. Additional lighting at night is anticipated to be no brighter than existing lighting from the surrounding industrial area.

Magnitude Low

Overall impact Low - Moderate


Impact Comment

VP2 – DATS (Southern residential area)

Sensitivity Moderate The view for adjoining residents would improve, as once the existing alignment of the Main Western Line is decommissioned, residents would no longer see trains at close proximity. Further, planting could be undertaken within the former railway corridor to screen views to the Proposal. Residents would see the top of the maintenance facility above the seven metre-deep cutting until vegetation planted within the former corridor is tall enough to screen the Site (expected to take three to five years). Residents would also see the administration building and vehicles accessing the Proposal Site. It is unlikely that the maintenance lines or trains within the maintenance area would be visible due to the depth of the cutting.

Magnitude Moderate


VP3 – Bunglegumbie Road, West Dubbo

Sensitivity Low The Proposal is unlikely to be seen from these elevated residential locations. The scale of the proposed maintenance facility is larger than surrounding industrial buildings however the maintenance facility would be located within a cutting and would be typical character to existing buildings within the industrial area and is unlikely to be seen from this distance.

Magnitude Negligible

Overall impact Negligible

VP4 – Fitzroy Street/Church Street Showground entrance

Sensitivity Low The Proposal is unlikely to be visible above the existing vegetation and buildings in the view.

Magnitude Negligible

Overall impact Negligible

VP5 – Wheelers Lane rail crossing

Sensitivity Low From Wheelers Lane, the top of the maintenance facility would be visible above the cutting about 600 metres away. However, the scale of the Proposal would not appear dissimilar to the building character of the surrounding industrial area and would not be visually prominent or central to the view.

Magnitude Low

Overall impact Low

VP6 – Cobbora Road rail crossing

Sensitivity Low From Cobbora Road, the proposed maintenance facility would be visible at approximately 650 metre from the viewer. From this angle, the viewer may see the western opening of the maintenance facility and trains on the maintenance tracks. However, the scale of the Proposal would not appear dissimilar to the building character of the surrounding industrial area and would not be visually prominent or central to the view.

Magnitude Low

Overall impact Low

VP7 – Wingewarra Street/Chelmsford Street

Sensitivity Moderate During operation a new, wider, formalised entrance would be visible. The entrance would likely comprise a bitumen road and concrete gutter. The Proposal provides an opportunity to plant Magnitude Moderate


Impact Comment

Overall impact Moderate new trees and create an attractive entrance to the Proposal. The maintenance facility and other proposed buildings are unlikely to be visible from this viewpoint.

6.2.4 Mitigation measures

Design The following would support the integration of the Proposal into the surroundings:

• Proposed building materials are to be non-reflective where feasible, including:

External walls and roofing materials are to be of a non-reflective material, such as brick; concrete block, rendered concrete or masonry, metal or fibre cement

All external building materials including roofing shall be of a neutral colour appropriate to the site that promotes the sense of a unified, planned industrial park (excluding solar panels).

• The colour of the maintenance facility is to be recessive (i.e. be of colours that blend into the background and do not have a high contrast), to reduce its visual dominance, or based on the colour palette typical of the surrounding industrial area (note, this would not apply to any proposed community artwork elements of the proposal).

• Art may be included to enhance the overall visual setting of the Proposal

• Use black mesh fencing or black palisade fencing as security fencing in visually prominent areas (black blends into surroundings).

• Limit signage in terms of size and garish colours and rationalise to minimise number of signs.

• A landscape plan would be prepared for the Proposal, which would include the consideration of following:

Undertake tree and shrub planting within the decommissioned alignment of the Main Western Line to screen the Proposal from residents located to the south of the Site. The screening vegetation would consist of the following:

Trees with a mature height of at least eight metres would be planted.

Trees would be at least 1.5 metres in height at planting.

Trees along street frontages shall be consistent and compatible with the existing street trees.

Tree species as recommended by Council’s Trees by Street document would be considered

Actively remove weeds during operation and maintain landscaping and grounds within the Proposal Site to a high standard.

Construction To reduce the visual impact during construction, the following measures are recommended:

• Ensure that the construction compound and construction parking areas are located away from direct residential views where practical.


• If practical, install visual screening to the rear of residential properties along the southern boundary of the Proposal Site to reduce the visual interruption of construction activities.

• Protect identified existing vegetation to be retained prior to commencement of construction in accordance with the Vegetation Management (Protection and Removal) Guideline (TfNSW, 2018c).

• Reduce potential dust impacts by:

Misting active work areas and exposed ground to avoid dust plumes.

Installing screen hoardings to the back fence of properties along the southern boundary of the Proposal.

• Avoid temporary light spill beyond the construction site (when night work is required) by directing light source down and installing shields around the light source.

• During construction, remove weeds and dispose in accordance with TfNSW’s Weed Management and Disposal Guide.

• Rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible following construction.

• Remove graffiti if it occurs at the construction site in accordance with TfNSW standard requirements.


6.3 Noise and vibration The potential noise and vibration impacts on sensitive receivers during construction and operation of the Proposal have been assessed as part of the Regional Rail Dubbo Maintenance Facility – Noise and Vibration Assessment (NVA) (Jacobs, 2018b) provided in Appendix F. The main findings of the report are summarised below.

6.3.1 Methodology The noise and vibration assessment was prepared in accordance with the following guidelines:

• Interim Construction Noise Guideline (ICNG) (Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW, July 2009).

• Construction Noise and Vibration Guideline (CNVG) (TfNSW, 2018b).

• Road Noise Policy (RNP) (NSW EPA, 2011).

• Assessing Vibration: a technical guideline (DEC, 2006).

• British Standard 6472-1: 2008 Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings Part 1: Vibration sources other than blasting, BSI, 2008.

• British Standard 7385 Part 2-1993 Evaluation and measurement for vibration in buildings Part 2, BSI, 1993.

• German Standards Institute (DIN) 4150: Part 3-1999 Structural vibration – Effects of vibration on structures, DIN, 1999.

• Noise Policy for Industry (EPA, 2017).

• NSW Rail Infrastructure Noise Guidelines (RING, EPA, 2013).

In summary, the methodology for the noise and vibration assessment comprised the following:

• Identifying noise and vibration sensitive receivers and defining the study area.


• Carrying out noise monitoring to determine the existing noise environment.

• Establishing noise and vibration assessment criteria.

• Prediction of construction and operational noise levels.

• Assessing predicted noise and vibration levels against the relevant criteria to identify potential impacts.

• Identify safeguards and management measures to be implemented to minimise impacts.

Study area The study area for the noise and vibration assessment has been defined as sensitive receivers located within 500 metres of the Proposal. Receivers were identified using aerial photography, Geographic Information System databases and information gathered from site visits.

Noise monitoring Unattended noise monitoring to identify background noise levels for the Proposal was carried out from 12 to 23 February 2018 at representative locations (refer to Figure 6-10) using automatic unattended noise monitoring equipment (Type Ngara noise loggers). The loggers continuously measured the level of ambient noise over 15-minute periods for the duration of the monitoring period at each location.

Noise modelling To evaluate potential noise impacts for sensitive receivers during construction and operation, a model was developed using SoundPlan v8.0 predictive software package. Key acoustic features of the existing environment were incorporated into the model including terrain, surrounding buildings, ground and air absorption, receivers, and local meteorological conditions

6.3.2 Existing environment The nearest residential receiver areas in relation to the Proposal include:

• Receivers north of the site along Darby Close, White Street and Welchman Street.

• Receivers to the north east off Hopkins Parade and Bonner Crescent.

• Receivers to the south along Wingewarra Street, Hakea Place, Grevillea Close, Aspen Road and Boronia Place.

• Receivers to the south west along Aspen Road, Mulga Court, Cedar Court, Maple Court and Kurrajong Court.

• Receivers to the west along Fitzroy Street.

The nearest non-residential sensitive receiver locations in relation to the Proposal are:

• Dubbo North Public School to the northwest.

• TAFE Western – Dubbo Myall Street Campus to the north.

• Orana Heights Public School to the south east.

• Dubbo Showground to the west.

• Dubbo Salvation Army Gipps Street to the west

These sensitive receiver locations listed above are shown in relation to the Proposal in Figure 6-10.


Existing noise environment The existing noise environment has been identified based on the results of unattended noise monitoring which was carried out at five representative locations within the study area, as shown in Figure 6-10. Noise results were post-processed to eliminate inconsistent features (including wind speed greater than five metres per second, rain and seasonal insect noise) and to develop the data into the relevant metrics for assessment. The noise monitoring results are presented in Table 6-10. The rating background level (RBL) refers to the median value of monitored background noise levels measured over each period. The equivalent continuous level (A weighted) or ‘LAeq’ is the equivalent continuous sound level or energy-time average for the relevant period of monitoring. Table 6-10 Unattended noise monitoring results

ID Location Measurement descriptor

Measured Noise Level – dB(A) re 20 µPa

Daytime 7:00am – 6:00pm

Evening 6:00pm – 10:00pm

Night time 10:00pm –

7:00am

NM1 White Street

LAeq 58 52 50

RBL (Background) 37 38 35

NM2 MacDonald Street

LAeq 55 52 47


NM3 Maple Court

LAeq 48 47 49


NM4 Hopkins Parade

LAeq 51 47 47


NM5 Grevillea Close

LAeq 63 68 60


The results of monitoring at all locations are considered representative of the surrounding noise environment. It is noted that LAeq noise levels at the Grevillea Close monitoring site are influenced by frequent barking dogs.

Noise levels throughout the area are generally influenced by local noise sources and the location’s proximity to road traffic noise form local and regional road corridors.

Location NM3 (Maple Court) was also used to monitor the existing rail noise. This monitoring location was selected because it is closest to the existing Main Western Line. Ambient daytime (7:00am to 10:00pm) and night-time (10:00pm to 7:00am) noise levels at the logger location have been summarised in Table 6-11 below.


Figure 6-10 Receivers, noise monitoring locations and noise catchment area


Table 6-11 Ambient noise levels at monitoring location NM3 (Maple Court)

Day/ date of measurement

Measured Noise Level – dB(A) re 20 µPa

Daytime 7:00am – 6:00pm Night time 10:00pm – 7:00am

Overall Levels 47.7 48.5

For the purpose of the noise assessment, receivers have been grouped into five separate Noise Catchment Areas (NCAs) based on the local existing noise environment and their potential to be affected by noise impacts from the Proposal. The NCAs are outlined in Table 6-12 and shown on Figure 6-10.

Table 6-12 Noise catchment areas

NCA Representative noise monitoring location Description

NCA 1 White Street (NM1) Receivers north of the site along Darby Close, White Street and Welchman Street

NCA 2 MacDonald Street (NM2) Receivers to the west along Fitzroy Street

NCA 3 Maple Court (NM3) Receivers to the south along Wingewarra Street, Hakea Place, Grevillea Close, Aspen Road and Boronia Place

NCA 5 Hopkins Parade (NM4) Receivers to the north east, off Hopkins Parade and Bonner Crescent

NCA 5 Grevillea Close (NM5) Receivers to the south west along Aspen Road, Mulga Court, Cedar Court, Maple Court and Kurrajong Court

6.3.3 Criteria

Construction noise criteria Construction noise criteria have been established for the Proposal in accordance with the ICNG, in the form of construction Noise Management Levels (NMLs).

The NMLs for residential receivers were derived from the existing background noise levels, or rating background levels, with the relevant criteria applied in accordance with the ICNG for works during recommended standard hours and works outside these hours. Table 6-13 identifies the methodology applied in the development of NMLs for residential receivers. Table 6-13 Development of construction noise management levels

Time of day NML LAeq(15min)

How the criteria apply

Recommended standard hours (SH): Monday to Friday 7:00am to 6:00pm Saturday 8:00am to 1:00pm No work on

Noise affected Rating RBL+10dB(A)

The noise affected level represents the point above which there may be some community reaction to noise. Where the predicted or measured LAeq(15 min) is greater than the noise affected level, the proponent should apply all feasible and reasonable work practices to meet the noise affected level. The proponent should also inform all potentially impacted residents of the nature of works to be carried out, the expected noise levels and duration, as well as contact details.


Time of day NML LAeq(15min)

How the criteria apply

Sundays or public holidays

Highly noise affected 75 dB(A)

The highly noise affected level represents the point above which there may be strong community reaction to noise. Where noise is above this level, the relevant authority (consent, determining or regulatory) may require respite periods by restricting the hours that the very noisy activities can occur, taking into account: times identified by the community when they are less sensitive to noise (such as before and after school for works near schools, or mid-morning or mid-afternoon for works near residences if the community is prepared to accept a longer period of construction in exchange for restrictions on construction times.

Outside recommended standard hours (OOH) – All other times including Public Holidays

Noise affected Rating RBL+5 dB(A)

A strong justification would typically be required for works outside the recommended standard hours. The proponent should apply all feasible and reasonable work practices to meet the noise affected level. Where all feasible and reasonable practices have been applied and noise is more than 5 dB(A) above the noise affected level, the proponent should negotiate with the community. For guidance on negotiating agreements see section 7.2.2 of the ICNG.

Noise sensitive non-residential receivers including educational, medical and places of worship are located within the study area. For these other relevant land uses within the Proposal Site, the noise criteria in Table 6-14 apply. Table 6-14 Noise management levels for non-residential land uses

Land use NML, LAeq(15min) (applies when properties are being used)

Classrooms at schools and other educational institutions

Internal noise level – 45 dB(A)

Hospital wards and operating theatres Internal noise level – 45 dB(A)

Place of worship Internal noise level – 45 dB(A)

Active recreation areas (characterised by sporting activities and activities which generate their own noise or focus for participants, making them less sensitive to external noise intrusion)

External noise level – 65 dB(A)

Passive recreation areas (characterised by contemplative activities that generate little noise and where benefits are compromised by external noise intrusion, for example, reading, meditation)

External noise level – 60 dB(A)

Industrial premises External noise level – 75 dB(A)

Offices, retail outlets External noise level – 70 dB(A) Source: ICNG, DECC 2009

Sleep disturbance criteria Operational and construction noise during the night has the potential to disturb people’s sleep patterns.

A sleep disturbance screening criteria of 55 dB(A) LA1 minute has been adopted for the construction of the Proposal based on the guidance in the RNP regarding the potential for sleep disturbance within residences.


Construction noise criteria summary Based on the background monitoring results outline in Section 6.3.2 and the application of the criteria presented above, the following construction NMLs have been established as outlined in Table 6-15. Out of hours works (OOHW) are works proposed to be undertaken outside of standard working hours (refer to Section 3.6.3). Table 6-15 Construction noise management levels

Noise management level, LAeq dB(A) Sleep disturbance

LA1 Receiver Standard

hours OOHW Highly

affected

Day Evening Night

NCA 1 47 42 43 40 75 50

NCA 2 54 49 47 37 75 47

NCA 3 44 39 41 40 75 50

NCA 4 50 45 44 41 75 51

NCA 5 50 45 46 42 75 52

Place of worship, classrooms at school and other educational institutions

55 external (or 45 internal)

n/a n/a n/a

All industrial premises 70 n/a n/a n/a

All offices and retail outlets 65 n/a n/a n/a

Active recreation areas 65 n/a n/a n/a

Passive recreation areas 60 n/a n/a n/a

Construction vibration criteria Construction vibration criteria are separated into two categories being vibration effects on humans, and vibration impacts on building structures.

Section 2.6 of the Rail Infrastructure Noise Guidelines (RING) refers to the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) Assessing Vibration: A Technical Guideline for a consideration of acceptable vibration levels from rail developments.

Human comfort criteria The NSW EPA classifies vibration as one of three types:

• Continuous – where vibration occurs uninterrupted and can include sources such as machinery and constant road traffic.

• Impulsive – where vibration occurs over a short duration (i.e. less than two seconds) and occurs less than three times during the assessment period, which is not defined. This may include activities such as occasional dropping of heavy equipment or loading / unloading activities.

• Intermittent – occurs where continuous vibration activities are regularly interrupted, or where impulsive activities recur. This may include activities such as rock hammering, drilling, pile driving and heavy vehicle or train pass-by events.


Construction vibration is typically classed as intermittent and is assessed using the vibration dose value (VDV). Relevant assessment criteria expressed as preferred and maximum VDVs are provided in Table 6-16. Table 6-16 Acceptable vibration dose values for intermittent vibration (m/s1.75) 1-80 Hz

Location Day time (7am-10pm)

Night time (10pm-7am)

Preferred value

Maximum value

Preferred value

Maximum value

Critical areas (e.g. hospitals) 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.20 Residential buildings 0.20 0.40 0.13 0.26 Offices, schools, churches, etc 0.40 0.80 0.40 0.80 Workshops 0.80 1.60 0.80 1.6 Source: DECC, 2006

Building Structures Criteria When assessing potential vibration impacts on building structures, the velocity and direction of the movement is measured. The measurement is referred to as the peak particle velocity (PPV), presented in millimetres per second (mm/s).

Vibration from construction activities, with regard to building damage, is assessed using the German standard DIN 4150: Part 3 – 1999 Effects of Vibration on Structures (DIN Guideline). The DIN Guideline values for PPV measured at the foundation of various structures are summarised in Table 6-17. Table 6-17 Vibration velocity for the evaluation of the effects of short term vibration (DIN)

Type of structure

Guideline values for velocity of vibration (mm/s)

Vibration frequency at the foundation Vibration at

horizontal plane of highest floor at

all frequencies 1 Hz to

10 Hz

10 Hz to

50 Hz 50 Hz to 100 Hz*

Buildings used for commercial purposes, industrial buildings and buildings of similar design

20 20 to 40 40 to 50 40

Dwellings and buildings of similar design and/or use 5 5 to 15 15 to 20 15

Structures that, because of their sensitivity to vibration, do not correspond to those listed in lines 1 and 2 and are of great intrinsic value (e.g. heritage structures/buildings that are under a preservation order)

3 8 to 10 8 to 10 8

* For frequencies above 100Hz, at least the values specified in this column shall be applied Source: DIN 4151

Operational rail noise criteria The Proposal includes the realignment of the Main Western Line to the north of the proposed rail yard, which is within the existing and operational rail corridor. Therefore, the realignment would be assessed as a redeveloped rail line against the RING. The RING recommended airborne noise criteria trigger levels for a redeveloped rail line are presented in Table 6-18 below. Trigger levels for non-residential sensitive receivers are presented in Table 6-14.


Table 6-18 Airborne residential noise trigger levels for rail line realignment

Type of development Noise trigger levels (external) – dB(A)

Day (7:00am – 10:00pm) Night (10:00pm – 7:00am)

Redevelopment of existing rail line

Development increases existing LAeq(period)1 rail noise levels by 2 dB(A) or

more, or existing LAmax rail noise levels by 3 dB(A) or more and predicted rail noise levels exceed:

65 LAeq(15h) 60 LAeq(9h)

85 LAFmax2 85 LAFmax

1 LAeq(period) means LAeq(15h) for the day-time period and LAeq(9h) for the night-time period. 2 LAFmax refers to the maximum noise level not exceeded for 95 per cent of rail pass-by events and is measured

using the “fast” response setting on a sound level meter.

For the redevelopment of existing rail projects, the noise trigger levels apply both immediately after operations commence and for projected traffic volumes at an indicative period (ten years or similar) into the future to represent the expected future level of rail traffic usage. For this assessment, it has been assumed that the rail traffic volumes are to remain the same.

Operational rail vibration criteria Vibration criteria have been determined in accordance with Assessing Vibration: A Technical Guideline (DECC, 2006). Rail traffic is generally classified as an intermittent vibration source. Vibration criteria for both construction and operational vibration are presented in Table 6-19. Table 6-19 Vibration criteria for rail traffic

Receiver type Time period Intermittent vibration dose value (VDV ms1.75)

Preferred Maximum

Residential Day (7am to 10pm) 0.2 0.4

Night (10pm to 7am) 0.13 0.26

Office, schools, educational institutions and places of worship

When in use 0.4 0.8

Operational noise of the Maintenance Facility – Noise Policy for Industry The NSW Noise Policy for Industry (NPI) provides the framework and process for deriving the noise limits for.

The procedure specifies that there are two aspects of environmental noise that require assessment. The two aspects are:

• Intrusiveness: a noise source would be deemed to be non-intrusive if the monitored LAeq(period) noise level of the development does not exceed the RBL by more than 5 dB(A).

• Amenity noise level: this is the acceptability of the resulting noise, in relation to maintaining the amenity of the surrounding area. The amenity noise levels are defined by the recommended noise levels minus 5 dB(A).

The more stringent of the amenity or intrusive criteria defines the criteria for the Proposal. Accordingly, the following criteria for intrusive noise and amenity have be have been determined for the residential receivers as provided in Table 6-20.


Table 6-20 Intrusiveness criteria for the Proposal

NCA Time of Day RBL Allowance Intrusive noise criteria LAeq dB(A)

NCA 1 Day 37 42

Evening 38 42*

Night 35 40

NCA 2 Day 44 49

Evening 42 47

Night 32 37

NCA 3 Day 34 39

Evening 36 +5dBA 39*

Night 35 39*

NCA 4 Day 40 45

Evening 39 44

Night 36 41

NCA 5 Day 40 45

Evening 41 45*

Night 37 42

The applicable amenity noise levels for non-residential receivers are presented in Table 6-21. Table 6-21 Amenity noise levels – recommended noise levels

Time of day

Recommended noise level LAeq

dB(A)

Receiver type Proposal amenity

noise level LAeq dB(A)

Urban residential Day 60 55 Evening 50 45 Night 45 40

School classroom - internal When in use 35 30 (or 40 external) Places of worship - internal 40 35 (or 45 external) Commercial premises 65 60 Industrial premises 70 65

Road traffic noise criteria In accordance with the application notes for the NSW Road Noise Policy (RNP), (DECCW, 2011) for existing residences and other sensitive land uses affected by additional traffic on existing roads generated by land use developments, any increase in the total traffic noise level as a result of the development should be limited to 2 dB. In general terms, an increase of this magnitude would occur where traffic volumes increase by approximately 60% as a result of the development.



Construction phase It is expected that the Proposal would be constructed over a period of approximately 30 months and is anticipated to commence in early 2019.

An overview of the indicative construction activities, used for the noise and vibration assessment, anticipated to occur during construction of the maintenance facility is presented below:

• Land clearing

• Earthworks

• Services and drainage installation

• Track work

• Building construction

• Utility installation

• Landscaping

• Site compound

• Demolition

This staging is based on the current design and may change once the detailed design methodology is finalised. The construction methodology and equipment list would be further developed during the detailed design of the Proposal by the nominated Contractor in consultation with TfNSW.

Proposed plant and equipment to be used during each stage of construction are provided in Section 3.6.2 and have been factored into the assessment of construction noise and vibration impacts during each stage of construction. The final construction methodology and staging would be refined during the detailed design phase of the Proposal, and associated noise and vibration impacts and mitigation measures reassessed as required.

Predicted construction noise impacts

Residential Construction noise impacts were evaluated at each receiver for the nine construction scenarios listed above for each of the five NCAs. Table 6-22 details predicted worse case construction noise impacts at each NCA for each stage of construction as identified above. Construction plant would be mobile and operate at multiple locations within the Proposal Site. The predicted noise impacts in Table 6-22 have been determined for worst case noise levels where required plant are in operation at or near the boundaries of the Proposal Site.


Table 6-22 Predicted construction noise impacts at surrounding residential receivers

Construction activity

Receiver location

Predicted noise – dB(A)

Predicted daytime impact – dB(A)

Predicted out-of-hours day impact –

dB(A)

Predicted out-of-hours evening impact – dB(A)

Predicted night-time impact – dB(A)

Standard Hours NML

Exceed. OOHW Day NML Exceed.

OOHW Evening

NML Exceed.

OOHW Night NML

Exceed.

Land clearing

NCA 1 42 to 61 47 Up to 14 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a





Earthworks






Service and drainage installation

NCA 1 37 to 56 47 Up to 9 42 Up to 14 43 Up to 13 40 Up to 16

NCA 2 26 to 54 54 - 49 Up to 5 47 Up to 7 37 Up to 17




Track work


NCA 2 21 to 49 54 - 49 - 47 Up to 2 37 Up to 12





Receiver location




dB(A)



Standard Hours NML


OOHW Evening

NML Exceed.

OOHW Night NML

Exceed.


Building construction


NCA 2 23 to 49 54 - n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a




Utility installation






Landscaping NCA 1 25 to 44 47 - n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a





Site compound NCA 1 30 to 53 47 Up to 6 42 Up to 11 43 Up to 10 40 Up to 13

NCA 2 21 to 47 54 - 49 - 47 - 37 Up to 10




Receiver location




dB(A)



Standard Hours NML


OOHW Evening

NML Exceed.

OOHW Night NML

Exceed.



Demolition







The predicted noise impacts for construction works are likely to cause annoyance and disturbance at nearest receivers. Notably, the 75 dB(A) LAeq,15min highly noise affected NML is predicted to only be exceeded at the nearest residential receivers in NCA 5.

The construction noise impacts for residential receivers are summarised as follows:

• Residential receiver at 7 Mulga Court, Dubbo has been identified to exceed the ‘highly noise affected’ NML during earthworks. Construction noise at the adjacent neighbour, 10 Mulga Court, have been predicted to be 75 dB(A) which just meets the ‘highly noise affected’ NML. No other receivers have been identified to exceed the ‘highly noise affected’ NML

• During demolition, residences in NCAs 1 and 2 are predicted to comply with the standard hours NMLs. However, residences in NCA 3 at Hakea Place, Grevillea Close, Boronia Place, Aspen Road and Wingewarra Street, in NCA 4 at Hopkins Parade and in NCA 5 at Mulga Court, Cedar Court and Aspen Road are predicted to exceed the standard hours NMLs

• During land clearing and earthworks, residences in all NCAs are predicted to exceed the standard hours NMLs. Residences in each NCA that have been identified to be most impacted are as follow:

NCA 1 – residences at White Street and Welchman Street.

NCA 2 – residences at Fitzroy Street and Wingewarra Street.

NCA 3 – residences at Hakea Place, Grevillea Close, Boronia Place, Aspen Road and Wingewarra Street.

NCA 4 – residences at Hopkins Parade.

NCA 5 – residences at Mulga Court, Cedar Court, Maple Court, Kurrajong Court, Aspen Road and Banksia Crescent.

• During service and drainage installation, residences in NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 are predicted to exceed the standard hours and all OOHW NMLs. Residences in NCA 2 are predicted to comply with the standard hours NML, but predicted to exceed all OOHW NMLs. Residences in NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 that have been identified to be most impacted are as follow:


NCA 3 – residences at Hakea Place, Grevillea Close, Boronia Place and Aspen Road.


NCA 5 – residences at Mulga Court, Cedar Court, Maple Court, Kurrajong Court and Aspen Road.

• During track work, residences in residences in NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 are predicted to exceed the standard hours and all OOHW NMLs. Residences in NCA 2 are predicted to comply with the standard hours and OOHW day NMLs, but predicted to exceed the OOHW evening and night NMLs. Residences in NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 that have been identified to be most impacted are as follow:






• During building construction, residences in NCAs 2 and 4 are predicted to comply with the standard hours NMLs. However, residences in NCAs 1, 3 and 5 are predicted to exceed the standard hours NMLs. Residences in NCAs 1, 3 and 5 that have been identified to be most impacted are as follow:


NCA 3 – residences at Hakea Place, Grevillea Close and Boronia Place.

NCA 5 – residences at Mulga Court, Cedar Court and Maple Court.

• During utility construction, residences in NCA 2 are predicted to comply with the standard hours NML. However, residences in NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 are predicted to exceed the standard hours NMLs. Residences in NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 that have been identified to be most impacted are as follow:





• During landscaping, residences in NCAs 1, 2 and 4 are predicted to comply with the standard hours NMLs. However, residences in NCAs 3 and 5 are predicted to exceed the standard hours NMLs. Residences in NCAs 3 and 5 that have been identified to be most impacted are as follow:

NCA 3 – residences at Hakea Place, Grevillea Close and Boronia Place.

NCA 5 – residences at Mulga Court, Cedar Court and Maple Court.

• Works carried out within the site compound are predicted to:

Exceed with the standard hours and all OOHW NMLs in NCAs 1 and 3. Exceedances in NCA.

Comply with the standard hours, OOHW day and OOHW evening NMLs, but exceed the OOHW night NML in NCA 2.

Comply with the standard hours NMLs, but exceed all OOHW NMLs in NCAs 4 and 5.

Commercial receivers Construction noise impacts were also evaluated for each NCA for the nine construction scenarios listed above for commercial receivers. The range of results and impacts are summarised in Table 6-23.


Table 6-23 Predicted construction noise impacts at commercial receivers


Receiver location Predicted noise – dB(A)

Predicted impact – dB(A)

Commercial NML Exceedance

Demolition

NCA 1 28 to 69 65 Up to 4

NCA 2 33 to 70 65 Up to 5

NCA 3 43 65 -

NCA 4 35 to 66 65 Up to 1

NCA 5 35 to 37 65 -

Land clearing

NCA 1 39 to 71 65 Up to 6

NCA 2 45 to 77 65 Up to 12

NCA 3 53 65 -

NCA 4 46 to 72 65 Up to 7

NCA 5 47 to 48 65 -

Earthworks

NCA 1 42 to 74 65 Up to 9

NCA 2 48 to 80 65 Up to 15

NCA 3 56 65 -

NCA 4 49 to 75 65 Up to 10

NCA 5 50 to 51 65 -


NCA 1 34 to 66 65 Up to 1

NCA 2 40 to 72 65 Up to 7

NCA 3 48 65 -

NCA 4 41 to 67 65 Up to 2

NCA 5 42 to 43 65 -

Track work

NCA 1 29 to 61 65 -

NCA 2 35 to 67 65 Up to 2

NCA 3 42 65 -

NCA 4 36 to 62 65 -

NCA 5 37 to 60 65 -


NCA 1 20 to 43 65 -

NCA 2 24 to 43 65 -

NCA 3 45 65 -

NCA 4 33 to 43 65 -

NCA 5 32 to 34 65 -


NCA 1 29 to 61 65 -

NCA 2 35 to 67 65 Up to 2

NCA 3 43 65 -

NCA 4 36 to 62 65 -

NCA 5 37 to 38 65 -



Receiver location Predicted noise – dB(A)


Commercial NML Exceedance

Landscaping

NCA 1 22 to 54 65 -

NCA 2 28 to 60 65 -

NCA 3 36 65 -

NCA 4 29 to 55 65 -

NCA 5 30 to 31 65 -

Site compound

NCA 1 20 to 45 65 -

NCA 2 22 to 44 65 -

NCA 3 43 65 -

NCA 4 34 to 43 65 -

NCA 5 34 to 36 65 -

The predicted construction noise levels at commercial receivers indicate that:

• During demolition, land clearing, earthworks and service and drainage installation, commercial receivers within NCAs 3 and 5 are predicted to comply with the NML but receivers in NCAs 1, 2 and 4 are predicted to exceed the NML.

• During track work and utility installation, commercial receivers within NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 are predicted to comply with the NML but receivers in NCA 2 are predicted to exceed the NML.

• During building construction, landscaping and site compound, commercial receivers within all NCAs are predicted to comply with the NML.

Industrial receivers Construction noise impacts were evaluated at each receiver for the nine construction scenarios listed above for industrial receivers. The range of results and impacts are summarised in Table 6-24. Table 6-24 Predicted construction noise impacts at industrial receivers


Receiver location



Industrial NML Exceedance

Demolition

NCA 1 41 to 63 70 -

NCA 2 34 to 77 70 Up to 7

NCA 3 72 to 87 70 Up to 17

NCA 4 32 to 64 70 -

NCA 5 31 to 66 70 -

Land clearing

NCA 1 51 to 62 70 -

NCA 2 45 to 81 70 Up to 11

NCA 3 60 to 69 70 -

NCA 4 47 to 70 70 -



Receiver location



Industrial NML Exceedance

NCA 5 44 to 72 70 Up to 2

Earthworks

NCA 1 54 to 65 70 -

NCA 2 48 to 84 70 Up to 18

NCA 3 63 to 72 70 Up to 2

NCA 4 50 to 73 70 Up to 3

NCA 5 47 to 75 70 Up to 5


NCA 1 46 to 57 70 -

NCA 2 40 to 76 70 Up to 6

NCA 3 55 to 64 70 -

NCA 4 42 to 65 70 -

NCA 5 39 to 67 70 -

Track work

NCA 1 42 to 52 70 -

NCA 2 35 to 71 70 Up to 1

NCA 3 46 to 48 70 -

NCA 4 37 to 60 70 -

NCA 5 34 to 62 70 -


NCA 1 32 to 50 70 -

NCA 2 38 to 48 70 -

NCA 3 53 to 56 70 -

NCA 4 32 to 48 70 -

NCA 5 28 to 42 70 -


NCA 1 41 to 52 70 -

NCA 2 35 to 71 70 Up to 1

NCA 3 50 to 59 70 -

NCA 4 37 to 60 70 -

NCA 5 34 to 62 70 -

Landscaping

NCA 1 34 to 45 70 -

NCA 2 28 to 64 70 -

NCA 3 43 to 52 70 -

NCA 4 30 to 53 70 -

NCA 5 27 to 55 70 -

Site compound

NCA 1 33 to 63 70 -

NCA 2 35 to 48 70 -

NCA 3 48 to 49 70 -

NCA 4 30 to 48 70 -

NCA 5 30 to 39 70 -


The predicted construction noise levels at industrial receivers indicate that:

• During demolition, industrial receivers in NCAs 1, 4 and 5 are predicted to comply with the NML but receivers in NCAs 2 and 3 are predicted to exceed the NML

• During land clearing, industrial receivers in NCAs 1, 3 and 4 are predicted to comply with the NML but receivers in NCAs 2 and 5 are predicted to exceed the NML

• During earthworks, industrial receivers in NCA 1 are predicted to comply with the NML but receivers in NCAs 2, 3, 4 and 5 are predicted to exceed the NML

• During service and drainage installation, track work and utility installation, industrial receivers in NCAs 1, 3, 4 and 5 are predicted to comply with the NML but receivers in NCA 2 are predicted to exceed the NML

• During building construction, landscaping and site compound scenarios, industrial receivers within all NCAs are predicted to comply with the NML.

Educational receivers Construction noise impacts were evaluated at each receiver for the nine construction scenarios listed above for educational receivers. The range of results and impacts are summarised in Table 6-25. Table 6-25 Predicted construction noise impacts at educational receivers


Receiver location



Educational NML Exceedance

Demolition NCA 1 30 to 69 55 Up to 14

NCA 2 32 to 37 55 -

NCA 5 40 55 -

Land clearing NCA 1 43 to 55 55 -

NCA 2 43 to 49 55 -

NCA 5 50 55 -

Earthworks NCA 1 46 to 58 55 Up to 3

NCA 2 46 to 52 55 -

NCA 5 53 55 -


NCA 1 38 to 50 55 -

NCA 2 38 to 44 55 -

NCA 5 45 55 -

Track work NCA 1 33 to 45 55 -

NCA 2 32 to 38 55 -

NCA 5 40 55 -


NCA 1 30 to 43 55 -

NCA 2 35 to 40 55 -

NCA 5 41 55 -

Utility installation NCA 1 33 to 45 55 -

NCA 2 33 to 39 55 -

NCA 5 40 55 -



Receiver location



Educational NML Exceedance

Landscaping NCA 1 26 to 38 55 -

NCA 2 26 to 33 55 -

NCA 5 33 55 -

Site compound NCA 1 26 to 47 55 -

NCA 2 36 to 41 55 -

NCA 5 41 55 -

The predicted construction noise levels at educational facilities indicate that:

• During demolition and earthworks, educational facilities in NCAs 2 and 5 are predicted to comply with the NML but facilities in NCA 1 are predicted to exceed the NML. The education facility in NCA 1 that has been predicted to exceed the NML is the TAFE Western Dubbo.

• During land clearing, service and drainage installation, building construction, utility installation landscaping and site compound scenarios, educational facilities within all NCAs are predicted to comply with the NML.

Place of worship Construction noise impacts were evaluated at each receiver for the nine construction scenarios listed above for places of worship (Salvation Army). The range of results and impacts are summarised in Table 6-26. Table 6-26 Predicted construction noise impacts at place of worship (Salvation Army)

Construction activity Receiver location



NML Exceedance

Demolition NCA 2 36 55 -

Land clearing NCA 2 47 55 -

Earthworks NCA 2 50 55 -

Service and drainage installation NCA 2 42 55 -

Track work NCA 2 37 55 -

Building construction NCA 2 35 55 -

Utility installation NCA 2 37 55 -

Landscaping NCA 2 30 55 -

Site compound NCA 2 37 55 -

The predicted construction noise levels at the place of worship indicate that during all construction activities, the Salvation Army in NCA 2 has been predicted to comply with the NML.


Sleep disturbance Noise from intermittent high level noise event has the potential to cause sleep disturbance at the nearest residential receivers if construction activities are conducted during the night time hours. Table 6-27, shows the predicted sleep disturbance impact. As can be seen form this table, exceedances of the sleep disturbance screening criteria would be expected at all NCAs. Table 6-27 Predicted Lmax construction noise levels during night-time period


Receiver location

Predicted night-time Lmax

noise – dB(A)

Predicted sleep disturbance impact – dB(A)

Screening criteria Exceedance


NCA 1 42 to 61 50 Up to 11

NCA 2 31 to 59 47 Up to 12

NCA 3 48 to 63 50 Up to 13

NCA 4 42 to 61 51 Up to 10

NCA 5 47 to 73 52 Up to 21

Track work

NCA 1 37 to 56 50 Up to 6

NCA 2 26 to 54 47 Up to 7

NCA 3 42 to 54 50 Up to 4

NCA 4 37 to 56 51 Up to 5

NCA 5 41 to 65 52 Up to 13

Site compound

NCA 1 35 to 58 50 Up to 8

NCA 2 26 to 52 47 Up to 5

NCA 3 39 to 55 50 Up to 5

NCA 4 33 to 52 51 Up to 1

NCA 5 33 to 54 52 Up to 2

Exceedances of the sleep disturbance screening criteria have been predicted at all NCAs.

Construction traffic noise As described in Section 6.1.3, during the main construction stage it is expected that the Proposal would generate about 135 light vehicle movements in the AM and PM peak. Heavy vehicle movements would peak at about of 400 vehicle trips per day, comprising of 200 in and 200 out. It is estimated that heavy vehicle movements would be about 40 vehicle trips per hour, comprising 20 in and 20 out during the main construction phase.

As described in Section 3.6.8, access to the site would be via the northern entry located on White Street. It is expected that heavy vehicles would travel to and from the site via the Golden Highway/Cobbora Road and White Street. Based on the existing traffic numbers and composition along this route, and the proximity to residential properties, off site traffic noise impacts are highly unlikely.

A short term increase in noise would likely to be restricted to the area of the main site gate at the start and end of shifts due to workers arriving and departing. As most traffic would turn west onto White Street, this impact would reduce as vehicles move away from residential receivers.


Construction vibration impacts Some vibration-intensive equipment may be used during the construction of the Proposal including compaction equipment. Based on the relevant guidelines, the recommended safe working distances to maintain building cosmetic and human comfort for typical items of vibration intensive plant are outlined in Table 6-28. Vibration intensive plant proposed to be operated during construction works may also impact on items with local heritage significance (such as the unlisted Boradze site) within and near the Proposal Site. An assessment of the potential impacts to items with local heritage significance and proposed mitigation measures to manage has been included in Section 6.5. Table 6-28 Recommended safe setback distances for relevant plant

Plant Rating/description Safe working distance

Cosmetic damage (BS7385-2: 1993)

Human response (DECC, 2006)

Vibratory Roller

<50 kN (typically 1-2 tonne) <100 kN (typically 2-4 tonne) <200 kN (typically 4-6 tonne) <300 kN (typically 7-13 tonne) >300 kN (typically 13-18 tonne) >300 kN (> 18 tonne)

5 metres 6 metres

12 metres 15 metres 20 metres 25 metres

15 to 20 metres 20 metres 40 metres

100 metres 100 metres 100 metres

The predicted vibration levels based on proposed vibration intensive equipment types and distance from the works for building damage and human comfort are shown in Table 6-29 and Table 6-30 respectively. These predicted levels are based on typical ground conditions and provide an indication of the expected vibration impacts for the works. Table 6-29 Estimated construction vibration levels (building damage)

Plant description Building damage

Vibration level (mm/s)

5m 10m 25m 50m 100m

Criterion 5 (typical) / 3 (heritage)

Vibratory roller (3-8 tonne) 7 3 0.7 0.3 0.1

Vibratory roller (8-13 tonne) 19 9 2 1 0.4

Vibratory roller (13-18 tonne) 22 10 3 1 0.4

Vibratory roller (>18 tonne) 28 13 4 1 0.5

Hydraulic hammer 6 2 0.5 0.2 0.1 Levels calculated in accordance with BS5228 – Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites (95% confidence) / FTA Guidance Manual for Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment


Table 6-30 Estimated construction vibration levels (human comfort)

Plant description Human comfort

eVDV (mm/s1.75)

5m 10m 25m 50m 100m Criterion 0.2 daytime / 0.13 night time Vibratory roller (3-8 tonne) 5.9 2.3 0.6 0.2 0.1 Vibratory roller (8-13 tonne) 16.2 7.3 2.2 0.8 0.3 Vibratory roller (13-18 tonne) 18.2 8.2 2.5 0.9 0.3 Vibratory roller (>18 tonne) 23.7 10.7 3.2 1.2 0.4 Levels calculate using the mid amplitude setting

Potential exceedances of the heritage vibration criteria would occur for the Boradze depot buildings if vibratory rolling is carried out within 25 metres of the structures. Smaller plant should be used as the distances outlined in Table 6-29 are approached.

The nearest residential receivers are located about 50 metres from the northern site boundary and the use of larger vibratory roller in this area may impact levels of human comfort as the Masonic Retirement Village is approached. Smaller units should be used within the vicinity of this property and this equipment should not be used during night time hours.

Where structures that do not have a heritage rating are considered, structural damage limits may be increased to 5 mm/s, and shows a risk to building structures located within 25 metres of most other large vibratory rollers. This is a conservative estimate and may be increased further, depending upon the frequency spectrum of the equipment in use. This spectrum and site specific operating distances may be determined through vibration monitoring.

A building condition survey and vibration monitoring is recommended for the Boradze depot buildings prior to the commencement of construction works.

Operational phase

Rail operational noise assessment To determine whether the noise levels are likely to increase at nearby receivers by 2 dB(A) or more for LAeq levels or 3 dB(A) or more for LAFmax levels as a result of the Proposal, operational noise was assessed by developing a project specific 3D noise prediction model.

Rail traffic data

Rail traffic frequency on the existing rail line during the noise monitoring is the same as the freight and passenger trains timetables which are provided by TfNSW. The rail traffic frequency used in the model noise is presented in Table 6-31 below. Table 6-31 Maximise service frequency on project line

Type Maximum number of trains in each period per day

Day (7am – 10pm) Night (10pm – 7am)

XPT trains 4 nil

Freight trains 1 3


Noise model validation To validate the noise model, a receiver point representing the measurement location described in Section 6.3.2 was established in the model. The model was then used to calculate noise levels at this location. Table 6-32 presents the comparison between the model results and the measured noise levels. The LAeq noise levels provide a validation of the assumed LAE train source levels and the number of trains assumed for a given period. Table 6-32 Modelling predictions and measured noise levels

Location

Noise level – dB(A)

LAeq(15h) Day LAeq(9h) Night

Measured Modelled Difference Measured Modelled Difference

Logger location NM3 (Maple Court) 47.7 47.9 +0.2 48.5 47.5 -1.0

The results presented in Table 6-32 indicate the agreement between the model results and the measurements is well within 2 dB(A) for LAeq(15h) and LAeq(9h) noise levels.

During the noise monitoring period, train pass-by events were observed to not exhibit any significant level of flanging noise or curve squeal at this location. Therefore, no correction was applied to the modelled results.

Predicted operational rail noise levels Table 6-33 presents the predicted operational rail noise levels for receivers with a predicted exceedance of the RING noise trigger levels. The results are shown as the worst-case impact for the residential receiver potentially most affected by the proposed alignment of the railway line in each NCA.

The results indicate that operational noise levels from the existing alignment are well below the RING LAeq and LAmax overall noise trigger levels. The LAeq rail noise levels of the proposed new alignment are higher at receivers to the north of the Proposal than at receivers to the south of the Proposal. This is consistent with the existing rail line being re-aligned to the north.

Although there is an increase of the Lmax noise levels at most affected residences in NCA 1 by 3 dB(A), an exceedance of the RING trigger levels does not occur due to the rail noise levels at these receivers being well below the day and night-time LAeq and Lmax limits. Table 6-33 Summary of rail noise impacts at most affected residential receivers

NCA

Predicted rail noise level at most affected residential receiver – dB(A)

Existing alignment Proposed alignment Noise level increase RING triggers (Yes/No)

LAeq Day

LAeq Night LAmax

LAeq Day

LAeq Night LAmax

LAeq Day

LAeq Night LAmax

NCA1 39.1 38.4 70.4 40.1 39.7 73.4 1.0 1.3 3.0 No

NCA2 34.7 34.2 68.4 33.9 33.4 68.4 -0.8 -0.8 0 No

NCA3 47.0 46.7 83.8 35.5 34.9 68.0 -11.5 -11.8 -15.8 No

NCA4 37.2 36.4 68.2 37.5 36.8 67.6 0.3 0.4 0.6 No

NCA5 47.6 47.2 84.3 44.0 43.9 80.0 -3.6 -3.3 -4.3 No


A summary of the highest overall operational rail noise levels for the existing alignment and proposed realignment of the rail line for non-residential receivers are presented in Table 6-34. The results are shown as the worst-case prediction in each NCA.

Although there is an increase of the LAeq noise levels at the most affected non-residential receivers in NCA 1 by more than 2 dB(A), the RING triggers are not exceeded due to the rail noise levels at these receivers being well below the day and night-time LAeq limits. Table 6-34 Summary of rail noise impacts at most affected non-residential receivers

NCA

Predicted rail noise level at most affected non – residential receiver – dB(A)

Existing alignment Proposed alignment Noise level increase RING triggers LAeq Day LAeq Night LAeq Day LAeq Night LAeq Day LAeq Night

NCA1 39.5 38.8 42.0 41.8 2.5 3.0 No

NCA2 48.8 48.7 47.8 47.8 -1.0 -0.9 No

NCA3 35.7 35.0 34.0 33.1 -1.7 -1.9 No

NCA4 39.5 38.9 39.9 39.5 0.4 0.6 No

NCA5 33.2 32.3 32.5 31.5 -0.7 -0.8 No

The predicted rail noise levels at surrounding residential and other sensitive receivers in Table 6-33 and Table 6-34 show that the RING trigger would not be exceeded. Based on this assessment, mitigation measures to the realignment Main Western Line would not be required.

Maintenance facility noise assessment A number of activities that would generate noise would take place in the maintenance facility. These activities have been grouped into the following operational scenarios (refer to Table 6-35). Table 6-35 Airborne residential noise trigger levels for rail line realignment

Scenario ID Name Description Noise sources Noise

descriptor

LAeq noise scenarios

1 Trains arrival Two trains arrive at the facility. Both trains travel at 5 km/h within the facility. One train travels to the train wash and the other train travels to the main maintenance facility. Modelled trains are outside the shed.

Two trains travelling at 5 km/h

LAeq

2 Trains departure

Two trains departing the facility. Both trains travel at 5 km/h within the facility. One train travels from the train wash and the other train travels from the main maintenance facility. Modelled trains are outside the shed.

Two trains travelling at 5 km/h

LAeq


Scenario ID Name Description Noise sources Noise

descriptor

LAeq noise scenarios

3 Wash facility One train idling at train wash, while washing is being carried out. Second train idling in the main maintenance facility.

Two trains idling and wash facility

LAeq

4 Wheel lathe One train idling at the wheel lathe, while the wheel lathe is in use. Second train idling outside the main maintenance facility.

Two trains idling and wheel lathe

LAeq

5 Maintenance facility

One train idling in main maintenance facility, while maintenance work is being carried out. Second train idling at the train wash track.

Two trains idling and maintenance facility

LAeq

6 Trains idling One train idling in main maintenance facility and the other train idling at the train wash track.

Two trains idling LAeq

7 Car park activities and building services

Four cars travelling at 40 km/h in the car park area and air conditioning units operating.

Four cars travelling at 40 km/h and building air conditioning units

LAeq

7a Substation Substation operating Substation LAeq

Lmax noise scenarios

8 Yard horn activation

Horn sound when train approaching facility outdoors

Yard horn LAmax

9 Brake release test

Brake release test outdoors Brake release/test LAmax

10 Country horn test

Country horn test outdoors Country horn LAmax

11 Car park activities

Maximum noise events associated with car parking

Door slams and engine starts

LAmax

12 Substation Circuit breakers triggering Substation circuit breakers

LAmax

Scenarios 8 and 10 have been included in the assessment to provide a complete understanding of potential impacts. However, Transport for NSW would ensure that noise emissions from the facility are managed in a manner which would achieve compliance with applicable sleep disturbance guidelines and policies. A number of options would be further


evaluated to achieve this outcome, which would include the implementation of alternative methodologies for horn usage. This is subject to further detailed design/operational planning.

The noise impacts of the operation of the maintenance facility have been predicted at nearest residential receivers for each scenario. The potential noise impacts have been modelled using SoundPLAN and assessed against the adopted NPI noise objectives (refer to Table 6-20). The predicted noise levels have been based on continuous operation of the noise sources are considered to represent the highest potential noise impacts.

Table 6-36 presents the predicted noise levels associated with the facility’s operational scenarios for the five NCAs along with a comparison with the relevant operational noise criteria (refer to Table 6-20). Table 6-36 Predicted operational noise levels at residential receivers

NCA Predicted range of operational noise level –

dB(A)

Noise criteria dB(A)

Day/Evening/Night

Exceedance dB(A) Day/Evening/Night

Compliance Yes/No

Day/Evening/Night

Scenario 1 – Trains arrival LAeq

NCA 1 4 to 26 42 / 42 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 2 9 to 23 49 / 45 / 37 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 3 16 to 23 39 / 39 / 39 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 4 8 to 24 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 5 to 22 45 / 45 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

Scenario 2 – Trains departure LAeq

NCA 1 4 to 26 42 / 42 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 2 8 to 23 49 / 45 / 37 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 3 16 to 23 39 / 39 / 39 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 4 8 to 24 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 5 to 22 45 / 45 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

Scenario 3 – Wash facility LAeq

NCA 1 13 to 46 42 / 42 / 40 4 / 4 / 6 No / No / No

NCA 2 7 to 39 49 / 45 / 37 - / - / 2 Yes / Yes / No

NCA 3 25 to 47 39 / 39 / 39 8 / 8 / 8 No / No / No

NCA 4 13 to 37 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 16 to 49 45 / 45 / 40 4 / 4 / 9 No / No / No

Scenario 4 – Wheel lathe LAeq

NCA 1 13 to 47 42 / 42 / 40 5 / 5 / 7 No / No / No

NCA 2 8 to 40 49 / 45 / 37 - / - / 3 Yes / Yes / No

NCA 3 25 to 47 39 / 39 / 39 8 / 8 / 8 No / No / No

NCA 4 14 to 38 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 17 to 49 45 / 45 / 40 4 / 4 / 9 No / No / No



dB(A)


Day/Evening/Night


Compliance Yes/No

Day/Evening/Night

Scenario 5 – Maintenance activities LAeq

NCA 1 20 to 49 42 / 42 / 40 7 / 7 / 9 No / No / No

NCA 2 15 to 48 49 / 45 / 37 - / 3 / 9 Yes / No / No

NCA 3 23 to 54 39 / 39 / 39 15 / 15 / 15 No / No / No

NCA 4 14 to 39 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 22 to 48 45 / 45 / 40 3 / 3 / 8 No / No / No

Scenario 6 – Trains idling LAeq

NCA 1 3 to 37 42 / 42 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 2 0 to 28 49 / 45 / 37 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 3 15 to 37 39 / 39 / 39 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 4 6 to 29 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 9 to 41 45 / 45 / 40 - / - / 11 Yes / Yes / Yes

Scenario 7 – Car park activities and building services LAeq

NCA 1 0 to 34 42 / 42 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 2 0 to 28 49 / 45 / 37 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 3 15 to 37 39 / 39 / 39 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 4 0 to 26 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 3 to 41 45 / 45 / 40 - / - / 11 Yes / Yes / Yes

Scenario 7a – Substation LAeq (sleep disturbance/night-time period only)

NCA 1 0 to 23 42 / 42 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 2 0 to 26 49 / 45 / 37 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 3 0 to 33 39 / 39 / 39 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 4 0 to 16 45 / 44 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

NCA 5 0 to 27 45 / 45 / 40 - / - / - Yes / Yes / Yes

Scenario 8 – Yard horn activation Lmax (sleep disturbance/night-time period only)

NCA 1 13 to 46 - / - / 50 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 2 4 to 33 - / - / 47 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 3 15 to 44 - / - / 50 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 4 13 to 36 - / - / 51 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 5 3 to 41 - / - / 52 - / - / - - / - / Yes

Scenario 9 – Brake release test Lmax (sleep disturbance/night-time period only)

NCA 1 5 to 39 - / - / 50 - / - / - - / - / Yes



dB(A)


Day/Evening/Night


Compliance Yes/No

Day/Evening/Night

NCA 2 0 to 24 - / - / 47 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 3 6 to 41 - / - / 50 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 4 10 to 35 - / - / 51 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 5 7 to 52 - / - / 52 - / - / - - / - / Yes

Scenario 10 – Country horn test Lmax (sleep disturbance/night-time period only)

NCA 1 33 to 67 - / - / 50 - / - / 17 - / - / No

NCA 2 24 to 52 - / - / 47 - / - / 5 - / - / No

NCA 3 34 to 69 - / - / 50 - / - / 19 - / - / No

NCA 4 39 to 63 - / - / 51 - / - / 12 - / - / No

NCA 5 35 to 80 - / - / 52 -/ - / 28 - / - / No

Scenario 11 – Car park activities Lmax (sleep disturbance/night-time period only)

NCA 1 1 to 20 - / - / 50 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 2 1 to 35 - / - / 47 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 3 18 to 39 - / - / 50 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 4 0 to 6 - / - / 51 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 5 0 to 32 - / - / 52 - / - / - - / - / Yes

Scenario 12 – Substation Lmax (sleep disturbance/night-time period only)

NCA 1 29 to 56 - / - / 50 - / - / 6 - / - / No

NCA 2 24 to 59 - / - / 47 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 3 42 to 66 - / - / 50 - / - / 16 - / - / No

NCA 4 19 to 49 - / - / 51 - / - / - - / - / Yes

NCA 5 37 to 60 - / - / 52 - / - / 8 - / - / No Notes:

(1) A 1 dB exceedance is not considered to be acoustically significant due to the average human hearing not able to detect sound levels of 1 dB difference. (2) Exceedances are highlighted in bold and shaded. (3) LAmax predictions have been assessed against the sleep disturbance criteria which is during the night time period only

The results presented in Table 6-36 indicate that where work is carried out within the maintenance work sheds (Scenarios 3, 4 and 5) noise levels will frequently exceed criteria at the nearest receivers within NCAs 1, 2, 3 and 5. Exceedances of the criteria are generally less than 10dB, however during Scenario 5, exceedances of up to 15dB have been predicted.

The following impacts have been predicted during each assessed scenario where exceedances have been forecast:

• Scenario 3:


3 exceedances are predicted at residential properties during day and evening hours within NCA 1, and up to 5 properties during night time hours.

5 exceedances are predicted at residential properties within NCA 2 during night time hours only.

16 exceedances are predicted at residential properties within NCA 3 during all hours.


• Scenario 4:


9 exceedances are predicted at residential properties within NCA 2 during night time hours only


8 exceedances are predicted at residential properties during day and evening hours within NCA 5, and up to 24 properties during night time hours

• Scenario 5:


74 exceedances are predicted at residential properties within NCA 2 during night time hours only and potentially 6 properties during evening hours



• Scenario 10:

Exceedances of sleep disturbance criteria of up to 28dB are predicted during horn testing activities. These exceedances are predicted to occur in all NCAs.

• Scenario 12:

Exceedances of sleep disturbance criteria are predicted where the substation circuits breakers are used during night time hours. These exceedances are predicted in NCAs 1, 2, and 3. Although the predicted noise levels in NCA 1 are lowest, lower existing background noise levels have caused have resulted in higher noise impacts.

Exceeding properties are generally located in the following locations:

• NCA 1 – Exceedances are predicted at properties on Darby Close and Welchman Street.

• NCA 2 – Exceeding properties are located on Wingewarra Street.

• NCA 3 – Exceeding locations include Boronia Place, Hakea Place and Grevillea Close.

• NCA 5 – Exceeding properties are located on Aspen Road, Cedar Court, Mulga Court, Kurrajong Court and Wingewarra Street.


The predicted noise impacts from all the operation scenarios for the nearby commercial receivers, industrial receivers, and places of worship (Salvation Army) are well within the noise criteria for non-residential receivers (refer to Table 6-21). Minor exceedances of up to 9dbA may be likely at educational facilities under Scenarios 3, 4 and 5.

6.3.5 Mitigation measures The following additional mitigation and management measures are recommended for consideration to assist in the reduction of noise impacts from the maintenance facility where reasonable and feasible:

Design

• A detailed review of the operational pattern of all identified dominant noise sources would be undertaken as part of the detailed design stage to determine if any operational changes can be implemented to reduce the potential noise impact.

• The maintenance shed would be constructed to achieve a sound insulation performance no less than 26 dB weighted sound reduction index (Rw). An acoustic insulation performance of 26 dB Rw could be achieved by panelling such as six millimetre Alucobond or a product of equivalent acoustic performance. A fast acting roller door or similar system would also be considered to allow shed doors to be closed quickly.

• Excess fill material could be used to construct a noise mound along the southern and south western site boundaries, where the most impacted receivers are located. The highest noise levels have been predicted to occur along the rear of properties on Hakea Place and Grevillea Close and a noise mound interrupting a direct line of sight between the door of the maintenance shed and these properties would be effective in reducing noise impacts. This would mean that the most effective locations for a noise barrier would be along the fenceline of Grevillea / Hakea Close or directly to the south of the maintenance shed door / parallel to the shed itself.

Construction

• Prior to commencement of works, a Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNVMP) would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Interim Construction Noise Guideline (Department of Environment and Climate Change, 2009), Construction Noise and Vibration Strategy (TfNSW, 2018). The CNVMP would take into consideration measures for reducing the source noise levels of construction equipment by construction planning and equipment selection where practicable.

• The CNVMP would outline measures to reduce the noise impact from construction activities. Reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures which would be considered, include:

Regularly training workers and contractors (such as at the site induction and toolbox talks) on the importance of minimising noise emissions and how to use equipment in ways to minimise noise

Avoiding any unnecessary noise when carrying out manual operations and when operating plant

Ensuring spoil is placed and not dropped into awaiting trucks

Avoiding/limiting simultaneous operation of noisy plant and equipment within discernible range of a sensitive receiver where practicable

Switching off any equipment not in use for extended periods e.g. heavy vehicles engines would be switched off whilst being unloaded


Avoiding deliveries at night/evenings wherever practicable

No idling of delivery trucks

Keeping truck drivers informed of designated vehicle routes, parking locations and acceptable delivery hours for the site

Minimising talking loudly; no swearing or unnecessary shouting, or loud stereos/radios onsite; no dropping of materials from height where practicable, no throwing of metal items and slamming of doors.

• Where noise levels are greater than those listed in Appendix F or their locations differ significantly from those assessed in this report, additional assessment would be carried out.

• A building condition survey and vibration monitoring is recommended for the Boradze depot buildings prior to the commencement of construction works.

Operation

• An operational noise and vibration management plan would be prepared and implemented. This plan would include:

Development of mitigation strategies and management measures for the identified activities and sources that contribute to exceedances of applicable sleep disturbance guidelines and policies.

Development of management strategies to ensure compliance with applicable sleep disturbance guidelines and policies for horn usage, warning signals and horn testing at the facility. Management measures would include:

Management of the location, time of day and manner in which activities are carried out.

Modifying operating procedures to reduce noise intensive activities during the evening and night at locations exposed to receivers.

Specifying noise emission limits for certain equipment or activities.

Developing further the mitigations strategies outlined in the Noise and Vibration Assessment.

• Alternatives to testing or use of the country horn at the Proposal Site would be further evaluated. This could include testing horns elsewhere on the network or developing alternative testing techniques.

• As part of the detailed design, alternative systems are to be investigated for train preparation (shunting) alarms. Alternative systems similar to those implemented at other NSW rail facilities could include visual alarms and ground based warning systems.


6.4 Aboriginal heritage The potential impacts on Aboriginal heritage during construction and operation of the Proposal have been assessed as part of the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Heritage Assessment – Regional Rail Maintenance Facility (OzArk, 2018a), provided in Appendix C. The potential impacts, and corresponding safeguards and mitigation measures, are summarised in this section.


6.4.1 Methodology The Aboriginal assessment was prepared in accordance with the Guide to Investigating, Assessing and Reporting on Aboriginal Cultural Heritage in NSW (OEH, 2011) and the former Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in NSW (2010).

The field survey component of this assessment was carried out as part of the preliminary heritage assessment on 25 October and 13 November 2017 and an additional inspection completed on 13 February 2018 by OzArk archaeologists and two Aboriginal community representatives from the Dubbo Local Aboriginal Land Council (LALC) and the Tubba-Gah Aboriginal Corporation. During the site survey, discussions were held about possible Aboriginal use of the area prior to European occupation, as well as the changes the landscape has undergone since, especially in relation to the likelihood for intact Aboriginal sites.

6.4.2 Existing environment

Aboriginal background According to historical maps of local Aboriginal tribal (or ethno-linguistic) group boundaries, the Dubbo area falls within the northern limits of the Wiradjuri nation. The Wiradjuri are typically described as a large language group/nation extending over a considerable area of NSW, comprising numerous sub-groups, including the Dubbo region. The Tubba-Gah were a local sub-group within the larger Wiradjuri entity, and are historically linked to the study area. The territory thought to have been traversed by the Tubba-Gah lies to the east of the Macquarie River, south of the Talbragar River and north of Eulomogo Creek.

Little recorded information survives concerning the life of Aboriginal people in the Dubbo area following European settlement. The most important historical resources are the oral histories passed from parent to child by local Indigenous inhabitants. According to early accounts, Tubba-Gah territory was rich in animal and plant food resources. Many daily activities were performed communally, for the benefit of the mob.

Camps moved frequently over short distances due to alterations in social relations and weather, and in response to hygiene concerns, among other factors. Longer distance movements tended to be linked to participation in large-scale gatherings (e.g. ceremony or warfare) or alterations in resource availability (OzArk, 2018).

There is extensive remaining evidence of Aboriginal occupation within five kilometres of Dubbo’s city limits, including artefact scatters, scarred trees and grinding grooves.

Database searches A search of the OEH Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) in October 2017 identified 112 records within an eight square kilometre that encompassed the Proposal Site. No previously recorded sites are located within the Proposal Site. The closest three recorded items to the Proposal are located between 180 and 460 metres to the north and northeast. These items include carved trees.

Of the AHIMS records, artefact sites (i.e. isolated finds or artefact scatters) followed by culturally modified trees (i.e. carved or scarred) are the most commonly represented site type. The remainder of identified AHIMS site types include grinding grooves, burial, modified tree, shells and stone quarries.

Field survey results Having regard to historical records and guideline requirements, a model was developed for the Proposal Site which predicted where evidence of former Aboriginal occupation on the


site would be most likely to occur. A field survey strategy was then developed based on the predictive model.

No new Aboriginal items were recorded during the field survey. In addition to this, no landforms with increased archaeological sensitivity or potential to contain sub-surface deposits were identified. Only one tree was considered old enough to possess cultural scarring, however no potential scars were identified. The results of the field survey are consistent with the predictive model, which suggested a general scarcity of Aboriginal items within the Proposal Site due to the site being highly disturbed.

6.4.3 Potential impacts As no Aboriginal heritage items were identified within the Proposal Site, there are no foreseeable impacts to Aboriginal heritage as a result of this Proposal during construction and operation. However, should any Aboriginal artefacts or skeletal material be found then all work should cease and the management measures in Section 7.2 would be implemented.

6.4.4 Mitigation measures The following mitigation measures are proposed to minimise and manage potential Aboriginal heritage impacts:

• All construction staff would undergo an induction in the recognition of Indigenous cultural heritage material. This training would include information such as the importance of Indigenous cultural heritage material and places to the Indigenous community, as well as the legal implications of removal, disturbance and damage to any Indigenous cultural heritage material and sites.

• If unforeseen Indigenous objects are uncovered during construction, the procedures contained in TfNSW’s Unexpected Heritage Finds Guideline (TfNSW, 2016c) would be followed, and works within the vicinity of the find would cease immediately. The Contractor would immediately notify the TfNSW Project Manager and TfNSW Environment and Planning Manager so they can assist in co-ordinating next steps which are likely to involve consultation with an Aboriginal heritage consultant, the OEH and the Local Aboriginal Land Council. If human remains are found, work would cease, the site secured and the NSW Police and the OEH notified. Where required, further archaeological investigations and an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit would be obtained prior to works recommencing at the location.

• Should the construction footprint of the Proposal extend beyond the currently assessed areas, then further archaeological assessment may be required.


6.5 Non-Aboriginal heritage Potential impacts of the Proposal on non-Aboriginal heritage items have been assessed in the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Heritage Assessment – Regional Rail Maintenance Facility (OzArk, 2018), provided in Appendix C. A summary of the report is presented in this section, together with safeguards and management measures to minimise any adverse impacts.


6.5.1 Methodology The non-Aboriginal heritage assessment comprised:

• Background historical research, including a review of previous heritage assessments to identify the potential for archaeological and heritage items to be present within the Proposal Site, to further define the scope of the field investigation

• A search of all available heritage registers on the 9 October 2017. This included the State Heritage Register (SHR), State Heritage Inventory (SHI), relevant LEPs, Railcorp Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Register, Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL), National Heritage List (NHL) and World Heritage List (WHL) to identify previously recorded non-Aboriginal heritage items within or near to the Proposal Site, and related legislative obligations.

• A field survey of the study area carried out by OzArk on 25 October 2017, 13 November 2017 and 13 February 2018 to identify any areas/items of potential heritage significance.

• Identification and assessment of potential impacts of the Proposal on non-Aboriginal heritage items, conservation areas and archaeology.

• The development of measures to manage the Proposal’s potential impact on non-Aboriginal heritage items, conservation areas and archaeology through the application of the ‘avoid, minimise and mitigate’ hierarchy.


Historical context European colonisation of the Dubbo region occurred late relative to other parts of NSW, as the expansion halted at Wellington Valley during the 1820s. Nevertheless, squatters and pastoralists obtained ‘tickets of occupancy’ to temporarily graze sheep and cattle on Crown Land in the area during the 1820s and a station was established at Dubbo in 1824. A permanent run was claimed by Robert Dalhunty in 1833, which he called ‘Dubbo’, and large tracts of land were taken up around Dubbo and the Macquarie River in the early 1830s.

Subsequent colonisation beyond Wellington was rapid and tended to follow the major river courses. In 1836, the Lands Act allowed the lease of Crown Land. By 1840 much of the Macquarie River frontage and adjoining land in the Dubbo area had been taken up as land leased for sheep and cattle runs. Early squatters and pastoralists constructed temporary shelters, very few of which have survived. Dundullimal Homestead was built around 1840 by John Maugham on an 11,000 hectare sheep station. The property is on the southern outskirts of Dubbo and the surviving slab residence is one of the oldest homesteads still standing in western NSW.

Dubbo obtained its current location, due to it being a staging post, camping area and convergence of regional stock travelling routes. In 1846, the settlement had only four buildings: the constable’s residence, a courthouse and lock-up, a general store, and an inn. The colony's Surveyor General surveyed and gazetted the village in November 1849. The original town plan was a square mile grid laid out to the east of the Macquarie River and the first land sales took place in 1850.

Large-scale urban and rural subdivision phases did not occur in Dubbo until after the municipal government was established in 1871. An extension to the Main Western Railway from Wellington to Dubbo was formally opened on 1 February 1881. Dubbo boomed during the 1880s when much of its architecture was built. Dubbo increased in importance when the railway line to Bourke was completed in 1885, diverting the river trade into NSW and away from South Australia. The Dubbo rail bridge over the Macquarie River was completed in 1884.


Listed heritage items A search of heritage registers for Dubbo Regional LGA, identified four heritage listed sites within 500 metres of the Proposal (refer to Table 6-37). The closest heritage items are located about 370 metres west of the Proposal.

It is noted that the Macquarie River rail bridge is described as being located in the western portion of the Proposal Site on the Dubbo LEP mapping, while the SHR listing shows the item located about 1.5 kilometres west of the study area. During the field survey it was confirmed that the Macquarie River rail bridge is located 1.5 kilometres west of the Proposal Site, and that no items of historic significance were evident in the location mapped by the Dubbo LEP. It was concluded that there is an error in the Dubbo LEP mapping of the Macquarie River rail bridge due to the listing not having a Lot and DP, which extends along the rail corridor between the Macquarie River rail bridge and the Proposal Site. Table 6-37 Listed heritage items within 500 metres of the Proposal Site

Heritage item name Register Listing

Number Significance Location

Dubbo Rail Station and Yard Group

SHR 01032 State Located 370 metres west of the study area

Dubbo Railway Station

Dubbo LEP I215 Local Located 370 metres west of the study area

Macquarie River Rail Bridge

Dubbo LEP I238 Local Listed within the Proposal Site however it is located 1.5 kilometres west of the Proposal Site.

Dubbo Railway Precinct

RailCorp Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Register

- - Dubbo Railway Precinct (SHI database 480632) is listed as present on Talbragar Street, Dubbo. It is presumed from review of this listing that it does not extend into the current study area.

Potential heritage items Research carried out as part of the heritage assessment identified two additional potential heritage items within the Proposal Site that are not listed on any heritage registers. These potential items include the Boradze depot and the fettlers’ camp (also referred to as Signalman or Tin Town) which are described further below. A fettler is a person who does repair or maintenance work on a railway.


Boradze depot The Boradze depot is located to the northwest of the Proposal Site (refer to Figure 6-12 and Figure 6-11) and comprises two corrugated iron buildings which were used to cut and treat the timber sleepers for the railway lines. The timbers were delivered to the depot rough cut from sawmills via the rail line and were then bored, adzed and treated to form the final wooden railway sleeper. From here they were loaded on special rail wagons to be taken along the line and then laid. During the initial field survey, disused wagons that may have been associated with the Boradze Depot when it was in operation were recorded near the Proposal Site. The wagons may have been used for carrying sleepers and ballast. The identified wagons have since been removed from the Proposal Site and no further evidence of the Boradze Depot was recorded within the Proposal Site

.


Figure 6-11 Location of non-Aboriginal heritage items near the Proposal Site


Figure 6-12 Boradze depot located to the north west of the Proposal Site

Fettlers’ camp Maintenance of the railway track and its structures was undertaken by fettlers. Many lived in isolated camps and undertook hard physical labour replacing worn sleepers and rails, and shovelling ballast. Often fettlers and their families lived in tents and makeshift houses constructed from fibro sheeting supplied by the railway. Corrugated iron, water, basic household supplies and mail were delivered by passing trains.

The main camp of fettlers at Dubbo Station reportedly camped adjacent to the original alignment of the railway line within the current Proposal Site (refer to Figure 6-11), and spreading southeast into the area where the showground is currently located. Whilst fettlers generally moved on shortly after the main period of local construction had been completed, shifting camp along the line to remain near the focus of work, there is some evidence that the Dubbo camp may have persisted in some form.

Historical sources, place the site of Tin Town as adjacent to Wellington Road (now including Cobra Street) more than 500 metres to the south of the Proposal Site. The distance of Tin Town from the route of the railway line makes a direct connection between this site and the fettler’s camp unlikely, beyond a possible movement of fettlers into Tin Town following relocation of their camp.

During the field survey no surface artefacts or features potentially associated with Tin Town, fettlers camp or any house were identified. The location of the camp and house are likely to have been bulldozed once they were no longer in use. In addition, ground surfaces throughout the Proposal Site have been disturbed. Accordingly, while isolated instances of buried historic relics are feasible, any that are present would be highly modified and disassociated with their context. Given the temporary nature of the fettlers’ camp and current disturbances, the Proposal Site is unlikely to be associated with intact or substantial subsurface deposits.



Construction phase No known non-Aboriginal items or sites are located within the Proposal Site. Accordingly, no impacts are expected. However, there may be a residual risk that unexpected finds may be discovered during construction activities, in which case the relevant safeguards and management measures would be implemented (refer to Section 7.2).

The nearby state heritage listed Dubbo Railway Station and Yard group would not be visible from the Proposal and would be considered unlikely to be impacted in terms of visual amenity.

If works are likely to extend beyond the study area boundary, then additional assessment may be required to determine whether this would generate potential impacts to items of heritage significance. This is particularly relevant to the Boradze depot, which is just outside the Proposal Site.

Operational phase Impacts to non-Aboriginal heritage as a result of the operation of the Proposal would not be expected as no heritage items were not identified within or near the Proposal Site.

6.5.4 Mitigation measures The following additional mitigation measures are proposed to minimise and manage potential non-Aboriginal impacts:

• A heritage induction would be provided to workers prior to construction, informing them of the location of known heritage items and guidelines to follow if unanticipated heritage items or deposits are located during construction.

• In the event that any unanticipated archaeological deposits are identified within the Proposal Site during construction, the procedures contained in the TfNSW Unexpected Heritage Finds Guideline (TfNSW, 2016c) would be followed, and works within the vicinity of the find would cease immediately. The Contractor would immediately notify the TfNSW Project Manager and the TfNSW Environment and Planning Manager so they can assist in co-ordinating the next steps which are likely to involve consultation with an archaeologist and OEH. Where required, further archaeological work and/or consents would be obtained for any unanticipated archaeological deposits prior to works recommencing at the location.

• The Boradze depot, which has been identified as being of local heritage significance, is located outside the study area boundary. Should impacts be proposed to this depot then a Statement of Heritage Impact would need to be prepared.

• As the non-Aboriginal heritage assessment has identified the Boradze depot with potential local heritage significance, a copy of the heritage assessment report (OzArk,2018) would be sent to Dubbo Regional Council for consideration prior to the Proposal commencing.

• Dubbo Regional Council would be notified of the error in the Dubbo LEP mapping of the curtilage of the Macquarie River rail bridge.



6.6 Property, land use and socio-economic

Potential property, land use and socio-economic impacts of the Proposal are presented in this section, together with safeguards and management measures to manage any negative impacts.

6.6.1 Methodology

The methodology for the property, land use and socio-economic assessment involved:

• Scoping of the potential property, land use and socio-economic issues for the Proposal and identification of potentially affected communities.

• Describing the existing property, land use and socio-economic environment near the Proposal.

• Assessing potential impacts of the Proposal’s construction and operation on property, land use and the socio-economic environment of the study area.

• Identifying safeguards and management measures to avoid, minimise or mitigate potential property, land use and socio-economic impacts identified in the assessment.

The description of the existing property, land use and socio-economic environment of the study area principally draws on information from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), supplemented with information and data from:

• Government agencies such as the NSW Department of Planning and Environment, and Destination NSW.

• Dubbo Regional Council.

The Proposal is located within the Dubbo Regional LGA (formerly the Western Plains Regional LGA), within the Orana region of NSW. The study area for this assessment includes the ABS Statistical Area Level 2 (SA2) of Dubbo-East and Dubbo-South. This assessment also considers potential impacts on regional communities and businesses in the Dubbo Regional LGA. The study area for the socio-economic assessment is provided in Figure 6-13.

6.6.2 Socio-economic policy context

Central West and Orana Regional Plan 2036

The Central West and Orana Regional Plan 2036 (Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E), 2017) (the Regional Plan) outlines the vision, goals and directions for the Central West and Orana region over the next 20 years.

The Regional Plan outlines a number of goals to guide the region’s productivity, liveability and environmental management, and to achieve the Government’s vision for ‘the most diverse regional economy in NSW with a vibrant network of centres leveraging on the opportunities for being at the heart of NSW.’

Priorities identified in the Regional Plan which are relevant to the Proposal and specific to the Dubbo Regional LGA include to:

• Plan for the infrastructure needs of an expanding population including the Newell Highway, Mitchell Highway and Golden Highway and their relationship with continued economic development


• Support the growing tourism industry in Dubbo and Wellington to create diverse and sustainable businesses that provide local jobs, and to recognise unique tourist assets.

The Proposal would generally meet the goals and priorities of the Regional Plan by stimulating the regional economy and assisting in creating sustainable long-term job opportunities, including for Aboriginal people, in Dubbo. The Proposal would also upgrade the regional train fleet and its facilities, which would improve safety, comfort and reliability of regional train services.

Community Strategic Plan – Dubbo 2036

The Community Strategic Plan – Dubbo 2036 (Dubbo Regional Council, 2011) (Community Strategic Plan) outlines the themes, outcomes, and strategies for the LGA over the next 20 years.

Transport infrastructure is identified as a key theme within the Community Strategic Plan. An outcome of this theme is that ‘various community and industry sectors can travel in a safe, convenient, efficient and comfortable manner’ throughout the Dubbo Regional LGA. A strategy to achieve this outcome is to ‘provide high level road and rail transport systems into, out of and within Dubbo.’ The Proposal would meet this strategy by upgrading the regional train fleet and its facilities, which would improve safety, comfort and reliability of regional train services.

Economic development through skills development is also a key theme in the Community Strategic Plan, including actions relating to high quality training facilities and opportunities, as well as the economic development of Aboriginal communities.

Public access to the Proposal Site is generally restricted due to the presence of rail corridors, adjacent industrial properties and existing security fencing.


Figure 6-13 Study area for the socio-economic assessment



Land use

Land within the Proposal Site is zoned on the Dubbo LEP as IN2 Light Industrial and SP2 Infrastructure (Railway) and is used by several public and private organisations as a maintenance and/or construction depot. Two parcels of land zoned as RE1 Public Recreation and RE2 Private Recreation are also located within the Proposal Site, however are not used for recreational purposes.

Population and demographics

Data regarding population and demography is primarily sourced from the 2016 ABS Census. Key findings of the demographics of the community within the study area (refer to Figure 6-13) can be summarised as follows:

• In 2016, the study area had a residential population of 27,320 people

• The study area is generally characterised by low population growth. Over the ten years to 2016, the study area experienced relatively low population growth with an average rate of growth at 0.6 per cent annually, less than half of the NSW average

• The population in the study area is expected to grow at a lower rate than NSW to 2036 (at 0.5 per cent compared to 1.2 per cent)

• The median age is similar to NSW, with higher proportions of children (i.e. aged 14 years or younger) and lower proportions of older people (i.e. aged 65 years or over) compared to NSW

• There are low levels of cultural diversity with relatively low proportions of people born overseas (at 8.3 per cent) and relatively high proportions of people who speak English only at home (at 87.2 per cent) compared to NSW (at 27.7 per cent and 68.5 per cent, respectively)

• A higher proportion of the study area’s population is reported to be Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander (at 14.4 per cent) compared to NSW (at 2.9 per cent)

• Communities in the study area displayed higher levels of people in need for assistance in one or more of the three core activity areas of self-help, mobility or communication due to disability, a long-term health condition or old age (at 6.2 per cent) compared to NSW (at 5.4 per cent).

Social infrastructure Social infrastructure located near the Proposal caters for both local and regional communities. Social infrastructure near the Proposal is shown in Figure 6-14 and includes: • Dubbo Masonic Retirement Village, located at Darby Close. The Dubbo Masonic

Retirement Village provides 45 units in total, including 26 one bedroom units and 19 two bedroom units.

• TAFE Western Dubbo College Campus, located at Myall Street and Fitzroy Street. The Western Institute of TAFE provides vocational training for students in central NSW. TAFE Western Dubbo College specialises in agriculture, heavy and light vehicles, hairdressing and beauty therapy, construction and nursing (TAFE Western, undated).

• Dubbo Base Hospital, located at Myall Street. The public hospital provides between 100 to 199 beds and an emergency department. The NSW Government has invested about $241.3 million for the Dubbo Base Hospital redevelopment (DP&E, 2017).


• Dubbo and District Preschool, located at Hampden Street. The preschool offers before and after school care and early learning programs for children between three to six years old. The preschool is licenced for 78 children per session.

• Dubbo Showground, located at Fitzroy Street. The showground hosts a number of events throughout the year, including the Dubbo Annual Show. The showground contains a number of venues including a main arena, the Orana Equestrian Centre, four pavilions and a function centre.

• Dubbo Regional Botanic Gardens, located at Coronation Drive. Dubbo Regional Botanic Gardens are open Monday to Friday (9:00am to 4:00pm) and Saturday and Sunday (9:30am to 4:30pm). The garden was established in 1999 and comprises four spaces, including Shoyoen Japanese Garden, the Sensory Gardens, the Biodiversity Garden and the Oasis Valley, as well as a café. Local community members volunteer at the gardens.

A number of schools are also located near the Proposal, including Orana Heights Public School, Dubbo North Public School and St Mary’s Primary School. Parks and open spaces located near the Proposal include Victoria Park, Barden Park, Joan Flint Park, Theresa Maliphant Park, Barden Park and Jubilee Park.

Economic profile

The study area had higher rates of workforce participation and lower levels of unemployment compared to NSW. At the 2016 Census, about 62.6 per cent of people aged 15 years or over were participating in the labour force (i.e. they either worked or were looking for work). This is compared to about 59.2 per cent in NSW. About 5.5 per cent of people aged 15 years or over were unemployed, compared to about 6.3 per cent in NSW.

The most common occupations in the study area at the 2016 Census were health care and social assistance (16.6 per cent of employed people aged 15 years or over). This is likely to reflect the presence of the Dubbo Base Hospital and Dubbo Private Hospital within the study area. This was followed by retail trade (11.7 per cent) and education and training (9.7 per cent). Other major industries of employment included construction (8.2 per cent), public administration and safety (7.6 per cent) and manufacturing (6.5 per cent).

At the 2016 Census, the median weekly household income in the study area was below the NSW average. However, median personal incomes were above the NSW average (i.e. $687 per week compared to $664 per week). Low income households (i.e. less than $650 gross weekly income per week) comprised about 18.2 per cent of households. This is compared to 17.7 per cent in NSW. High income households (i.e. more than $2,000 gross weekly income per week) comprised about 26.5 per cent of households. This is compared to 33.6 per cent in NSW.

Business and industry

Dubbo is located within the geographical centre of the Central West and Orana region. Mining and agriculture, forestry and fishing are major industries within the Central West and Orana region. In 2011, mining was the largest gross regional product contributor within the region, at $2.5 billion, while agriculture, forestry and fishing were the second largest gross regional product contributors within the region, at $1.3 billion (DP&E, 2017).

Dubbo is identified within the Central West and Orana Regional Plan 2036 as a regional city. Dubbo includes major hospital and education facilities and serves as the ‘central hub for connections to a large number of dispersed rural communities’ (DP&E, 2017).

Dubbo is located on the Newell Highway, which is a popular tourist route running through central NSW from the Queensland to Victorian borders. The Newell Highway, along with the


Mitchell Highway and Golden Highway, provide connectivity between a number of rural towns and regional centres. From October 2016 to September 2017, Central NSW (which includes Dubbo, Bathurst, Coonabarabran, Cowra, Mudgee, Narromine, Orange and Parkes) received nearly 2.5 million domestic overnight visitors and over 40,000 international overnight visitors. This was an increase of 16.8 per cent and a decrease in seven per cent from the previous year, respectively (Destination NSW, 2017).

Taronga Western Plains Zoo is a major tourist attraction within Dubbo. In 2016/2017, over 260,000 people visited Taronga Western Plains Zoo (Taronga Conservation Society Australia, 2017). Other tourist attractions include Dubbo Observatory, Dubbo Regional Botanic Gardens, and Macquarie River. Dubbo also includes a number of tourism-related businesses, such as short-term accommodation including motels, cabins, caravans and other ‘guest’ accommodation and an information centre.

Local businesses

Businesses in Dubbo consist of a mix of industrial, commercial, professional and health care services. Businesses located near the Proposal include:

• Construction and manufacturing businesses, such as Wright Way Building & Construction and Countrywide Industries

• Repair and maintenance services, such as Mick Harris Automotive and Macquarie Automotive

• Retail businesses, such as DIY Auto, Totally Workwear, Wrigley Kart Supplies, Robertson Motorcycles, Tradelink and Astley’s Plumbing and Hardware

• Cafés, such as Magnolia Café and Pit Stop Coffee

• Wholesale businesses, such as DMC Meat and Seafood Centre

• Health care and social assistance services, such as NALAG Centre for Loss & Grief

• Other businesses, such as Elegance Brows and Beauty, Storage King Dubbo, Grain Corp and Dubbo Buslines.

Community values

Community values include those values held as important to residents for quality of life and well-being. Local amenity and character near the Proposal is mainly influenced by industrial land uses, rail infrastructure and areas of open space. Pockets of low density residential areas are also located to the north and south of the Proposal.

Within the Dubbo Regional LGA, rural land uses and landscapes are important to the character and identity of the area, while the rural amenity and lifestyles are valued by local communities. During consultation for the Community Strategic Plan, the community identified maintaining the village lifestyle and understanding the needs of the rural community to be an important issue over the next 20 years (Dubbo Regional Council, 2013).

Communities in the LGA host a variety of local and regionally significant events which provide opportunities to involve local communities and help to foster a sense of community and local identity. These include events such as an annual multicultural festival, an annual Dubbo Show held around April/May each year, and the Dubbo City Eisteddfod.


Access and connectivity

The study area includes a number of major roads and highways that provide access to communities, employment and infrastructure within the study area as well as the wider Central West and Orana region. The Golden Highway is located north of the Proposal and provides an east-west connection from Dubbo to Newcastle. There are also local roads and access roads that connect to the Proposal, including Myall Street, Fitzroy Street, White Street and Welchman Street.

Dubbo Station is located about 680 metres west of the Proposal. Passenger rail services are available from Central Railway Station in Sydney to Dubbo (via the Main Western Line). Rail services terminate at Dubbo Station, where passengers are able to transfer to coach services for destinations west and north of Dubbo. Freight services operating within the study area include the Australian Rail Track Corporation network from east (Merrygoen) to west (Narromine) and Country Regional Network from north (Gilgandra) to south (Wellington).

A number of local bus services operated by Dubbo Buslines operate within the study area. A local bus route (Route 571) operates near the Proposal, providing access along White Street to Welchman Street from Dubbo CBD to Orana Mall.

A number of on-road and off-road cycleways are located within Dubbo. On-road cycleways near the Proposal include along White Street, Welchman Street, Myall Street, Fitzroy Street, Wheelers Lane and Cobbora Road.

Further details regarding traffic and transport near the Proposal is provided in Section 6.1.2.


Property impacts

The Proposal would result in the permanent property acquisition of about 3.5 hectares of land owned by Dubbo Regional Council. Dubbo Regional Council has been consulted regarding the property acquisition requirements during the design development of the Proposal. The remaining portion of land required for the Proposal is owned by TfNSW.

The Proposal would not require the acquisition of private property.

Construction of the Proposal would be carried out entirely within the operational boundary. As a result, the Proposal is not expected to require the temporary lease of land for ancillary facilities or other construction activities.

Construction phase

Land use The Proposal would be located within land zoned within the Dubbo LEP as IN2 Light Industrial and SP2 Infrastructure (Railway), as well as RE1 Public Recreation and RE2 Private Recreation. Although construction of the Proposal would result in the loss of land zoned for public and private recreation, the land is not publicly accessible or used for recreational purposes. As a result, impacts on land use during construction of the Proposal are considered to be minor.

Social infrastructure

As discussed in Section 6.6.3 the Dubbo Masonic Retirement Village is located at Darby Close, less than 50 metres from the Proposal Site (refer to Figure 6-14). Temporary


impacts may be experienced by residents of the retirement village due to noise and dust from construction activities (refer to Section 6.3) and increased construction traffic, including heavy vehicles, along White Street.

In addition, the use of larger vibratory rollers near the retirement village during construction may impact levels of human comfort (refer to Section 6.3.4). Some residents may also be more sensitive to effects of construction noise and vibration, due to their age or illness. Ongoing consultation with residents and management of the Dubbo Masonic Retirement Village about potential impacts of the Proposal during the construction phase would be undertaken to minimise potential impacts.

During construction, impacts on amenity may be also experienced by users of other social infrastructure located close to construction works, such as the TAFE Western Dubbo College at Myall Street. Impacts on amenity may result from increased noise and dust due to construction traffic, and changes in local traffic and access. This may temporarily impact on the enjoyment of social infrastructure, particularly outdoor areas. These impacts would be managed through the implementation of safeguards and management measures (refer to Section 7.2).

Jobs, skills and industry participation

The Jobs, Skills & Industry Participation Strategy (TfNSW, 2017) identifies that the Proposal would provide long-term, regionally-based employment opportunities, enable skills development leading to nationally recognised qualifications, and opportunities for local businesses.

Priorities and Objectives

The Regional Rail Fleet Project’s Jobs Skills and Industry Participation (JSIP) priorities and objectives reflect industry skills requirements, local demographics, regulatory drivers and wider government priorities around skills, employment, diversity and business growth. The Proposal would support Government’s commitments to regional NSW through delivering long-term, regionally-based employment opportunities, and opportunities for local businesses to supply to the Proposal across its lifecycle. The Proposal could stimulate regional economies through:

• creating sustainable regional jobs that transition from across project delivery and operations phases;

• increasing workforce diversity and providing opportunities for young people in regional NSW;

• enabling skills development, leading to nationally recognised qualifications, through ‘hands-on’ experience during final fit-out activities to support ongoing maintenance tasks;

• encouraging the use of Australian/New Zealand (ANZ) small to medium enterprises (SME) and regional NSW businesses with long term opportunities across the final fit-out and maintenance phases; and

• capability building ANZ SMEs and regional NSW businesses e.g. in rail safety competency, new technologies etc.


Figure 6-14 Social infrastructure near the Proposal


A key objective for the Proposal is to increase workforce diversity, providing jobs and skills opportunities for under-represented groups. For example, as discussed in Section 6.3.3, a higher proportion of the study area’s population reported to be Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander compared to NSW. The Proposal aims to create sustainable employment opportunities that increase Aboriginal participation, as well as youth, long-term unemployment, women and people with disabilities.

Priority areas and objectives for jobs, skills and industry participation include:

• Regional jobs

Provide sustainable regional jobs

Increase Aboriginal participation

Provide opportunities for young people

• Developing the skills base

Help to resolve regional skills shortages

Enhance regional workforce retention and career prospects

Transferable skills and qualifications

• Opportunities for regional NSW businesses

Increase opportunities for regional NSW businesses, ANZ SMEs and Recognised Aboriginal businesses to access the Regional Rail Fleet Project supply chain

Help boost and improve regional and broader NSW business and industry capability and capacity

A collaborative approach would be adopted to ensure that relevant expertise and resources are harnessed for the regional development outcomes sought for the Project.

Partnership with NSW Government and industry

Key partners have been identified to realise JSIP opportunities. The key partners would be responsible for the delivery and resourcing of programs that could be accessed to support the JSIP objectives.

Potential partners would include Department of Industry, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Office of Regional Development, NSW Roads and Maritime Services, Health Infrastructure, Inland Rail, Commonwealth Department of Jobs and Small Business and Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Jobs, skills and industry participation advisory group

The JSIP Advisory Group (JSIPAG) would be established by TfNSW as a strategic stakeholder forum, bringing together key partners, as well as stakeholders such as the Contractor to support the collaborative delivery model.

The objective of this group is to inform, advise and support the delivery of the Regional Rail JSIP Strategy and associated programs. JSIPAG members would provide expertise, resources and delivery mechanisms to support JSIP outcomes.

The JSIPAG would be supported by an Aboriginal Working Group comprising Aboriginal representatives from stakeholders including Aboriginal Affairs NSW, Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet, The Three Rivers Regional Assembly, Department of Industry and NSW Roads and Maritime Services. The Group would aim to support TfNSW and the Contractor


achieve its Aboriginal participation objectives and support economic development for local Aboriginal communities.

Jobs and skills

During construction, the Proposal would have positive short-term impacts on employment through direct employment opportunities, as well as indirect employment opportunities in businesses and industries that support the Proposal’s construction. Construction of the Proposal would generate about 200 to 250 jobs (TfNSW, 2017), with train completion works anticipated to generate 40 to 60 jobs. The projected number of jobs is based on an assessment of comparable projects within Australia. It is anticipated that the construction workforce would contribute to current regional capacity, through the development of transferable skills.

Indirect employment opportunities would be generated across regional and ANZ businesses in industries that support construction such as manufacturing and services.

Local business and industry participation

Dubbo is estimated to receive an increase in gross regional product as a result of the Proposal. During construction, the Proposal would likely to have a beneficial impact on some Dubbo-based businesses through increased demand for local goods and services and indirect employment opportunities, particularly for supply of goods and materials, and sub-contracted construction services for the maintenance facility. Temporary negative impacts may be experienced by local businesses nearest to construction works due to temporary changes to access, and noise and vibration. These impacts are expected to be minor and would be managed through the implementation of safeguards and management measures (refer to Section 7.2).

Community values

Potential impacts on community values during construction may be experienced by communities near the Proposal due to:

• Temporary adverse changes in local amenity due to noise and dust generated from construction activities.

• Increased construction traffic and heavy vehicles on local roads, including Cobbora Road, Myall Street, White Street, and Welchman Street, impacting perceptions of safety.

• Noise and light spill from night-time construction activities.

• Temporary changes in local access and connectivity, including rail closedowns, resulting in delays and disruptions.

• Adverse changes in visual amenity and local character due to the presence of construction ancillary facilities and infrastructure, and clearing of vegetation near the Proposal.

During construction, out-of-hours work may be carried out near some residential receivers to minimise disruptions to customers, pedestrians, motorists and other nearby sensitive receivers. Noise and lighting from these works may temporarily impact on night-time amenity or disrupt sleeping patterns for some residents which are closest to construction activities. The local community and businesses would be notified in advance of any out-of-hours works that are likely to be audible at adjacent sensitive receivers, including mid-week, night time and weekend rail closedowns.


These impacts would be managed through the implementation of safeguards and management measures (refer to Section 7.2).


Temporary impacts on access and connectivity for road users and rail freight networks may be experienced during construction, including from:

• Rail closedown periods (or possessions) in order to facilitate construction of the Proposal

• Increased construction traffic on local roads near the Proposal, including heavy vehicles

• Speed limit reductions near construction areas to allow for safe working practices.

Changes to access and connectivity may result in disruptions to public transport users, and delays and increased travel times on local roads for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists. Increased heavy vehicles on local roads near the Proposal may also impact perceptions about road safety.

As discussed in Section 3.6.4, the Proposal would require rail closedowns to facilitate construction or emergency works within the rail corridor in a safe manner. During these periods, rail services and access to train services would be suspended and replacement buses would operate. Rail closedown periods would generally be carried out on weekends or holiday periods when there is lower patronage demand. Early and ongoing consultation would be carried out with the local community and businesses regarding rail closedown periods to assist in minimising impacts.

Access to private properties would be maintained during construction and temporary property access would be provided where required.

An assessment of potential impacts of the Proposal on traffic and transport is provided in Section 6.1.

Operational phase

Land use

Although portions of the Proposal Site are zoned under the Dubbo LEP as RE1 Public Recreation and RE2 Private Recreation, the site is not currently accessible by the public or used for recreational land uses. The site would continue to be used for rail infrastructure uses, and as a consequence there are no likely impacts on land use.

Social infrastructure

Operation of the Proposal would not result in direct impacts to social infrastructure. However, indirect impacts to amenity may occur as a result of noise impacts during operation. In particular, the Dubbo Masonic Retirement Village may experience noise impacts during operation of the facility (refer to Section 6.3.4). Ongoing consultation with residents and management of the Dubbo Masonic Retirement Village about potential impacts of the Proposal during the construction phase would be undertaken to minimise potential impacts.

Jobs and skills

During operation, the Proposal would have positive long-term impacts on employment through direct employment opportunities at the facility, including apprenticeships and traineeships. The Proposal would generate 40-60 full time equivalent jobs during operational


maintenance activities based on comparable facilities (TfNSW, 2017). During the normal weekday day shift, this number could increase by a further 10 office staff.

Indirect employment opportunities would be generated across regional and ANZ businesses in industries that can provide maintenance services and/or componentry supply for the trains, as well as maintenance services for the facility.

Local business and industry participation

The Proposal would stimulate the regional economy and assist in creating sustainable long-term job opportunities in Dubbo. Dubbo is estimated to receive an increase in gross regional product as a result of the Proposal. In addition, the operational phase may provide opportunities for some local businesses to supply the Proposal through train components, associated services or facilities maintenance.

Community values Impacts to community values during operation of the Proposal would generally be related to reduced amenity due to noise and visual impacts during operation of the Proposal.

As discussed in Section 3.6, land within the Proposal Site is used by several public and private organisations as a maintenance and/or construction depot, however residential areas are located to the north and south of the site. The Proposal would result in the establishment of new rail infrastructure within the Proposal Site, which may impact nearby residents due visual impacts and changes to landscape character. Further details of the landscape character and visual impacts of the Proposal are provided in Section 6.2.


The Proposal would upgrade facilities associated with the Regional Rail Fleet, which would improve safety, comfort and reliability of regional train services. This would have a positive long-term impact on access and connectivity within the Central West and Orana region, including to Dubbo, through increased regional service patronage.

Operation of the Proposal would result in increases to closures at rail level crossings at Fitzroy Street, Wheelers Lane and Sheraton Road. This has the potential to result in additional delays and disruptions for motorists and other road users. The overall impact of rail level crossings is expected to have a negligible impact on the road network within the study area (refer to Section 6.13). Ongoing consultation with local communities about potential changes to road networks, public transport, and local pedestrian and cycle facilities, during the operational phase of the Proposal would assist in minimising potential impacts.

The Proposal would require rail closedown periods to facilitate maintenance activities within the rail corridor in a safe manner when trains are not operating. During these periods, rail services and access to train services would be suspended and replacement buses would operate. Rail closedown periods would generally be carried out on weekends or holiday periods when there is lower patronage demand. Early and ongoing consultation would be carried out with the local community and businesses regarding rail closedown periods to assist in minimising impacts.


6.6.5 Mitigation measures The following additional mitigation measures are proposed to manage property, land use and socio-economic impacts:

• Jobs, skills and industry participation criteria for the Proposal would be established to encourage the Contractor to achieve the JSIP priorities and objectives including:

Encouraging the purchase of goods and services in regional NSW, helping to ensure the local community benefits from the construction of the Proposal.

Working collaboratively with TfNSW and the JSIPAG to support capability and capacity building of regional NSW businesses that may supply to the Contractor during construction and operational phases.

Minimum targets across all JSIP priorities and objectives including for Aboriginal employment, apprentices and workforce skills development.

• A Community Liaison Plan would be prepared prior to construction to identify all potential stakeholders and best practice methods for consultation with these groups during construction. The plan would also encourage feedback and facilitate opportunities for the community and stakeholders to have input into the Proposal, where practicable.

• Contact details for a 24-hour construction response line, Project Infoline and email address would be provided for ongoing stakeholder contact throughout the construction phase.

• Ongoing consultation with local communities would be carried out in accordance with the Community Liaison Plan about potential changes to road networks, public transport, and local pedestrian and cycle facilities, during the pre-construction, construction and operational phase of the Proposal.

Additional measures relevant to the management of property, land use and socio-economic impacts are also outlined in other sections of this REF, including:

• Section 6.1 (traffic and transport).

• Section 6.2 (landscape character and visual amenity).

• Section 6.3 (noise and vibration).

• Section 6.10 (air quality).

6.7 Biodiversity A Biodiversity Assessment Report which details the methods, biodiversity field survey results and potential ecological impacts associated with the new Dubbo Maintenance Facility has been prepared by OzArk (OzArk, 2018b). This assessment is attached as Appendix G of this REF. A summary of this assessment is provided in the following sections.

6.7.1 Methodology A detailed methodology for the biodiversity assessment is provided in the Biodiversity Assessment in Appendix G. The following provides a summary of the methodology used. The methodology for the biodiversity assessment involved:

• A desktop review of relevant database records and previous studies within the locality to identify Commonwealth and State listed threatened species, populations and ecological communities. A habitat assessment was carried out to assess the likelihood of the species being present in the study area.


• The mapping of vegetation communities and flora through aerial photograph interpretation, regional spatial data, and elevation data to stratify vegetation and habitats in the study area.

• Vegetation and habitat condition assessment consistent with the Biodiversity Assessment Method (BAM) (OEH, 2017). The flora survey aimed to provide baseline data for the presence of threatened plant species, populations and ecological communities to provide a basis for the prediction of impacts.

• Targeted terrestrial flora and fauna surveys which were carried out on 11 October 2017 and 13 November 2017. A more-detailed assessment was completed subsequently in late summer 2018, on Tuesday 13 February 2018.

• The fauna survey method included rapid habitat assessment across the study area, searches for evidence of threatened fauna, and opportunistically recording fauna species active at the time of the survey. No targeted fauna survey techniques such as mammal trapping, bat (anabat) surveys, spotlighting, frog surveys or call playback, were carried out.

• An assessment of threatened species to identify the likely occurrence of State and nationally listed threatened species; these were identified from background reviews based on their habitat requirements.

• An assessment of significance for threatened species and ecological communities positively identified during surveys and inspections or that are considered to have a moderate or high likelihood of occurring in the study area.

• Identification of impacts and associated mitigation measures to reduce and manage impacts.

Database search and literature review A desktop review of relevant background reports and government databases pertaining to the biodiversity of the bioregion was undertaken on 22 November 2017 comprising a 10 kilometre radius surrounding the Proposal. The databases searched included the following:

• BioNet - the website for the Atlas of NSW Wildlife and OEH Threatened Species Profile Database.

• NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) freshwater threatened species distribution maps.

• The Australian Department of Environment and Energy Protected Matters Search Tool.

• OEH BioNet Vegetation Classification System database.

• Register of Declared areas of Outstanding Biodiversity Value OEH vegetation information system (VIS) database (OEH, 2015).

• EPBC Act protected matters search tool (Department of the Environment, 2016).

• NSW Master Plant Community Type Classification system for Plant Community Types (OEH, 2018).

• The Australian Bureau of Meteorology’s Atlas of Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE).

The database search findings and a review of vegetation spatial date were used to identify a list of 'subject species, populations and ecological communities' for targeted survey during the field surveys.


Field survey Field surveys were carried out on 11 October 2017 and 13 November 2017. A more-detailed assessment was completed subsequently, on Tuesday 13 February 2018 by ecologists from OzArk. The field survey included vegetation and fauna field surveys.

The fauna survey method included rapid habitat assessment at multiple sites, searches for evidence of threatened fauna, and opportunistically recording fauna species active at the time of the survey. No targeted fauna survey techniques such as mammal trapping, spotlighting, Microbat ultrasonic call capture, frog surveys or call playback, were undertaken.

The field assessment focussed on identifying areas of predominantly native vegetation versus areas dominated by exotic vegetation (weeds), to determine the value and conservation significance of the native vegetation at the site. Formalised plots were not completed, however the site was fully traversed, vegetation communities identified and mapped, and diagnostic species identified for purposes of the impact assessment.

Special consideration was given to locating rare or threatened plants identified in database searches as having potential to occur. The conservation significance of flora was determined by referencing the schedules associated with the BC Act and the EPBC Act. The Proposal Site was searched by pedestrian traverses across areas with a higher proportion of native species, targeting predicted threatened flora species.

6.7.2 Existing environment The Proposal is located in the Talbragar Valley subregion of the Brigalow Belt South bioregion (Thackway & Cresswell,1995). This bioregion consists of landscapes derived from both extensive basalt flows and quartz sandstones, and consequently has highly variable soils and vegetation depending on the local rock type or sediment source (OEH, 2016).

The Proposal Site has been substantially disturbed over a long period, however there are large areas where the original soil profile and remnant native vegetation have been retained.

The Proposal is surrounded by the urban areas of Dubbo, and has very limited habitat connectivity to other areas of native vegetation.

The surveys recorded 62 plant species (of which 24 were exotic) and 20 fauna species. The full list of species recorded during the surveys is provided in the Biodiversity Assessment in Appendix G.

Plant community types Three Plant Community Types (PCTs) have been previously mapped in the vicinity of the Proposal, refer to Figure 6-17. However only two of these PCTs were identified within the Proposal Site. These are:

• PCT 201: Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial brown loam soils mainly in the NSW South Western Slopes Bioregion (refer to Figure 6-15).

• PCT 796: Derived grassland of the NSW south western slopes (refer to Figure 6-16).

The conservation value of derived grasslands is that they represent the original ground cover vegetation for an area and habitat for native species. Derived grasslands can be regenerated to a woodland condition by active revegetation and/or be a source of local native seed stock for regeneration. In the broader context, this community is derived from a number of woodland types. Within the Proposal Site, the derived grassland is mostly likely a derived form of Fuzzy Box woodland, where trees have been cleared in the past.


Figure 6-15 Fuzzy Box Woodland (PCT 201)

Figure 6-16 Derived grassland (PCT 796)

Groundwater dependent ecosystems The Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Atlas of Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems (BoM, 2017) does not identify any groundwater dependant ecosystems within the Proposal Site. However, given the topographic location on a depression near the junction of two major rivers (the Macquarie and the Talbragar Rivers) and the history of the area being a swamp, there is likely to have some degree of groundwater dependence.


Figure 6-17 Plant community types identified within the Proposal Site


Aquatic ecological communities The Proposal is located within the catchment of the Macquarie River which forms part the endangered Aquatic ecological community in the natural drainage system of the lowland catchment of the Darling River (Darling River EEC). The Darling River EEC occurs in lowland riverine environments of the Darling River catchment and includes the meandering channels and a variety of aquatic habitats including deep channels and pools, wetlands, gravel beds and floodplains. The Darling River EEC is known to contain habitat for 21 native fish species and hundreds of native invertebrate species. However, the Proposal Site does not contain any identified watercourses and is accordingly not considered to be part of the Darling River EEC.

Terrestrial ecological communities Six terrestrial endangered ecological communities (EEC) are known or predicted to occur in the Brigalow Belt South, Talbragar Valley subregion. However, only one EEC, the Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial Soils of the South Western Slopes, Darling Riverine Plains and Brigalow Belt South Bioregions which was confirmed to occur within the Proposal Site, refer to Table 6-38. Table 6-38 Threatened ecological communities confirmed within the Proposal Site

Scientific Name Common Name

NSW status

Commonwealth Status

Likelihood

Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial Soils of the South Western Slopes, Darling Riverine Plains and Brigalow Belt South Bioregions

Fuzzy Box Woodland

Endangered Ecological Community

- Yes. This community was confirmed to occur on the site, due to the presence of PCT 201 Fuzzy Box Woodland.

The Fuzzy Box woodland EEC occurs in the Darling Riverine Plains and Brigalow Belt South bioregions of NSW, and predominantly within the South Western Slopes bioregion. Approximately 95 per cent of the original extent has been historically cleared for agriculture. The EEC is naturally restricted to the higher alluvial flats subject to infrequent flooding. This results in patches that are relatively small and often linear in shape. In turn, this means localised patches are particularly susceptible to edge effects and other disturbance. OEH mapping predicts approximately 20,000 hectares of Fuzzy Box woodland occurs across NSW and at the local scale, a total area of approximately 4,000 hectares of Fuzzy Box woodland occurs within the Dubbo Regional LGA.


Figure 6-18 Remnant Fuzzy Box (Eucalyptus conica) at the Proposal Site

Threatened flora and fauna Based on regional records and the presence of suitable habitat, 20 threatened fauna species and 20 threatened flora species are predicted or known to occur in the locality. Of the 20 threatened flora species five species have previously been recorded within 10 kilometres of the Proposal. These four species and the likelihood of occurrence with in the Proposal Site are summarised in Table 6-39.

Based on the habitat requirements of each of the fauna species and the type of habitat present at the site, three fauna species have potential to be present within Proposal Site as described in Table 6-40. All other predicted threatened fauna species, including those previously recorded within 10 kilometres were not considered likely to occur or be impacted by the Proposal due to the absence of suitable habitat in the immediate area.

The field survey did not record any threatened flora species. No threatened fauna species or confirmed signs or traces of threatened fauna species were recorded during the field surveys. However, there is the potential for the bats to be present within the Proposal Site due to the presence of manmade structures (existing buildings) which could provide roosting or breeding habitat.


Table 6-39 Threatened flora species and their likelihood of occurrence

Type Scientific Name Common Name

NSW Status

Commonwealth Status

Record within 10km

Likelihood of occurrence within the Proposal Site

Orchid Diuris tricolor Pine Donkey Orchid

Vulnerable Not listed 7 Possible - The Pine Donkey Orchid grows in sclerophyll forest among grass, often with native Cypress Pine; it is found in sandy soils, either on flats or small rises.

Shrub Commersonia procumbens

Vulnerable Vulnerable 3 Unlikely - Grows in sandy sites, often along roadsides.

Shrub Homoranthus darwinioides

Vulnerable Vulnerable 1 Unlikely - Grows in gravely sandy soils, in vegetation with a shrubby understorey.

Shrub Indigofera efoliata Leafless Indigo

Endangered Endangered 9 Unlikely - Very rare and possibly now extinct, known only from a few collections in the Dubbo area.

Table 6-40 Threatened fauna species with potential to be impacted

Class Scientific Name

Common Name

NSW Status

Commonwealth Status

Record within 10km

Likelihood to be impacted by the Proposal

Bats Chalinolobus picatus

Little Pied Bat Vulnerable Not listed 3 Possible - foraging habitat identified for this species within the study area was highly degraded. Roosting habitat for this species (old buildings) was identified within the study area.

Bats Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis

Eastern Bentwing-bat

Vulnerable Not listed 3 Possible - foraging habitat identified for this species within the study area was highly degraded. Roosting habitat for this species (old buildings) was identified within the study area.

Bats Saccolaimus flaviventris

Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat

Vulnerable Not listed 4 Possible - foraging habitat identified for this species within the study area was highly degraded. Roosting habitat for this species (old buildings) was identified within the study area


Fauna habitat The sparse and open nature of the grassland portions within the Proposal Site would favour fauna species which could utilise open ground or modified habitats. Many of the bird species recorded in such habitats on-site utilise the open grassland areas for foraging but are reliant on native woodland and forest communities for roosting and nesting (e.g. raptors and parrots). The derived grasslands may provide limited habitat and protection for small animals.

• Several non-threatened bird species were recorded in the Proposal Site and include:

• Australian Magpie (Cracticus tibicen)

• Common Starling (Sturnus vulgaris)

• Crested Pigeon (Ocyphaps lophotes)

• Galah (Eolophus roseicapillus)

• Magpie-lark (Grallina cyanoleuca).

Weeds Weeds are present across most of the site in varying density. These include numerous exotic grasses, thistles, verbena, wild sage, onion weed, among other weeds. Some areas are heavily dominated by Paspalum, which is a persistent and invasive grass that can rapidly out-compete native species. Only one weed species (Saffron Thistle (Carthamus lanatus)) listed under the Biosecurity Act 2015 was identified within the Proposal. The full list of the exotic species recorded at the site is provided in Appendix G.


Construction phase

Removal of native vegetation As shown in Table 6-41, about 9.2 hectares of PCT 796 Derived grassland of the NSW south western slopes would be cleared for the Proposal. About 1.88 hectares of PCT 201 Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial brown loam soils mainly in the NSW South Western Slopes Bioregion would be avoided. This area is considered to be part of the Fuzzy Box woodland EEC, where scattered trees remain and there is potential for assisted natural regeneration. It is estimated that 95 per cent of PCT 201 has been cleared relative to its original extent across the state (OEH, 2018). Due to this relatively small extent remaining, all areas of this PCT therefore have conservation significance. Table 6-41 Predicted loss of native vegetation from the Proposal

Location Vegetation impacted Vegetation avoided

Lot Area

Lot 1 DP1185204 (middle section of site) 6.84 ha of PCT 796 Derived grassland

1.88 ha of PCT 201 Fuzzy Box woodland

21.9 ha

Lot 100 DP710487 (eastern end of site) 2.36 ha of PCT 796 Derived grassland

Assumed nil

3.5 ha

Lots to 5 DP1006357 (western section of site)

Negligible native vegetation present or impacted

2.17 ha


Location Vegetation impacted Vegetation avoided

Lot Area

Railway corridor of the Main West Line Negligible native vegetation impact

-

Total 9.2 ha

Threatened biodiversity The Proposal is not predicted to remove any EECs. However, the 9.2 hectares of derived native grassland that is expected to be removed would have supported the Fuzzy Box Woodland EEC in the past. In its current condition it is not consistent with the definition of the EEC due to the absence of Fuzzy Box trees.

The design has sought to avoid and minimise impacts to the Fuzzy Box woodland EEC by retaining an area of 1.88 hectares in the southern part of the site, where the trees are present (refer to Figure 6-18). The area of the site has the greatest potential for assisted natural regeneration of the Eucalyptus conica overstorey which could feasibly be restored to a woodland condition.

The Proposal is not predicted to affect any natural habitat or hollow bearing trees that would be suitable roosting or breeding habitat for the three threatened fauna species that have the potential to be present, namely, the Little Pied Bat (Chalinolobus picatus), Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris) and Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis). However, any old buildings and structures that are to be removed as part of the Proposal, do provide habitat which could be suitable for roosting or breeding for these threatened fauna species.

Operational phase No adverse biodiversity impacts would be expected from the Proposal during operation. There is the oppounitunity to improve the biodiveristy value of the site by restoration of the retained Fuzzy Box woodland and provision of offsets for impacts native vegetation and individual trees.

Conclusion on significance of impacts The following four threatened species and one EEC were assessed for significance under the BC Act. These include:

• Pine Donkey Orchid (Diuris tricolour).

• Little Pied Bat (Chalinolobus picatus).

• Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris).

• Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis).

• Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial Soils of the South Western Slopes EEC.

The assessments of significance found that Proposal would be unlikely to significantly impact threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats, as defined by BC Act or FM Act. Accordingly, a Species Impact Statement is not required.

The Proposal would not be likely to significantly impact threatened species, populations, ecological communities or migratory species, within the meaning of the EPBC Act therefore a referral under the EPBC Act is not required.


6.7.4 Mitigation measures The following additional mitigation measures are proposed to minimise and manage potential biodiversity impacts:

• Opportunities to reduce the clearing of native vegetation would be investigated during detailed design.

• The construction works and vehicle access to the construction site is to be constrained to the minimum area practical and would use as few entry/exit points as possible.

• Material stockpiles, equipment and machinery storage and laydown areas would be consolidated within a defined impact area to minimise the overall impact footprint and retain the southern area of native vegetation.

• The impact footprint would be minimised by restricting access across the site beyond the defined development footprint including avoiding unnecessary vehicle and personnel movements across unused land.

• Site checks for evidence of the bats prior to commencement of construction.

• Program demolition of man-made structures to be outside of the breeding season for the identified bat species.

• Pre-works detailed inspections on and under the structures prior to detect if the animals are, or could be, present.

• Animal handler/ecologist to be on site and supervise during the removal of man-made structures.

• A Vegetation Management Plan would be prepared to guide the appropriate restoration of the retained EEC area towards benchmark condition of the EEC. This would include native vegetation management actions and an ongoing weed management strategy. The 1.88 hectare of retained Fuzzy Box woodland would be restored by either assisted natural regeneration or active revegetation, subject to detailed design. Any restoration works would need to be appropriate to the status of the vegetation as an EEC and consistent with OEH guidelines and licence conditions. This measure is not a formal offset, rather it represents a minimisation and mitigation measure.

• Impacts to native vegetation would be offset in accordance with the Transport for NSW Vegetation Offset Guide for Native Vegetation (TfNSW, 2016).

6.7.5 Offsetting Offsetting is not a statutory requirement for this Proposal and has not been considered in the current study. The NSW Biodiversity Offset Scheme is not compulsory for developments assessed under Division 5.1 of the EP&A Act that do not have a significant impact.

TfNSW has a Vegetation Offset Guide for Native Vegetation (TfNSW, 2016) for those projects where statutory offsets do not apply, in order to achieve an ‘improved or maintained’ outcome through the provision of offsets for impacts native vegetation and individual trees. The process outlined in this guide would be implemented for this Proposal.


6.8 Contamination, landform, geology and soils A Phase 1 Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) was prepared by Nation Partners and a Geotechnical Assessment was prepared by Aurecon. These documents are provided in Appendix H. The findings of these investigations are summarised in this section.


Topography Topographic contours for the local area indicate that the site is located on a gentle east to west slope, with low relief and ranging from approximately 284 metres Australian Height Datum (AHD) on the eastern boundary to 268 metres AHD on the eastern boundary. No permanent watercourses are located within one kilometre of the site, with the closest watercourse being the Macquarie River located approximately two kilometres west of the site (refer to Section 6.9).

Geology and soils

Geology and soil landscapes The Dubbo 1:250 000 Soil Landscape Map (B.W. Murphy, 1998) indicates that the Proposal Site is generally located in soil mapped as Eulomogo soil. The Eulomogo Soil Landscape is characterised by undulating rises on Sandstone, local relief to 30 metres and typically of 2-7 per cent slopes with moderate to high erosion hazard under cultivation and low to moderate available water holding capacity. The western portion of the site is mapped as Bunglegumbie soil. The Bunglegumbie Soil Landscape is characterised by level to slightly undulating plains, higher terraces of the Macquarie River with small pockets of Black earths, local relief to 10 metres and slopes typically less than three percent with moderate to high water holding capacity.

The Dubbo 1:250 000 Geological Series Map (Colquhoun G.P et al., 1999) indicates that the geology of the Proposal Site is underlain almost entirely by sediments of the Napperby Formation. The eastern portion of the Proposal Site is close to the boundary with the Pilliga sandstone and the Tertiary Basalts.

Much of the structural geology of the Dubbo area is concealed at depth beneath the sediments of the Surat Basin of the Great Australian Basin. Tertiary volcanic rocks intrude throughout these sediments and occur in irregular shaped areas around the Dubbo region. One such area is close to the eastern end of the Proposal Site.

Acid sulfate soils A search of the Acid Sulfate Soil Risk Mapping indicates that the Proposal Site is not located within an area mapped as an area of concern for acid sulfate soils.

Salinity The Proposal Site is not within an area with soils mapped as being at high risk of salinity.

Contamination A search of official databases on the 12 June 2018 did not reveal any known contaminated sites within the Proposal Site. No records for the Proposal Site were recorded on the NSW EPA Contaminated Land list under the CLM Act. No record of notices or licenced activities for the Proposal Street listed for the NSW EPA dataset under the POEO Act. No records for the site were listed on the National Waste Management Site Database.


Based upon the results and observations of the PSI, potential sources of contamination from past or current activities at the site include:

• Contamination associated with current and former waste disposal areas that included observations of 200 litre drums, refer to Figure 6-19.

• Contamination associated with current and former rail associated activities, including minor quantities of chemicals, oils, and lubricants stored at the site.

• Stockpiles of waste materials, including fly-tipped waste dumped illegally at the site, refer to Figure 6-20.

• Uncontrolled fill material within the bounds of the Council compound area and the embankment constructed for the road overpass, refer to Figure 6-21.

• Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semi volatile organic compounds (SVOCs).

• Heavy metal and pesticide contamination associated with insect and vegetation control.

Based upon the potential contaminant sources identified for the site, potential contaminants of concern include:

• Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX), and petroleum hydrocarbons resulting from rail associated activities, compound areas, and waste disposal.

• Heavy metals and organic contaminants including BTEX, total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) associated with waste and fill materials.

• Asbestos, asbestos containing materials (ACM) and other hazardous building materials associated with waste and fill materials.

• Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semi volatile organic compounds (SVOCs)

• Heavy metals and pesticides.

Figure 6-19 Drums in fenced area near ARTC entrance


Figure 6-20 Stockpile of rail sleepers and other waste materials in centre of site

Figure 6-21 Earthen fill bund and materials stockpiles



Construction phase The Proposal would require levelling works to reduce the existing gradient of the site. This would result in the generation of approximately 10,000 square metres of material excavated from site.

Soil disturbance Excavation and other earthworks such as trenching and stockpiling activities, if not adequately managed, could result in the following impacts:

• Erosion of exposure soil and stockpiled materials.

• Dust generated from excavation and vehicle movements over exposed soil.

• An increase in sediment loads entering the stormwater system and/or local runoff.

These impacts are considered to be moderate due to the site terrain and proximity to the open stormwater channel. However, it is expected that erosion risks could be adequately managed through the implementation of standard measures as outlined in the ‘Blue Book’ Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction Guidelines (Landcom, 2004).

Potential to cause contamination Construction activities have the potential to result in contamination of soils and/or groundwater due to spills and leaks of fuel, oils and other hazardous chemicals, particular in relation to their use and storage within compound sites. These impacts would be readily managed through the implementation of relevant mitigation measures as outlined in Section 6.8.3.

Reuse of materials for fill or other suitable purposes along the alignment would be subject to appropriate testing in accordance with the relevant guidelines prior to their use, to avoid potential cross-contamination of soils. Management in accordance with the relevant waste management measures would be required where materials are deemed unsuitable for reuse, or where there is a surplus of reusable material (e.g. fill).

Management of pre-existing contamination Based on a review of background information, there is potential for contamination to be encountered throughout the construction footprint.

Exposure or disturbance of contaminants during construction may have the following impacts:

• Mobilisation of contaminants with the potential to impact groundwater, surface water or soils

• Migration of contaminants into surrounding areas via leaching, overland flow and/or subsurface flow (water and/or vapour) with the potential to impact on flora, fauna or groundwater dependent ecosystems

• Risk of exposure to contaminants by site workers or site users.

Table 6-42 summarises the initial contamination conceptual site model based on the desk-based search of relevant databases and historical records. The table lists the contaminants of potential concern, the environmental media which may be affected, the location of the Areas of Environmental Interest relative to the alignment, and the likelihood of contamination being present in the construction footprint.


Table 6-42 Initial contamination conceptual site model

Source Contaminants Media Pathway Receptors

Current and former rail associated activities and waste disposal areas

Heavy metals, BTEX and TPH, PAHs, VOCs and SVOCs, Asbestos and ACMs

Surface soils, fill and waste materials

Direct contact or migration and inhalation of dust

Current and future site workers or users, users of adjacent properties, the general public or trespassers

Sub-surface soils

Direct contact or migration and inhalation of dust

Future site workers and users

Groundwater Infiltration Groundwater

Fly-tipped waste, waste stockpiles, uncontrolled fill

Heavy metals, BTEX and TPH, PAHs, VOCs and SVOCs, Asbestos and ACMs

Surface soils, fill and waste materials

Direct contact, migration and inhalation of dust

Current and future site workers and users, users of adjacent properties, general public or trespassers.


Insect and vegetation control

Heavy metals, pesticides

Surface soils Direct contact, migration and inhalation of dust

Current and future site workers and users, users of adjacent properties, general public and trespassers


Operational phase There would be no operational risks to geology and soils as a result of the Proposal.

6.8.3 Mitigation measures TfNSW would implement the following mitigation measures to mitigate impacts to landform, geology and soils:

• Prior to commencement of works, a site-specific Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be prepared in accordance with the ‘Blue Book’ Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction Guidelines (Landcom, 2004) and updated throughout construction so it remains relevant to the activities. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan measures would be implemented prior to commencement of works and maintained throughout construction.

• Erosion and sediment control measures would be established prior to any clearing, grubbing and site establishment activities and would be maintained and regularly inspected (particularly following rainfall events) to ensure their ongoing functionality. Erosion and sediment control measures would be maintained and left in place until the works are complete and areas are stabilised.

• Vehicles and machinery would be properly maintained and routinely inspected to minimise the risk of fuel/oil leaks. Construction plant, vehicles and equipment would also be refuelled offsite, or in a designated refuelling area.

• All fuels, chemicals and hazardous liquids would be stored away from drainage lines, within an impervious bunded area in accordance with Australian Standards, EPA Guidelines and the Chemical Storage and Spill Response Guidelines (TfNSW, 2018e).


• In the event of a pollution incident, works would cease in the immediate vicinity and the Contractor would immediately notify the TfNSW Project Manager and TfNSW Environment and Planning Manager.


6.9 Hydrology, flooding and water quality Potential impacts on local hydrology, flooding and water quality are presented in this section, together with safeguards and management measures to manage any negative impacts.

6.9.1 Methodology A desktop Flooding, Groundwater and Water Quality technical assessment was prepared in order to assess the potential surface water and flooding impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed Dubbo Rail Yard Maintenance Facility

The methodology for the hydrology and flooding assessment involved reviewing background information relevant to the Proposal, including potential mitigation measures and strategies to mitigate flooding, groundwater and water quality. This assessment also considered studies prepared by Cardno (2018), on behalf of TfNSW, to identify the existing flood characteristics in Dubbo to inform design development.


Surface water and associated features The Macquarie-Bogan catchment is located in the central-west of NSW and is regulated by two major storages – Burrendong Dam and Windemere Dam. The Macquarie-Bogan Catchment is 74,800 square kilometres in size, with the headwaters of the Macquarie River originating in the Great Dividing Range south of Bathurst and flowing north-westerly for 960 kilometres until it joins the Barwon River near Brewarrina. Burrendong Dam supplies water for irrigation, stock and domestic needs along the Macquarie River as well as providing significant flood mitigation capability to reduce downstream flooding. Rainfall is fairly evenly distributed throughout the year and across most of the lower catchment averaging between 300 to 500 millimetres per year (NSW Office of Water, 2011).

The catchment is dominated by agricultural land use practices with over 80 per cent of the catchment being used for grazing. The remainder is made up of dryland cropping, occurring predominantly in the middle and lower parts of the catchment as well as forestry, conservation and other native landscapes (NSW Office of Water, 2011). The topography of Dubbo city is a transitional zone within the alluvial flood plains of the Macquarie and Talbragar Rivers.

The Macquarie River is the main watercourse located near the Proposal, located between 1.3 and 1.8 kilometres west of the Proposal. Long term alteration of natural river flows through construction of dams and weirs and erosion related to land clearing have resulted in poor riverine health and water quality. There are no other named or unnamed watercourses or drainage lines that fall within or in close proximity to the Proposal.

The Macquarie River at Dubbo has been classified as a major regulated river by OEH. These rivers supply irrigation water including town and industrial water, largely through trapping of water in large dams. Therefore, flow can be highly variable throughout the year depending on irrigation requirements. OEH have nominated a number of environmental values for the Macquarie River at Dubbo. Environmental values are for particular uses of the environment that are important for a healthy ecosystem or for public benefit or health that require protection from the effects of pollution. The nominated water quality objectives/environmental values for the Macquarie River are extensive and include:


• Protection of aquatic ecosystems.

• Visual amenity.

• Primary and secondary contact recreation.

• Livestock, irrigation and homestead water supply.

• Drinking water at point of supply – Disinfection only.

• Drinking water at point of supply – Clarification and disinfection.

• Drinking water at point of supply – Groundwater.

• Aquatic foods (cooked).

Dubbo Regional Council has undertaken water quality monitoring of the Macquarie River at Dubbo between July 2016 and May 2018. The data was collected at monthly intervals for a number of physical and chemical parameters.

The data shown in Table 6-43 indicates that the water quality of Macquarie River is generally good with the exception of elevated nitrogen concentrations, which is likely the result of the surrounding land uses of agriculture and farming activities. These land uses often require the application of fertilisers which are nitrogen based. Table 6-43 Median water quality Macquarie River

Indicator Median value ANZECC/ARMCANZ Guidelines*

Turbidity (NTU) 10.8 25

pH 7.7 6-8.0

Conductivity (µS/cm) 298.4 30-350

Mercury (total) (mg/L) <0.0003 0.00006

Arsenic (total) (mg/L) 0.0017 0.013

Barium (total) (mg/L) 0.049 No Guideline

Boron (total) (mg/L) 0.015 0.37

Silver (total) (mg/L) <0.0001 0.00005

Selenium (total) (mg/L) 0.00015 0.011

Molybdenum (total) (mg/L) 0.0003 No Guideline

Nitrate (mg/L) 0.2 0.015

Soluble Reactive Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.011 0.015 *ANZECC – Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council ARMCANZ – Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand

Flooding and drainage conditions The Proposal Site is located approximately 1,600 metres east of the main channel of the Macquarie River. Flood studies have been carried out on behalf of Dubbo Regional Council, including a Flood Management Plan which was adopted in 1993. The plan is based on considerations of flooding from the Macquarie River. Further studies have been conducted by Cardno in 2012. The available flood studies and the Dubbo LEP confirm that the Proposal Site is not impacted by riverine flooding.


A review of stormwater data indicates that a 1.5 metre diameter stormwater pipe runs along the western boundary of the Proposal Site. The stormwater pipe drains a catchment area of approximately 140 hectares located south of the Proposal Site. Three stormwater detention basins (Cardno, 2018) are located east of the Proposal Site which receive rainfall runoff from a catchment area of approximately 180 hectares. Outflows from the basins are discharged into a 1.5 metre diameter stormwater pipe.

A preliminary flood assessment undertaken by Cardno (2018) shows that approximately 50 per cent of the Proposal Site is impacted by shallow flooding in the 20 year average recurrence interval (ARI) event due to overland flooding. The flood extent in the 100 year ARI event is more extensive than the 20 year event.

Groundwater The Dubbo Maintenance Facility Geotechnical Factual Investigation Report (Aurecon, 2018) has been used to inform the groundwater assessment. The surface geology within the Proposal Site almost entirely comprises the Napperby Formation with a minor occurrence of Piliga Sandstone at the eastern extent (refer to Figure 6-22). Underlying the Napperby Formation is the Tertiary Basalt, which dips to the west such that the thickness of the Napperby Formation increases to the west.

The Napperby Formation is described as comprising siltstone thinly interbedded with fine to medium grained lithic quartz sandstone, minor conglomerates. This stratum is dominated by medium to high plasticity silts and clays.

The basalt formation outcrops around 500 metres to the east of the Proposal Site. The basalt is medium strength and fractured with a thickness of about five metres and underlain by silty clay.

In the eastern portion of the Proposal Site where the deepest excavation would take place, the Napperby Formation is identified as being two to four metres deep and in the western portion of the Proposal Site the Napperby Formation reaches depths of about 15 to 18 metres and do not penetrate the underlying basalt.

Hydraulic testing has not been carried out for the Proposal and therefore the hydraulic properties of the Napperby Formation and basalt underlying the Proposal are unknown.

Aurecon determined that the Napperby Formation would not be a water yielding formation as this has been shown to be dry during drilling and the nature of the sediments encountered indicates very low hydraulic conductivity. It is not considered that the Napperby Formation would permit inflows to excavations.

The basalt is a fractured formation with local outcrops, which suggests that rainfall recharge at the outcrop can move along fractures leading to groundwater inflows into excavations. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about four metres below ground level at the contact with the Napperby Formation.

On this basis, the assessment of groundwater inflows and impacts assumes that the Napperby Formation is dry and the basalt is saturated. The Aurecon geotechnical report (2018a) determined the site groundwater levels on 10 January 2018 which are provided in Table 6-44 below.


Figure 6-22 Location of monitoring bores, water table contours and GDEs


Table 6-44 Groundwater levels

Bore ID Surveyed Top of Pipe Level (mAHD)

Groundwater Level (mAHD)

Material at Groundwater Level

MW01 266.8 250.28 Silty clay

MW02 270.5 254.6 Silt

MW03 274.5 262.73 Basalt

MW04 279.4 275.18 Basalt

Sensitive groundwater receptors

Groundwater users Review of NSW DPI Water Pinneena data base (NSW DPI Water, 2018) indicated that there are registered groundwater bores surrounding the site, most of which are situated to the west of the Proposal Site. Information for registered bores on and in close proximity to the site is summarised in Table 6-45. Table 6-45 Groundwater bore details

Bore I.D. Approximate surface elevation

(mAHD)

License status

Drilled depth (m)

Water bearing zones (m BGL) and material

Standing water level mAHD (mBGL)

GW021494 268.0 ND ND ND ND

GW021493 269.0 ND ND ND ND

GW802597 269.0 Active 23.0 19.5-21.5, unknown 253.47 (15.53)

GW802609 269.0 Active 6.0 3.8-5.3, sandy clay ND

GW802531 283.0 Active 1.5 ND ND

GW802575 286.0 Active 2.0 ND ND

GW021407 267.0 Converted 67.1 (drilled to

91.5)

35.1-41.2, 50.3-54.9, 61.0-65.6, all 'unconsolidated'

ND

GW802556 273.5 Active 11.0 8.5-10.0m, sandy clay ED

ND - no data

ED - erroneous data (SWL reported below final and drilled depths)

Groundwater dependent ecosystems The Bureau of Meteorology Atlas of GDE (BoM, 2017) does not identify any groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDEs) as being present in the vicinity of the Proposal.


Potentially connected surface water systems The topographic location of the site is on a depression near the junction of the Macquarie and Talbragar Rivers and it is therefore possible that some groundwater surface water interaction may be taking place if the surface watercourses are in connectivity with the groundwater. Where connectivity exists there would be exchange between the two systems, the direction and magnitude of which is dependent on the difference in elevation between the two systems and may vary seasonally.


Construction phase

Flooding Construction of the Proposal has the potential to impact on construction workers and external properties if flood management measures are not planned, implemented, monitored and maintained during the construction phase.

Additional flood modelling would be undertaken at the subsequent design stages to define flood behaviour for the full range of flood events for critical phases of construction. The flood impact assessment would identify external flood impacts and flood hazards within the Proposal Site. If necessary, flood mitigation measures would be provided to address construction impacts and a Flood Management Plan would be adopted to address public safety.

Water quality Construction of the Proposal presents a risk to degradation of downstream water quality if management measures are not implemented, monitored and maintained throughout the construction phase.

Potential impacts to water quality would occur through the following construction activities:

• Removal of vegetation and general earthworks, including stripping of topsoil, excavation or filling

• Stockpiling of topsoil and vegetation

• Transportation of cut and/or fill materials and the movement of heavy vehicles across exposed earth

• Potential for spills/leaks.

Additional details on these risks are provided below.

Removal of vegetation and general earthworks

Removal of vegetation and general earth works can impact on water quality during construction if runoff is allowed to mobilise exposed soils. This can result in increased erosion and sedimentation. The earthworks and construction of the above ground components of the Proposal such as the construction compounds and worksites would result in the removal of existing vegetation and structures therefore disturbing and exposing soils. Additionally, existing detention basins would be relocated which could impact water quality should a significant rainfall event occur prior to reestablishment of basins. Without detention basins, pollutants and sediments can be carried downstream in large plumes which can adversely affect water quality.

The impact of these works on water quality could include increased turbidity, suspended solids, nutrients and contaminants from mobilisation of soils. As construction compounds and worksites would be located within the rail corridor or in locations that are more than one


kilometre from the Macquarie River the Proposal is unlikely to impact on water quality provided standard erosion and sediment control measures detailed in the CEMP are in place.

Stockpiling of topsoil and vegetation

Stockpiles of raw materials or spoil would be located as close as practical to the work area with implementation of appropriate environmental protection measures to minimise impacts on receiving waters from erosion and sedimentation.

Sediment movement

The earthworks and movement of construction vehicles within the Proposal Site could increase erosion and sediment deposition in the waterways. Construction activities adjacent to waterways could introduce contaminants such as oil or greases and disturb contaminated sediments, potentially having an adverse impact on water quality. However, as the nearest waterway is 1.3 kilometres west of the Proposal water quality is unlikely to be impacted.

Groundwater This section documents a preliminary estimate of the potential groundwater inflows into the excavations and the radial extent of groundwater drawdown.

Receivers that may potentially be impacted by changed groundwater conditions have been identified. Figure 6-23 displays the area of the proposed excavation base which is inferred to be below the water table. The area below the water table is assumed in the ground water model and modelled ground water drawdown contours.

Potential risks to the groundwater system associated with construction of the Proposal are as follows:

• Excavations below the water table resulting in groundwater inflows

• Propagation of groundwater drawdown

• Impacts to groundwater users

• Impacts to GDEs

• Reduction in baseflow in potentially connected surface water systems

• Contamination of groundwater.

No groundwater dependent culturally significant sites were identified in the Proposal Site.


Figure 6-23 Indicative groundwater dewatering and drawdown areas


Groundwater inflows to excavations

Based on the available groundwater elevation data and the approximate maximum excavation depth of seven metres below ground level, which occurs at the eastern extent of the proposed main maintenance facility and corresponds to a level of approximately 273 metres AHD, a small portion of the excavation for the main maintenance facility is expected to intersect the groundwater table.

Based on contours (refer to Figure 6-22) generated from the available groundwater elevation data, this area comprises the eastern 45 metres of the excavation and has a dewatering height ranging from a maximum of about 1.5 metres in the east to zero metres in the west. As a result, temporary dewatering is anticipated to be required during construction, and perpetually if the excavation is continually drained rather than lined. Other areas of excavation for the Proposal are expected to be above the water table.

The groundwater inflow rate into excavations would be dependent on the permeability of the intersected geology and the groundwater level. The inflow would also depend on the size of the excavation, the length of the excavation remaining open and mitigation measures used.

The calculation or modelling of groundwater inflow rates and dewatering volumes would be undertaken during the detailed design phase. An assessment of potential impacts associated with dewatering would also be undertaken, including localised groundwater drawdown. This would need to be documented in a construction Dewatering Management Plan prior to construction activities commencing.

To assess likely groundwater inflow volumes into the excavation and associated drawdown impacts at potential receptors, an analytical groundwater model was established.

Model results indicated an average groundwater inflow of 4m³/d with peak rates of approximately 10-15m³/d. Maximum drawdown which occurs at the excavation edge was 1.5 metres and the maximum distance to the 1 metre drawdown contour was around 50 metres.

Disposal of groundwater

As the excavation is expected to penetrate below the water table, the management and disposal of groundwater inflows would be required. All groundwater encountered during construction would be managed in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines (EPA, 2014) and the Water Discharge and Reuse Guideline (TfNSW, 2015) and the potential environmental impacts of disposal would need to be minimised as far as practicable.

Preparation of a construction Dewatering Management Plan to detail likely inflow rates and a water management and disposal strategy would be required prior to construction.

Groundwater drawdown

The removal of groundwater would result in a drawdown of the groundwater table. Preliminary analysis based on the information available indicates very limited propagation of drawdown effects. However, if groundwater drawdown reaches receivers that use or depend on groundwater there is the potential for these receivers to be impacted.

Groundwater users

Preliminary analysis indicates that impacts to these receivers (i.e. groundwater bores) is unlikely. Further consideration and assessment of the potential impacts to groundwater users would be undertaken during detailed design.


Groundwater dependent ecosystems

BoM Atlas of groundwater dependent ecosystems (BoM, 2017) does not identify any GDEs as being present in the vicinity of the Proposal. If further biodiversity or ecological assessments identify GDEs, the potential groundwater related impacts would need to be assessed (refer to Figure 6-22).

Potentially connected surface water systems

The Macquarie River is situated approximately 1.3 to 1.8 kilometres west of the Proposal and the Talbragar River is situated about five kilometres north of the Proposal. Based on the preliminary analysis of the extent of drawdown, impacts to these receivers are not expected.

Contamination of groundwater

There is potential for accidental spills or leaks from construction equipment to enable hydrocarbons such as fuels, oils, and/or grease contamination to enter the shallow groundwater system. Any decline in water quality or the contamination of groundwater could be problematic for groundwater users and downstream sensitive receiving environments.

Any potential impacts would be manageable through the application of well proven and tested safeguards and adherence to site specific pollution prevention protocols for water quality and hazardous material procedures which would be documented in the CEMP.

Operational phase

Flooding A preliminary flood impact assessment undertaken by Cardno (2018) for the Proposal identified minor increase in flood levels on external properties, adverse impact of flood levels within the Proposal Site and a section of the existing railway if flooding was not appropriately mitigated. However, impacts on flood velocities were largely confined to open space areas adjoining the current railway line, along roads and non-residential areas.

A detailed flood impact assessment would be undertaken at the subsequent design stages to quantify external flood impacts and mitigation measures would be included in the design to mitigate adverse impacts on people and external properties.

Surface water quality

Changes to impervious surfaces, surface runoff and hydrology

The Proposal would result in an increase in impervious surfaces across the site. Minor increases in impervious surface areas associated with works have the potential to result in increased runoff due to changes in the hydrological regime. This could lead to water quality impacts associated with increased erosion and sedimentation and increased concentrations or the introduction of pollutants into downstream waterways.

Automated train wash facility

An automated train wash building is proposed as part of the Proposal, that would clean all external surfaces of the train fleet. A component of this facility is a waste water treatment plant that is expected to treat all the wash water, with up to 95 per cent of this being recycled. The residual five per cent of the wash water would be discharged to the sewer. Subject to detailed design, a trade waste agreement would need to be obtained for this discharge or waste would be transported to a licenced disposal facility.

Any wash water leaving the site untreated or discharged into the storm water system could contain high levels of sediments, oils and other metals. Should these enter the receiving waters it is likely the water would become turbid, and potentially impact the normal


ecological process by forming a layer of silt or oil over aquatic organisms. Accidental spills (including spills from the fuel delivery area) can also reduce the potential for water oxygenation.

Liquid and waste storage requirements and train wash water capture would prevent contamination of stormwater and receiving waters.

Potential for spills and leaks

The operation of the maintenance facility has the potential to impact on surface water quality from the spill of vehicle oils, lubricants and hydraulic fluids and other accidental spills including leakage of chemicals in transit. Given the distance from downstream waterways and the provision of spill containment measures, impact to water quality is expected to be minimal.

Groundwater During construction of the excavations, the groundwater inflows may prove to be negligible or quickly reduce to negligible levels. If this is the case, additional impacts during the operational period due to groundwater inflows or drawdown are not expected.

If groundwater inflows are found to be persistent during construction it is recommended that the excavations are lined to reduce the inflows to negligible levels such that there would not be additional impacts due to groundwater inflows or drawdown during operation and there would not be a requirement for ongoing inflow management and disposal.

Impacts due to infrastructure

Infrastructure installed below the water table can impede the natural movement of groundwater by creating a barrier to flow, causing mounding behind the barrier. However, the excavations associated with the Proposal and proposed lining are not of sufficient scale to impact groundwater flow.

The conversion of pervious areas to impervious areas has the potential to reduce infiltration of rainfall or surface flow and to reduce groundwater recharge. Given the small footprint of the Proposal the increase in impervious surface would be negligible and hence the reduction in groundwater recharge would also be negligible.

Contamination of groundwater

Accidental spills or leakages of hazardous materials (such as fuels, lubricants and hydraulic oils) during the operational phase of the Proposal have the potential to result in groundwater contamination.

6.9.4 Mitigation measures The following mitigation measures are proposed to minimise and manage potential hydrology, flooding and water quality impacts:

• A site specific Flood Impact Assessment would be undertaken during detailed design to confirm the impacts of the Proposal on flood levels and behaviour for both the Proposal site and surrounding properties. Where flood levels/flood behaviour at surrounding private properties are predicted to increase as a result of the Proposal, appropriate flood mitigation measures are to be identified and implemented to ensure that there is no net increase in flood levels and adverse flood behaviour as a result of the Proposal.

• Prior to construction, a construction Dewatering Management Plan would be prepared to detail likely inflow rates, proposed water management and disposal strategy. The plan would include further analysis based on latest monitoring data and project design to quantify groundwater inflow rates and radial extent of groundwater drawdown in


accordance with the NSW Aquifer Interference Policy (NOW, 2012). Any groundwater encountered during the construction of the Proposal would be managed and disposed of in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines (DECC, 2009) and Transport for NSW’s Water Discharge and Reuse Guideline (2012).

• Site specific controls would be developed and implemented as part of the CEMP to reduce the risk of the release of potentially harmful chemicals from spills entering downstream watercourses. Storage of hazardous materials such as oils, chemical and refuelling activities would occur in bunded areas. Scour protection and controls at culvert extensions would be installed to reduce erosion and water quality impacts from increased sediment loads.

• Stockpile locations and earthwork operations would be specified prior to commencement of construction activities. Diversion drains and erosion and sediment control measures would be in place prior to commencement of any stockpiling activities and material would only be stockpiled in designated areas.

• Implementation of relevant safeguards and pollution management strategies as documented in the Operational Environmental Management Plan. Site specific controls would be developed to reduce the risk of the release of potentially harmful chemicals from spills entering downstream watercourses or groundwater.

Refer to Table 7-1 for a list of proposed mitigation measures

6.10 Air quality The potential air quality impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Proposal have been assessed as part of the Regional Rail Dubbo Maintenance Facility – Air Quality Assessment (Jacobs, 2018c) provided in Appendix I. The main findings of the report are summarised below.

6.10.1 Methodology The objectives of the air quality impact assessment were to identify and assess potential air quality impacts associated with the construction and operational phases of the Proposal, including cumulative and regional considerations, in accordance with current guidelines.

Construction Impacts during construction were evaluated using the method described in Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction Version 1.1 (UK IAQM, 2014).

Operation Impacts during operation were evaluated using the Approved Methods for Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW (Approved Methods) (EPA, 2016). The guideline contains ‘impact assessment criteria’ for assessing potential air quality impacts associated with an activity. Criteria relevant to the pollutants related to the Proposal are provided in Appendix I. Impacts to local and regional air quality during operations were evaluated by quantitative modelling, using the CALMET/CALPUFF meteorological and dispersion model.



Surrounding sensitive receivers The nearest residential receiver areas in relation to the Proposal Site include:

• Receivers less than 100 metres to the north of the site along Darby Close, White Street and Welchman Street.

• Receivers around 250 metres to the northeast off Hopkins Parade and Bonner Crescent.

• Receivers to the east, southeast, south and southwest along Aspen Road, Kurrajong Court, Maple Court, Cedar Court, Mulga Court, Boronia Place, Grevillea Close, Hakea Place and Wingewarra Street.

• Wingewarra Street, Hakea Place, Grevillea Close, Aspen Road, Boronia Place, Mulga Court, Cedar Court, Maple Court and Kurrajong Court.

• Receivers 200 metres or more to the west and northwest along Fitzroy Street.

The nearest non-residential sensitive receiver locations in relation to the Proposal are:

• Dubbo North Public School located 500 metres to the northwest.

• TAFE Western – Dubbo Myall Street Campus, 400 metres to the north

• TAFE Western – Dubbo Fitzroy Street Campus, 700 metres to the southwest

• Saint Mary’s Primary School, 700 metres to the northeast.

• Orana Heights Public School 500 metres to the southeast.

• Dubbo Christian School 1,050 metres to the southeast.

• Central West Leadership Academy 700 metres to the southwest.

• Mian School 1,100 metres to the southwest.

• Dubbo Public School 1,000 metres to the west.

• Dubbo Base Hospital 650 metres to the north

• Dubbo Private Hospital 1,000 metres to the north

• Lourdes Hospital and Community Health Service 950 metres to the northeast

Seven representative receiver locations were identified around the Proposal which is displayed below in Figure 6-24.

Terrain A digital terrain model (DGM) around the Proposal was developed using 30 metre resolution ground elevation data obtained from NASA SRTM3. Terrain around the Proposal study area is generally flat, with ground elevations ranging between approximately 250 and 350 metres above sea level.


Climate The nearest weather station with long-term historical climate records is the Dubbo Airport (station number 065070). This station is located approximately five and a half kilometres to the northwest of the Proposal Site.

Long-term temperature and rainfall averages recorded at this station from 1993 (date of commencement of measurement) to 5 December 2017 data indicate that the locality around the Proposal Site experiences warm summers with mean daily maximum temperatures of around 32 degrees Celsius. Months through winter are the coldest with average mean daily maximum temperatures of approximately 16 degrees Celsius.

November to March are the wettest months, where an average of 57 millimetres per month have been recorded. Rainfall is considerable lower from April to October with an average of 42 millimetres per month. Further details relating to Dubbo’s climate are provided in Section 6.10.2.


Figure 6-24 Representative air quality receiver locations


Meteorology Meteorological conditions are important for determining the direction and rate at which emissions from a source will disperse. The key meteorological requirements for an air dispersion model typically include hourly records of wind speed, wind direction, temperature, atmospheric stability class and mixing layer height. For air quality assessments, a minimum one year of hourly data is usually required, which means that almost all possible meteorological conditions, including seasonal variations, are considered in the simulations.

The annual and seasonal wind roses demonstrated the following typical trends for each season:

• Summer – winds blowing from the east and east northeast are most common, with calm conditions occurring around 2% of the time.

• Autumn – winds from the east and southeast are most common, with calm conditions taking place 3 to 7% of the time.

• Winter – prevailing winds blowing from the south southeast are most common, with calm conditions generally taking place around 5% of the time.

• Spring – prevailing winds from the east, and southeast, with calm conditions generally occurring 3 to 5% of the time.

Regional air quality

Air quality index OEH have developed a metric known as the air quality index (AQI) to provide an indication of the overall air quality of a locality. The AQI metric considers pollutant data measurements for ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), sulphur dioxide (SO2) and PM10, as well as visibility.

Statistics generated from daily AQI values calculated at the nearest OEH air quality stations (Bathurst and Tamworth) for 2014 to 2017 indicate that daily AQI values are generally ‘very good’ to ‘good’ with occasional days of ‘fair’ air quality or worse, expected to be driven by particulate matter concentrations.

Background concentrations OEH operates an air quality monitoring network which provides information on current and historical air quality across numerous locations. Data from six stations, located between approximately 200 to 470 kilometres, from the Proposal Site were used to characterise ambient air quality conditions for the available pollutants of potential concern relevant to the assessment around the study area.

These data indicate that maximum 24 hour averaged PM10 concentrations occasionally exceeded the 50 µg/m3 criterion however the 95th percentile values were in the order of 60% of the criterion or less. Annually averaged PM10 concentrations were found to vary between the stations considered, with the highest value of 16 µg/m3 recorded at the Tamworth station in 2014 and at the Wyong station in 2017 against the 25 µg/m3 impact assessment criterion. Values reviewed ranged between 11 and 16 µg/m3.

Maximum 24 hour averaged concentrations of PM2.5 exhibited the same trend as for PM10 with the 25 µg/m3 assessment criterion occasionally being exceeded, with the 95th percentile values below this criterion. Annually averaged PM2.5 concentrations were consistent across most stations, ranging from 5 to 8 µg/m3.

Measured results for NO2, SO2 and CO were well below the respective impact assessment criteria at all of the stations reviewed.


Adopted background concentrations Considering the monitoring data presented above, the background concentrations presented in Table 6-46 were established for the receiving environment around the Proposal. Table 6-46 Adopted pollutant background atmospheric concentrations

Pollutant Averaging time Adopted background concentration

Total suspended particulate (TSP)

Annual 19 µg/m3

Particulate matter (PM10) 24-hour 30 µg/m3

Annual 15 µg/m3

Particulate matter (PM2.5) 24-hour 10 µg/m3

Annual 6 µg/m3

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 1-hour 53 µg/m3

Annual 4 µg/m3

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 1-hour 29 µg/m3

24-hour 11 µg/m3

Annual 1 µg/m3

Carbon monoxide (CO) 1-hour 2 mg/m3

8-hour 1 mg/m3


Construction phase As identified above in Section 6.10.1, generation of dust is expected to be the primary air risk during construction. This risk was evaluated in this assessment using the method developed by the UK IAQM (2014). Potential dust emission magnitudes and the surrounding area sensitivity classifications were combined to determine the risk of impacts with no mitigation applied. This risk rating is summarised in Table 6-47. Using the guidance presented in Section 8 of the UK IAQM (2014), the mitigation measures identified in Section 6.10.4 were developed specific to demolition, earthworks, construction, and trackout activities during construction of the Proposal.

Operational phase The proposed maintenance facility would have very little operational impact on air quality. Cumulative pollutant concentrations were predicted to be well below impact assessment criteria for the assessment scenarios modelled.

The assessment indicated that odour impacts are also unlikely during operations.


Table 6-47 Unmitigated risk of dust impacts risk ratings for the Proposal

Potential impact

Unmitigated risk value

Demolition Earthworks Construction Trackout*

Dust soiling Low risk Medium risk Medium risk Medium risk

Human health impacts

Negligible Low risk Low risk Low risk

Ecological effects Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible

Note: Trackout is the term used to describe soil, mud or dust transported offsite on the wheels of construction vehicles, usually at the site entrance.


Construction A summary of the management and control measures that would be implemented during construction to minimise impacts on air quality where reasonable and feasible are provided below:

• Prior to commencement of construction an air quality management and monitoring for the Proposal would be undertaken in accordance with TfNSW’s Air Quality Management Guideline (TfNSW, 2018f).

• To minimise the generation of dust from construction activities, the following measures would be implemented:

apply water (or alternate measures) to exposed surfaces (e.g. unpaved roads, stockpiles, hardstand areas and other exposed surfaces).

cover stockpiles when not in use.

appropriately cover loads on trucks transporting material to and from the construction site and securely fix tailgates of road transport trucks prior to loading and immediately after unloading.

prevent mud and dirt being tracked onto sealed road surfaces.

during earthworks activities revegetate earthworks and exposed areas/soil stockpiles to stabilise surfaces as soon as practicable.

• Methods for management of emissions would be incorporated into project inductions, training and pre-start/toolbox talks.

• Plant and machinery would be regularly checked and maintained in a proper and efficient condition. Plant and machinery would be switched off when not in use, and not left idling.

• Vehicle and machinery movements during construction would be restricted to designated areas and sealed/compacted surfaces where practicable.

Operation Given that the predicted air quality concentrations from operational activities at surrounding receivers were predicted to be below the impact assessment criteria, no specific mitigation measures were determined to be necessary. This recommendation should be reviewed should operations at the Proposal differ materially from those assessed in this report.



6.11 Waste reduction and resource recovery

6.11.1 Policy setting

The Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 (WARR Act) promotes waste avoidance and resource recovery in NSW. TfNSW endeavours to reduce and manage waste to conserve resources and reduce impacts associated with waste disposal through the implementation of the waste management hierarchy established under the WARR Act as follows:

• Waste Avoidance – take action to avoid the generation of waste and to be more efficient in its use of resources. If unable to avoid generating waste, then reduce the amount of waste generated and reduce the toxicity or potential harm associated with its generation and management.

• Resource Recovery – maximise the reuse, reprocessing, recycling and recovery of energy from materials.

• Disposal – Disposal is the least desirable option and must be carefully handled to minimise negative environmental outcomes.


Construction Construction of the Proposal would generate waste streams typical of a construction project, including:

• Green waste from cleared vegetation. • Excess fill material from any excavation of soils and fill embankments during

construction. • Construction waste, including packaging, concrete, bricks, crushed rock, steel, timber,

etc. and surplus materials used during site establishment such as safety fencing and barriers (which may include plastics and metals).

• Railway materials (i.e. guide posts, timber sleepers, railway lines, traffic signage). • Oil, grease and other liquid wastes from the maintenance of construction plant and

equipment. • General wastes and sewage from site compounds and offices. • Plant and equipment maintenance waste including liquid wastes from cleaning, repairing

and maintenance. • Packaging materials from items delivered to site, such as pallets, crates, cartons,

plastics and wrapping materials. Any remaining surplus material would be stockpiled in a suitable location for use by TfNSW on other projects, or disposed of to a licenced facility following validation assessment of the type of spoil waste classification. Allowance would be made at the Proposal Site for initial stockpiling of surplus material, either for re-use elsewhere on the site, or prior to its disposal. In accordance with TfNSW requirements, the Contractor will be required to divert over 90% non-hazardous waste and 100% of reusable spoil from landfill.

Sufficient space exists across the Proposal Site to accommodate material stockpiles, and these would be managed in accordance with the Contractor’s CEMP.

The quantities of each type of waste would be defined during detailed design. As indicated in Section 6.8.2, there is the potential for contamination to be encountered in the soil. This may include hydrocarbons, heavy metals and asbestos.


Resource use The Proposal would require a wide range of materials during construction including steel, paints, concrete, ballast, cabling and timber. Opportunities to use recycled and sustainable building materials would be explored where possible throughout the detailed design.

Equipment and vehicles on the construction site would consume a large quantity of fuel to construct the Proposal. Electricity needs during construction would be minor, and connection of the office to the local power grid would be sufficient.

Water would be required during construction for dust suppression, compaction and pavement stabilisation, concrete batching, washing of plant and equipment, firefighting (if required) and for staff facilities. Non-potable water sources would be investigated by the Contractor to minimise reliance on potable water where possible.

Operation During operation, potential impacts in terms of waste generation would include:

• General waste from site personnel

• Green waste associated with the maintenance of landscaping

• Site sewage and grey water generated by operational staff

• Waste liquids associated with maintenance activities such as train washing (it is expected that 80 per cent of the wash water used in the automated train wash would be recyclable), graffiti removal, and other oils and chemicals

• General waste generated from the maintenance of the Regional Rail Fleet (which for major maintenance may include substantial amounts of steel or other metals associated with component change out).


The following mitigation measures would be implemented for waste reduction:

• A Waste Management Plan would be prepared as part of the CEMP that must address waste management and would at a minimum:

Identify all potential waste streams associated with the works and outline methods of disposal of waste that cannot be reused or recycled at appropriately licensed facilities

Detail other onsite management practices such as keeping areas free of rubbish

Specify controls and containment procedures for hazardous waste and asbestos waste

Outline the reporting regime for collating construction waste data.

• Surplus material that cannot be used within the Proposal Site would be reused or disposed of in the following order of priority:

Transferred to other major project development sites for reuse in accordance with a relevant EPA resource recovery exemption

Transported off site for reuse by another third party in accordance with a relevant EPA resource recovery exemption

Disposed of at an approved materials recycling or waste disposal facility

Management of operational wastes would be managed by the operators of the maintenance facility in accordance with relevant legislative requirements.


• An appropriate Unexpected Finds Protocol, considering asbestos containing materials and other potential contaminants, would be included in the CEMP. Procedures for handling asbestos containing materials, including licensed contractor involvement as required, record keeping, site personnel awareness and waste disposal to be undertaken in accordance with WorkCover requirements.

• All spoil to be removed from site would be tested to confirm the presence of any contamination. Any contaminated spoil would be disposed of at an appropriately licensed facility.

• All spoil and waste must be classified in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines Part 1: Classifying waste (EPA, 2014) prior to disposal.

• Any concrete washout would be established and maintained in accordance with TfNSW’s Concrete Washout Guideline – draft (TfNSW, 2015i) with details included in the CEMP and location marked on the Environmental Controls Map.

The sustainability initiatives listed in Section 3.2.12 such as solar PV, water recycling and rainwater collection would be implemented where feasible to reduce resource use by the Proposal.


6.12 Climate change

Research by Baker et al. (2009) highlights key climate-related risks to rail infrastructure as increased track buckling, drainage challenges and service disruption due to severe weather. Climate events may impact upon property and transport assets in complex ways, potentially leading to significant productivity losses.

The rail sector is characterised by unique operational and management requirements relating to both fixed and mobile transport assets. These factors, as well as the long-term nature of rail infrastructure, increase the vulnerability of the Proposal to weather events such as storms, floods and heatwaves. The effect of climate change is likely to exacerbate current impacts, highlighting the need to identify and manage risks in the increasingly uncertain context of a changing climate.

This chapter is a summary of a Climate Change Risk and Adaptation (CCRA) report prepared for TfNSW by Edge Environment (2018) specifically for the Dubbo Maintenance Facility. As part of the CCRA process, TfNSW commissioned workshops and a risk assessment to inform the design process of those climate change related matters that would pose the largest risk, and which could be mitigated through design solutions.

TfNSW has also recognised the important opportunity of understanding natural hazards and the projected impacts of climate change on the Proposal. The development of management measures that are integrated into design guidelines plans (for design and operation) would allow TfNSW to proactively mitigate and manage key climate-related risks to the project assets over their operational lifetime.

6.12.1 Methodology

Risk approach This climate change risk assessment study aligns with the following standards for applying climate change risk analysis to infrastructure assets:

• ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines.

• AS5334 – Climate Change Adaptation for Settlements and Infrastructure – A Risk Based Approach.


The risk assessment is intended to form part of a risk management process which involves communication and consultation with the design team, relevant stakeholders, as well as regular monitoring and review of the risk assessment plan.

Establishing the context The climate context for the region has been established through:

• The presentation and review of historical climate records for the Dubbo region (from Bureau of Meteorology records).

• The sourcing and review of climate change projections for the region.

Risk evaluation Risk ratings were used to prioritise risks that are of increased significance for the Regional Rail Maintenance Facility. Minor risks were screened out at this stage to address the issues associated with medium, high and very high risks.

Risk treatment The risk treatment stage involved identifying the best management options for each risk, based on workshop outcomes and previous experience within the project team. Treatment options were recommended to TfNSW, with the aim of integrating these into the delivery contract.

Historical climate Table 6-48 summarises BoM weather stations used in the study to provide historical climate information. Trangie is located approximately 70 kilometres to the west of Dubbo, and was used in this study due its significantly longer temperature record (1968-present) compared to Dubbo itself (1993-present). Table 6-48 BOM weather station locations

BOM ID Name Nearest Town Latitude Longitude

065070 Dubbo Airport Automatic Weather Station (AWS)

Dubbo -32.22° S 148.58° E

051049 Trangie Research Station AWS Trangie -31.99° S 147.95° E

Ambient Temperature The Dubbo region has a humid sub-tropical climate but borders semi-arid climate areas. January is the hottest month, with an average maximum temperature of 33.2°C, while the coldest month is July, with a maximum average daily temperature of 15.5°C (BOM, 2017). Notably, all days above 45°C recorded in both Trangie and Dubbo have occurred in the last 16 years. The highest temperature in the region of 47°C was recorded at Trangie in February 2017.

On average, Dubbo experiences 10.7 days above 35°C per year, 1.9 days above 40°C and 0.2 days above 45°C. Heatwaves above 35°C occur in Dubbo approximately 9.7 times per year, while heatwaves above 40°C are rare, occurring just under once per year on average, refer to Table 6-49. Trangie temperature data shows slight increases compared to Dubbo due to its location in the hotter, grassland region. Dubbo experiences characteristic variability in temperature due to its position between the hotter Central Western Plains region and cooler Central Tablelands area.


Table 6-49 Regional temperature summary for Trangie and Dubbo Airport

Location

Annual Heatwaves Annual Hot Days

Heatwaves above 35°C



Av. Annual days

above 35°C

Av. Annual days

above 40°C

Av. Annual days

above 45°C

Trangie (1968 – 2017)

11.1 0.95 0 12.3 1.9 0.2

Dubbo Airport (1993 – 2017)

9.7 0.9 0 10.7 1.6 0.08

Rainfall Average annual rainfall in the Dubbo region is approximately 590 millimetres, with an average 88.5 days of rain per year (BOM, 2017). November to March are the wettest months, while April is the driest month on average. Importantly, rainfall in the region has shown little long-term trend since records began, with periods of both wetter and drier conditions (Ekstrom, et al., 2015). La Niña conditions have driven increased rain and flooding in the region, while El Niño events have exhibited a drying effect.

Extreme Weather Events The following climatic events have occurred in the Dubbo region, and require consideration for their potential impacts and risks upon the Proposal:

• Droughts: Droughts are a relatively common climatic feature of the Central Slopes Region. Most recently, the Millennium Drought caused over a decade of dry conditions in south-east Australia, and is considered the most severe drought ever recorded in the region (van Dijk, et al, 2013). Although significant, the Millennium Drought’s effects were not as pronounced in the Dubbo region as further south. Both the Federation Drought (1896-1902) and the World War II Drought (1937-1947) were important drought periods with widespread economic and environmental impacts. Most droughts on Australia’s East coast have occurred during El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) periods, which arise at irregular two to nine-year intervals, with an average duration of five years (BOM, 2017).

• Floods and storms: Minor flooding is quite common in the Dubbo region due its relatively flat regional topography (Smith, Phillips, & Yu, 2006). Major floods have occurred in the region in the past, with the most notable event being in 1955, which led to widespread inundation of the central business district (Dubbo City Council, 2000).

• Bushfires: The most significant bushfire in the Dubbo region occurred in summer 1938–1939, which resulted in 13 deaths and approximately 73,000 ha burned (AIC, 2002). Although the Dubbo metropolitan area is not located in a high bushfire risk zone, bushfires may indirectly impact upon the Regional Fleet project. Bushfires pose a significant health risk to the metropolitan area through a reduction in air quality.

• Hail storms: Summer thunderstorms in the region frequently lead to hailstorms. The most recent hailstorm led to hailstones up to 20mm in diameter falling on 13 March 2017 (BOM, 2017).


6.12.2 Climate Projections

Current understanding of projected climate change is based on the climate system, its historical trends, and the output from model simulations on the impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere. Climate models are mathematical simulations of the complex interactions between climate drivers, including land mass, ice, oceans and atmosphere. These can be used to make continental-scale predictions about climate changes due to anthropogenic GHG emissions. Climate models are routinely evaluated through comparison with historical climate information (IPCC, 2014).

Making use of scaled-down climate projections, it is possible to understand regionally-specific climate change impacts. These projections can then be used to perform risk analyses on aspects of the built environment. The CCRA prepared by Edge Environment utilizes two sets of locally-relevant climate projections for NSW; NARCLiM Projections and CSIRO Projections.

Temperature Temperatures in the Dubbo region are projected to increase throughout the coming century due to anthropogenic climate change. By 2030, 1995 mean temperatures are expected to rise by 0.6°C to 1.5°C under current emissions scenarios. Long term projections to 2090 under the RCP 8.5 scenario exhibit warming of the 1995 mean by 3°C to 5.4°C. Climate models for temperature increases in this region are projected with very high confidence (Ekstrom, et al., 2015).

The scaled down NARCLiM data are more modest, and suggest increases in the maximum temperature by 0.7°C in the near future (2030), and 2.7°C in the far future (2070) (NSW OEH, 2014). Overall, fewer cold nights and more hot days are projected by these models.

In summary, temperatures in the Dubbo region are likely to increase under climate change, with more pronounced increases likely for summer and spring temperatures.

Rainfall Climate change projections show significant variability in the rainfall response to climate change (CSIRO, 2015). The key finding for rainfall projections under intermediate (RCP4.5) and high-emissions (RCP8.5) scenarios for both 2030 and 2090 is that increasing natural variability in rainfall is projected in the Dubbo region (Ekstrom, et al., 2015). Under RCP 8.5, decreases in mean winter rainfall are projected with high confidence, while rainfall changes in other seasons show low model agreement and cannot be reliably projected.

The NARCLiM models suggest long term rainfall changes with an increase in autumn rainfall and an average decrease in spring. As with RCP emissions scenarios, the A2 scenario employed by the NARCLiM team suggests that near future projections are likely to be highly variable, with both increases and decreases in rainfall projected to 2030.

Greater rainfall variability necessitates infrastructure risk and impact assessments that consider the effects of both droughts and floods.

Extreme Weather Events Future climate change is likely to increase the intensity and severity of extreme climatic events. Importantly, the relationship between climatic averages and the frequency of extreme events is often non-linear, illustrated by climate projections that associate dramatic increases in very hot days with small increases in mean temperature (AGO 2006). Non-linear responses to climate variables make the development of reliable projections for extreme events such as storms and droughts very difficult. Key extreme climate projections are discussed below:


• Droughts: As with rainfall projections, there is low confidence in predicting changes in the frequency and longevity of extreme droughts in the future. There is medium confidence that under a high emissions scenario, the Dubbo region is likely to experience increased time under drought conditions (Ekstrom, et al., 2015). Drought conditions are conducive to bushfires, suggesting that bushfire risk is likely to be increasingly difficult to predict under the effects of climate change (Bradstock, Davies, Price & Cary, 2008).

• Heat waves: Heat waves present many complex challenges for urban environments, including exacerbating heat-related illness and dramatic demands on energy requirements for cooling systems. The NARCliM study projects a significant increase in days per year above 35°C (NSW OEH, 2014). In the near future (2020-2039), there is likely to be a ten day increase, while the far future (2060 to 2079) projections suggest 30 more days above 35°C per year (NSW OEH, 2014). The CSIRO study projects a far future (2090) tripling of days over 35°C and a six-fold increase in days over 40°C under the RCP 8.5 emissions scenario (Ekstrom, et al, 2015).

• Floods and storms: There is high confidence that the intensity of rainfall would increase under a warming climate but, as with mean rainfall projections, the scale of these changes is difficult to predict (Ekstrom, et al, 2015). Projections suggest an increase in occurrence of rare extreme rainfall events for far future for this region. This is a common pattern observed in other regions across Australia. The magnitude of these changes depends on the emissions scenario employed, and is greatest under the RCP 8.5 high emissions scenario.

• Bushfires: Severe fire weather in the Orana region of NSW is likely to increase under climate change in both the near and far future, especially for summer and spring (NSW OEH, 2014). These are prescribed burning periods, presenting increased risk for the region. Likewise, Ekstrom et al. (2015) project a 220 per cent increase in periods of severe fire weather for the RCP 8.5 emissions scenario to 2090.

• Hailstorms: There is low confidence in the magnitude of change associated with hail intensity and size, although the projected increase in storm intensity could lead to increased impacts from hailstorms (CSIRO, 2015).

6.12.3 Climate Change Summary Table 6-50 provides a summary of climate change projections derived from Ekstrom et al. (2015). Table 6-50 Dubbo climate change projections

Variable Current (1993-2017) Units 2030

(RCP4.5) 2090

(RCP8.5)

Temperature – average annual maximum

24.5 °C 25.1 - 26 26.5 - 30

Temperature – Heat waves

22 Average days over 35°C per year

31 (26 – 37) 65 (49 – 85)

2.5 Average days over 40°C per year

3.8 (3.2 – 5.6) 17 (9.9. – 26)


Variable Current (1993-2017) Units 2030

(RCP4.5) 2090

(RCP8.5)

9.7 Times per year 35°C exceeded for 3-5 successive days

There is very high confidence in the increased duration and frequency of hot spells.

Rainfall – Annual mean 590 mm % change -2 (-11 to 7) -6 (-23 to 18)

Relative humidity (9am and 3pm)

67% and 41% % change -0.6 (-2.5 to 0.9) -2.4 (-7.4 to 1.1)

Solar Radiation 28 MJ/m2 Little change Slight increase in winter

Wind speed (annual) 17 km/h Little change Slight increases in spring

Additional climate change projections from Ekstrom et al. (2015) are summarised in Table 6-51. Table 6-51 Climate change projections for Dubbo - other climate variables

Variable Projection

Hail Hail accompanies thunderstorms, which occur approximately 25 times per year in the Dubbo region. There is low confidence in the magnitude of change associated with hail intensity and size, however increased projected storm intensity may lead to increases in hail size and frequency.

Drought Droughts are characteristic of this climate region, and they would continue under climate change. Under RCP8.5, there is a projected increase in time spent in drought conditions towards the end of the century. There is generally low model agreement in projections for droughts (as with projections for rainfall) under climate change.

Bushfire Increased fire risk is projected for both 2030 and 2090 due to increased temperatures and potential lower rainfall that create a higher drought factor. There is high confidence in this projection, but low model agreement means there is low confidence in the magnitude of change.

Storms and floods

High confidence in increased intensity of rainfall under both RCP4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, but there is low confidence in the magnitude of this change.

6.12.4 Climate Change risk assessment Following the risk identification workshop and the refinement process the climate change risks identified for the Regional Rail maintenance facility are summarised as follows:

• Many of the risks identified for the maintenance facility were associated with increased frequency and intensity of hot days and heatwaves. Key risks were associated with an inability to maintain reasonable inside temperatures for facility employees during the hottest parts of the day, as well as impacts to productivity.


• Storm systems can lead to significant property impacts due to increased rainfall, strong winds, hail and lightning strikes. The most significant risks related to storm impacts were identified as the blocking of roof drainage systems during hail events, leading to increased requirements for maintenance and repair.

• Bushfires can cause both direct and indirect risks to building operations. This risk analysis highlights that although the maintenance facility is not likely to be directly affected by bushfires, the smoke impacts of regional fires may present operational challenges, increased costs and reduced service delivery.

6.12.5 Climate change risk treatments The CCRA identified potential risk treatment and mitigation strategies developed in consultation with TfNSW. The recommendations are based solely on workshop discussions and require more thorough investigation to ensure feasibility and efficacy.

• Facility design should maximise thermal control opportunities such as passive ventilation and shade structures in the maintenance area.

• Indoor/office areas should be well insulated to reduce cooling costs.

• Operational plans should be developed for improved cooling efficiency during heatwaves and very hot days.

• Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems should be selected for increased operational temperature range.

• HVAC design should allow reduction/shut-off of fresh air intake to reduce dust ingress into building during dust storms.

• Consider high water efficiency fittings to reduce operational water demand.

• Introduce water recycling options for train wash to reduce demand from mains.

• Consider caveats in non-potable water use operational targets under drought conditions.

• Onsite drainage should be designed for and accommodate increasingly severe flooding scenarios under climate change.

• Facility roof drainage should include hail guards to reduce the risk of hail blockages and roof collapse.

• If rooftop solar PV cells are included in Design, hail resistance should be investigated.

• Keep vegetation and debris clear of building (ensure appropriate buffer).

• Ensure transformers located in/near bushfire risk areas are heat/fire resistant.

6.13 Cumulative impacts Cumulative impacts occur when two or more projects are carried out concurrently and in close proximity to one another. The impacts may be caused by both construction and operational activities and can result in a greater impact to the surrounding area than would be expected if each project was undertaken in isolation. Multiple projects undertaken at a similar time/similar location may also lead to construction fatigue, particularly around noise, traffic and air quality impacts, if not appropriately managed.


A search of the Department of Planning and Environment’s Major Projects Register, and Dubbo Regional Council Development Application Register was undertaken on 20 June


2018. One project was identified within two kilometres of the Proposal: the NSW Health Dubbo Hospital redevelopment located 300 metres north on Myall Street.

During construction, the works would be coordinated with any other construction activities in the area (including the Dubbo Hospital redevelopment). Consultation and liaison would occur with NSW Health, Dubbo Regional Council, ARTC, and any other nearby major project construction managers identified, to minimise cumulative construction impacts such as traffic and noise.

Traffic associated with the construction work is not anticipated to have a significant impact on the surrounding road network. Operational traffic and transport impacts would have a minimal impact on the performance of the surrounding road network.

Based on this assessment, it is anticipated that the cumulative impacts would be minor/negligible, provided that consultation with relevant stakeholders and mitigation measures in Chapter 7 are implemented.


The potential cumulative impacts associated with the Proposal would be further considered as the design develops and as further information regarding the location and timing of potential developments is released. Environmental management measures would be developed and implemented as appropriate.


7 Environmental management This chapter of the REF identifies how the environmental impacts of the Proposal would be managed through environmental management plans and mitigation measures. Section 7.2 lists the proposed mitigation measures for the Proposal to minimise the impacts of the Proposal identified in Chapter 6.

7.1 Environmental management plans A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for the construction phase of the Proposal would be prepared in accordance with the requirements of TfNSW’s Environmental Management System (EMS). The CEMP would provide a centralised mechanism through which all potential environmental impacts relevant to the Proposal would be managed, and outline a framework of procedures and controls for managing environmental impacts during construction.

The CEMP would incorporate as a minimum all environmental mitigation measures identified below in Section 7.2, any conditions from licences or approvals required by legislation, and a process for demonstrating compliance with such mitigation measures and conditions.

7.2 Mitigation measures Mitigation measures for the Proposal are listed below in Table 7-1. These proposed measures would minimise the potential adverse impacts of the Proposal identified in Chapter 6 should the Proposal proceed.

Table 7-1 Proposed mitigation measures

No. Mitigation measure

General

1. A CEMP would be prepared by the Contractor in accordance with the relevant requirements of Guideline for Preparation of Environmental Management Plans (Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, 2004) for approval by TfNSW, prior to the commencement of construction and following any revisions made throughout construction.

2. A project risk assessment including environmental aspects and impacts would be undertaken by the Contractor prior to the commencement of construction and documented as part of the CEMP.

3. An Environmental Controls Map (ECM) would be developed by the Contractor in accordance with TfNSW’s Guide to Environmental Controls Map (TfNSW, 2015b) for approval by TfNSW, prior to the commencement of construction and following any revisions made throughout construction.

4. Prior to the commencement of construction, all contractors would be inducted on the key project environmental risks, procedures, mitigation measures and conditions of approval.

5. Site inspections to monitor environmental compliance and performance would be undertaken during construction at appropriate intervals.

6. Service relocation would be undertaken in consultation with the relevant authority. Contractors would mark existing services on the ECM to avoid direct impacts during construction.

7. Any modifications to the Proposal, if approved, would be subject to further assessment and approval by TfNSW. This assessment would need to demonstrate that any environmental



impacts resulting from the modifications have been minimised.

Traffic and site access

8. A construction traffic management plan should be developed for the project. The plan would identify and plan for risks with regards to traffic and transport. In particular, the plan should identify a strategy for the transport of oversized loads to the site.

9. The right-turn movement from White Street to Cobbora Road currently experiences significant delay (even without the Proposal). The construction traffic management plan would require construction traffic to only turn left out of White Street onto Cobbora Road.

10. It is recommended that all trucks use Welchman Street to access the site to reduce the risk of queuing across the level crossing in Cobbora Road.

Landscape and visual amenity

11. Design Proposed building materials are to be non-reflective, including: • External walls and roofing materials are to be of a non-reflective material, such as brick;

concrete block, rendered concrete or masonry, metal or fibre cement • All external building materials including roofing shall be of a neutral colour appropriate to

the site that promotes the sense of a unified, planned industrial park (excluding solar panels).

12. The colour of the maintenance facility is to be recessive (i.e. be of colours that blend into the background and do not have a high contrast), to reduce its visual dominance, or based on the colour palette typical of the surrounding industrial area (note, this would not apply to any proposed community artwork elements of the proposal).

13. Art may be included to enhance the overall visual setting of the Proposal

14. Use black mesh fencing or black palisade fencing as security fencing in visually prominent areas (black blends into surroundings).

15. Limit signage in terms of size and garish colours and rationalise to minimise number of signs.

16. A landscape plan would be prepared for the Proposal, which would include the consideration of following: • Undertake tree and shrub planting within the decommissioned alignment of the Main

Western Line to screen the Proposal from residents located to the south of the Site. The screening vegetation would consist of the following:

Trees with a mature height of at least eight metres would be planted.

Trees would be at least 1.5 metres in height at planting.

Trees along street frontages shall be consistent and compatible with the existing street trees.

Tree species as recommended by Council’s Trees by Street document would be considered

• Remove weeds and dispose in accordance with TfNSW’s Weed Management and Disposal Guide.

• Actively remove weeds during operation and maintain landscaping and grounds within the Proposal Site to a high standard.



17. Construction

Ensure that the construction compound and construction parking areas are located away from direct residential views where practical.

18. If practical, install visual screening to the rear of residential properties along the southern boundary of the Proposal Site to reduce the visual interruption of construction activities

19. Protect identified existing vegetation to be retained prior to commencement of construction in accordance with the Vegetation Management (Protection and Removal) Guideline (TfNSW, 2018c).

20. Reduce potential dust impacts by: • Misting active work areas and exposed ground to avoid dust plumes.

• Installing screen hoardings to the back fence of properties along the southern boundary of the Proposal.

21. Avoid temporary light spill beyond the construction site (when night work is required) by directing light source down and installing shields around the light source.

22. During construction, remove weeds and dispose in accordance with TfNSW’s Weed Management and Disposal Guide.

23. Rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible following construction.

24. Remove graffiti if it occurs at the construction site in accordance with TfNSW standard requirements.

Noise and vibration

25. Design A detailed review of the operational pattern of all identified dominant noise sources would be undertaken as part of the detailed design stage to determine if any operational changes can be implemented to reduce the potential noise impact.

26. The maintenance shed would be constructed to achieve a sound insulation performance no less than 26 dB weighted sound reduction index (Rw). An acoustic insulation performance of 26 dB Rw could be achieved by panelling such as six millimetre Alucobond or a product of equivalent acoustic performance. A fast acting roller door or similar system would also be considered to allow shed doors to be closed quickly.

27. Construction Prior to commencement of works, a Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNVMP) would be prepared and implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Interim Construction Noise Guideline (Department of Environment and Climate Change, 2009), Construction Noise and Vibration Strategy (TfNSW, 2018). The CNVMP would take into consideration measures for reducing the source noise levels of construction equipment by construction planning and equipment selection where practicable. The CNVMP would outline measures to reduce the noise impact from construction activities. Reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures which would be considered, include: • Regularly training workers and contractors (such as at the site induction and toolbox

talks) on the importance of minimising noise emissions and how to use equipment in ways to minimise noise

• Avoiding any unnecessary noise when carrying out manual operations and when operating plant

• Ensuring spoil is placed and not dropped into awaiting trucks



• Avoiding/limiting simultaneous operation of noisy plant and equipment within discernible range of a sensitive receiver where practicable

• Switching off any equipment not in use for extended periods e.g. heavy vehicles engines would be switched off whilst being unloaded

• Avoiding deliveries at night/evenings wherever practicable • No idling of delivery trucks • Keeping truck drivers informed of designated vehicle routes, parking locations and

acceptable delivery hours for the site • Minimising talking loudly; no swearing or unnecessary shouting, or loud stereos/radios

onsite; no dropping of materials from height where practicable, no throwing of metal items and slamming of doors.

28. Where noise levels are greater than those listed in Appendix F or their locations differ significantly from those assessed in this report, additional assessment would be carried out.

29. A building condition survey and vibration monitoring is recommended for the Boradze depot buildings prior to the commencement of construction works.

30. Operation An operational noise and vibration management plan would be prepared and implemented. This plan would include: • Development of mitigation strategies and management measures for the identified

activities and sources that contribute to exceedances of applicable sleep disturbance guidelines and policies.

• Development of management strategies to ensure compliance with applicable sleep disturbance guidelines and policies for horn usage, warning signals and horn testing at the facility. Management measures would include:

Management of the location, time of day and manner in which activities are carried out.

Modifying operating procedures to reduce noise intensive activities during the evening and night at locations exposed to receivers.

Specifying noise emission limits for certain equipment or activities.

Developing further the mitigations strategies outlined in the Noise and Vibration Assessment.

31. Alternatives to testing or use of the country horn at the Proposal Site would be further evaluated. This could include testing horns elsewhere on the network or developing alternative testing techniques.

32. As part of the detailed design, alternative systems are to be investigated for train preparation (shunting) alarms. Alternative systems similar to those implemented at other NSW rail facilities could include visual alarms and ground based warning systems.

Aboriginal heritage

33. All construction staff would undergo an induction in the recognition of Indigenous cultural heritage material. This training would include information such as the importance of Indigenous cultural heritage material and places to the Indigenous community, as well as the legal implications of removal, disturbance and damage to any Indigenous cultural heritage material and sites.

34. If unforeseen Indigenous objects are uncovered during construction, the procedures contained in TfNSW’s Unexpected Heritage Finds Guideline (TfNSW, 2016c) would be followed, and works within the vicinity of the find would cease immediately. The Contractor



would immediately notify the TfNSW Project Manager and TfNSW Environment and Planning Manager so they can assist in co-ordinating next steps which are likely to involve consultation with an Aboriginal heritage consultant, the OEH and the Local Aboriginal Land Council. If human remains are found, work would cease, the site secured and the NSW Police and the OEH notified. Where required, further archaeological investigations and an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit would be obtained prior to works recommencing at the location.

35. Should the construction footprint of the Proposal extend beyond the currently assessed areas, then further archaeological assessment may be required.

Non-Aboriginal heritage

36. A heritage induction would be provided to workers prior to construction, informing them of the location of known heritage items and guidelines to follow if unanticipated heritage items or deposits are located during construction.

37. In the event that any unanticipated archaeological deposits are identified within the Proposal Site during construction, the procedures contained in TfNSW’s Unexpected Heritage Finds Guideline (TfNSW, 2016c) would be followed, and works within the vicinity of the find would cease immediately. The Contractor would immediately notify the TfNSW Project Manager and the TfNSW Environment and Planning Manager so they can assist in co-ordinating the next steps which are likely to involve consultation with an archaeologist and OEH. Where required, further archaeological work and/or consents would be obtained for any unanticipated archaeological deposits prior to works recommencing at the location.

38. The Boradze depot, which has been identified as being of local heritage significance, is located outside the study area boundary. Should impacts be proposed to this depot then a Statement of Heritage Impact would need to be prepared.

39. As the non-Aboriginal heritage assessment has identified the Boradze depot with potential local heritage significance, a copy of the heritage assessment report (OzArk,2018) would be sent to Dubbo Regional Council for consideration prior to the Proposal commencing.

40. Dubbo Regional Council would be notified of the error in the Dubbo LEP mapping of the curtilage of the Macquarie River rail bridge.

Property, land use and socio-economic

41. Jobs, skills and industry participation criteria for the Proposal would be established to encourage the Contractor to achieve the JSIP priorities and objectives including:

• Encouraging the purchase of goods and services in regional NSW, helping to ensure the local community benefits from the construction of the Proposal.

• Working collaboratively with TfNSW and the JSIPAG to support capability and capacity building of regional NSW businesses that may supply to the Contractor during construction and operational phases.

• Minimum targets across all JSIP priorities and objectives including for Aboriginal employment, apprentices and workforce skills development.

42. A Community Liaison Plan would be prepared prior to construction to identify all potential stakeholders and best practice methods for consultation with these groups during construction. The plan would also encourage feedback and facilitate opportunities for the community and stakeholders to have input into the Proposal, where practicable.

43. Contact details for a 24-hour construction response line, Project Infoline and email address would be provided for ongoing stakeholder contact throughout the construction phase.

44. Ongoing consultation with local communities would be carried out in accordance with the Community Liaison Plan about potential changes to road networks, public transport, and local



pedestrian and cycle facilities, during the pre-construction, construction and operational phase of the Proposal.

Biodiversity

45. Opportunities to reduce the clearing of native vegetation would be investigated during detailed design.

46. The construction works and vehicle access to the construction site is to be constrained to the minimum area practical and would use as few entry/exit points as possible.

47. Material stockpiles, equipment and machinery storage and laydown areas would be consolidated within a defined impact area to minimise the overall impact footprint and retain the southern area of native vegetation.

48. The impact footprint would be minimised by restricting access across the site beyond the defined development footprint including avoiding unnecessary vehicle and personnel movements across unused land.

49. Site checks for evidence of the bats prior to commencement of construction.

50. Program demolition of man-made structures to be outside of the breeding season for the identified bat species.

51. Pre-works detailed inspections on and under the structures prior to detect if the animals are, or could be, present.

52. Animal handler/ecologist to be on site and supervise during the removal of man-made structures.

53. A Vegetation Management Plan would be prepared to guide the appropriate restoration of the retained EEC area towards benchmark condition of the EEC. This would include native vegetation management actions and an ongoing weed management strategy. The 1.88 hectare of retained Fuzzy Box woodland would be restored by either assisted natural regeneration or active revegetation, subject to detailed design. Any restoration works would need to be appropriate to the status of the vegetation as an EEC and consistent with OEH guidelines and licence conditions. This measure is not a formal offset, rather it represents a minimisation and mitigation measure.

54. Impacts to native vegetation would be offset in accordance with the Transport for NSW Vegetation Offset Guide for Native Vegetation (TfNSW, 2016).

Contamination, landform, geology and soils

55. Prior to commencement of works, a site-specific Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be prepared in accordance with the ‘Blue Book’ Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction Guidelines (Landcom, 2004) and updated throughout construction so it remains relevant to the activities. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan measures would be implemented prior to commencement of works and maintained throughout construction.

56. Erosion and sediment control measures would be established prior to any clearing, grubbing and site establishment activities and would be maintained and regularly inspected (particularly following rainfall events) to ensure their ongoing functionality. Erosion and sediment control measures would be maintained and left in place until the works are complete and areas are stabilised.

57. Vehicles and machinery would be properly maintained and routinely inspected to minimise the risk of fuel/oil leaks. Construction plant, vehicles and equipment would also be refuelled offsite, or in a designated refuelling area.



58. All fuels, chemicals and hazardous liquids would be stored away from drainage lines, within an impervious bunded area in accordance with Australian Standards, EPA Guidelines and the Chemical Storage and Spill Response Guidelines (TfNSW, 2018e).

59. In the event of a pollution incident, works would cease in the immediate vicinity and the Contractor would immediately notify the TfNSW Project Manager and TfNSW Environment and Planning Manager.

Hydrology, flooding and water quality

60. A site specific Flood Impact Assessment would be undertaken during detailed design to confirm the impacts of the Proposal on flood levels and behaviour for both the Proposal site and surrounding properties. Where flood levels/flood behaviour at surrounding private properties are predicted to increase as a result of the Proposal, appropriate flood mitigation measures are to be identified and implemented to ensure that there is no net increase in flood levels and adverse flood behaviour as a result of the Proposal.

61. Prior to construction, a construction Dewatering Management Plan would be prepared to detail likely inflow rates, proposed water management and disposal strategy. The plan would include further analysis based on latest monitoring data and project design to quantify groundwater inflow rates and radial extent of groundwater drawdown in accordance with the NSW Aquifer Interference Policy (NOW, 2012). Any groundwater encountered during the construction of the Proposal would be managed and disposed of in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines (DECC, 2009) and Transport for NSW’s Water Discharge and Reuse Guideline (2012).

62. Site specific controls would be developed and implemented as part of the CEMP to reduce the risk of the release of potentially harmful chemicals from spills entering downstream watercourses. Storage of hazardous materials such as oils, chemical and refuelling activities would occur in bunded areas. Scour protection and controls at culvert extensions would be installed to reduce erosion and water quality impacts from increased sediment loads.

63. Stockpile locations and earthwork operations would be specified prior to commencement of construction activities. Diversion drains and erosion and sediment control measures would be in place prior to commencement of any stockpiling activities and material would only be stockpiled in designated areas.

64. Implementation of relevant safeguards and pollution management strategies as documented in the OEMP. Site specific controls would be developed to reduce the risk of the release of potentially harmful chemicals from spills entering downstream watercourses or groundwater.

Air quality

65. Prior to commencement of construction an air quality management and monitoring for the Proposal would be undertaken in accordance with TfNSW’s Air Quality Management Guideline (TfNSW, 2018f).

66. To minimise the generation of dust from construction activities, the following measures would be implemented: • apply water (or alternate measures) to exposed surfaces (e.g. unpaved roads, stockpiles,

hardstand areas and other exposed surfaces). • cover stockpiles when not in use. • appropriately cover loads on trucks transporting material to and from the construction site

and securely fix tailgates of road transport trucks prior to loading and immediately after unloading.

• prevent mud and dirt being tracked onto sealed road surfaces. • During earthworks activities revegetate earthworks and exposed areas/soil stockpiles to



stabilise surfaces as soon as practicable.

67. Methods for management of emissions would be incorporated into project inductions, training and pre-start/toolbox talks.

68. Plant and machinery would be regularly checked and maintained in a proper and efficient condition. Plant and machinery would be switched off when not in use, and not left idling.

69. Vehicle and machinery movements during construction would be restricted to designated areas and sealed/compacted surfaces where practicable.

Waste reduction and resource recovery

70. A waste management plan would be prepared as part of the CEMP that must address waste management and would at a minimum: • Identify all potential waste streams associated with the works and outline methods of

disposal of waste that cannot be reused or recycled at appropriately licensed facilities • Detail other onsite management practices such as keeping areas free of rubbish • Specify controls and containment procedures for hazardous waste and asbestos waste • Outline the reporting regime for collating construction waste data.

71. Surplus material that cannot be used within the Proposal Site would be reused or disposed of in the following order of priority: • Transferred to other major project development sites for reuse in accordance with a

relevant EPA resource recovery exemption • Transported off site for reuse by another third party in accordance with a relevant EPA

resource recovery exemption • Disposed of at an approved materials recycling or waste disposal facility • Management of operational wastes would be managed by the operators of the

maintenance facility in accordance with relevant legislative requirements.

72. An appropriate Unexpected Finds Protocol, considering asbestos containing materials and other potential contaminants, would be included in the CEMP. Procedures for handling asbestos containing materials, including licensed contractor involvement as required, record keeping, site personnel awareness and waste disposal to be undertaken in accordance with WorkCover requirements.

73. All spoil to be removed from site would be tested to confirm the presence of any contamination. Any contaminated spoil would be disposed of at an appropriately licensed facility.

74. All spoil and waste must be classified in accordance with the Waste Classification Guidelines Part 1: Classifying waste (EPA, 2014) prior to disposal.

75. Any concrete washout would be established and maintained in accordance with TfNSW’s Concrete Washout Guideline – draft (TfNSW, 2015i) with details included in the CEMP and location marked on the ECM.

Cumulative impacts

76. The potential cumulative impacts associated with the Proposal would be further considered as the design develops and as further information regarding the location and timing of potential developments is released. Environmental management measures would be developed in the CEMP, and implemented as appropriate.


8 Conclusion This REF has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of section 5.5 of the EP&A Act, taking into account to the fullest extent possible, all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment as a result of the Proposal.

The Proposal would provide the following benefits:





• Service the Regional Rail Fleet in a regional location

• Boosting regional economic development

• Provide long-term, regionally-based employment opportunities.

The following key impacts have been identified should the Proposal proceed:

• Traffic and transport – impacts would primarily occur during the construction of the Proposal. The access road intersection with Wingewarra Street would be upgraded to a left in / left out intersection as part of the Proposal for operation. Operation of the Proposal would also result in increases in the number of closures at rail level crossings at Fitzroy Street, Wheelers Lane and Sheraton Road.

• Landscape and visual character– impacts would include introducing larger buildings to the site. While they are larger, they are not dissimilar in scale to the existing buildings within the industrial area around the Proposal.

• Noise and vibration – construction of the project would result in minor exceedances of the construction noise criteria and disturbance to nearby residents and commercial premises. Rail operations would occur within noise management levels, however maintenance facility activities may lead to exceedances of daytime, evening and sleep disturbance criteria. Alternatives to horn testing/ground based alarms in the yard would be explored during design development to minimise exceedances.

• Air – during construction of the project, the primary air quality impact risk would be airborne dust. No operational air quality impacts are anticipated.

• Property, land use and socio-economic – construction of the Proposal would impact on the local amenity (i.e. air quality, noise, traffic and visual impact. However, the Proposal would have a positive long-term benefit to the quality of regional rail travel as well as provide long-term, Dubbo-based employment opportunities and opportunities for local businesses.

• Biodiversity – about 9.2 hectares of derived grassland of the NSW south western slopes would be cleared for the Proposal. This grassland derived would have supported the Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial Soils of the South Western Slopes which is listed as an endangered ecological community under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

• Hydrology, flooding and groundwater – The preliminary flood impact assessment identified there would be minor increase in flood levels on external properties and adverse impacts of flood levels within the Proposal Site and a section of the existing railway. A detailed flood impact assessment would be undertaken at the subsequent design stages to quantify changes in flood dynamics to ensure the final maintenance


facility/detention basin design would result in no additional flood risk to people and external properties.

The Proposal would also take into account the principles of ESD (refer to Section 4.6). These would be considered during the detailed design, construction and operational phases of the Proposal. This would ensure the Proposal is delivered to maximum benefit to the community, is cost effective and minimises any adverse impacts on the environment.

This REF has considered and assessed these impacts in accordance with clause 228 of the EP&A Regulation and the requirements of the EPBC Act (refer to Chapter 6, Section 4.1.1 and Appendix B). Based on the assessment contained in this REF, it is considered that the Proposal is not likely to have a significant impact upon the environment or any threatened species, populations or communities. Accordingly, an Environmental Impact Statement is not required, nor is the approval of the Minister for Planning.


9 References Australian Green Infrastructure Council (AGIC), 2011, Guidelines for Climate Change

Adaptation, AGIC (now ISCA), Sydney

Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO), 2006, Climate Change Impacts and Risk Management – A Guide for Business and Government, AGO, Canberra

Baker, CJ, Chapman, L, Quinn, A, & Dobney, K, 2009, Climate change and the railway industry: A review, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science

Bureau of Meteorology (BoM), 2017, Atlas of Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems, available: http://www.bom.gov.au/water/groundwater/gde/map.shtml, accessed: November 2017

Bradstock, R, Davies, I, Price, O, & Cary, G, 2008, Effects of climate change on bushfire threats to biodiversity, ecosystem processes and people in the Sydney region, New South Wales Department of Environment and Climate Change.

Cardno, 2018, Flood Impact Assessment (Draft), Dubbo Rail maintenance facility, Sydney

Colquhoun GP, Meakin NS, Morgan EJ, Raymond OL, Scott MM, Watkins JJ, Barron LM, Cameron RG, Henderson GAM, Jagodzinski EA, Krynen JP, Pogson DJ, Warren AYE, Wyborn D and Yoo EK, 1999, Dubbo 1:250 000 Geological Sheet SI/55-04, 2nd edition, Geological Survey of New South Wales, Sydney

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), 2015, Southern & South Western Flatlands Cluster Report, Climate Change in Australia Projections for Australia's Natural Resource Management Regions, CSIRO, Canberra

Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, 2017, Groundwater dependent ecosystems, available: https://wetlandinfo.ehp.qld.gov.au/wetlands/ecology/aquatic-ecosystems-natural/groundwater-dependent/, accessed: June 2018

Department of Environment and Conservation, 2006, Assessing Vibration: A Technical Guideline, Sydney

Department of the Environment and Heritage, 2006, Climate Change Impacts and Risk Management; A Guide for Business and Government, AGO, Canberra

Department of Environment and Climate Change, 2009, Interim Construction Noise Guideline, Sydney

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, 2010, Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in NSW, Sydney

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, 2011, NSW Road Noise Policy, Sydney

Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, 2004, Guideline for Preparation of Environmental Management Plans, Sydney

Edge Environmental, 2018, Climate Change Risk and Adaptation Report, Edge Environmental, Sydney

Ekstrom, MAD, Bhend, J, Chiew, F, Kirono, DL, McInnes, K, Whetton, P, 2015, Climate Change in Australia – Central Slopes Cluster Report, CSIRO, Canberra

Envisage, 2018, Proposed Regional Fleet – Maintenance Facility, Dubbo – Visual Assessment Report, Newcastle


http://www.bom.gov.au/water/groundwater/gde/map.shtml

https://wetlandinfo.ehp.qld.gov.au/wetlands/ecology/aquatic-ecosystems-natural/groundwater-dependent/

https://wetlandinfo.ehp.qld.gov.au/wetlands/ecology/aquatic-ecosystems-natural/groundwater-dependent/

Environment Protection Authority (EPA), 2000, NSW Industrial Noise Policy, Sydney

EPA, 2014, Waste Classification Guidelines, Sydney

EPA, 2016, Approved Methods for Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW, EPA, Sydney

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2014, Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report, Geneva, Switzerland

Jacobs, 2018a, Dubbo Maintenance Facility Traffic Impact Assessment, Jacobs, 2018

Jacobs, 2018b, Dubbo Maintenance Facility Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Jacobs, 2018

Jacobs, 2018c, Dubbo Maintenance Facility Air Quality Impact Assessment, Jacobs, 2018

Landcom, 2004, Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction, 4th Edition, Sydney

Ministry of Transport, 2008, Guidelines for the Development of Public Transport Interchange Facilities, Sydney

Murphy, BW & Lawrie, JW, 1998, Soil landscapes of the Dubbo 1:250 000 sheet (Dubbo, Wellington, Gulgong, Mudgee), DLWC, Sydney

Nation Partners, 2018, Dubbo Maintenance Facility Phase I Preliminary Site Investigation, Nation Partners, Sydney

NSW Government, 2014, Rebuilding NSW – State Infrastructure Strategy 2014, Sydney

NSW Heritage Office & Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP), 1995, NSW Heritage Manual, Sydney

NSW Heritage Office, 1998, How to Prepare Archival Records of Heritage Item, Sydney

NSW Heritage Office, 2002, Conservation Management Documents – Guidelines on Conservation Management Plans and Other Management Documents, Sydney

NSW Heritage Office, 2005, Interpreting Heritage Places and Items Guidelines, Sydney

NSW Government, 2015, State Priorities – NSW: Making It Happen, Sydney

NSW Office of Water (NOW), 2012, NSW Aquifer Interference Policy, NOW, Sydney

Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH), 2010, Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in NSW South Wales, Sydney

OEH, 2011, Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites, OEH, Sydney

OEH, 2014, Central West and Orana Climate Change Snapshot, OEH, Sydney

OEH, 2018a, Brigalow Belt South – landform, available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/bioregions/BrigalowBeltSouth-Landform.htm accessed: February 2018

OEH, 2018b, Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial Soils of the South Western Slopes, Darling Riverine Plains and Brigalow Belt South Bioregions – profile, available http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/profile.aspx?id=10335, accessed June 2018


http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/bioregions/BrigalowBeltSouth-Landform.htm

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/profile.aspx?id=10335

OEH, 2018c, Threatened ecological communities, available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspecies/hometec.htm , accessed: June 2018

OEH, 2018d, NSW Vegetation Information System: Classification, available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/NSWVCA20PRapp/default.aspx, accessed June 2018

OzArk, 2018a, Aboriginal and Historic Heritage Assessment – Regional Rail Maintenance Facility, OzArk, Dubbo

OzArk, 2018b Dubbo Regional Rail Maintenance Facility, Ecological Assessment, OzArk, Dubbo

Smith, J, Phillips, B, & Yu, S, 2006, Modelling Overland Flows and Drainage Augmentations in Dubbo. 46th Floodplain Management Authorities Conference, Lismore. available http://xpsolutions.com/assets/dms/cs-overlandflowsdrainageaugindubbo.pdf , accessed June 2018

TfNSW, 2013, Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guide for Construction Projects, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2015a, Water Discharge and Reuse Guideline, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2015b, Guide to Environmental Controls Map, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2015c, Weed Management and Disposal Guide, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2015d, Concrete Washout Guideline (draft), TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2016a, Vegetation Offset Guide, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2016b, TfNSW Climate Risk Assessment Guidelines, accessed https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/documents/2017/tfnsw-climate-risk-assessment-guideline-9tp-sd-081-1.pdf, accessed June 2018

TfNSW, 2016c, Unexpected Heritage Finds Guideline, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2017, Jobs, Industry and Skills Strategy, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2018a, Future Transport 2056, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2018b, Construction Noise and Vibration Strategy, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2018c, Vegetation Management (Protection and Removal) Guideline, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2018d, Fauna Management Guideline, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2018e, Chemical Storage and Spill Response Guidelines, TfNSW, Sydney

TfNSW, 2018f, Air Quality Management Guideline, TfNSW, Sydney

Thackway, R, & Cresswell, I, 1995, An interim biogeographic regionalisation for Australia: a framework for setting priorities in the National Reserves System Cooperative Program, Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra

UK Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM), 2014, Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction Version 1.1, UKIAQM, London


http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspecies/hometec.htm

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/NSWVCA20PRapp/default.aspx

http://xpsolutions.com/assets/dms/cs-overlandflowsdrainageaugindubbo.pdf

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/documents/2017/tfnsw-climate-risk-assessment-guideline-9tp-sd-081-1.pdf

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/documents/2017/tfnsw-climate-risk-assessment-guideline-9tp-sd-081-1.pdf

Appendix A Consideration of matters of national environmental significance

The table below demonstrates TfNSW’s consideration of the matters of NES under the EPBC Act to be considered in order to determine whether the Proposal should be referred to Commonwealth Department of the Environment.

Matters of NES Impacts

Any impact on a World Heritage property? There would be no impact to World Heritage properties by the Proposal.

Nil

Any impact on a National Heritage place? There would be no impact to National Heritage places by the Proposal.

Nil

Any impact on a wetland of international importance? There would be no impact to wetlands of international importance by the Proposal.

Nil

Any impact on a listed threatened species or communities? The Biodiversity Assessment (OzArk, 2018a) found that the Proposal would not cause any significant impact to any threatened species or communities listed under the EPBC Act. Safeguards and mitigation measures to manage impacts to these species are summarised in Section 6.7.4.

Nil

Any impacts on listed migratory species? The Proposal would not impact any listed migratory species

Nil

Does the Proposal involve a nuclear action (including uranium mining)? The Proposal does not involve a nuclear action (including uranium mining).

Nil

Any impact on a Commonwealth marine area? There would be no impact to Commonwealth marine areas by the Proposal.

Nil

Does the Proposal involve development of coal seam gas and/or large coal mine that has the potential to impact on water resources? The Proposal does not involve development of coal seam gas or a large coal mine.

Nil

Additionally, any impact (direct or indirect) on Commonwealth land? There would be no direct or indirect impact to Commonwealth land by the Proposal.

Nil

Dubbo Maintenance Facility Review of Environmental Factors

Appendix B Consideration of clause 228

The table below demonstrates TfNSW’s consideration of the specific factors of clause 228 of the EP&A Regulation in determining whether the Proposal would have a significant impact on the environment.

Factor Impacts

(a) Any environmental impact on a community? Construction of the Proposal would result in some short-term negative impacts, such as visual amenity impact, traffic and access disruptions, in addition to the potential noise and air emissions impacts. These could impact negatively on the local community as described in this REF.

Potential visual amenity impact during construction would include the placement and movement of construction vehicles and stockpile areas within the Proposal Site.

Potential traffic impacts during construction would include an increase in the volume of construction vehicles travelling to and from the site and interruption of traffic flows on Wingewarra Street during construction of the new site entry. These impacts would be mitigated through a TMP, prepared by the Contractor as part of the overall CEMP.

Construction noise would be generated from construction plant and vehicles. Air quality impact would result from dust and vehicle emissions. The impact is likely to occur for the duration of construction.

During operation of the Proposal noise and visual impacts are expected at residential properties near the Proposal Site (refer to Section 6.2.3 and Section 6.3.4). Feasible and reasonable noise mitigation measures that could be adopted for the Proposal are summarised in Section 7.2.

Chapter 6 of this REF describes the likely temporary and permanent impacts of the Proposal, and lists recommended measures to mitigate impacts during construction and operation. The CEMP would incorporate all of the proposed safeguards for implementation throughout the Proposal’s construction phase.

The primary long-term positive impact of the Proposal would include:

• Improve safety, comfort and reliability of regional train services. This would have a positive long-term impact on access and connectivity. The

• Long-term, regionally-based employment opportunities, as well as opportunities for local businesses.

Long-term, minor, negative Long-term positive

(b) Any transformation of a locality? The Proposal would further industrialize the site and introduce elements into the landscape of greater scale and bulk than was previously present. The Proposal would also have associated noise, traffic and visual impacts. Traffic, visual and noise impacts would be managed through the mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.

Long-term, minor, negative


Factor Impacts

(c) Any environmental impact on the ecosystem of the locality? The Proposal would require the removed of about 9.2 hectares of Derived grassland of the NSW south western slopes, which is mostly likely a derived form of Fuzzy Box woodland, where trees have been cleared in the past. The Fuzzy Box Woodland on alluvial Soils of the South Western Slopes, Darling Riverine Plains and Brigalow Belt South Bioregions is a listed EEC under the BC Act. Removal of habitat may also affect other fauna, however, tests of significance found no significant impact to these species as a result of the Proposal. Mitigation measures to manage impacts to these species are summarised in Section 7.2.

Long-term, minor, negative

(d) Any reduction of the aesthetic, recreational, scientific or other environmental quality or value of a locality? The Proposal is expected to have some ecological and visual impacts on the Site, as described in (a) to (c) above, resulting in some reduction to the aesthetic and overall environmental quality of the locality. However, impact would be minimised as far as practicable through the implementation of mitigation measures outlined in Section 7.2. No recreational or scientific qualities of the Proposal Site are anticipated to be impacted during the construction or operation of the Proposal.

Short-term negative

(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? No know Aboriginal or Non-Aboriginal heritage items are expected to be impacted by the Proposal.

Nil

(f) Any impact on the habitat of protected fauna (within the meaning of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974)? The Proposal may remove of habitat of threatened fauna, however, tests of significance found no significant impact to these species as a result of the Proposal. Mitigation measures to manage impacts to these species are summarised in Section 7.2.

Short term, minor, negative

(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 is not anticipated to endanger any species of animal, plant or other form of life. Biodiversity impacts associated with the Proposal would be mitigated through the implementation of mitigation measures outlined in Section 7.2.

Nil impacts

(h) Any long-term effects on the environment? The operation of the Proposal would have some permanent noise and visual impacts to nearby residential receivers. In addition, the Proposal would also permanent clear up 9.2 hectares Derived grassland of the NSW south western slopes, which is mostly likely a derived form of Fuzzy Box woodland which is listed EEC under the BC Act. These impacts would be localised and managed through the implementation of mitigation measures in Section 7.2. The Proposal would have positive long-term effects by improving safety, comfort and reliability of regional train services as well as local employment opportunities.

Short-term, minor, negative


Factor Impacts

(i) Any degradation of the quality of the environment? The Proposal has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment through accidental spills and erosion and sediment during construction. An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be implemented to mitigate the impact.

Short-term, minor, negative

(j) Any risk to the safety of the environment? The construction of the Proposal has the potential to temporarily decrease safety along the local roads around the Proposal Site due to increased construction vehicles on the local next work. Mitigation measures have been proposed to minimise risks associated with encountering contaminated land or groundwater as well as their subsequent disposal. Through implementation of the proposed management and mitigation measures within this REF, it is not anticipated that the Proposal would result in any substantial risks to the safety of the existing environment. Operation of the Proposal would improve safety, comfort and reliability of regional train services rail safety.

Short-term negative Long-term positive

(k) Any reduction in the range of beneficial uses of the environment? The Proposal would not result in a reduction in the range of beneficial uses of the environment as the Proposal Site is currently used by several public and private organisations as a maintenance and/or construction depot. Public access to the Proposal Site is generally restricted due to the presence of the rail corridors, adjacent industrial properties and existing security fencing.

Nil

(l) Any pollution of the environment? The Proposal would have the potential to result in some minor negative short-term water pollution risks including from sediments, soil nutrients, waste, and spillage of fuels and chemicals. Management of water quality impacts would be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures outlined in Section 7.2. Short-term noise and air quality impacts (dust and exhaust emissions) would be expected during the construction of the Proposal. Management of noise and air quality impacts would be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures summarised in Section 7.2. The operation of the Proposal would have minor impacts on the local amenity due to noise, traffic and visual impacts. Traffic, visual and noise impacts would be managed through the mitigation measures described in Section 7.2.

Short-term, minor, negative Long-term, minor, positive

(m) Any environmental problems associated with the disposal of waste? Contaminated waste is not anticipated as a result of the Proposal. Stockpile and compound sites would be managed in a way that minimise waste on site and manage excess materials. Waste associated with the Proposal would be managed in accordance with the WARR Act and recycled where possible. Issues associated with the disposal of waste are not expected.

Nil

(n) Any increased demands on resources (natural or otherwise) that are, or are likely to become, in short supply? The majority of the materials used in the construction of the Proposal would be considered to be common construction materials and would not be considered to be in short supply or have restricted availability.

Nil


Factor Impacts

(o) Any cumulative environmental effect with other existing or likely future activities? The Dubbo Hospital Redevelopment would occur nearby over a similar construction phase duration. TfNSW would liaise with NSW Health (or any other organisations for major projects which coincide with the Proposal) to minimise potential cumulative impacts.

Unlikely

(p) Any impact on coastal processes and coastal hazards, including those under projected climate change conditions? The Proposal is not located within a coastal area and would not result in any impact on coastal processes and coastal hazards

Nil


Appendix C Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Heritage Assessment


Appendix D Traffic Impact Assessment


Appendix E Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment


Appendix F Noise and Vibration Assessment


Appendix G Biodiversity Assessment


Appendix H Phase 1 Preliminary Site Investigation Report


Appendix I Air Quality Impact Assessment
