REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT PREPARED FOR
ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER FEBRUARY 2016
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT
PREPARED FOR:
ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
FEBRUARY 2016
POSTAL ADDRESS PO
B OX 1963 P EISLEY S TREET TELEPHONE 02 6393 5000 EMAIL ORANGE @ GEOLYSE . COM LOCATION 154
O RANGE NSW 2800 O RANGE NSW 2800 FACSIMILE 02 6393 5050 WEB SITE WWW . GEOLYSE . COM
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Report Title:
Review of Environmental Factors
Project:
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project
Client:
Orange City Council/Central Tablelands Water
Report Ref.:
215327_REF_001B.docx
Status:
Final
Issued:
10 February 2016
Geolyse Pty Ltd and the authors responsible for the preparation and compilation of this report declare that we do not have, nor expect to have a beneficial interest in the study area of this project and will not benefit from any of the recommendations outlined in this report. The preparation of this report has been in accordance with the project brief provided by the client and has relied upon the information, data and results provided or collected from the sources and under the conditions outlined in the report. All data and information contained within this report is prepared for the exclusive use of Orange City Council/Central Tablelands Water to accompany this report for the land described herein and are not to be used for any other purpose or by any other person or entity. No reliance should be placed on the information contained in this report for any purposes apart from those stated therein. Geolyse Pty Ltd accepts no responsibility for any loss, damage suffered or inconveniences arising from, any person or entity using the plans or information in this study for purposes other than those stated above.
PAGE I 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................... VII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................. 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE OF REPORT .................................................................................................... 2 STRUCTURE OF REPORT ................................................................................................ 2 DRAWING SCHEDULE ...................................................................................................... 2
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION ...................................................................................... 3 2.1
PROJECT DRIVERS .......................................................................................................... 3 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4
2.2
OPTIONS CONSIDERED ................................................................................................. 13 2.2.1 2.2.2
2.3
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT .................................................................................. 3 WATER SECURITY CRITERIA .......................................................................... 6 EXISTING WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS AND FORECASTS ............................ 7 OPPORTUNITIES ............................................................................................. 13 WATER SECURITY OPTIONS ......................................................................... 13 PIPELINE ALIGNMENT AND SIZE................................................................... 15
BENEFITS OF PROJECT ................................................................................................ 15
PIPELINE PROJECT ............................................................................................... 17 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 17 INFRASTRUCTURE ......................................................................................................... 17 INTEGRATION ................................................................................................................. 21 SCHEME OPERATION .................................................................................................... 23 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3
3.5
WATER SOURCES .......................................................................................................... 24 3.5.1 3.5.2
3.6
OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................... 23 WATER SECURITY MODE .............................................................................. 23 CONTINGENCY MODE .................................................................................... 24 OPERATION ..................................................................................................... 24 CONSTRUCTION.............................................................................................. 25
PROJECT DELIVERY ...................................................................................................... 25
STATUTORY PLANNING ........................................................................................ 26 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4
ACTIVITY DEFINITION .................................................................................................... 26 DETERMINATION ............................................................................................................ 26 DETERMINING AUTHORITY ........................................................................................... 26 APPROVAL AUTHORITIES ............................................................................................. 27 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.4.3 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4.6 4.4.7 4.4.8
4.5 4.6
DPI - FISHERIES .............................................................................................. 27 DPI - WATER .................................................................................................... 27 HERITAGE COUNCIL ....................................................................................... 28 ROADS AND MARITIME SERVICE.................................................................. 28 BLAYNEY SHIRE COUNCIL ............................................................................. 29 ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY ................................................. 29 NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ................................................ 29 DPI – CROWN LANDS ..................................................................................... 29
NOMINATED DETERMINING AUTHORITY .................................................................... 30 REF FUNCTION ............................................................................................................... 30 PAGE II 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
CONSULTATION ..................................................................................................... 32 5.1 5.2
AGENCIES ....................................................................................................................... 32 SERVICES ........................................................................................................................ 35 5.2.1 5.2.2
HIGH PRESSURE NATURAL GAS PIPELINE ................................................. 35 RAIL LINES ....................................................................................................... 35
IMPACTS ................................................................................................................. 37 6.1
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 37 6.1.1 6.1.2
6.2
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY .............................................................................................. 38 6.2.1 6.2.2 6.2.3 6.2.4 6.2.5 6.2.6 6.2.7
6.3
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 73 ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES .......................................................................... 73 HISTORICAL ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 73 SITE SURVEY ................................................................................................... 74 ASSESSMENT RESULTS ................................................................................ 74 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... 76 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................ 82
SOIL RESOURCE ............................................................................................................ 84 6.6.1 6.6.2 6.6.3 6.6.4 6.6.5 6.6.6 6.6.7
6.7
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 69 SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT .............................................................................. 70 ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION ....................................................................... 70 LANDSCAPE CONTEXT .................................................................................. 70 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY ......................................................................... 70 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... 72 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................ 72
HISTORIC HERITAGE ..................................................................................................... 73 6.5.1 6.5.2 6.5.3 6.5.4 6.5.5 6.5.6 6.5.7
6.6
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 54 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK........................................................................... 54 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY .................................................................... 55 AQUATIC HABITAT VALUES ........................................................................... 57 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................... 65 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................ 67 CONCLUSION................................................................................................... 69
ABORIGINAL HERITAGE ................................................................................................ 69 6.4.1 6.4.2 6.4.3 6.4.4 6.4.5 6.4.6 6.4.7
6.5
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 38 REGIONAL SETTING ....................................................................................... 39 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK AND GUIDELINES ........................................... 39 FLORA ............................................................................................................... 42 FAUNA .............................................................................................................. 46 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................ 48 CONCLUSION................................................................................................... 53
AQUATIC ECOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 54 6.3.1 6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4 6.3.5 6.3.6 6.3.7
6.4
SCOPE .............................................................................................................. 37 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................... 37
SOIL LANDSCAPES ......................................................................................... 84 LAND CAPABILITY ........................................................................................... 88 ACID SULFATE SOIL ....................................................................................... 91 CONTAMINATED SOIL .................................................................................... 93 NATURALLY OCCURRING ASBESTOS.......................................................... 93 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................... 93 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................ 94
SURFACE WATERS ........................................................................................................ 95 6.7.1
CATCHMENT .................................................................................................... 95 PAGE III 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.7.2 6.7.3 6.8
LAND USE ........................................................................................................................ 98 6.8.1 6.8.2
6.9
POTENTIAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................... 98 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................ 98 OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................... 98 POTENTIAL IMPACT ...................................................................................... 101
NOISE AND VIBRATION ................................................................................................ 101 6.9.1 6.9.2 6.9.3 6.9.4
EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................ 101 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA .............................................................................. 101 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................. 104 MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................. 106
6.10 TRAFFIC AND ACCESS ................................................................................................ 107 6.10.1 6.10.2 6.10.3
ROAD NETWORK ........................................................................................... 107 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................................................... 108 MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................. 108
6.11 AIR QUALITY.................................................................................................................. 108 6.11.1 6.11.2 6.11.3 6.11.4
CRITERIA ........................................................................................................ 108 DISPERSION CONDITIONS........................................................................... 108 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................................................... 109 MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................. 109
6.12 SPOIL AND WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................ 110 6.12.1 6.12.2 6.12.3
SPOIL .............................................................................................................. 110 CONSTRUCTION WASTES ........................................................................... 110 OPERATIONS WASTE ................................................................................... 111
6.13 GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................... 111 6.13.1 6.13.2 6.13.3 6.13.4
RESOURCE .................................................................................................... 111 VULNERABILITY............................................................................................. 113 POTENTIAL IMPACT ...................................................................................... 115 MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................. 115
6.14 VISUAL AMENITY .......................................................................................................... 115 6.14.1 6.14.2 6.14.3
VISIBILITY ....................................................................................................... 115 POTENTIAL IMPACT ...................................................................................... 115 MITIGATION MEASURE ................................................................................. 116
6.15 SOCIAL IMPACTS .......................................................................................................... 116 6.16 ECONOMIC IMPACTS ................................................................................................... 116
MITIGATION MEASURES ..................................................................................... 117 7.1 7.2
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 117 DESIGN .......................................................................................................................... 117 7.2.1 7.2.2 7.2.3 7.2.4 7.2.5
7.3
PRE-CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................................. 119 7.3.1 7.3.2 7.3.3 7.3.4 7.3.5
7.4
DESIGN REFINEMENT .................................................................................. 117 WATERCOURSE CROSSINGS ..................................................................... 118 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE ............................................................................... 119 ACOUSTIC AMENITY ..................................................................................... 119 VISUAL AMENITY ........................................................................................... 119 APPROVALS ................................................................................................... 119 SAFETY MANAGEMENT STUDY .................................................................. 120 WATER MAINS PROTECTION ...................................................................... 120 PROPERTY INSPECTION .............................................................................. 121 ROAD DILAPIDATION REPORT .................................................................... 121
CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................................................... 121 PAGE IV 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
7.4.1 7.4.2 7.4.3 7.4.4 7.4.5 7.4.6 7.4.7 7.4.8 7.4.9 7.4.10 7.4.11 7.4.12 7.4.13 7.4.14 7.4.15 7.4.16 7.4.17 7.4.18 7.4.19 7.5
CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...................... 121 LANDOWNER CONSULTATION .................................................................... 121 SOIL AND WATER MANAGEMENT ............................................................... 121 INCIDENT MANAGEMENT ............................................................................. 122 WEED MANAGEMENT ................................................................................... 122 MINIMISING VEGETATION DISTURBANCE ................................................. 124 STABILISATION OF WORK SITE .................................................................. 125 FAUNA PROTECTION .................................................................................... 127 FISH HABITAT AND WATER QUALITY ......................................................... 127 TRAFFIC ......................................................................................................... 128 HISTORIC HERITAGE .................................................................................... 128 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE ............................................................................... 129 FUEL AND CHEMICAL STORAGE ................................................................ 130 NATURALLY OCCURRING ASBESTOS........................................................ 130 NOISE AND VIBRATION ................................................................................ 131 AIR QUALITY .................................................................................................. 132 BUSHFIRES .................................................................................................... 132 INDUCTION..................................................................................................... 132 ACQUIRE EASEMENTS ................................................................................. 132
OPERATIONS ................................................................................................................ 132
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 134 8.1 8.1
CLAUSE 228 FACTORS ................................................................................................ 134 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT .......................................................................................... 136
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 137 DRAWING SCHEDULE APPENDICES APPENDIX A Agency Consultation APPENDIX B Ecological Assessment APPENDIX C Heritage Assessment
TABLES Table 2.1 – OCC and CTW Water Supply Systems................................................................................ 9 Table 2.2 – OCC and CTW Projected Water Demand.......................................................................... 10 Table 3.1 – Summary of Key Project Elements .................................................................................... 19 Table 5.1 – Agency Consultation .......................................................................................................... 32 Table 5.2 – Rail Interfaces .................................................................................................................... 35 Table 6.1 – Vegetation Communities Impact ........................................................................................ 45 Table 6.2 – Key Fish Habitat Sensitivity Classification Scheme ........................................................... 55 Table 6.3 – Classification of Waterways for Fish Passage ................................................................... 56 Table 6.4 – Summary of Strahler Stream Order Waterways Intersected.............................................. 57 Table 6.5 – Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats ......................................... 58 Table 6.6 – Aboriginal Sites Recorded During Survey .......................................................................... 72 Table 6.7 – Statement of Heritage Impacts ........................................................................................... 77 Table 6.8 – Responsibilities and Timing for Historic Heritage Mitigation Measures ............................. 84 Table 6.9 – Soil Landscapes ................................................................................................................. 86 Table 6.10 – Land and Soil Capability .................................................................................................. 89 Table 6.11 – Land Zoning Objectives ................................................................................................... 99 Table 6.12 – Noise at Sensitive Land Uses ........................................................................................ 102 Table 6.13 – Traffic Noise Criteria....................................................................................................... 102 PAGE V 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.14 – Vibration Criteria............................................................................................................. 103 Table 6.15 – Criteria for Blasting ......................................................................................................... 103 Table 6.16 – Operational Noise Criteria .............................................................................................. 104 Table 6.17 – General Measures to Manage Noise and Vibration Impacts ......................................... 107 Table 6.18 – Groundwater bore data within 100 m of proposed pipeline ........................................... 111
FIGURES Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4: Figure 5: Figure 6: Figure 7: Figure 8: Figure 9: Figure 10: Figure 11: Figure 12:
OCC Water Supply System ................................................................................................ 7 CTW Water Supply System ................................................................................................ 9 Regional Water Security without Climate Change............................................................ 12 Regional Water Security with Climate Change ................................................................. 12 Regional Water Security ................................................................................................... 16 Project Layout and Staging ............................................................................................... 18 Water Supply System (the Project shown in red) ............................................................. 22 Distribution of Soil Landscapes (Source: OEH)................................................................ 85 Land and Soil Capability Class Map (Source: OEH) ........................................................ 90 Probability of Acid Sulfate Soil (Source: CSIRO) ............................................................. 92 Flood Planning Areas (Source: NSW Planning Viewer) ................................................... 97 Groundwater Vulnerability Map (Source: DLWC) ........................................................... 114
PAGE VI 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
ABBREVIATIONS ARA
Appropriate Regulatory Authority
ASRIS
Australian Soil Resource Information System
BAU
Business as Usual
BSAL
Biophysical Strategic Agricultural Land
BSC
Blayney Shire Council
BVT
Broad Vegetation Type
CEMP
Construction Environmental Management Plan
Centroc
Central NSW Regional Organisation of Councils
CTRWSPP
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project
CTW
Central Tablelands Water
DLWC
Department of Land and Water Conservation
DotE
Department of the Environment
DPI
Department of Primary Industries
DPIW
Department of Primary Industries – Water
EEC
Endangered Ecological Community
EPA
Environment Protection Authority
EPL
Environment Protection Licence
ESCP
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan
IWCM
Integrated Water Cycle Management Plan
LGA
Local Government Area
LPI
NSW Land and Property Information
MAR
Managed Aquifer Recharge scheme
MNES
Matter of National Environmental Significance
MOPP
Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline Project
OCC
Orange City Council
OEH
NSW Office of Environment and Heritage
OEMP
Operations Environmental Management Plan
PCT
Plant Community Type
RMS
Roads and Maritime Services
SISD
Safe Intersection Site Distances
SWMP
Soil and Water Management Plan
TCP
Traffic Control Plan
TEC
Threatened Ecological Community
TRB
Typical Residential Bill
WFP
Water Filtration Plant
WoNS
Weed of National Significance
PAGE VII 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Executive Summary Long term water security is important to meet community needs and to underpin confidence for continued investment and growth in regional areas. The project outlined in this Review of Environmental Factors has the strategic objective of improving water security. It involves the construction of potable water distribution infrastructure comprising of pumps and pipes to enable sharing of water resources between two neighbouring water utilities; Orange City Council and Central Tablelands Water. This project, known as the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project, does not require any change to any existing water access licences. The project is about sharing treated potable water. There is no component of the project rationale or justification, or assumption about future operations, that assumes any change to current, capped licenced entitlements. The key element of the project is a pipeline connecting Orange to Blayney and Carcoar via Millthorpe. The pipeline and pumps would allow the bi-directional transfer of potable water. The project has two operational components; regional water security and contingency. Water security would be achieved by sharing water resources between various sources. Water could be moved from Orange City Council to Central Tablelands Water, or vice versa, depending on needs and water availability. Contingency would be provided through linkage of the major water filtration plants in the event of a plant failure or contamination within either water supply system. The potential for adverse environmental impact is primarily restricted to the construction phase. The pipeline traverses lands mapped as Biophysical Strategic Agricultural Land which is of high significance in terms of agricultural potential. It entails crossing nineteen (19) watercourses assessed as potential key fish habitat. Works will be undertaken within heritage conservation areas and three locations will involve construction activity within and/or immediately adjacent to an endangered and threatened ecological community. Significant impacts can be avoided but require restricted construction footprints at these locations and enhanced monitoring. Construction works should not result in the pollution of land or water so long as best management practices for erosion and sediment control are undertaken during construction, and appropriate remediation measures are implemented on a progressive basis. Whilst Orange City Council is the nominated determining authority for the project, at certain locations other approvals/permits/licences will need to be secured from the Department of Primary Industries, the Office of Environment and Heritage and Blayney Shire Council before construction activity can commence. The Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project can be built and used without the risk of serious or irreversible damage; without degrading the health, diversity and productivity of the environment for future generations; and without jeopardising biological diversity or ecological integrity This Review of Environmental Factors concludes that, subject to adoption of appropriate mitigation measures, the construction and operation of the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project is unlikely to result in a significant adverse environmental impact.
215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Introduction 1.1
BACKGROUND
Orange City Council (OCC) is an inland regional council that provides water services to 16,900 connections and a population of about 40,000. Central Tablelands Water (CTW) is a neighbouring water utility and provides water services to 5,700 connections in Blayney, Weddin and parts of Cabonne and Cowra local government areas; a population of just over 12,000. The Centroc Water Security Study (MWH, 2009) investigated water security across seventeen (17) local government areas and identified that 29 towns were at risk and required substantial water security improvements. OCC was identified as being at risk, however, CTW was considered to be secure due to the expected yield from Lake Rowlands. The Centroc study recommended an integrated program of water conservation and demand management measures, coupled with new and upgraded water distribution and storage infrastructure. An enlarged Lake Rowlands was the key to the Centroc recommended region-wide town water security strategy. Coupled with the augmentation of Lake Rowlands was a series of pipeline connections to distribute water to Centroc centres. A pipeline connecting the CTW system to the Orange water system via Millthorpe was one of these recommended connections. In late 2011, revised secure yield modelling for Lake Rowlands indicated there were some concerns about its capacity to meet all necessary regional needs. Faced with this outcome, OCC investigated other alternatives and identified the Macquarie River to Orange pipeline as the preferred option, ensuring that any spare capacity in Lake Rowlands would be available for other Councils, especially those in the Lachlan catchment with no other viable large scale alternatives. In June 2013, OCC obtained project approval for the construction and operation of the Macquarie River to Orange pipeline project. Construction is now complete and the pipeline is expected to commence operation in early 2016. This connection substantially increases the OCC system secure yield and coupled with other water security projects will provide water security for Orange for the next 50 years based on medium growth projections and allowing for climate change. However, the secure yield of the CTW system remains at risk. The modelled shortfall in 2060 is approximately 1,120 ML/year when climate change is considered. OCC and CTW identified that there was an opportunity to connect their two supply systems to share the additional secure yield provided by the Macquarie River to Orange pipeline; thereby improving water security across the local region. The Project is called the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project.
1.2
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Project would connect the OCC and CTW potable water supply systems. The pipeline and associated pumps would allow the bi-directional transfer of potable water between the two water utilities and provide potable water supplies to the various demand centres along its route. The Project has two operational components: regional water security and contingency. Water security would be achieved by sharing water resources between various existing licenced sources. Water could be moved from OCC to CTW, or vice versa, depending on needs and water availability. Water supply contingency would be provided through linkage of the major water filtration plants in the region providing contingency in the event of plant failure or water contamination within either supply system.
PAGE 1 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
The Project would make use of the spare treatment capacity currently available in the Blayney Water Filtration Plant (WFP) and Carcoar WFP. In the event that it is required up to 9 ML/day could be transferred to the Orange water system. Likewise, in the event of treatment plant failures or water contamination at either at Blayney or Carcoar, 9 ML/day could be transferred from Orange to the CTW system. Sizing of the distribution system is based on the following philosophy:
Pumping systems are sized to meet the average CTW secure yield shortfall which requires an average of up to 3.0 ML/day to meet future demand.
Pipes are sized for contingency to enable the transfer of up to 9 ML/day to cater for catastrophic failure of treatment plants.
Pumps for contingency operation would not be provided. Rather, each pump station would be equipped with connection points (appropriate flanges, tees and valves) and pads to allow the connection of temporary pump sets in the event that contingency water is required. These pumps could either be electric or diesel powered.
1.3
PURPOSE OF REPORT
This Review of Environmental Factors has been prepared to assist OCC, CTW and other approval bodies determine whether the construction and operation of the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline is likely to cause a significant adverse environmental impact.
1.4
STRUCTURE OF REPORT
The Review of Environmental Factors is structured as follows:
Section 2 provides the project justification and identifies the key projects drivers and consideration of options.
Section 3 describers the scheme infrastructure, its mode of operation, its sources of water, and how the project is to be delivered.
Section 4 clarifies the statutory planning frameworks and relevant approval authorities
Section 5 details the consultation undertaken as part of the projects development and in preparing this assessment report.
Section 6 identifies and assesses potential impacts associated with the projects construction and operation.
Section 7 summarises environmental safeguards and mitigation measures that form part of the projects design, construction and operation.
Section 8 provides a conclusion with regards to the likelihood of significant adverse environmental impact.
1.5
DRAWING SCHEDULE
The Drawing Schedule included in this Review of Environmental Factors identifies the conceptual design of scheme infrastructure and incorporates mapping of environmentally sensitive areas.
PAGE 2 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Project Justification 2.1
PROJECT DRIVERS
2.1.1
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
The Project aligns with several regional and local strategies and plans which are summarised in the following sections.
2.1.1.1 Centroc Regional Integrated Water Cycle Management Plan The Central NSW Regional Organisation of Councils (Centroc) Regional Integrated Water Cycle Management Plan (IWCM) is a supporting management plan to the implementation of other key plans for the region including the:
Centroc Water Security Study;
Centroc Regional Demand Management Plan; and
Centroc Regional Drought Management Plan.
In consultation with the Project Steering Committee for Centroc, one of the eight objectives identified for regional integrated water cycle management was: “To demonstrate water supply security”
The Project is consistent with this objective.
2.1.1.2 Centroc Water Security Study Centroc undertook a Water Security Study to investigate and recommend solutions to improve water security across 17 LGA’s (MWH, 2009). The study included an audit of existing bulk water supply infrastructure (Component 1) and an assessment of options to improve water supply security (Component 2). Water demand forecasts were developed for each town for the next 50 years (until 2059). The forecasts took into account projected population growth, surface water and groundwater resources, climate sequence and climate change. The study identified that 29 towns were at risk, and required substantial water security improvements. OCC was identified as being at risk however CTW was considered to be secure due to the expected yield from Lake Rowlands. The subsequent revised secure yield calculation for Lake Rowlands demonstrates that the CTW system is at risk. The Centroc study recommendation was an integrated program of water conservation and demand management measures, coupled with new and upgraded water supply and storage infrastructure was required. The recommended region-wide town water security strategy is described as 2a: Lake Rowlands Regional Network + Local Options + Cadia Hill (MWH, 2009, p45). This strategy recommended the following infrastructure:
Lake Rowlands augmentation to a capacity of 26,500 ML;
Lake Rowlands to Millthorpe pipeline (CTW Trunk Mains D and F duplication);
CTW to Orange pipeline via Millthorpe;
Lake Rowlands to Gooloogong pipeline (CTW Trunk Mains P and C duplication);
Gooloogong to Forbes pipeline (including connection to Parkes);
Woodstock to Cowra pipeline (completed);
PAGE 3 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Orange to Molong Creek Dam pipeline (lower priority action resulting from the level of surety around the security of Molong. There is an existing pipeline from Molong Creek Dam into which this new pipeline would connect);
New minor storage and water treatment facilities at Cumnock;
New minor storage and water treatment facilities at Yeoval;
New minor storage at Condobolin (off-stream from Lachlan river);
New pipeline replacing the existing channel and minor storage at Lake Cargelligo;
Burrendong to Wellington pipeline;
Chifley to Bathurst pipeline;
Chifley to Oberon pipeline; and
Belubula Creek to Cadia Hill pipeline (already available).
The above infrastructure would be combined with continued best practice management across the region. The two infrastructure elements highlighted above are part of the proposed Project. One of the components of the recommended Region-Wide strategy is for OCC, in partnership with CTW, to: “Commence approvals, consultation, planning, design and operating regimes of the Lake Rowlands to Orange Pipeline via Millthorpe”
The Project is consistent with the objective of this recommendation (i.e. connection of the two systems to improve security).
2.1.1.3 Centroc Regional Demand Management Plan This plan seeks to define the opportunities for regional collaboration to facilitate each member Council’s efficient use of water resources. The objectives of this plan are:
To develop a consistent regional approach, balanced against local priorities, towards cost effective water demand management, ensuring the efficient use of regional water resources;
Demonstrate that each Council has a Best-Practice demand management plan to meet NSW Best-Practice requirements; and
Demonstration of leadership and self-management in regional water management approaches.
2.1.1.4 Centroc Regional Drought Management Plan The Regional Drought Management Plan has the following objectives:
To provide a voluntary consistent approach to managing water supply during drought periods;
To enable implementation of consistent water restrictions definitions across Centroc which can be applied locally using individual Council’s triggers; and
To specify a regional drought management framework.
OCC and CTW have adopted the Bathurst-Orange-Dubbo water restrictions definitions.
2.1.1.5 Orange City Council IWCM Evaluation Study The Orange City Council IWCM Evaluation Study (Geolyse, 2013) examined the Business as Usual (BAU) scenario that was built on the OCC 2009 Strategic Water Supply Strategy. The strategic objective of the strategy is:
PAGE 4 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
To establish a broad based water supply strategy for the next 50 years and beyond which focuses on ongoing water conservation, quality and demand management and the provision of key water supply infrastructure at least 10 years in advance of projected demand.
The ultimate aim of the strategy is to see fewer restrictions, improved security, and capacity for ongoing growth based on the following:
A holistic/integrated approach which meets national water initiative requirements – essentially a balanced portfolio of realistic demand and supply options;
Achievable and very significant levels of demand management;
Achievable and very significant levels of user education;
Achievable and very significant levels of water system efficiency;
Proper inclusion of climate change and climate correction;
Proper analysis of yield, reliability and security compared to population and growth;
After consideration of the above, the identification of the need for further sources to meet growth and improve yield, reliability and security; and
Identification of local and regional sources to take the city forward several decades with an appropriate cushion/contingency.
The strategy outlined a number of actions aimed at meeting its strategic objective. These actions addressed the following elements:
Water conservation and quality and demand management;
Provision of infrastructure – priority local options, priority regional options and alternative options;
Management, promotion and lobbying; and
Funding.
One of the actions under the provision of regional infrastructure was to pursue State and Federal Government funding for regional pipelines including a CTW connection. A key element of the strategy is that it is based on delivering water supply infrastructure for up to 10 years prior to the projected demand. This responsible strategic approach to water supply planning avoids short term and often costly decisions made under emergency conditions: it is proactive rather than reactive. OCC’s IWCM is supported by other best practice management documents including:
Strategic Business Plan;
Pricing policy (including Developer Charges, Liquid Trade Waste policy and Approvals);
Demand Management Plan which links to the Centroc Demand Management Plan; and
Drought Management Plan which links to the Centroc Drought Management Plan.
The provision of a secure water supply system with infrastructure provided ten years in advance of demand and the investigation of innovative solutions are consistent with OCC’s business as usual scenario as defined in the IWCM Evaluation Study.
2.1.1.6 Central Tablelands Water IWCM Evaluation Study The operations of CTW were included in a joint Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) Evaluation Study in 2009 (HydroScience Consulting, 2009a). The CTW section of this IWCM identified that water security is an issue requiring further investigation. CTW was actively considering expanding Lake Rowlands, its major surface water storage, to improve water security. However, subsequent studies indicated there were some concerns about its capacity to meet all necessary regional needs. PAGE 5 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
CTW has also developed a $40 million capital works program to replace aging trunk mains. The Project aligns with the strategic direction outlined in the IWCM. The additional water security provided by connecting the OCC and CTW water systems removes the need to expand Lake Rowlands, ensuring that any spare capacity in Lake Rowlands would be available for other Councils and improves system redundancy. The CTW mains used in the Project are identified for replacement or upgrade. CTW’s IWCM is supported by other best practice management documents including:
Strategic Business Plan;
Pricing policy (including Developer Charges, Liquid Trade Waste policy and Approvals);
Demand Management Plan which links to the Centroc Demand Management Plan; and
Drought Management Plan which links to the Centroc Drought Management Plan.
2.1.1.7 NSW 2021 Goal 21 of NSW 2021 is to secure potable water supplies with the following target (NSW Government, 2011): Secure long term potable water supplies for towns and cities supported by effective effluent management
The Project directly addresses this goal by providing a secure water supply for the water utility areas operated by OCC and CTW.
2.1.2
WATER SECURITY CRITERIA
The water security criteria adopted for the Project is based on the 5:10:10 design rule (Office of Water Assuring Future Urban Water Security – Draft December 2013). This rule: “requires storages to be sized so as to ensure that full unrestricted demands can be supplied in wet, average and shorter dry periods but that moderate duration, frequency and severity of water restrictions will be required in extended drought periods. Under this design rule, the total time spent in drought restrictions should be no more than 5% of the time, restrictions should not need to be applied in more than 10% of years and when they are applied the water supply system should be able to provide 90% of the unrestricted dry year water demand (i.e. 10% reduction in demand) through a repetition of the worst recorded drought commencing at the time restrictions are introduced. Secure yield is defined as the highest annual water demand that can be supplied from a water supply headworks system whilst meeting the 5:10:10 design rule. The secure yield can be increased by providing larger storages, more water sources, increased transfer capacities or a combination of all three. Water security is achieved if the secure yield of a water supply is at least equal to the unrestricted dry year annual demand”
The Department of Primary Industries – Water (DPIW) Guidelines (referred to above) identify which utilities need to assess their secure yield in accordance with the Guidelines (i.e. the 5:10:10 design rule). CTW and OCC have been identified, although OCC has now completed 5:10:10 analysis for existing and future infrastructure (i.e. stormwater harvesting schemes, additional bores, Macquarie River pipeline) along with water efficiency strategies.
PAGE 6 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
2.1.3
EXISTING WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS AND FORECASTS
2.1.3.1 Overview OCC System The existing OCC raw water supply system consists of the following elements (Figure 1):
Surface water catchments and the main reservoirs formed by Gosling Creek, Spring Creek and Suma Park Dams;
The Blackmans Swamp Creek stormwater harvesting scheme – currently approved to operate whenever the level in Suma Park reservoir is below 100%;
The Ploughmans Creek stormwater harvesting scheme – currently approved to operate whenever the level in Suma Park reservoir is below 100%;
The Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline – currently approved to transfer 12 ML/day whenever the level in Suma Park reservoir is below 90% and the flow in the Macquarie River at the offtake point is greater than 108 ML/day (the 12/108/90 operating rule); and
Groundwater bores at the Showground, Council works depot and Clifton Grove.
Figure 1:
OCC Water Supply System
The OCC water supply system supplies a population of 40,100 through 16,930 connections and the current unrestricted annual demand is 5,170 ML/year. All potable water is supplied from a 38 ML/day water filtration plant which draws its raw water supply from Suma Park Dam.
CTW System The existing CTW raw water supply system consists of the following elements (Figure 2):
Surface water catchments and the main reservoir formed by Lake Rowlands; and
PAGE 7 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Bore fields licensed to extract 1,488 ML/ year, including: –
Gooloogong
400 ML/year
–
Bangaroo
472 ML/year
–
Cudal
100 ML/year
–
Blayney well and blue hole
250 ML/year
–
Quandialla
266 ML/year
The following comments apply to the bore fields:
The Gooloogong bore is located in an alluvial aquifer system and provides good quality water which is currently chlorinated and pumped into the CTW reticulation system.
The Bangaroo bore is currently not in use and has not been used for 20 years. It is equipped, but would require a pump station and connection refurbishment to be able to supply water to the CTW system. Historically, there have been some water quality issues with this bore with elevated manganese concentrations.
The Cudal bore is equipped and provides chlorinated groundwater to the Cudal reservoir. This bore was installed in around 2004.
The Blayney well is a shallow well located adjacent to the Belubula River; the blue hole is a water hole in the river. These sources are licensed for a combined extraction of 250 ML/year. These sources are not currently connected to the CTW system and exhibit variable water quality. The CTW IWCM recommends that these supplies are connected to the Blayney WFP due to the water quality issues.
The Quandialla bore field provides a chlorinated supply to Quandialla only and this system is not connected to the main CTW supply network. This bore field is licensed to extract up to 266 ML/year and the current annual demand is around 40 ML/year. The spare extraction capacity of this bore field cannot be added to the CTW system. Therefore, this system is not included in the water security assessment.
Based on the above, the CTW system (excluding Quandialla) currently receives an input of 500 ML/year from the Gooloogong and Cudal bores, and could potentially receive a further 722 ML/year.
PAGE 8 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 2:
CTW Water Supply System
CTW provides water services to 5,700 connections in Blayney, Weddin and parts of Cabonne and Cowra local government areas; a population of just over 12,000. Potable water is supplied from two water filtration plants: a 6 ML/day water filtration plant located at Blayney and a 9 ML/day water filtration plant located near Carcoar. A summary of the OCC and CTW water supply systems is provided in Table 2.1. Table 2.1 – OCC and CTW Water Supply Systems Measure
Orange City Council
Central Tablelands Water
Population served with water
40,100
12,200
No of assessments
16,930
5,710
Average annual residential water supplied (2012/13), kL/property
178
201
Existing TRB 2013-14, $/property
$529
$633
2014 unrestricted annual demand, ML/year
5,170
1,890
2060 unrestricted annual demand, ML/year
6,950
2,500
2.1.3.2 Potable Water Demand and Security of Supply The IWCM Evaluation Studies prepared by OCC and CTW include forecast water demands. For OCC, the forecast demand was extended to 2060. For CTW, the forecast demand extended to 2037. For the purpose of this REF, the CTW water demand has been extended to 2060 based on an average population growth of 0.7% pa and scenario 2 demand management as defined in the CTW IWCM Evaluation Study. The forecast CTW demand does not include Quandialla. The OCC water forecasts are based on the medium growth rate (0.8% pa) and BAU demand management. PAGE 9 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Current and forecast unrestricted water demand for OCC and CTW are provided in Table 2.2.
OCC System Secure Yield The secure yield of the OCC system is 7,900 ML/year (based on the 5:10:10 rule) made up of:
Surface water catchments (Gosling, Spring Creek and Suma Park Dam) = 3,400 ML/year
Harvesting schemes (Blackmans Swamp Creek and Ploughmans Creek) = 1,100 ML/year
Bores (Licensed for 462 ML/year) = 450 ML/year
Macquarie River (12/108/90 rule) = 2,800 ML/year
Raising Suma Park Dam = 150 ML/year
Modelling indicates that the secure yield could reduce to 6,850 ML/year with climate change.
CTW System Secure Yield The secure yield of the CTW system is 2,400 ML/year (based on the 5:10:10 rule) made up of:
Surface water catchments (Lake Rowlands) = 1,900 ML/year
Bores (Gooloogong and Cudal) = 500 ML/year
Modelling indicates that the secure yield of Lake Rowlands could reduce to 1,410 ML/year with climate change. This would reduce the system secure yield to 1,910 ML/year assuming that the yield from the existing connected bores will not change under a climate change scenario. The CTW secure yield could potentially be increased by 722 ML/year if the Bangaroo and Blayney bores are added to the system and the yield is available in dry periods. It is noted that both these additional supplies have experienced water quality issues. The CTW IWCM notes that (HydroScience Consulting, 2009b, p32) “Whilst the DWE groundwater licence allows for the extraction of 400 ML/a from Gooloogong, CTW has no control over the quality of the bore water, the unknown and varying water table may not sustain bore pump maximum output for lengthy continuous operation and sustained supply of bore water to consumers may result in a high number of complaints of poor aesthetic quality. Failure of the groundwater supply would place further strain on the secure yield of Lake Rowlands.”
Therefore the CTW secure yield presented above which includes yield from the bores may be less. Supplementing the supply from the OCC system would provide system redundancy in the event of failure of the CTW bore supply. CTW also has a commitment to supply Cowra Shire Council with 50% of the transferable volume from Lake Rowlands via Carcoar Filtration Plant in the case of an emergency, subject to ratification by both entities. This would impact on annual demand in a dry year.
Security of Supply Summary A summary of the existing and forecast water security for the two utilities is presented in Table 2.2. The supply target is based on providing infrastructure 10 years in front of demand. Table 2.2 – OCC and CTW Projected Water Demand Measure
Orange City Council
Central Tablelands Water
2014 unrestricted dry year annual demand, ML/year
5,170
1,890
Existing secure yield (5:10:10), ML/year
7,900
2,400
Existing water security, ML/year
+2,730
+510
2060 supply target without climate change, ML/year
7,360
2,700
PAGE 10 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 2.2 – OCC and CTW Projected Water Demand Measure
Orange City Council
Central Tablelands Water
2060 water security – no climate change
+540
-300
Estimated secure yield with climate change, ML/year
6,850
1,910
2060 supply target with climate change, ML/year
7,910
2,890
2060 water security – with climate change
-1,060
-980
2.1.3.3 Combined Security The data in Table 2.2 demonstrates:
Without climate change, the OCC system is secure through to 2060 and has capacity to cover the forecast shortfall in the CTW system;
The CTW system is at risk in 2060 with or without climate change; and
There is a shortfall in 2060 in both systems with climate change.
This analysis includes the 500 ML/year supply from the existing bores in the CTW system but excludes the possible use of the additional bores in the CTW system. There is some risk of the bores not providing expected yields during dry periods and water quality issues may limit the use of this source of water. Without a reliable supply from the bores the combined system is at risk in 2060 under climate change. However, the connection of the two systems would allow other potential water sources to be added to the system to boost supplies. The combined water security situation under the Project is illustrated in Figure 3 and Figure 4.
PAGE 11 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
CTW Secure Yield
OCC Secure Yield
Potential combined secure yield with additional CTW bores
Combined OCC + CTW Water Demand
Combined Secure Yield Target 12000
10000
ML/year
8000
6000
4000
2000
0 2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2055
2060
Year
Figure 3:
Regional Water Security without Climate Change CTW Secure Yield
OCC Secure Yield
MAR (or other scheme)
Potential combined secure yield with additional CTW bores
Combined OCC + CTW Water Demand
Combined Secure Yield Target
12000
10000
ML/year
8000
6000
4000
2000
0 2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
2055
2060
Year
Figure 4:
Regional Water Security with Climate Change
PAGE 12 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Without climate change (refer to Figure 3) the combined system has sufficient capacity to meet forecast water demand to around 2060. Figure 4 demonstrates that with the Project there is sufficient combined secure yield to meet forecast demand across the region until around 2050 under climate change assumptions and assuming the CTW bores can be utilised. At this time the secure yield could be boosted using a Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) scheme, or another regional option, which would meet forecast demand to beyond 2060. Connection of the two water systems diversifies supplies which improves security as water shortfalls may not necessarily occur in both areas at the same time. Therefore the combined secure yield of the two systems is expected to be better than estimated by adding the secure yields of the two separate systems.
2.1.4
OPPORTUNITIES
Collaboration between neighbouring water utilities has identified the following opportunities:
The recent commissioning of the Macquarie River to Orange pipeline has provided an opportunity; there is now spare secure yield in the OCC system and as this source is located high in the catchment there is the opportunity to distribute this to other water utilities.
The distribution of secure yield provides the first opportunity to provide a strategic water supply linkage between the Macquarie and Lachlan catchments.
The strategic linkage provides the backbone for other possible regional connections.
The pipeline routes pass through areas identified for future development opportunities including the Orange airport precinct and other potential rural residential developments.
The pipeline provides reliable potable water supplies to OCC villages Spring Hill and Lucknow which reduces reliance on groundwater sources.
The pipeline route allows changes to the existing OCC water reticulation system that would rectify level of service (pressure) issues in the south-east part of the city.
Improved transfer capacity and changes to the pipe network from the Carcoar WFP through Carcoar to Blayney provides the opportunity to take the Blayney WFP off-line and only use this plant on an as needs basis. This will reduce long term operating costs.
The proposed pipeline route passes through an area flagged as a potential area for Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR). This provides the opportunity to investigate MAR as a means to improve water security in the future.
The connection can provide system redundancy allowing the distribution of treated water from various water filtration plants around the system in the event of plant failure or water contamination.
2.2
OPTIONS CONSIDERED
2.2.1
WATER SECURITY OPTIONS
During the detailed consideration of the Macquarie River to Orange pipeline project OCC undertook a detailed review of numerous water security options. This review identified that the preferred option was the pipeline project. In terms of regional water security, the Centroc study (MWH, 2009) reviewed a range of options and recommended a range of infrastructure and management actions for the region. For the local region, the recommendation was for a pipeline from CTW to Orange.
PAGE 13 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Further options identified for the local region water security are/were:
Enlarged Lake Rowlands;
The proposed Belubula River Dam;
Using water from Carcoar Dam;
Demand management; and
Managed Aquifer Recharge.
A brief overview of considerations for each of these options is provided below.
2.2.1.1 Enlarged Lake Rowlands This proposal would see Lake Rowlands enlarged in capacity from 4,500 ML to 26,310 ML. The modelled climate change secure yield for the enlarged dam is 2,640 ML/year, which is 1,230 ML/year above the secure yield provided by the existing storage. The cost of raising the dam is estimated to be $150 million, which represents a significant capital investment for a modest increase in secure yield. With a 50% government grant, this project would increase the Typical Residential Bill (TRB) for CTW customers by $1,147 per property. An enlarged Lake Rowlands was the key infrastructure element identified in the Centroc Water Security Study (MWH, 2009). It is however a large cost item that provides a relatively modest increase in secure yield for the regional area. It is also likely to take a long time to secure the necessary regulatory approvals and complete the construction. The Project would remove the need to upgrade Lake Rowlands with the additional secure yield required being delivered by the OCC system. It would therefore offset these costs and provide time to find alternative solutions for longer term regional water security.
2.2.1.2 Proposed Belubula River Dam The proposed Belubula River Dam has recently been suggested as an option for water security in the region. It is considered that this proposal is still somewhat uncertain due to the need to undertake detailed feasibility studies, and if feasible, detailed assessment, approval and design before construction could commence. In addition, it is likely that the main purpose of this dam would be improved irrigation security. As it is not a short term project it was not considered further. However it should be noted that infrastructure installed as part of the Project could provide one part of a distribution network if the Belubula River project went ahead.
2.2.1.3 Carcoar Dam Carcoar Dam is a NSW Water (State Water) owned and operated water storage for the provision of stock and irrigation water. Accessing town water supplies from this source is not likely in the short term. However, if water was to be made available at some time in the future, the Project would be well placed to distribute this water to the CTW and OCC water supply systems, with possible future connections to other regional areas. A possible option would be to use Carcoar Dam to store water harvested from Lake Rowlands.
2.2.1.4 Demand Management Forecast water demands were based on continuing to implement the demand management measures outlined in water utilities Demand Management Plans. The per capita water consumption is expected to decrease over time. PAGE 14 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Only marginal gains can be achieved by further demand management and the existing secure yield shortfall is too great for demand management actions alone.
2.2.1.5 Managed Aquifer Recharge MAR is a feasible concept and could boost the secure yield of the system by approximately 1,600 ML/year. However, it needs further assessment of operational considerations such as the injection and recovery rate, water quality requirements, aquifer storage volume and impacts on other users. The proposed pipeline route passes through an area identified as a potential MAR site which would allow a trial of this supply source. The trial could examine these issues and define how a MAR could sustainably operate. This is required before a fully operational MAR scheme can be considered.
2.2.2
PIPELINE ALIGNMENT AND SIZE
The pipeline alignment has been examined, refined and optimised through the development of the Project. Various pipeline alignments have been considered and adjusted to meet the project objectives. A key driver in this process was to minimise impact on private land and biodiversity. Detailed field investigations have allowed micro-siting of the pipeline route to avoid sensitive areas. It is considered that the pipeline alignment has been optimised. The proposed 300 mm diameter pipeline provides adequate capacity for water security transfers and can transfer up to 9 ML/day (either way) for contingency operations.
2.3
BENEFITS OF PROJECT
The CTW system is not secure into the future and requires additional sources of water. A bi-directional connection between the OCC and CTW potable water systems would ensure that:
The combined system has a secure water supply system that satisfies the 5:10:10 rule for the forecast demands of Orange and the CTW network for at least 50 years;
There is improved water security for Orange, Spring Hill, Lucknow, Millthorpe, Blayney and Carcoar and the other centres serviced with water from the Carcoar water filtration plant including Canowindra, Gooloogong, Eugowra, Grenfell, Cargo, Cudal and Manildra and potentially Cowra;
Connection of the two water systems diversifies supplies which improves security as water shortfalls may not necessarily occur in both areas at the same time;
The connection provides the flexibility to move water in either direction to supply future large water users which may come into the catchment providing regional economic benefits;
One of the key recommendations from the Centroc water security study is implemented, providing a link between CTW and the Orange water supply systems;
It would avoid the need to upgrade Lake Rowlands and provide time to find alternative solutions for longer term regional water security;
There is system contingency for the OCC and CTW water supplies through a bi-directional pipeline connection and inter-connection of major water filtration plants;
The Blayney WFP could be taken off-line and used on an as needs basis as potable supply can be delivered by the Carcoar WFP;
A strategic pipeline connection is in place between the Macquarie River and Lachlan River catchments that would form the backbone of a regional pipeline network;
Various local level of service issues can be rectified and opportunities for future water supply expansion explored; and
There is regional infrastructure in place that would support regional growth.
PAGE 15 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
The Project provides a key strategic link between catchments and, coupled with a separate project being submitted by Cabonne Council, would result in a regional potable and raw water distribution network which would provide water security for at least the next 50 years to 20 regional centres supporting a population of approximately 63,500. The combined projects would also provide a key regional water distribution network that could capitalise on possible future water supply projects such as the proposed Belubula River Dam or changes to the operation of Carcoar Dam. The immediate footprint of this network would extend from Yeoval in the north to Grenfell in the south. There is also potential to supply water to Cowra in the case of an emergency. The key water distribution infrastructure installed under these projects could be expanded in the future to supplement supplies to other regional water supply utilities including Forbes, Parkes and Condobolin, and the associated regional centres that rely on water from these authorities. This would expand the reach of the water distribution network to a regional population of over 107,000 (refer – Figure 5). The State Government funding for the Project and contributions from OCC and CTW only allows for the construction of the pipeline and associated infrastructure from Orange through to Blayney. The benefits of the proposal outlined above can only be fully realised when the pipeline is extended through to the Carcoar WFP and the two water supply systems are linked.
Figure 5:
Regional Water Security
PAGE 16 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Pipeline Project 3.1
INTRODUCTION
This section of the REF identifies the key elements of the Project and discusses how it would be constructed and operated.
3.2
INFRASTRUCTURE
The Project proposes the construction of a large diameter water main from Orange to Blayney and Carcoar in seven (7) Stages. Funding is available for construction of Stages 1 to 4 (Blayney to Orange) with the remaining stages (Blayney to Carcoar WFP) subject to timing of additional government funding. The Project layout and staging is shown on Figure 6 and elements of each stage outlined in Table 3.1. The scheme elements have been sized based on consideration of two operating regimes; regional water security and contingency.
Regional water security – flows required to meet forecast demands at the various demand centres along the pipeline. Under current demand, transfer from OCC to CTW would not be very frequent and restricted to dry periods. As demand increases the volume of water transferred will increase. The average CTW secure yield shortfall requires an average transfer of 3.0 ML/day to Blayney to meet future demand. Pump flow rates are based on 18 to 24 hours of pumping each day.
Contingency – to enable the transfer of up to 9 ML/day either direction to cater for catastrophic failure of treatment plants or water supplies. Pump flow rates are based on 22 hours of pumping each day.
The preliminary concept design flow rates for each operating regime are included in Table 3.1. The description of water movement under “OCC to CTW operations” or “CTW to OCC operations” indicates the direction of water movement. The transfer of water between the OCC and CTW systems occurs along the section of pipeline from Spring Hill to Millthorpe. Either side of this section various demand centres are supplied by either OCC or CTW.
PAGE 17 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 6:
Project Layout and Staging
PAGE 18 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 3.1 – Summary of Key Project Elements Stage 1
2
3
Components
Regional Water Security Design Flow
Contingency Design Flow
Blayney to Millthorpe
OCC to CTW operation
OCC to CTW operation
Pump station New 15 – 20 L/s pump station located in block building with roof, at Blayney Plumb Street reservoir to transfer water to Millthorpe. Provision for 93 L/s drop-in contingency pump at Plumb Street in pump building Pipeline 11.6 km of new 300 mm diameter DICL pipe to replace existing pipe Connection to Plumb Street reservoir Connection to Millthorpe reservoir Other Decommission Browns Creek reservoir and pump station Connection for supply to customers on exiting line
Current:
nil
All:
Future:
2.17 ML/day (34 L/s)
CTW to OCC operation
Millthorpe to Spring Hill
OCC to CTW operation
OCC to CTW operation
Pump station No permanent pump station required at Millthorpe Pipeline 8.6 km of new 300 mm diameter DICL pipe Connection to Spring Hill reservoir
Current:
nil
All:
Future:
3.0 ML/day (46 L/s)
CTW to OCC operation
All: CTW to OCC operation Current:
0.83 ML/day (13 L/s)
Future:
Nil
All: CTW to OCC operation Current:
Nil
Future:
Nil
8.3 ML/day (105 L/s)
9.7 ML/day (123 L/s)
9.0 ML/day (114 L/s)
9.0 ML/day (114 L/s)
Spring Hill to Spring Creek Filter
OCC to CTW operation
OCC to CTW operation
Pump station No permanent pump station required at Spring Hill New 66 L/s pump station located in block building with roof at Spring Creek water filtration plant. New 30 L/s pump to boost local reticulation network located in block building with roof at Spring Creek water filtration plant Provision for 64 L/s drop-in contingency pump at Spring Creek filter in pump building
Current:
1.55 ML/day (24 L/s)
All:
Future:
4.55 ML/day (70 L/s)
CTW to OCC operation All:
CTW to OCC operation Current:
Nil
Future:
Nil
10.0 ML/day (126 L/s)
9.0 ML/day (114 L/s)
Pipeline 12.2 km of new 300 mm diameter DICL pipe Connection to new pump station at Spring Creek water filtration plant 530 m of 200 mm DICL to connect to existing reticulation 4
Spring Creek Filter to Icely Road Filter
OCC to CTW operation
OCC to CTW operation
Pump station No pump stations required at Icely Road WFP
Current:
3.35 ML/day (38 L/s)
All:
Pipeline 5.3 km of new 375 mm diameter DICL pipe Connection to Spring Creek reservoir tank Connection to Icely Road 9 ML reservoir tank
Future:
6.35 ML/day (74 L/s)
CTW to OCC operation All:
CTW to OCC operation Current:
Nil
Future:
Nil
11.0 ML/day (127 L/s)
9.0 ML/day (114 L/s)
PAGE 19 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 3.1 – Summary of Key Project Elements Stage 5
6
Components
Regional Water Security Design Flow
Blayney to Carcoar
OCC to CTW operation
OCC to CTW operation
Pump station Post Stage 1 - no additional pump station required at Plumb Street Reservoir Provision for 29 L/s drop-in contingency pump at Carcoar with possible booster locations along the pipeline route between Carcoar and Blayney Pipeline 14 km of new 300 mm diameter DICL pipe 2.85 km 100 mm DICL Backhouse Spur
Current:
Nil
All:
Future:
Nil
Carcoar to Carcoar Filter
OCC to CTW operation
OCC to CTW operation
Pump station Upgrade existing water reticulation pumps at Carcoar water filtration plant to 54 L/s located in existing building Provision for 29 L/s drop-in contingency pump at Carcoar water filtration plant Pipeline 6.6 km of new 300 mm diameter DICL pipe
Current:
Nil
All:
Future:
Nil
6.0 ML/day (76 L/s)
CTW to OCC operation CTW to OCC operation All: Current:
3.0 ML/day (46 L/s)
6.0 ML/day (76 L/s)
Blayney WFP offline
Future:
0.45 ML/day (7 L/s)
5.4 ML/day (68 L/s)
CTW to OCC operation CTW to OCC operation All: Current:
3.5 ML/day (54 L/s)
6.6 ML/day (83 L/s)
Blayney WFP offline
Future: 7
Contingency Design Flow
1.05 ML/day (14.5 L/s)
Lake Rowlands to Carcoar Filter
OCC to CTW operation
OCC to CTW operation
Pump station Provision of pump station and associated infrastructure, including up to 152 L/s drop-in contingency pump at Lake Rowlands Pipeline Replace 670 m of existing pipe with of new 375 mm diameter DICL pipe
Current:
Nil
All:
Future:
Nil
CTW to OCC operation
CTW to OCC operation Current:
All:
Nil
12.0 ML/day (152 L/s)
8.6 ML/day (100 L/s) Blayney WFP offline
Future:
6.45 ML/day (75 L/s)
During Stage 3, OCC may take the opportunity to lay a medium diameter polyethylene (PE) pipe in the trench (or in an adjacent trench) alongside the proposed water main. The dual pipeline would extend from the northern end of the airport precinct through to the point where the water pipeline turns into Spring Creek. This PE pipe may be used in the future as a rising main to transfer sewage from the Airport precinct to the Orange sewerage system. If dual trenched, the trench width may be about 300 mm wider through this section to accommodate the additional pipeline. Alternatively if the PE pipe is placed in an adjacent trench it may be separated by approximately one metre to minimise the impacts on the water main trench. In either case, the area of disturbance as assessed in this REF will remain unchanged. Laying the PE pipe during construction of the water main will avoid the need for construction activity in the future. The pipeline has been sized based on the consideration of likely and available maximum flows. Nine megalitres per day is the maximum spare capacity in CTW’s water filtration plants in the foreseeable future that is available to be transferred from CTW to Orange under contingency operation. The ability to transfer 9 ML/day from OCC to CTW will easily meet security demand and exceeds potential requirements due to the smaller demand centres.
PAGE 20 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
The pipe size will be verified in the Lachlan Macquarie Drought Study prior to the finalisation of tenders. However, there is unlikely to be any modification, nor would a change in pipe diameter alter the assessment presented in this REF.
3.3
INTEGRATION
Ultimately the Project would connect the OCC and CTW water systems and allow the two way movement of potable water. In times when CTW is short of water potable, supplies would be transferred from Orange. In the event of failure in the Orange system, potable water could be transferred from the CTW system to Orange. The proposed interconnection of the two water supply systems offers opportunities not only for growth, but also significant redundancy if there is a failure in any one part of the system. The ultimate water supply arrangement is shown in Figure 7.
PAGE 21 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 7:
Water Supply System (the Project shown in red)
PAGE 22 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
3.4
SCHEME OPERATION
3.4.1
OVERVIEW
The Project has two operational components; regional water security and contingency. Water security would be achieved by sharing water resources between various, existing licenced sources. Water could be moved from Orange City Council to Central Tablelands Water, or vice versa, depending on needs and water availability. Water supply contingency would be provided through linkage of the major water filtration plants in the region providing contingency in the event of plant failure or water contamination within either supply system. The Project would make use of the spare treatment capacity currently available in the Blayney WFP (3 ML/day) and Carcoar WFP (6 ML/day). In the event that it is required 9 ML/day could be transferred to the Orange water system. Likewise, in the event of treatment plant failures or water contamination at either at Blayney or Carcoar, 9 ML/day could be transferred from Orange to the CTW system. The Icely Road WFP has a capacity of 38 ML/day. The peak day demand is up to 30 ML/day and average water demand around 14 ML/day which indicates the plant has capacity to supply the CTW system. Sizing of the Project’s distribution system is based on the following philosophy:
Pumping systems are sized to meet the average secure yield shortfall in 2060 (movement of water from OCC to CTW) which is 450 ML/year with no climate change or 1,120 ML/year with climate change. This equates to 1.2 ML/day and 3 ML/day respectively. Therefore an average of 3 ML/day has been adopted. Pumping needs would be reviewed in the future and, if needed, pump stations upgraded to meet future water security demand.
Pipes are sized for contingency, to enable the transfer of up to 9 ML/day to cater for catastrophic failure of treatment plants or water supplies.
Pumps for contingency operation would not be provided. Rather, each pump station (and potentially booster points along the pipeline between Carcoar and Blayney) would be equipped with connection points (appropriate tees and valves) and pads to allow the connection of temporary pumps in the event that contingency water is required. Typical operating regimes are described below.
3.4.2
WATER SECURITY MODE
The most likely water security operation is movement of water from OCC to CTW as follows:
Potable water would flow by gravity from the Icely Road 20 ML reservoir to the Spring Creek reservoir.
Water from the Spring Creek reservoir would gravity feed to a new pump station located at the old Spring Creek WFP from where it would be boosted along the 300 mm DICL main south to Millthorpe reservoir.
Once at Millthorpe water would flow by gravity all the way to the Carcoar WFP.
Offtake points would be provided at Plumb Street (Blayney) and Carcoar.
CTW water transfers from Carcoar WFP via Carcoar to Blayney and from Blayney to Millthorpe would continue as part of normal water supply operations.
PAGE 23 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
3.4.3
CONTINGENCY MODE
3.4.3.1 OCC to CTW Contingency transfer from OCC to CTW would be required in the event of catastrophic failures in the CTW system and operate as follows:
Potable water would flow by gravity from the Icely Road 20 ML reservoir to the Spring Creek reservoir.
Water from the Spring Creek reservoir would gravity feed to a drop-in contingency pump station located at the Spring Creek WFP from where it would be boosted along the 300 mm DICL main, south to Millthorpe reservoir.
Once at Millthorpe, water would flow by gravity all the way to the Carcoar WFP.
Offtake points would be provided at Plumb Street (Blayney) and Carcoar.
3.4.3.2 CTW to OCC Contingency transfer from CTW to OCC would be required in the event of catastrophic failures in the OCC system and operate as follows:
A drop-in contingency pump would draw raw water from Lake Rowlands and pump it to the Carcoar WFP for treatment.
A drop-in contingency pump would be used to pump potable water from the Carcoar WFP to the Plumb Street reservoir at Blayney. Some drop-in booster points may be required along this pipeline section.
A drop-in contingency pump would draw potable water from the Plumb Street reservoir and transfer it along the 300 mm DICL main, north to Millthorpe.
Once at Millthorpe, water would flow by gravity through to the OCC system all the way to the Icely Road WFP.
Offtake points would be provided at Spring Hill, the Airport and Spring Creek reservoir.
3.4.3.3 Summary A summary of the pump stations associated with the Project is provided below.
Spring Creek Water Filtration Plant (WFP): permanent pump for water security; provision for dropin contingency pump; booster pump for local reticulation. All to be housed in new pump building.
Blayney Plumb Street reservoir: permanent pump for CTW water security and provision for dropin contingency pump. All to be housed in new pump building.
Carcoar reservoir: provision for drop-in contingency pump (or there may be booster locations along the pipeline from Carcoar to Blayney)
Carcoar WFP: upgrade existing pumps for water security; provision for drop-in contingency pump
Lake Rowlands: provision for drop-in contingency pump.
3.5
WATER SOURCES
3.5.1
OPERATION
The Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline project does not entail changing existing or securing any new Water Access Licences (WAL) and its use would not be inconsistent with either of the two relevant Water Sharing Plans; being the:
Water Sharing Plan for the Macquarie Bogan Unregulated and Alluvial Water Sources 2012; and
Water Sharing Plan for the Lachlan Unregulated and Alluvial Groundwater Sources, 2012. PAGE 24 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
With regards to the recently approved and constructed Macquarie River to Orange Pipeline Project (MOPP), the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline will not impact on OCC’s statutory requirement to comply with the Minister’s Conditions of Approval for the MOPP: in particular Condition B4 – Operating Rules and more specifically condition (b)(v) regarding not exceeding flow restrictions.
3.5.2
CONSTRUCTION
Charging, commissioning and testing sections of the constructed pipeline would be undertaken with potable water. Water required for construction would be sourced from existing, approved supply options from Orange City Council and Central Tablelands Water. Water would not be sourced from an unlicensed extraction point for use during construction (i.e. for dust suppression). The extraction point from any watercourse needs to be licensed.
3.6
PROJECT DELIVERY
The delivery of the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project will be undertaken over a number of years and through awarding Design and Construct contract(s). Detailed design of has yet to be completed and is contingent on first securing environmental approval to proceed with the project and then securing funding for the later stages of the project.
PAGE 25 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Statutory Planning 4.1
ACTIVITY DEFINITION
Pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 a:
water reticulation system means a facility for the transport of water, including pipes, tunnels, canals, bores, pumping stations, related electricity infrastructure, dosing facilities and water supply reservoirs;
water storage facility means a dam, weir or reservoir for the collection and storage of water, and includes associated monitoring or gauging equipment;
water supply system means a water reticulation system, water storage facility, water treatment facility, or any combination of these; and
water treatment facility means a facility for the treatment of water (such as a desalination plant or a recycled or reclaimed water plant) whether the water produced is potable or not, and includes residuals treatment, storage and disposal facilities, but does not include a water recycling facility.
The Orange to Lake Rowlands potable water supply pipeline as proposed constitutes a water supply system; specifically a water reticulation system. Development for the purpose of water reticulation systems may be carried out by or on behalf of a public authority without consent on any land. The pipeline will be carried out on behalf of Orange City Council (OCC) and Central Tablelands Water (CTW) (both public authorities) and therefore development consent is not required.
4.2
DETERMINATION
Notwithstanding that development consent is not required, both OCC and CTW have an obligation under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to consider the environmental impacts of this activity. Specifically, OCC and CTW have a statutory obligation to examine and take into account to the fullest extent possible all matters affecting or likely to affect the environment by reason of this activity.
4.3
DETERMINING AUTHORITY
A determining authority, as defined by s.110 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979: means a Minister or public authority and, in relation to any activity, means the Minister or public authority by or on whose behalf the activity is or is to be carried out or any Minister or public authority whose approval is required in order to enable the activity to be carried out.
OCC and CTW are the public authorities on whose behalf the activity is to be carried out. There are, however, other public authorities whose ‘approval’ is also required in order to enable the activity to be carried out. In this context, an ‘approval’ means a consent, licence, permit, permission or any form of authorisation. These other authorities and other approvals associated with the pipeline project are detailed below.
PAGE 26 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
4.4
APPROVAL AUTHORITIES
4.4.1
DPI - FISHERIES
Pursuant to definitions in the Fisheries Management Act 1994; water land means land submerged by water, whether permanently or intermittently; dredging work means any work that involves excavating water land; and reclamation work means any work that involves using any material to fill in or reclaim water land, or depositing any such material on water land for the purpose of constructing anything over water land. As the pipeline will pass through water land, construction of the pipeline will entail dredging and reclamation. OCC, as a local government authority, must not carry out dredging or reclamation work within key fish habitat except under the authority of a permit issued by the Minister pursuant to s.200 of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. CTW is a public authority and pursuant to s.199 of the Act does not require a permit, although there are Ministerial consultation and notification requirements. Specifically, the Minister for DPI Fisheries must be notified of any proposed dredging and reclamation works within key fish habitat. The pipeline will cross nineteen (19) watercourses assessed as potential key fish habitat. Seven of these will require securing a s.200 permit prior to works and twelve (12) require DPI-Fisheries s.199 notification. In addition to the above, permits may also be required to temporarily or permanently block fish passage under s.219 of the Act. Such works would include the temporary damming of waterways during construction.
4.4.2
DPI - WATER
4.4.2.1 Controlled Activity Approval A controlled activity approval confers a right on its holder to carry out a specified controlled activity at a specified location in, on or under waterfront land. A controlled activity includes: the erection of a building or the carrying out of a work (within the meaning of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979), or the removal of material (whether or not extractive material) or vegetation from land, whether by way of excavation or otherwise, or the deposition of material (whether or not extractive material) on land, whether by way of landfill operations or otherwise, or the carrying out of any other activity that affects the quantity or flow of water in a water source. Waterfront land includes the bed of any river, together with any land lying between the bed of the river and a line drawn parallel to, and the prescribed distance (being 40 metres) inland of, the highest bank of the river. In this context a river includes any watercourse, whether perennial or intermittent and whether comprising a natural channel or a natural channel artificially improved, and any tributary, branch or other watercourse into or from which a watercourse referred to above flows. Installation of the pipeline as proposed will constitute a controlled activity undertaken on waterfront land. Notwithstanding, Council as a public authority and under cl.38 of the Water Management (General) Regulation 2011 is exempt from s.91E(1) of the Water Management Act 2000 and no controlled activity approval is required.
4.4.2.2 Water Supply Work Approval Pursuant to s.90(2) of the Water Management Act 2000 a water supply work approval authorises its holder to construct and use a specified water supply work at a specified location. A water supply work includes a water pipe that is constructed or used for the purpose of conveying water to the point at which it is to be used. PAGE 27 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Consultation with DPI – Water has confirmed that for much of the pipeline, pursuant to cl.34(1)(b) Water Management (General) Regulation 2011, OCC and CTW are exempt from the need to secure a water supply work approval under s.91B(1) of the Water Management Act 2000. This exemption does not apply across the full pipeline length. Specifically the exemption is not applicable to a water supply work constructed on any of the following land:
Land that is a heritage conservation area within the meaning of an environmental planning instrument that applies to the land under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. This land exists throughout Spring Hill, Millthorpe and Carcoar.
Waterfront land (other than waterfront land relating to a minor stream: noting that a minor stream constitutes a 1st and 2nd order stream under the Strahler stream classification system). The pipeline will cross six (6) 3rd order streams and five (5) 4th order streams
The implication of the above is that a water supply works approval will be required for particular sections of the pipeline.
4.4.2.3 Water Use Approval Consultation with DPI – Water has confirmed that a water use approval under s.89(1) of the Water Management Act 2000, that confers a right on its holder to use water for a particular purpose at a particular location is not required. DPI Water do not issue a water use approval for any of the town water supply works applied for by Councils.
4.4.3
HERITAGE COUNCIL
A person must not disturb or excavate any land knowing or having reasonable cause to suspect that the disturbance or excavation will or is likely to result in a relic being discovered, exposed, moved, damaged or destroyed unless the disturbance or excavation is carried out in accordance with an excavation permit issued under s.140 of the Heritage Act 1977. A relic means any deposit, artefact, object or material evidence that relates to the settlement of the area that comprises New South Wales, not being Aboriginal settlement, and is of State or local heritage significance. This section does not apply to a relic that is subject to an interim heritage order made by the Minister or a listing on the State Heritage Register. Heritage investigations have determined that a s.140 permit is required for specific works within Carcoar (refer – Section 6.5).
4.4.4
ROADS AND MARITIME SERVICE
Pursuant to s.138 of the Roads Act 1993 a person must not erect a structure or carry out a work in, on or over a public road without the consent of the appropriate roads authority. Council has, as part of route investigations and design refinement, secured the consent from RMS for the underbore of the Mid-Western Highway (HW6) at the following locations.
approximately 215 m north east of Brady Road, Carcoar, angled at 90 degrees;
1,340 m north east of Brady Road, Carcoar, using an existing water pipeline as a casing pipe;
approximately 870 m south west of Carcoar Street, Blayney, angled at 90 degrees (+/- 10 degrees);
388 m south of Icely Road, Carcoar, below the Highway bridge and located a minimum of 3.0 m from the bridge supports; and
PAGE 28 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
20 m west of the corner of Bathurst Road and Lone Pine Avenue, Orange, angled at approximately 90 degrees across Bathurst Road.
A copy of this consent is provided in Appendix A.
4.4.5
BLAYNEY SHIRE COUNCIL
Pursuant to s.138 of the Roads Act 1993 a person must not erect a structure or carry out a work in, on or over a public road without the consent of the appropriate roads authority. The construction of the pipeline will entail such works under a number of roads for which Blayney Shire Council is the relevant road authority. Consent will be required from Blayney Shire Council for those works undertaken on roads within the Blayney Local Government Area.
4.4.6
ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY
Neither the construction nor operation of the Project requires an Environment Protection Licence (EPL) issued under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. The construction works are not scheduled development work, the operation of the pipeline is not a scheduled activity, and there is no requirement to regulate water pollution. Notwithstanding that the Project does not require an EPL, because it is an activity to be carried out by a local/public authority (ie. OCC and CTW), the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) is the Appropriate Regulatory Authority (ARA).
4.4.7
NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
As proposed the Project does not entail works on any land reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 and as such, no authorisation by or under this Act is required pursuant to cl.125(4) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007.
4.4.8
DPI – CROWN LANDS
Section 155 of the Crown Land Act specifies that it is an offence for any person, except with lawful authority, to (among other things) erect a structure on public land. Section 158 clarifies that a structure is on public land without lawful authority if it is: (a) a structure the erection of which was not, at the time of its erection, authorised by or under the provisions of this or any other Act (other than Part 11 or 12A of the Local Government Act 1919, Part 1 of Chapter 7 of the Local Government Act 1993 or the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979), not being a structure referred to in paragraph (b), or (b) a structure: (i) the erection or use of which was authorised by or under the provisions of this or any other Act (other than Part 11 or 12A of the Local Government Act 1919, Part 1 of Chapter 7 of the Local Government Act 1993 or the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979), (ii) that is or was required, by or under those provisions, to be removed at or within a specified time, and (iii) that has not been so removed.
It is understood that the Crown land affected (generally being Crown roads, creeks and streams and the like) are not subject to plans of management. By virtue of the above, lawful authority must be gained by OCC and CTW pursuant to the Crown Lands Act for the erection of a structure in Crown Land.
PAGE 29 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
A permanent easement would also need to be acquired over all private and Crown land affected by the pipeline. Initial consultation with Department of Primary Industries - Lands has been carried out and their response is detailed in Section 5 and a copy of this advice provided in Appendix A. Under Section 24 of the Local Government Act 1993 Councils have the power to ‘provide goods, services and facilities, and carry out activities, appropriate to the current and future needs within its local community and of the wider public’. Chapter 6 of the Local Government Act 1993 states that such service functions include ‘environmental conservation, protection and improvement services and facilities’. Easements would be acquired under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991. The likely conditions for the easement would include:
The landowner not being permitted to erect any building or permanent structure on the easement.
The landowner not being permitted to plant substantial or deep rooted trees on the easement.
Subject to the above, it is likely that the landowner would be able to continue to carry out the following activities on the easement:
4.5
–
normal passage over the easement
–
grazing of livestock
–
normal cultivation for crops and pasture.
NOMINATED DETERMINING AUTHORITY
Determining authorities for the pipeline include:
Orange City Council;
Central Tablelands Water;
Blayney Shire Council;
DPI - Fisheries
DPI – Water;
DPI – Crown Lands;
NSW Heritage Council; and
Roads and Maritime Service.
Section 110A(1) of the EPA Act states that where there is more than one determining authority the Minister may nominate a determining authority to be the nominated determining authority in relation to the activity. In May 1999 the Minister published an order in the Gazette pursuant to s.110A of the EPA Act nominating the determining authority that is the proponent, to be the nominated determining authority for the purposes of Part 5 of the EPA Act. For the pipeline project the proponents are OCC and CTW. CTW has provided advice to OCC that in the context of the above gazettal order, OCC can be considered the proponent (refer Appendix A). Accordingly, OCC is the nominated determining authority for the pipeline.
4.6
REF FUNCTION
This Review of Environmental Factors (REF) has been prepared to assist in the determination process through the provision of information that will help in the consideration of the relevant factors specified in:
s.111 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and
cl.228 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. PAGE 30 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
4.7
COMMONWEALTH REFERRAL
The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) requires that actions which are likely to have a significant impact on a matter of National Environmental Significance (NES) be subject to a rigorous assessment and referral to the Commonwealth. The CTRWSPP will not have a significant impact on any matter of NES. No referral to the Commonwealth is required.
PAGE 31 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Consultation 5.1
AGENCIES
Consultation was undertaken with the various state government agencies as part of the preparation of this REF. Appendix A provides copies of all responses received and Table 5.1 details what issues were raised and where in the REF this issue has been addressed. Table 5.1 – Agency Consultation Agency Blayney Council
Shire
Issue EEC elements that are of high conservation value on the Mid-western Highway, including the area adjacent to the Blayney Golf Club entrance with patches over Red Hill to the North of Lucks Lane; the parcel of land that Blayney Shire Council has managed from the late 1990s adjacent to the Millthorpe Cemetery; and an area that contains Bursaria spinose on land adjacent to the Carcoar reservoir.
REF Section 6.2
7.4.5
Advising Council of a potential new future development; specifically, a new road corridor that begins to the north west of Nestle from Orange Rd, crosses Browns Ck Rd, heads south then crosses the rail corridor and enters back onto MidWestern Hwy near Lucks Lane. DPI - Water
An impact assessment of construction and operation of the pipeline within 40 m of the banks of watercourse is required. This is recommended to be consistent with DPI Water “Guidelines for Controlled activities on Waterfront Land”. Particular attention should be given to the construction, maintenance and rehabilitation of temporary and permanent watercourse crossings. Identification of water volumes and water sources for the pipeline construction and testing is required. This includes confirmation that water supplies are sourced from an appropriately authorised and reliable supply and to identify if additional water licences are required. Potential impacts on groundwater should be considered. Commitment to prepare a construction environmental management plan to identify and manage impacts during construction. This is requested to be in accordance with the guideline, “Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction (Landcom 2004). Demonstrate how the operation of the pipeline is consistent with the relevant rules of the Water Sharing Plan including rules for access licences, distance restrictions for water supply works and rules for the management of local impacts in respect of surface water and groundwater sources, ecosystem protection (including groundwater dependent ecosystems), water quality and surface-groundwater connectivity.
6.7
3.5.2
6.13 7.4
3.5.1
PAGE 32 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 5.1 – Agency Consultation Agency DPI - Fisheries
Issue
DPI - Agriculture
DPI - Lands
REF Section
Waterway Crossings – The design and construction of pipeline crossings across all waterways within Key Fish Habitat should be undertaken in accordance with the Department’s Policy and Guidelines for Fish Habitat Conservation and Management (Update 2013).The waterway crossings need to ensure that the works are undertaken with minimal impact on the aquatic environment within the immediate vicinity of the proposed works. DPI Fisheries need to be consulted with regards to any temporary measures that will result in blocking fish passage. This includes coffer dams, temporary access tracks or redirecting lows whilst works are conducted. Bank Stabilisation and Rehabilitation – DPI Fisheries seek information on any destabilisation of any watercourse with heavy machinery or damage to the bed or banks. DPI Fisheries requests that any bed and bank rehabilitation works be completed immediately after the completion of works. Proposal to ensure replacement of aquatic and riparian vegetation with native/endemic species are encouraged. Loss of Riparian Vegetation – There is also the likelihood of a loss of riparian vegetation due to access routes and pipeline construction. The “degradation of native riparian vegetation” has been listed as a Key Threatening Process under the provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. DPI Fisheries have a ‘no net loss’ policy to ensure that fish stocks are conserved and the key fish habitats upon which fish depend on is conserved. Where riparian loss occurs there should be rehabilitation /replanting with the riparian zone. Sedimentation and Erosion Controls - DPI Fisheries requests information on any proposal to remove, realign or relocate snags (large woody debris) during works. Proposed works should be outlined with the REF. Snags should not be removed, realigned or relocated without first contacting DPI Fisheries. Note: that the removal of large woody debris is listed as a Key Threatening Process under the FM Act. Threatened species – The REF must address the threatened species provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 for species, populations or communities listed under schedules 4 and 5 whose historical geographical distribution extends to the area of works. The proposal should address whether there are likely to be any significant impacts on the listed threatened species.
6.3
Assessments of current resources and land uses that will help assess considerations that the proposal must take account of in relation to the landscape information (including topography), land and soil capability and/or agricultural land suitability, vegetation growth and adjacent agricultural land uses (where applicable). Management of soil resources pre and post pipeline construction. The removal and stockpiling of the surface soils in the process that will be immediately remediated the management of these topsoils, subsequent respreading and management of the area for final land use should be considered in the operational aspects of this proposal. Consultation with adjoining rural stakeholders particularly in relation to disturbances associated with livestock. Weed, pest animal, biosecurity and bush fire hazards would be best dealt with by an overall management place as part of pipeline installation operations.
6.6 6.8
6.2.
6.3
6.7
6.3
6.12
7.4 7.4
Easements required over the crown lands required for pipeline under the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms) Compensation Act. Simplest to transfer crown public roads to relevant Council under s 151 of the Roads Act 1993. Once transferred Crown Lands would no longer have any interest in the roads and any consents to works within the roads would be a matter for the relevant Roads Authority.
Roads and Maritime Service
Impact of traffic generated by construction works such as traffic volumes, interaction with background traffic, origin-destination and temporary and permanent accesses.
6.10
Must be an undertaking to prepare a traffic management plan which identifies how construction traffic will safely access and egress construction locations along the pipeline. Consideration of Safe Intersection Site Distance (SISD).
7.4
PAGE 33 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 5.1 – Agency Consultation Agency
Issue
Environment Protection Authority
Noise and Vibration – identify potential noise and vibration impacts during both the construction and operational stages and identify mitigation strategies to be incorporated for both stages to minimise noise and vibration emission; Air Quality and Odour – identify potential air quality and odour impacts (point source diesel emission from plant equipment and/or fugitive dust emissions) during both the constructions and operational stages and identify mitigation strategies to minimise point and/or fugitive and/or odour emissions; Land Management – identify if the soils in the area of the Proposal are contaminated or are acid forming (i.e. acid sulphate soils) and if so, identify any mitigation strategies or remedial and/or disposal actions that will be required/undertaken; Water Management – identify potential impacts to surface and groundwater during both the construction and operational stages )including waterway crossings) and identify appropriate pollution control systems/measures to protect surface and groundwater resources, particularly erosion and sediment controls during the construction stages and the rehabilitation stages and the inclusion of permanent erosion and sediment controls where required; Waste Management – identify options and strategies for waste minimisation; reuse and recycling across all activities during the construction stage and appropriate disposal options; General Flooding Impacts – any developments should be designed and undertaken in accordance with the State Government’s Flood Policy as outlined in the NSW Government Floodplain Development Manual 2005 (or any revision) Storage of Chemicals/Fuels – ensure adequate control and clean-up measures are in place for storages to reduce the risk of spills contaminating land and waterways during the construction stage; and Incident Management Procedures – adequate procedures should be established including notification requirement to the Appropriate Regulatory Authority and other relevant authorities for incidents that cause or have the potential to cause material harm to the environment (Part 5.7 of the POEO Act)
Central Tablelands Local Land Service Office Environment Heritage
of and
of and
Central Tablelands Water
6.9 6.11 6.6
6.7 6.19
6.12
6.7 7.4
7.4
-
Department Planning Environment
REF Section
Identify if there are any listed or potential heritage items within the proposed project area. If any listed or potential heritage items are likely to be affected, a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) must be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced heritage consultant as part of the review. The HIA should assess how the development would impact on any places of heritage significance in or surrounding the SSD site. A historical archaeological assessment should be prepared by a suitably qualified historical archaeologist in accordance with the Heritage Division, Office of Environmental and Heritage Guidelines ‘Assessing Significance for Historical Archaeological Sites and ‘Relics’ 2009. Where harm is likely to occur, it is recommended that the significance of the relics be considered in determined an appropriate mitigation strategy. In the event that harm cannot be avoided in whole or part, an appropriate Research Design and Excavation Methodology should be prepared to guide any proposed excavations. The proposal should have regard to any impacts on places, items or relics of significance to Aboriginal people. Where it is likely that the project will impact on Aboriginal heritage, adequate community consultation should take place regarding the assessment of significance, likely impacts and management/mitigation measures.
6.5
6.5
6.4
Regarding the Macquarie Pipeline project, a modification to the current approval is note required: predicated on assumption that Council would still be able to comply with the conditions in B4 – Operating Rules, specifically condition (b)(v) regarding not exceeding the flow restrictions.
3.5.1
If future proposals will cause non-compliance with any specific conditions further consultation with the Department is required: otherwise these future proposals can be processed under Part 5 of the EP&A Act.
REF
Central Tablelands Water nominates Orange City Council as the determining authority under Part 5 of the EP&A Act for the project.
4.5
PAGE 34 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
5.2
SERVICES
5.2.1
HIGH PRESSURE NATURAL GAS PIPELINE
A section of the pipeline will be installed parallel to the APA’s High Pressure Pipeline. Consultation between APA and OCC has clarified that APA Group’s tenure extends to the boundary of the easement (delineated by DP 499030 – Gazette No. 454 (Special) 09/09/1986) (refer – Appendix A). Providing the alignment of the proposed pipeline is adjacent but not within the easement, APA group has no legal ability to impose restrictions on the project activity. The pipeline is to be located at least 0.5 m outside of the existing gas easement. However, in accordance with the State Environment Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 – Clause 55, the consenting authority must ‘be satisfied that the potential safety risks or risks to the integrity of the pipeline that are associated with the development […} have been identified, and […] take those risks into consideration. In addition to the above some sections of the pipeline which will cross and parallel to Jemena Gas’s medium pressure gas lines around the Leewood Estate area in Orange as well as potentially numerous domestic lines within Orange itself. OCC has undertaken consultation with Jemena Gas to confirm what conditions/requirements Jemena Gas require for any new service that will cross or run parallel to these gas lines. Jemena Gas has advised when working near a Jemena High Pressure pipeline (or Secondary Steel Gas Main ) a Jemena technician is required to supervise the works; a separation between Jemena’s asset and the pipeline being installed must be at least 200–300 mm, and OCC is required to pothole to locate the asset to avoid any damage (refer Appendix A).
5.2.2
RAIL LINES
The pipeline crosses rail lines at three locations and runs parallel to a section of line for approximately 2.25 km. Table 5.2 – Rail Interfaces Crossing
Location
Crossing 1
End of Shepherd Road across to Huntley Road, under the Orange to Blayney rail line at 5.11 km on the Blayney side from Orange Railway Station.
Crossing 2
At abandoned rail crossing, under the Orange to Blayney rail line at 1.39 km on the Blayney side from the Millthorpe Railway Station.
Crossing 3
Adjacent to the existing Orange Road overhead rail crossing, on the currently unused Blayney-Demondrile rail line 1.87 km on the Demondrile side of the Millthorpe Railway Station.
In rail corridor
In rail corridor for approximately 2.25 km: starting at 1.87 km on the Demondrile side of the Blayney Railway Station and finish at 3.76 km on the Demondrile side of the Blayney Railway Station
PAGE 35 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
OCC has secured in-principle approval for the above works in the rail corridor on the operational line at Orange, Millthorpe and Blayney from the John Holland Rail Country Regional Network and Transport for NSW, as the asset owner, subject to the following conditions.
Council provide the final design, works methodology and safety documentation (to include the SWMS, competency certificates and protection officer details)
design and installation works complying to relevant Country Regional Networks standards
surface signage to be installed to indicate the alignment of service crossings any changes in alignment for services running through the corridor
as built data is to be provide to John Holland Rail on completion of the works
evidence of Council’s public liability insurance ($250 million) and professional indemnity insurance ($20 million)
No works are to commence in the rail corridor until John Holland Rail has received and accepted the above information. Refer Appendix A for a copy of this approval.
PAGE 36 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Impacts 6.1
INTRODUCTION
6.1.1
SCOPE
This section of the Review of Environmental Factors identifies and assesses potential impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Project. These include impacts relating to:
terrestrial ecology;
aquatic ecology;
Aboriginal heritage;
historic heritage;
soil resource;
surface water;
land use;
noise and vibration;
traffic and access;
air quality;
spoil and waste management;
groundwater;
visual amenity;
social; and
economic impacts.
6.1.2
LIMITATIONS
6.1.2.1 Design and Construct Contracts The delivery of the Project will be undertaken over a number of years and through awarding a number of Design and Construct contracts. Progressing to detailed design of the project stages is contingent on first securing environmental approval to proceed with the project and then securing funding for the later stages of the project. Notwithstanding, there is an adequate understanding of the pipeline alignment and likely construction methodologies to identify environmental impacts and requisite measures for minimising these impacts.
6.1.2.2 Route selection Route selection has been undertaken by OCC and CTW using high resolution aerial imagery, consultation with service providers and land-owners, route walkovers and field inspections (including locating services) and preliminary hydraulic modelling. Constraints in terms of environmentally sensitive areas have been mapped, field truthed and accommodated in the concept design process to avoid or minimise impacts. This Review of Environmental Factors is based on the project infrastructure and alignments shown in the Schedule of Drawings (Version 8).
PAGE 37 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.1.2.3 Impact Footprint Excluding specific sections of the pipeline alignment that have been identified as environmentally sensitive and needing specific controls to reduce the construction footprint, all construction activity would be limited within a 20 m wide corridor. This includes storage of pipe, materials and room for construction vehicles and plant to manoeuvre. Within this 20 m corridor in which activity will be undertaken, a more intense physical disturbance associated with the excavation and laying of pipe would be contained with a 6–10 m wide strip. Within this strip the land to be physically cleared of vegetation, topsoil removed and the trench excavated would be limited to approximately 3 m width. In areas of sensitivity the land to be physically cleared will be reduced to as low as reasonably practicable for construction; dropping down to 1 m where machine reach allows.
6.1.2.4 Design Refinements The project alignment and infrastructure components assumed in this Review of Environmental Factors may be refined during the detailed design phase as a result of the need to:
avoid ground conditions or services that present significant construction difficulties in terms of logistics, time and/or cost;
reduce the overall construction timeframe;
avoid previously undetected/unknown areas of environmental sensitivity identified following determination;
reduce impacts on residents; or
improve the operation of the project.
Design refinements would not include significant changes to the project. The test for ‘significant change’ would include consideration of whether the refinement:
would result in any of conditions of any approvals not being met;
is consistent with the description of the project as described in this REF;
would result in any potential environmental or social impacts of a greater scale or different nature than that considered in this Review of Environmental Factors.
Any design refinement that pushes infrastructure outside the corridor of impact assessed as part of this Review of Environmental Factors may need to be approved by OCC and/or CTW. To this end, it is noted that the project area considered in the ecological assessment includes a 100 m wide corridor centred on the Version 8 pipeline alignment.
6.2
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
6.2.1
INTRODUCTION
This ecological assessment provides the technical baseline information to enable identification of key terrestrial ecological values, assess their condition and identify the likely impacts of the project on these values. The scope of work for this assessment consisted of the following tasks:
identify current legislation, policy and guidelines relevant to the ecological assessment
conduct a desktop review of available data and previous studies in the vicinity of the project, and conduct database searches for threatened species, populations and ecological communities
PAGE 38 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
conduct a field survey of the project area to ground-truth ecological values, with an emphasis on ecological values of conservation significance. This includes: –
fauna habitat assessment of target sites identified from the desktop assessment
–
fauna survey of target sites identified from the habitat assessment
–
refinement of vegetation mapping along the alignment (extending approximately 50 m either side of the alignment) (the Project area)
–
targeted searches for threatened and protected flora species
–
assessment of potential route changes to avoid or reduce impacts on identified ecological values
identify and describe any listed threatened species, populations or ecological communities encountered along the alignment
prepare an ecological assessment report that identifies the methods and results of the desktop and field studies, assesses the likely ecological impacts of the project, and recommends appropriate impact mitigation measures where necessary.
A full copy of the ecological assessment is provided in Appendix B. Provided below is a summary of the key findings and required mitigation measures.
6.2.2
REGIONAL SETTING
The project falls within the Orange and Blayney Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Central West New South Wales Rural land use dominates both the Orange and Blayney LGAs, at 73% and 96% respectively (GHD 2008). The project area sites within the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion, which covers the dissected ranges and plateau of the Great Dividing Range that are topographically lower than the Australian Alps (OEH 2011). This bioregion extends to the Great Escarpment in the east, to the western slopes of the inland drainage basins, and south into Victoria. The South Eastern Highlands Bioregion exhibits a temperate climate characterised by warm summers and no dry season. Due to the higher elevation of the Orange region the study site experiences mild summers and cold winters. There are 88 flora species listed in the schedules of the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) in the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion (OEH 2011). Of these, 36 are listed as endangered, 50 are listed as vulnerable and two species (Stammacantha australis and Galium australe) are considered extinct. There are 88 fauna species listed in the schedules of the TSC Act in the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion (OEH 2011). Of these 25 are listed as endangered and 63 as vulnerable. A general trend of decline in woodland bird species such as robins, treecreepers and many small honeyeaters has been reported in this bioregion (OEH 2011). The pipeline traverses the Macquarie River catchment in the north and the Lachlan River catchment in the south, each forming part of the broader Murray-Darling Basin.
6.2.3
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK AND GUIDELINES
6.2.3.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) is administered by the Department of the Environment (DotE) and regulates any action that will have, or is likely to have, an impact on any Matter of National Environmental Significance (MNES). MNES relevant to biodiversity include:
wetlands of international importance (listed under the Ramsar Convention)
listed threatened species and Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) PAGE 39 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
migratory species protected under international agreements
Commonwealth marine areas.
Pursuant to the EPBC Act a person must not undertake any action that will have, or is likely to have, a significant impact on any MNES. According to the MNES Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 (DotE 2013) a significant impact is an impact which is important, notable or of consequence, having regard to its context or intensity. Whether or not an action is likely to have a significant impact depends upon the sensitivity, value and quality of the environment which is impacted, and upon the intensity, duration, magnitude and geographic extent of the impacts. A significant impact is considered likely if it is real or does not have a remote chance or possibility. A referral to the DotE is not required as part of the works, as the project will not interfere with any wetlands of international importance nor Commonwealth marine areas, and Assessments of Significance have determined that the project is unlikely to result in significant impacts on Commonwealth listed threatened species, TECs or migratory species.
6.2.3.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 The project is an activity being assessed under Part 5 of the EP&A Act. This ecological assessment forms part of this REF for the activity and considers the relevant factors specified in Section 111 of the EP&A Act.
The project is unlikely to conflict with any conservation agreements entered into under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NPW Act).
No plans of management adopted under the NP&W Act have been identified for land intersected by the proposed project.
The project is not known to intersect any areas of joint management agreement entered into under the Threatened Species Act.
No BioBanking agreements are in place for land intersected by the project.
The project area contains no wilderness areas as defined by the Wilderness Act 1987.
The project area contains no critical habitat.
The project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on threatened or migratory species or ecological communities recognised as MNES by the EPBC Act. Similarly, the project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats, within the meaning of the TSC Act or Fisheries Management Act.
No protected flora species were identified during the field survey. Appropriate mitigation measures will be in place to reduce the incidence of injury or death of native fauna by construction of the project.
6.2.3.3 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 The Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) provides for the conservation of threatened species, populations and ecological communities of plants and animals. It provides a framework to ensure that the impact of any action affecting threatened species is assessed. Schedule 1 of the TSC Act lists endangered species, populations and ecological communities; Schedule 2 lists vulnerable species; and Schedule 3 lists key threatening processes. Part 3 of the TSC Act defines critical habitat. This ecological assessment considers the potential impacts to all threatened species, populations and endangered ecological communities (EECs) listed under the TSC Act that are either known or considered likely to occur within the project area. The review of relevant literature and database searches identified that a number of flora and fauna species and endangered ecological communities are known to occur within the desktop search area. However, the assessments concluded that no
PAGE 40 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
threatened flora or fauna species, populations or ecological communities listed under the TSC Act are likely to be significantly impacted by the project. Part 7A Division 2 of the TSC Act facilitates the establishment of BioBanking agreements. A search of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage BioBanking Public Register, conducted 30 November 2015, identified no records for the Blayney LGA and only one record for the Orange LGA. OCC is the landowner for BioBanking Agreement 146 in the Orange LGA, executed 27 January 2015 for an area of 257.8 ha location approximately 22 km north-east of the Icely Road Filtration Plant. Consequently, the project is well removed from land on which a BioBanking agreement is in place.
6.2.3.4 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NP&W Act) governs the establishment, preservation and management of national parks, historic sites, and the protection of certain fauna, native plants and Aboriginal relics. Under the NP&W Act all fauna is protected, threatened or otherwise. Schedule 13 of the NP&W Act lists protected plants, which shall not be harmed or picked on any land either on or off National Park estate without prior approval. No such flora species were identified during the field survey. Mitigation measures are in place to protected native fauna throughout construction of the project. The project does not entail works on any land reserved under the NP&W Act. As such, no authorisation by or under this Act is required pursuant to clause 125(4) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. The Project alignment intersects or adjoins a number of Wildlife Refuges in the southern extent of the project area. These refuges are the result of conservation agreements entered into under the NP&W Act (including the former Fauna Protection Act 1948) and are known as:
Anahdale Wildlife Refuge, No. 266
Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge, No. 177
Stanfield Wildlife Refuge, No. 352
Thring Wildlife Refuge, No .182.
There are no known management strategies or farm plans for these Wildlife Refuges. However, the project is not expected to interfere with the conservation or management intent of these Wildlife Refuges.
6.2.3.5 SEPP 44 – Koala Habitat Protection The NSW State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 – Koala Habitat Protection (SEPP 44), prepared under the EP&A Act, aims to encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation that provide habitat for the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) to ensure a permanent free-living population over their present range and reverse the current trend of koala population decline. The Blayney LGA is listed in Schedule 1 of the SEPP 44. The Orange LGA is not. As such, this SEPP applies only to the southern portion of the project that falls within the Blayney LGA. Schedule 2 of the SEPP 44 lists koala feed tree species. Those species encountered within the project area include ribbon gum (Eucalyptus viminalis), river red gum (E. camaldulensis) and white box (E. albens). However, no koalas, koala scratches nor scats were detected within the project area, despite targeted searches. Although koalas have been recorded from the broader desktop search area, the nearest being approx. 5 km south-east of the alignment near Barry Road in 2014 (OEH 2015a), the pipeline alignment itself is unlikely to constitute koala habitat, owing to the exposed nature of areas where suitable feed trees were encountered.
PAGE 41 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.2.3.6 Noxious Weeds Act 1993 The Noxious Weeds Act 1993 (NW Act) provides the regulatory framework for controlling weeds in NSW. The Act aims to reduce the negative impact of weeds on the economy, community and environment by establishing control mechanisms to prevent the establishment of significant new weeds; prevent, eliminate or restrict the spread of particular significant weeds; and to manage widespread significant weeds in NSW. There are five classes of noxious weeds, comprising: Class 1 – State Prohibited Weeds. The plant must be eradicated from the land and the land must be kept free of the plant. Control Objective: to prevent the introduction and establishment of those plants in NSW. Class 2 – Regionally Prohibited Weeds. The plant must be eradicated from the land and the land must be kept free of the plant. Control Objective: to prevent the introduction and establishment of those plants in parts of NSW. Class 3 – Regionally Controlled Weeds. The plant must be fully and continuously suppressed and destroyed. Control Objective: to reduce the area and the impact of those plants in parts of NSW. Class 4 – Locally Controlled Weeds. The growth of the plant must be managed in a manner that reduces its numbers, spread and incidence and continuously inhibits its flowering and reproduction. Class 5 – Restricted Plants. It is likely, by their sale or the sale of their seeds or other movement, to spread within or outside of NSW. A weed that is as a Class 1, 2 or 5 noxious weed is a notifiable weed, for which the relevant officer of the Local Control Authority (Council) must be notified of their presence within three days of their detection. The plants must be controlled in order to prevent the introduction of those plants into NSW, the spread of those plants within NSW, or from NSW to another jurisdiction.
6.2.4
FLORA
The project area falls within the northern extent of the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion which occupies approximately 6.11% of NSW (OEH 2011b) and extends just inland from the coastal bioregions of the South East Corner and the Sydney Basin, bounded by the Australian Alps and South Western Slopes bioregion to the south and west. The pipeline route transects, or lies adjacent to, a variety of land tenures and uses, including:
freehold and/or leasehold land, used primarily for grazing and dryland cropping
reserves such as road reserves and stock routes
other infrastructure easements (electricity, gas, telecommunications)
wildlife refuges.
6.2.4.1 Vegetation Communities The pipeline alignment intersects, or passes within 50 m of a mosaic of broad open grazed and cropped farmlands, woodland and native grassland remnants, native and exotic landscape plantings, plantation pine, as well as roadside plantings and woodland regrowth. Past clearing, pasture improvement, livestock grazing, earthworks, exotic plantings, roadside vegetation management and weed invasion have impacted and influenced the vegetation across the project area and have substantially removed much of the native composition and floristic structure from the landscape.
PAGE 42 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
The project area is strongly dominated by agricultural pasturelands and associated grasslands. DEC (2006) mapping, prepared at a coarse scale of 1:250,000, recognises seven broad vegetation type (BVT) intersected by the alignment, comprising:
Blakely’s Red Gum–Yellow Box open-woodland of the tablelands;
Apple Box–Yellow Box–Mountain Gum open-woodland on flats and low hills of the tablelands;
natural grassland and shrubland;
unclassified vegetation;
water;
wetlands; and
cleared land.
Patches of grassy open woodland contain various proportions of yellow box (Eucalyptus melliodora), white box (E. albens), Blakely’s red gum (E. blakelyi), ribbon gum (E. viminalis), apple box (E. bridgesiana), bundy (E. goniocalyx), white sally (E. pauciflora), broad-leaved peppermint (E. dives) and red stringybark (E. macrorhyncha). These patches are the remnants of original box-gum woodland. Across the majority of the Project area, the native understorey of these box-gum remnants has been displaced by exotic pasture species and a long history of grazing; however, a number of these remnants contain sufficient floristic structure to still be representative of the box-gum woodland EEC listed under the TSC Act and/or TEC listed under the EPBC Act. Field surveys and examination of aerial imagery identified two plant community types (PCT) including:
Yellow Box–Blakley’s Red Gum grassy woodland on the tablelands, South Eastern Highlands Bioregion; and
Apple Box – Yellow Box dry grassy woodland of the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion.
These PCTs can represent both EECs and TECs. Whether or not a PCT is also an EEC or TEC is based on size, formation and floristic structure criteria established by DECCW (2010), OEH (2015), NPWS (2002) and DEH (2006). The impacts of the project on EECs and TECs is discussed below, however, only a small proportion (0.31 ha or 7.5%) of the PCTs falling within the corridor represent an EEC and/or TEC. In addition to PCTs, the following features were identified within or adjacent to the pipeline corridor:
lacustrine wetlands;
riverine wetlands;
landscape plantings, dominated by natives;
landscape plantings, dominated by exotics; and
plantation pine.
6.2.4.2 Threatened Species Searches of the EPBC Act Protected Matters database (DotE 2015a) and the Atlas of NSW Wildlife (OEH 2015a) identified previous records of ten threatened flora species within a search area extending at least 10 km from the project area. Of these seven are listed under both the EPBC Act and TSC Act. One species is listed under the EPBC Act only, and two species are listed under the TSC Act only. No records were identified from the NSW Flora Online Search – ROTAP (RBGDT, 2011). Seasonal conditions during the survey were appropriate for the detection of a broad range of flora species, including those listed as threatened. Preferred habitat for hoary sunray (Leucochrysum albicans var. tricolor), small purple-pea (Swainsona recta), black gum (Eucalyptus aggregata) and austral toadflax (Thesium australe) occurs within the project area. However, despite dedicated searches, no threatened flora species were detected in the project area during the field survey.
PAGE 43 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.2.4.3 Other Native Flora The Atlas of NSW Wildlife identifies three threatened flora species, 37 protected flora species, 531 nonprotected native flora species, and 326 exotic species within the search area. Most of these species are associated with grassy woodlands and riparian habitats common in the local area.
6.2.4.4 Weeds The Commonwealth Government recognises 32 Weeds of National Significance (WONS) across Australia, based on their:
invasiveness and impact characteristics
potential and current area of spread
current primary industry, environmental and socio-economic impacts.
The NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) identifies weeds that are declared noxious under the Noxious Weeds Act 1993. For the Orange and Blayney LGAs 121 noxious weeds are identified, 19 of which have been recorded from the search area (OEH 2015a). Noxious weeds and WONS identified during the field survey include:
African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum) – Class 4 noxious, WONS
Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus) – Class 4 noxious, WONS
Chilean needle grass (Nassella neesiana) – Class 4 noxious, WONS (Plate 1)
Montpellier broom (Genista monspessulana) – WONS
Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium) – Class 4 noxious
Serrated tussock (Nassella trichotoma) – Class 4 noxious, WONS (Plate 2)
Sweet briar (Rosa rubiginosa) – Class 4 noxious
Willows (Salix spp.) – Class 4 noxious, WONS.
None of these species are notifiable weeds. Instead, they are locally controlled weeds requiring that their growth be managed in a manner that continuously inhibits the ability of the plant to spread, and they must not be knowingly distributed.
6.2.4.5 Potential Impacts Vegetation Communities Route selection was undertaken by OCC and CTW using high resolution aerial imagery, alignment walkovers and on-ground assessment with the aim of avoiding sensitive ecological areas. This has resulted in a final concept alignment (Version 8) that has minimised the requirement for vegetation clearing and avoids the majority of large trees encountered in the project area. Generally, where there are no constraints, pipeline construction activity will be limited to a maximum 20 m wide corridor. This allows for pipe laydown areas, storage of other materials, and room for construction vehicles and plant to double pass. The 20 m wide corridor will generally be restricted to agricultural grasslands largely void of trees and native grasses. Where possible, the zone of disturbance will be reduced to 6-10 m. Within this zone of disturbance, land to be physically cleared (ie. vegetation cleared and topsoil stripped) will be limited to approximately 3 m wide. In areas of sensitivity the land to be physically cleared will be reduced to as low as reasonably practicable for construction; dropping down to 1 m where machine reach allows. Despite careful route selection construction of the Project would involve vegetation clearing and earthworks resulting in the temporary loss of varying vegetation types along the aggregated ~66 km route. This vegetation is dominated by agricultural pasturelands and associated grasslands. Remnant vegetation intersected by the pipeline includes diverse representations of two PCTs, being: PAGE 44 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Yellow Box–Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland on the tablelands, SE Highlands Bioregion;
Apple Box–Yellow Box dry grassy woodland of the SE Highlands Bioregion.
The pipeline transects approximately 5.11 km of remnant vegetation, or 7.7% of the 66 km alignment. General disturbance would occur across an approximate area of 4.1 ha (8 m) to 10.22 ha (20 m) of remnant vegetation. Physical clearing and earthworks would be limited to approximately 1.53 ha (up to 3 m wide) of remnant vegetation. Table 6.1 lists the estimated maximum clearing extents for remnant vegetation, as well as for remnant vegetation representing EECs/TECs. The impacts are considered minimal in both a local and regional context because of the extent of these vegetation communities remaining outside the project area. The pipeline alignment intersects the edge of a patch of Box-Gum Grassy Woodland EEC in the road corridor approximately 550 m south of the edge of Blayney. Although not yet proven by detailed floristic survey (i.e. identifying 12 or more native understorey species, excluding grasses), the precautionary principle has been applied in assuming that the remnant patch is Box-Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Grassland TEC. However, only 0.01 to 0.03 ha of the disturbed edge of this patch will be impacted, and impacts will be contained to the road corridor. The impacts are minimal in both a local and regional context. This is supported by an Assessment of Significance. The pipeline alignment also intersects a patch of Tablelands Snow Gum Grassy Woodland EEC in the road corridor in the vicinity of the Blayney Golf Course. This patch is unlikely to represent a TEC, as the understorey is predominantly exotic. Only 0.03 to 0.09 ha of this weed impacted EEC is likely to be affected, and impacts would be confined to the road corridor. Again, the impacts are minimal in both a local and regional context. This is supported by an Assessment of Significance. Table 6.1 – Vegetation Communities Impact Vegetation Community
Impact Area Scenarios (ha) Construction Corridor (20 m)
Zone of Disturbance (8m av)
Clearing (3m)
Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland on the tablelands, South Eastern Highlands Bioregion
8.86
3.54
1.33
Apple Box – Yellow Box dry grassy woodland of the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion
0.59
0.24
0.09
Clearing in sensitive area (1m)
PCT (excluding EECs/TECs
EEC / TEC Box Gum Woodland EEC / Box Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Grassland TEC
0.03
0.01
Tablelands Snow Gum Grassy Woodland EEC
0.09
0.03
Threatened Species No threatened flora species (listed under either the EPBC Act or TSC Act) were detected within the project area despite targeted searches during suitable seasonal conditions. Although there remains potential for threatened flora species to occur within proposed impact areas it is considered unlikely that substantial populations would exist without having been detected during the survey. It is considered unlikely that the Project would result in significant impacts on threatened flora species.
PAGE 45 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Noxious Weeds and WoNS Noxious weeds and WoNS occurring on the Project alignment that would be removed or otherwise managed as part of the works include African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum), blackberry (Rubus fruticosus), Chilean needle grass (Nassella neesiana), Montpellier broom (Genista monspessulana), Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium), serrated tussock (Nassella trichotoma), sweet briar (Rosa rubiginosa), and willows (Salix spp.). These weeds were opportunistically recorded during the survey 27 November 2015. It is likely that a number of other noxious weeds and WoNS would be encountered along the alignment. If left unmitigated, construction activities have the potential to introduce and promote the spread of weeds through the use of unclean machinery which can spread weed propagules.
6.2.5
FAUNA
6.2.5.1 Species Searches of the EPBC Act Protected Matters database and the Atlas of NSW Wildlife database identified the potential occurrence of 32 threatened fauna species within a search area extending at least 10 km from the pipeline alignment. Of these species 15 are listed under both the EPBC Act and the TSC Act. The remaining 17 are listed under the TSC Act only. Ten of the fauna species identified from the search are listed as migratory under the EPBC Act. Of those species identified within the broader search area 21 threatened fauna species and an additional five migratory species are either known or have the potential to occur within the project area based on habitat assessments conducted. A total of 81 fauna species were opportunistically detected in the project area during the field survey. This comprised five frog species, four reptile species, eight mammal species and 64 bird species. Included in this count are three threatened or migratory species that were opportunistically detected, being:
Blue-billed duck (Oxyura australis) – Vulnerable (TSC Act), identified in open water of Spring Creek Reservoir, well downstream of the proposed alignment crossing of Gosling Creek south or Orange.
A snipe (Gallinago sp.), potentially Latham’s snipe (Gallinago hardwickii) – Migratory (EPBC Act), in the vicinity of the proposed alignment crossing of Gosling Creek south of Orange.
Superb parrot (Polytelis swainsonii) – Vulnerable (TSC Act and EPBC Act), identified from open woodland in the vicinity of the proposed Backhouse Spurline, approximately 3.8 km north east of Carcoar.
6.2.5.2 Habitat Features of the project area that provide fauna with opportunities for foraging and nesting are represented by:
Yellow Box–Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland;
Apple Box–Yellow Box dry grassy woodland;
regrowth and native landscape plantings;
exotic landscape plantings;
native grassland and pasture;
riverine wetland / waterways; and
lacustrine wetland / dams.
Although a variety of fauna habitats were encountered, no unique habitats were encountered that are not represented in adjoining habitats of the locale and broader region.
PAGE 46 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.2.5.3 Potential Impacts Habitat loss Fauna habitat assessments were undertaken at 11 sites during the survey. Habitat features commonly encountered included ground logs, small and large rocks, leaf litter, seeding grass cover, fleshy fruiting plants, nectar / pollen producing plants, mistletoe and a number of koala feed trees. Small and/or large hollows were encountered in the majority of woodland sites. Vegetation removal is discussed earlier. Up to approximately 10 ha of remnant vegetation will be removed, or otherwise interfered with by the project. A number of trees will be lopped or removed. This includes a portion of trees within the approximate 10 ha of remnant vegetation patches of >0.1 ha mapped as part of this assessment, as well as trees within smaller patches of remnant vegetation, isolated paddock and road corridor trees, regrowth vegetation, and landscape plantings. In addition to woody plants, construction activities will remove grasses, forbs and (to a lesser extent) shrubs from the corridor, resulting in temporary reductions in the available food resources for herbivores, granivores, nectarivores and (to a lesser extent) insectivores. Considering the limited vegetation removal required, the extent of similar vegetation in adjoining areas, and that rehabilitation works will immediately follow pipe placement, the impacts of habitat loss on fauna are considered both minor and reversible.
Connectivity and Habitat Fragmentation The project area provides habitat for a diversity of fauna and is likely to provide habitat for a number of threatened species, particularly woodland birds. The proposed works may temporarily fragment habitat available for wildlife along roadside corridors and within other remnant patches. However, these areas would be rehabilitated post-construction and therefore the impact on habitat connectivity is considered temporary. Rehabilitation would include managing weedy species – such as African boxthorn, blackberry, Montpellier broom, Scotch thistle, sweet briar and willows – allowing for assisted regeneration of native trees, native and pasture grasses, to help restore habitat connectivity.
Threatened and Migratory Species Impacts to the following 24 threatened fauna species may occur as a result of the proposal:
Speckled warbler (Chthonicola sagittata) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Brown treecreeper – eastern subspecies (Climacteris picumnus victoriae) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Black falcon (Falco subniger) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Regent honeyeater (Anthochaera phrygia) – Critically Endangered (EPBC Act and TSC Act)
Painted honeyeater Grantiella picta) – Vulnerable (EPBC Act and TSC Act)
Little eagle (Hieraaetus morphnoides) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Swift parrot (Lathamus discolour) – Endangered (EPBC Act and TSC Act)
Barking owl (Ninox connivens) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Powerful owl (Ninox strenua) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Blue-billed duck (Oxyura australis) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Freckled duck (Stictonetta naevosa) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Scarlet robin (Petroica boodang) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Flame robin (Petroica phoenicea) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Superb parrot (Polytelis swainsonii) – Vulnerable (EPBC Act and TSC Act)
Australian painted snipe (Stagonopleura guttata) – Vulnerable (TSC Act) PAGE 47 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Spotted-tailed quoll (SE mainland population) (Dasyurus maculatus maculatus) – Endangered (EPBC Act), Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri) – Vulnerable (EPBC Act and TSC Act)
Eastern bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Southern myotis (Myotis macropus) – Vulnerable (TSC Act)
Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) – Vulnerable (EPBC Act and TSC Act)
Grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) – Vulnerable (EPBC Act and TSC Act)
Pink-tailed worm-lizard (Aprasia parapulchella) – Vulnerable (EPBC Act and TSC Act).
Seven-part tests of significance have been undertaken for these species. The assessments determined that the project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on any of these fauna species. There is potential for the following migratory bird species to utilise the study area on occasion:
Great egret (Ardea alba / modesta) – Migratory (EPBC Act)
Cattle egret (Ardea ibis) – Migratory (EPBC Act)
Latham’s snipe (Gallinago hardwickii) – Migratory (EPBC Act)
Rainbow bee-eater (Merops ornatus) – Migratory (EPBC Act)
Satin flycatcher (Myiagra cyanoleuca) – Migratory (EPBC Act)
Seven-part tests of significance have been undertaken for these MNES species, consistent with the bilateral agreement between the Australian and NSW Governments (DPI 2013). The assessments determined that the project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on any of these migratory species.
Critical Habitat Critical habitat is the whole or any part of the habitat of an endangered species, population or ecological community or critically endangered species or ecological community that is critical to the survival of the species, population or ecological community and is declared as such under the TSC Act or FM Act. Four critical habitat declarations are in place under the TSC Act, being for Gould’s petrel (Pterodroma leucoptera leucoptera), the little penguin (Eudyptula minor) population in Sydney’s North Harbour, Mitchell’s rainforest snail (Thersites mitchellae) in Stotts Island Nature Reserve, and for the Wollemi Pine (Wollemia nobilis). No critical habitat occurs within the project area.
6.2.6
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures would assist in minimising the ecological impacts of the project. These measures generally include the minimum standard of management identified in the Code of Environmental Practice – Onshore Pipelines (APIA 2013), as well as additional measures specific to the project. Mitigation measures are divided into measures that should be undertaken as part of the project during:
planning,
construction,
reinstatement and rehabilitation; and
operations.
PAGE 48 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.2.6.1 Planning Flora
Existing roads, tracks and areas of disturbance should be used where available, both for locating the pipeline and any lay down areas. Any new access tracks / points should be designed / chosen to avoid impacts on flora, fauna and their habitat.
On private property, pre-construction assessments including photographs and GPS references should be undertaken as required – for use as pre-construction baseline allowing for future comparison should the need arise.
Clearing activities shall be scheduled so that the time between initial clearing and rehabilitation is minimal.
Clearly mark the location of the construction zone on plans. All construction activities must be kept within the construction zone. No clearing will occur outside the construction zone.
Rehabilitation measures should be planned (erosion/sediment control devices, re-use of any cleared vegetation) to optimise potential for regrowth and stabilisation success.
Weed control should be incorporated into the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), including a weed hygiene procedure for known areas of weed infestation. On private property landowner input should be sought on the presence and location of weeds.
An inventory of noxious or declared weed species occurring along the easement should be compiled and appropriate weed control procedures developed.
Weed management goals and desired outcomes should be established based on regulatory pest plant control guidelines, regional weed control programs, an assessment of weed risk and consultation with landowners.
Arrangements should be made to ensure project and contractor staff are inducted into weed control issues and solutions, and appraised of relevant project commitments and their responsibilities in fulfilling these.
Terrestrial Fauna
Pre-clearance terrestrial fauna surveys/checks must be undertaken by an ecologist or experienced fauna spotter/catcher approximately 1-5 days prior to tree clearing to identify and mitigate against direct impacts on breeding places of threatened species (such as parrots, woodland birds, raptors, microbats and quolls). Any trees or logs observed to contain an active breeding place of a threatened species must be cordoned off and left untouched until young have naturally vacated the immediate area.
If the pre-clearance terrestrial fauna survey/check identifies an occupied nest of a threatened species, nest boxes would be placed into nearby retention areas as an attempt to offset impacted tree hollows for use during subsequent breeding events.
6.2.6.2 Construction Flora
Clearly mark the location of the construction zone on the ground. All construction activities must be kept within the construction zone. No clearing will occur outside the construction zone.
Flagging or marking tape shall be used to identify ecologically sensitive features adjacent to the impact zone for strict avoidance during construction.
Vehicle parking shall be restricted to the pipeline construction corridor, easement, roadsides or other specifically designated areas agreed with the landowner in advance when outside of the road corridor.
Parking under trees can damage their roots through soil compaction and impaired water infiltration into the soil and should be discouraged.
PAGE 49 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
The removal or disturbance of vegetation outside the access tracks, agreed/approved work areas and pipeline corridor is not permitted unless additional regulatory and landowner approvals are obtained.
Trimming of any native trees over-hanging the construction zone is preferred over removal, where feasible.
Woody vegetation over-hanging the construction zone should be lopped to the minimum extent necessary to achieve safe construction of the pipeline.
Vegetation clearance should be minimised as far as practicable, with any cleared vegetation being stockpiled separately if required for respreading during reinstatement.
Avoid disturbing roots or compacting soil in the drip zone of vegetation to be retained.
Where possible, any native trees to be removed should be mulched and re-used in surrounding areas.
Any cleared vegetation shall be stockpiled separately in a manner which:
–
facilitates respreading
–
avoids damage to adjacent live vegetation (e.g. any trees to be felled shall be felled onto the easement away from standing timber)
Cleared vegetation management options include: –
distribution of mulch over the pipeline construction area during rehabilitation to recycle nutrients and to provide surface protection from erosion or access barriers
–
retention of logs on site as habitat.
Any cleared vegetation shall be stockpiled separately in a manner which does not impede stock or wildlife.
During earthworks, topsoil should be stockpiled locally, separately from subsoil, and respread over the disturbed area at completion of works in order to aid rehabilitation.
Appropriate weed biosecurity measures, as identified below, shall be applied as necessary. –
All machinery, equipment and vehicles brought to the Project site should be free of any soil, seed or plant material. All soil and organic matter should be removed, including under the vehicle and in the cabin or trays.
–
Restrict access of vehicles and personnel to areas of known noxious weed infestation. Vehicles exiting such areas may need to be re-cleaned.
–
All machinery, equipment and vehicles taken into private landholdings should be inspected upon entry, and either admitted or refused entry on the bases of presence / absence of soil seed or plant material.
–
Construction machinery shall be weed free prior to entering a flowing watercourse, or starting construction of a watercourse crossing.
–
Construction machinery shall be weed free prior to entering a new private landholding, unless otherwise agreed by the landholder.
–
Declared noxious weeds should be managed according to the requirements stipulated by the Noxious Weeds Act 1993.
–
Construction machinery shall be blown down on site, then floated off site for washing, following completion of works within a landholding identified as containing Chilean needle grass (Nassella neesiana) or serrated tussock (N. trichotoma).
–
Evidence of compliance with weed biosecurity requirements should be documented, e.g. on a Vehicle Wash Down Register.
PAGE 50 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
–
Transportation of topsoil along the pipeline corridor should be avoided where practicable.
–
Any weed control activities involving the use of chemicals shall be undertaken in consultation with the relevant landowners and regulatory authorities, giving due consideration to sensitive land uses (e.g. chemical free, organic and biodynamic farming, run off potential, wind drift and flora and fauna sensitivities).
Terrestrial Fauna
Felling of hollow bearing trees should be avoided where possible.
Prior to clearing, any habitat trees/ hollows / hollow logs and other habitat for conservation significant species should be identified and flagged, with a view to re-using such trees / hollows / hollow logs as fauna habitat as part of reinstatement.
Individual pipes and joined pipe sections (pipe strings) shall not impede vehicle, stock or wildlife passage.
Joined pipe sections should have temporary end caps installed when the site is not attended, to prevent ingress of fauna.
Measures shall be adopted to prevent fauna entrapment within the pipeline trench, such as:
–
minimising the period of time the trench is open, particularly in fauna habitat areas
–
constructing trench plugs, at appropriate intervals, with slopes <45° to provide exit ramps for fauna
–
use of branches, ropes, hessian sacks, ramped gangplanks or similar to create ‘ladders’ to enable fauna to exit the trench.
An experienced fauna spotter / catcher should be available to: –
advise on tree clearing techniques that will minimise fauna impact and to undertake fauna handling if required
–
remove trapped fauna as required
–
treat (or transport) any animals inadvertently injured.
Project personnel to: –
regularly monitor the open trench and arrange for removal of any trapped fauna by an experienced fauna / spotter.
–
survey the trench prior to the commencement of pipe laying and backfill activities, notify the fauna spotter / catcher where fauna is present, and wait until such fauna has been removed before proceeding with pipe laying or backfill.
Records of all fauna interactions should be created, listing the species concerned, the nature of the interaction and its GPS coordinates.
6.2.6.3 Reinstatement and Rehabilitation General
The pipeline should be constructed in stages to allow for progressive rehabilitation.
Rehabilitation should commence as soon as possible following completion of construction.
Upon completion of pipeline construction, temporary access tracks should be closed and rehabilitated to a condition compatible with the surrounding land use, and as pre-agreed with the landowner when outside of the road corridor.
Private landholdings on strategically important land
Remove excess rock or fill material.
Re-profiling the site in a manner which ensures soil stability and which is as near as practicable to pre-existing contours.
PAGE 51 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Relieve soil compaction in trafficked areas as necessary (e.g. rip along the contours).
Respreading stockpiled topsoil over the rehabilitation area.
Undertake seeding, where required by the landowner, in consultation with the landowner.
Monitor rehabilitation success, undertaking maintenance and or supplementary seeding as required.
Road corridors and similar areas
Remove excess rock or fill material.
Re-profile the site in a manner which ensures soil stability and which is as near as practicable to pre-existing contours.
Relieve soil compaction in trafficked areas as necessary (e.g. rip along the contours).
Respread stockpiled topsoil over the rehabilitation area, maximising the use of the existing seed bank to regenerate and stabilise disturbed areas.
Monitor rehabilitation success, undertaking maintenance or seeding as required.
Works in proximity to (i.e. within 20 m of) EECs or TECs
Remove excess rock or fill material.
Re-profile the site in a manner which ensures soil stability and which is as near as practicable to pre-existing contours.
Soil compaction relief in trafficked areas as necessary (e.g. rip along the contours).
Respread stockpiled topsoil over the rehabilitation area.
Apply native seed of local species, containing kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra), tussock (P. labillardierei) and / or snow grass (P. sieberiana), in proximity to the EEC at the Icely Road WFP in Orange.
Apply native seed of local species dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) in proximity to the EEC at Millthorpe Cemetery and the EEC / TEC 550 m south of Blayney (over Red Hill to the north of Lucks Lane.
Apply native seed of local species dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei) in proximity to the EEC at Blayney Golf Course and the EEC on the Mid Western Highway 2.8 km north east of Carcoar. (east of Fullers Lane).
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north east of Carcoar (along Brady Road and the Mid Western Highway).
Monitor rehabilitation success, undertaking maintenance and supplementary seeding as required.
Where seeding is adopted to facilitate prompt revegetation and soil stabilisation, the following principles shall be considered:
–
seed mixtures shall be formulated with consideration of the vegetation composition of the areas adjacent to the pipeline construction area. When outside of the road corridor, the proposed seed mixture must first be agreed with the landholder.
–
where applied, seed shall be evenly dispersed over the disturbed area
–
seeding shall take place as soon as practicable after reinstatement of the soil profile; reapplication of seed may be required in some areas
–
fertilisers and soil supplements may be necessary to aid germination, but shall only be applied in consultation with landholders, as their application could encourage fastergrowing weed species.
A watering regime should be determined for newly reinstated areas, to facilitate optimum germination of seed stock in the absence of rain.
PAGE 52 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Rehabilitation should be monitored regularly, with requisite maintenance being undertaken as soon as practicable.
If rehabilitation monitoring determines that erosion is occurring due to inadequate vegetation cover on the easement, consideration should be given to promoting additional growth or installing erosion control structures. Such work should be conducted with prior consultation with the relevant landowner when outside of the road corridor.
Flagging or marking tape, used to identify ecologically sensitive features, shall be removed and correctly disposed of at the completion of construction.
6.2.6.4 Operation
The pipeline alignment should be patrolled at least annually by personnel trained in the identification of weed species likely to be encountered, particularly WoNS (Weeds of National Significance) and other declared noxious weeds, and in techniques for their management. Overall rehabilitation success should also be monitored as part of this patrol.
Inspection of the pipeline easement should include an assessment of weed impacts. If significant infestations are found, aspects noted should include: –
weed species that are present (WoNS and other noxious weeds should be noted as such)
–
estimated coverage of total area
–
possible reasons for infestation
–
suggested management measure(s).
All maintenance inspections should include notes on weeds encountered and actions taken / recommended.
Follow up weed control should be undertaken, in consultation with the landowner, where it is determined likely that the Project has led to their presence.
Maintenance crews should be made aware of weed control requirements and their compliance with weed control requirements monitored as appropriate.
6.2.7
CONCLUSION
The project alignment intersects or passes within 50 m of a mosaic of broad open grazed and cropped farmlands, woodland and native grassland remnants, native and exotic landscape plantings, plantation pine, as well as roadside plantings and woodland regrowth. Past clearing, pasture improvement, livestock grazing, earthworks, exotic plantings, roadside vegetation management and weed ingression have each impacted and influenced the vegetation across the project area, substantially removing much of the native composition and floristic structure from the landscape. Remnant vegetation intersected by the pipeline includes various representations of Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland on the tablelands, South Eastern Highlands Bioregion, with a small occurrence of Apple Box – Yellow Box dry grassy woodland of the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion. The route selection process has resulted in an alignment which minimises the need for vegetation clearing, avoiding the vast majority of woody vegetation encountered within the project area. The aggregated 66 km Project alignment intersects about 5.11 km of remnant vegetation, equating to a maximum disturbance area of 10.22 ha of remnant vegetation (20 m corridor). This is more likely to be in the order of 4.1 ha of remnant vegetation, with a reduced average zone of disturbance of about 8 m width in woodland habitats. These impacts are considered minimal in both a local and regional context. A number of EECs and potential TECs were identified in the project area (i.e. within 50 m of the alignment). The proposed alignment avoids most of these remnants, with impacts limited to the removal of approximately 0.01 to 0.03 ha of the disturbed edge of a patch of Box-Gum Grassy Woodland EEC (being potential Box-Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Grassland TEC) and approximately 0.03-0.09 ha of a disturbed patch of Tablelands Snow Gum Grassy Woodland EEC, each falling within the road
PAGE 53 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
corridor. The impacts on each EEC / TEC are minimal in both a local and regional context. This is supported by an Assessment of Significance. No threatened flora species (listed under either the EPBC Act or TSC Act) were detected within the project area despite targeted searches during suitable seasonal conditions. Although there remains potential for threatened flora species to occur within the proposed impact areas, it is unlikely that substantial populations would exist without having been detected during the survey. A number of noxious weeds and WoNS were identified in the project area during the survey, highlighting the importance of weed hygiene protocols to be adhered to throughout all phases of the project. Impacts to fauna and their habitat are considered minor, restricted largely to temporary removal of foraging habitat, as opposed to removing breeding habitat. Direct impacts on fauna can be mitigated during construction by fauna pre-clearance checks in the lead up to clearing, as well as the presence of a fauna spotter/catcher during clearing and earthworks, at least when passing through woodland remnants and waterway crossings. The project may disrupt or otherwise impact up to 24 threatened fauna species and an additional five migratory bird species. However, Assessments of Significance have determined that impacts are unlikely to be significant. The project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on threatened or migratory species or ecological communities recognised as MNES by the EPBC Act. Similarly, the project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats, within the meaning of the TSC Act. Consequently, the requirement for a Species Impact Statement is not triggered.
6.3
AQUATIC ECOLOGY
6.3.1
INTRODUCTION
The aquatic assessment focussed on key watercourses intersected by the pipeline to confirm aquatic habitat features and inform construction techniques from an ecological perspective. A full copy of this assessment is provided in Appendix B. Provided below is a summary of the key findings and required mitigation measures.
6.3.2
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
The NSW Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act) and its regulations are relevant to aquatic habitat, fauna species and aquatic ecological communities that may be affected by the project. Threatened aquatic species, populations and EECs are listed under Schedules 4, 4A and 5 of the FM Act. Schedule 6 lists key threatening processes. This ecological assessment considers the potential impacts to those threatened species, populations and EECs listed under the FM Act that are known or considered likely to occur within the project area. Within the jurisdiction of OCC, a permit from DPI Fisheries must be attained prior to pipeline construction (i.e. dredging and reclamation works) within Key Fish Habitat in accordance with section 200 of the FM Act. Within the jurisdiction of Central Tablelands Water (being a public authority), DPI Fisheries must be notified of any dredging and reclamation works within Key Fish Habitat at least 28 days prior to the works. For the purposes of the FM Act, dredging and reclamation works include, but are not limited to, construction of temporary crossings / side tracks, bridges, creek diversions, pipeline waterway crossings, geotechnical investigations, excavating or reclaiming the bed or banks of any waterways. Temporary coffer dams will likely be required at a number of waterway crossings, subject to actual and forecast flows. This is anticipated to be undertaken for Class 1 and Class 2 waterways. In accordance PAGE 54 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
with Section 219 of the FM Act, a permit must first be attained from DPI Fisheries for any such works that will temporarily or permanently block fish passage. The classification of waterways in the study area was carried out in general accordance with the policy and guidelines for fish habitat conservation and management (DPI 2013). The assessment of ecological impacts assumed that any waterway crossing would be designed and built to comply with this policy.
6.3.3
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Aquatic habitat attributes were described in accordance with AusRivAS protocols for NSW streams (DEC 2004). This established a general description of the 100 m waterway reach and its immediate surrounds including topography, water level, shading, riparian vegetation composition, land use, stream width, depth, substrate composition and relative abundance, as well as a visual assessment of disturbance related to human activities.
6.3.3.1 Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity The sensitivity of affected fish habitat was assessed by both desktop and field data. In this context ‘sensitivity’ is defined by NSW DPI (2013) by the importance of the habitat to the survival of fish (noting that ‘fish’ under the FM Act includes all aquatic invertebrates) and its resilience. Table 6.2 defines those habitats which are considered ‘key fish habitats’ for the purposes of the FM Act, FM Regulations, policies and guidelines. Fish habitat sensitivity rankings were also applied to provide context to the importance of the ‘Type’ of key fish habitat encountered along the pipeline alignment. Table 6.2 – Key Fish Habitat Sensitivity Classification Scheme Type 1 – Highly sensitive key fish habitat
strapweed (Posidonia australis)
Zostera, Heterozostera, Halophila and Ruppia species of seagrass beds >5m2 in area
coastal saltmarsh >5m2 in area
coral communities
coastal lakes and lagoons that have a natural opening and closing regime (i.e. are not permanently open or artificially opened or are subject to one off unauthorised openings)
Marine Park, an aquatic reserve or intertidal protected area
SEPP 14 coastal wetlands, wetlands recognised under international agreements (e.g. Ramsar, JAMBA, CAMBA, ROKAMBA wetlands), wetlands listed in the Directory of Important Wetlands of Australia
freshwater habitats that contain in-stream gravel beds, rocks greater than 500 mm in two dimensions, snags greater than 300 mm in diameter or 3 m in length, or native aquatic plants
any known or expected protected or threatened species habitat or area of declared ‘critical habitat’ under the FM Act
mound springs
Type 2 – Moderately sensitive key fish habitat
Zostera, Heterozostera, Halophila and Ruppia species of seagrass beds >5m2 in area
mangroves
coastal saltmarsh <5m2 in area
marine macroalgae such as Ecklonia and Sargassum species
estuarine and marine rocky reefs
coastal lakes and lagoons that are permanently open or subject to artificial opening via agreed management arrangements (e.g. managed in line with an entrance management plan)
aquatic habitat within 100 m of a marine park, an aquatic reserve or intertidal protected area
PAGE 55 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
stable intertidal sand / mud flats, coastal and estuarine sandy beaches with large populations of in-fauna
freshwater habitats and brackish wetlands, lakes and lagoons other than those defined in Type 1
weir pools and dams up to full supply level where the weir or dam is across a natural waterway
Type 3 – Minimally sensitive key fish habitat, which may include
unstable or unvegetated sand or mud substrate, coastal and estuarine sandy beaches with minimal or no in-fauna
coastal and freshwater habitats not included in Types 1 or 2
ephemeral aquatic habitat not supporting native aquatic or wetland vegetation
6.3.3.2 Waterway Classification Mapping of Key Fish Habitat area undertaken by DPI (2007) was reviewed. These are areas mapped as providing aquatic and riparian habitat that are important to the maintenance of fish (including aquatic invertebrate) populations and communities and the commercial and recreational fishing industries, and which have the highest priority for being conserved and protected from potential adverse impacts associated with development. Waterways intersected by the pipeline were then classified in accordance with NSW DPI’s classification scheme (2013). This classification scheme factors in the functionality of the waterway as fish habitat, using indicators such as:
hydraulic geometry (stream shape and size)
frequency of stream flows (perennial, intermittent or ephemeral)
presence of aquatic habitat units (pools, riffles, vegetation, snags)
presence of threatened or protected fish species and other native fish, and
connection to adjacent habitats (e.g. floodplain wetlands).
Waterway class is used to assess the impacts of activities on fish habitats in conjunction with the habitat sensitivity type. The waterway class scheme has been used to guide impact mitigation measures to minimise impacts on different fish habitats. Table 6.3 – Classification of Waterways for Fish Passage Classification
Characteristics of Water Class
Class 1 Major key fish habitat
Marine or estuarine waterway or permanently flowing or flooded freshwater waterway (e.g. river or major creek), habitat of a threatened or protected fish species or ‘critical habitat’.
Class 2 Moderate key fish habitat
Non-permanently flowing (intermittent) stream, creek or waterway (generally names) with clearly defined bed and banks with semi-permanent to permanent waters in pools or in connected wetlands areas. Freshwater aquatic vegetation is present. Type 1 and 2 habitats present.
Class 3 Minimal key fish habitat
Named or unnamed waterway with intermittent flow and sporadic refuge, breeding or feeding areas for aquatic fauna (e.g. fish, yabbies). Semi-permanent pools form within the waterway or adjacent wetlands after a rain event. Otherwise, any minor waterway that interconnects with wetlands or other Class 1-3 fish habitats.
Class 4 Unlikely key fish habitat
Waterway (generally unnamed) with intermittent flow following rain events only, little or no defined drainage channel, little or no flow or free standing water or pools post rain events (e.g. dry gullies or shallow floodplain depressions with no aquatic flora present).
PAGE 56 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.3.4
AQUATIC HABITAT VALUES
6.3.4.1 Catchments The proposed pipeline alignment occurs in the Macquarie River catchment from the start of the alignment to 2 km north of Millthorpe (excluding a small section south of Orange Airport that falls within the Lachlan River catchment), and occurs in the Lachlan River catchment from Millthorpe to the end of the alignment.
6.3.4.2 Waterways The pipeline alignment intersects 63 waterways, including a number of named watercourses and smaller tributaries, as summarised in the table below. Table 6.4 – Summary of Strahler Stream Order Waterways Intersected Stream Order
Number of Crossings
1
36
Unnamed drainage depressions
2
16
Unnamed drainage depressions
3
6
Spring Creek
4
5
Gosling Creek, School Creek, Belubula River, Coombing Creek
Named Waterway
6.3.4.3 Key Fish Habitats Seventeen of the waterways intersected by the alignment have been mapped by NSW DPI (2007) as Key Fish Habitat. Aquatic habitat sensitivities have been determined and Key Fish Habitat classifications were refined in accordance with the Policy and guidelines for fish habitat conservation and management (NSW DPI 2013). Based on this approach the alignment intersects:
3 x Class 1 waterways, representing major key fish habitat
6 x Class 2 waterways, representing moderate key fish habitat
10 x Class 3 waterways, representing minimal key fish habitat
44 x Class 4 waterways, representing unlikely key fish habitat.
Waterway class is used to assess the potential impacts of activities on fish habitats in conjunction with the habitat sensitivity type. The waterway class scheme is used in this assessment to guide impact mitigation measures to minimise impacts on fish habitats. The information provided in the table below has been used to inform relevant NSW DPI permit applications under the FM Act. For the purposes of this assessment Class 1, 2 and 3 waterways have been identified as Key Fish Habitat. The location of all 19 Key Fish Habitat pipeline crossings are identified in the Schedule of Drawings. .
PAGE 57 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.5 – Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats
KP
Stream Order
Waterway
Mapped as Key fish habitat
Waterway classification
Type
Reason
Class
Aquatic habitat assessment undertaken
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
4
Gosling Creek
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
2 (Moderate key fish habitat)
2
Tributary of Spring Creek Reservoir
-
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
2 (Moderate key fish habitat)
3
Spring Creek
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
1 (Major key fish habitat)
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
OC-1.7
OC-5.5
OC-7.0
OC-9.0
OC-10.4
OC-11.4
OC-11.5
OC-11.6
OC-14.3
OC-15.2
Aquatic habitat sensitivity
PAGE 58 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.5 – Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats
KP
Stream Order
Waterway
Mapped as Key fish habitat
Waterway classification
Type
Reason
Class
Aquatic habitat assessment undertaken
1
Unnamed drainage depression
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
3
Unnamed drainage depression
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants*
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants*
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
4
Unnamed drainage depression
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants*
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
OC-19.6
OC-19.7
OC-20.3
OC-20.5
OC-22.0
OC-24.1
OC-24.3
OC-27.4
OC-27.9
OC-28.7
Aquatic habitat sensitivity
PAGE 59 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats
KP
Stream Order
Waterway
Mapped as Key fish habitat
Waterway classification
Type
Reason
Class
Aquatic habitat assessment undertaken
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
ď&#x192;ź
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Indiscernible*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
OC-29.0
OC-29.8
OC-31.1
OC-32.2
OC-32.4
OC-33.1
OC-35.0
OC-37.0
OC-37.9
OC-38.7
Aquatic habitat sensitivity
PAGE 60 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats
KP
Stream Order
Waterway
Mapped as Key fish habitat
Waterway classification
Type
Reason
Class
Aquatic habitat assessment undertaken
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
ď&#x192;ź (flora site)
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
OC-38.9
OC-41.2
OC-41.6
OC-42.5
OC-43.0
OC-43.3
OC-43.7
OC-44.6
OC-45.1
OC-45.2
Aquatic habitat sensitivity
PAGE 61 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.5 – Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats
KP
Stream Order
Waterway
Mapped as Key fish habitat
Type
Reason
Class
Aquatic habitat assessment undertaken
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater containing plants
habitat, aquatic
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
(flora site)
OC-45.7
OC-46.6
OC-48.7
BS-1.4
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
3
Unnamed creek
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
2 (Moderate key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
4
School Creek
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
2 (Moderate key fish habitat)
-
4
Belubula River
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
1 (Major key fish habitat)
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
BS-2.4
OC-50.3
OC-50.4
OC-52.2
OC-52.5
OC-53.6
Waterway classification
Aquatic habitat sensitivity
PAGE 62 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.5 – Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats
KP
Stream Order
Waterway
Mapped as Key fish habitat
Waterway classification
Type
Reason
Class
Aquatic habitat assessment undertaken
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants*
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
4
Coombing Creek
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
1 (Major key fish habitat)
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants*
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
3
Unnamed drainage depression
-
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
2 (Moderate key fish habitat)
-
3
Unnamed drainage depression
1 (Highly sensitive)
Freshwater habitat containing native aquatic plants
2 (Moderate key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
OC-53.8
OC-54.1
OC-54.4
OC-55.0
S7-0.3
S7-0.9
S7-0.9
S7-1.4
S7-2.4
S7-3.2
Aquatic habitat sensitivity
PAGE 63 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.5 – Waterways, Aquatic Habitat Sensitivity and Key Fish Habitats
KP
Stream Order
Waterway
Mapped as Key fish habitat
Type
Reason
Class
Aquatic habitat assessment undertaken
1
Unnamed drainage depression
-
3 (Minimally sensitive)
Highly ephemeral; native aquatic plants unlikely*
4 (Unlikely key fish habitat)
-
3
Unnamed drainage depression
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater habitat, likely to contain aquatic plants*
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
2
Unnamed drainage depression
-
2 (Moderately sensitive)
Ephemeral freshwater containing plants
3 (Minimal key fish habitat)
-
S7-3.3
S7-3.8
S7-3.9
Waterway classification
Aquatic habitat sensitivity
habitat, aquatic
PAGE 64 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.3.4.4 Endangered Ecological Communities The pipeline does not intersect any endangered ecological communities listed under the FM Act. The southern portion of the project falls within the Lachlan River Catchment, which contains the ‘Aquatic ecological community in the natural drainage system of the lowland catchment of the Lachlan River’ (the Lachlan River EEC). However, the Lachlan River EEC extends downstream from Wyangala Dam, is well removed from the project area, and is not expected to be impacted by the pipeline construction.
6.3.4.5 Threatened Fishes Searches of the NSW DPI Records Viewer (DPI 2015), EPBC Act Protected Matters database (DoE 2015), Atlas of NSW Wildlife database (OEH 2015a) and the Sustainable Rivers Audit 2 (MDBA 2012) identified eight threatened fishes as having been recorded from the broader Lachlan and Macquarie River catchments. Of these species, three fishes are listed under both the EPBC Act and FM Act. The remaining five species are listed under the FM Act only. Fish were not surveyed as part of the assessment. Instead, the assessment focussed on assessing habitat potential for threatened fishes that may be encountered within the project area. Although habitat for a number of these threatened fishes is likely to occur in the broader search area, preferred habitat for these species was not encountered in the vicinity of the proposed crossing locations. However, the Belubula River at Carcoar and Coombing Creek 2.8 km south of Carcoar provide marginal habitat for the Murray cod (Maccullochella peelii) and silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) on occasion.
6.3.4.6 Turtles A search of the Atlas of NSW Wildlife database (OEH 2015a) identified only one species of turtle from the search area. This is the eastern snake-necked turtle (Chelodina longicollis), a species commonly found throughout eastern Australia. This species was detected crossing the highway on a number of occasions and locations during the survey, typical of the overland migrations commonly undertaken by this species in the warmer months of the year.
6.3.4.7 Platypus The platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus), protected under the NP&W Act, has previously been recorded from a number of locations (17) within the search area, including the Belubula River approximately 8 km downstream of the proposed crossing location. The proposed crossing locations generally lacked habitat features suitable for platypus breeding. However, it is likely that platypus would transit a number of these waterways on occasion.
6.3.5
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
6.3.5.1 General The pipeline alignment intersects 63 waterways, including a number of named watercourses and smaller tributaries. Works within and adjoining the waterways of the project area, in particular those waterways representing Class 1 or 2 key fish habitat, have the potential to temporarily impact aquatic ecological values through:
vegetation clearing, earthworks, and vehicle use within, or adjacent to, waterways
creation of barriers obstructing surface water flows and aquatic fauna passage
unmitigated sediment laden stormwater runoff entering waterways
spills of contaminants such as fuels, oils or chemicals that could migrate into waters.
The level of impact is influenced by the construction methodology applied, environmental factors such as soil and substrate characteristics, vegetation type, flow levels, weather, and rehabilitation measures such as bank stabilisation and revegetation. PAGE 65 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
An approximate 3 m wide section of riverbed would be impacted by instream works at most crossings of Class 3 and 4 waterways. This area would be widened to up to 20 m in flowing Class 1 and 2 waterways, where earthworks will likely extend to the construction of temporary minor dams and flow diversions. Exceptions to this include Spring Creek 4.1 km south of Orange, a tributary of Spring Creek Reservoir 2.1 km from Orange, and School Creek at Carcoar, for which the pipeline is expected to be placed in the road abutment, elevated above an existing culvert, and pass over the creek from high bank to high bank, respectively. An approximate 3 m wide section of bank vegetation would also be temporarily impacted at each waterway crossing. Loss of bank vegetation would reduce edge habitat complexity, shelter and organic inputs into the stream reach. Weed management and site rehabilitation would assist in reducing impacts. The installation of instream structures during construction (temporary minor dams) may directly impact aquatic habitat through dredging and / or reclamation. This may include the relocation of large woody debris located within the dam footprint. Works that involve dredging or reclamation require consultation with DPI (Fisheries). The direct impact of any dredging or reclamation on instream habitat is expected to be minimal, owing to the relatively small impact footprint and the prevalence of similar habitat extending both upstream and downstream of crossing locations. Impacts would be localised and a small amount of large woody debris may need to be relocated from areas of disturbance. Minor dams may partially obstruct flow and impede fish passage for the duration of the works. The dams would require dewatering during installation. This has the potential to increase turbidity temporarily. The dams also have the potential to capture fish, and these would need to be salvaged during the dewatering. Pipeline construction through waterways has the potential to impact surface water quality through increased erosion of stream banks left exposed following vegetation clearing. In the absence of suitable controls, mobilised sediments can lead to increased suspended sediment loads in waterways. This can in turn reduce light penetration and visibility, limiting plant growth and impede fish movement. Increased sedimentation can also affect water chemistry, reduce waterway depths, change drainage patterns and smother benthic flora and fauna. Leaks or spills of hydrocarbon based fluids from construction equipment presents a potential risk. Hydrocarbons are toxic to aquatic flora and fauna at relatively low concentrations. Runoff of spilled fuels and oils into waterways is only likely to occur if spills occur in close proximity to the waterway, or if the spill or leak is left uncontrolled. The severity and duration of impacts would depend on the type and quantity of any fuel or oil spilled, and the effectiveness of containment measures.
6.3.5.2 Threatened Aquatic Species and Endangered Ecological Community Although unlikely to make substantial use of the project area, transient impacts to the silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Vulnerable (FM Act), Critically Endangered (EPBC Act); and the Murray Cod (Maccullochella peelii) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Vulnerable (EPBC Act), may occur as a result of the Project. A seven-part test of significance has been undertaken for these species. The assessment determined that the proposal is unlikely to result in significant impacts on either of these species.
6.3.5.3 Critical Habitat Critical habitat is the whole or any part of the habitat of an endangered species, population or ecological community or critically endangered species or ecological community that is critical to the survival of the species, population or ecological community and is declared as such under the FM Act. One critical habitat declaration is in place under the FM Act, being for the grey nurse shark (Carcharias taurus). No critical habitat occurs within the project area.
PAGE 66 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.3.6
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures would assist in minimising the ecological impacts of the project. Mitigation measures are divided into measures that should be undertaken as part of the project during:
design
planning,
construction,
reinstatement and rehabilitation; and
operations
6.3.6.1 Planning
For waterways within the jurisdiction of OCC, a permit from DPI Fisheries must be obtained prior to pipeline construction (i.e. dredging and reclamation works) within Key Fish Habitat areas, in accordance with Section 200 of the FM Act.
For waterways within the jurisdiction of Central Tablelands Water, being a public authority, DPI Fisheries must be notified (28 days notification) prior to pipeline construction (i.e. dredging and reclamation works) within Key Fish Habitat areas, in accordance with Section 199 of the FM Act.
A permit from DPI Fisheries must be attained from DPI Fisheries prior to the construction of any minor dams or other bunding that would block fish passage (even temporarily). This should be undertaken in conjunction with the Section 200 permit application and / or Section 199 notification.
Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plans should be developed for crossings of Class 1 and 2 waterways (as a minimum), and implemented during construction site establishment to minimise the likelihood of construction-related activities mobilising sediments and leading to turbidity and sedimentation of waterways.
6.3.6.2 Construction Methodology Where possible crossings should be constructed while the waterway is dry using the open cut trenching method. If flow is present water should be conveyed across the trench via flume pipes or, alternatively, the watercourse should be temporarily dammed and the water flow pumped around the crossing site.
Standard open cut Waterways that are Class 3 (minimal key fish habitat) and Class 4 (unlikely key fish habitat) are expected to be constructed using the standard open cut (trenching) method. This technique is most suited to dry or low flow conditions. It involves establishing a stable working platform either side of the watercourse and creating a trench using excavators. Tie-in points are located on high ground well away from any water flow. Trench spoil removed from the waterway should be placed above the bank. Trench and backfill activities should be undertaken in a manner that enables bed and bank material to be stockpiled separately and returned to the trench to match original conditions. Joined pipe is laid in the trench and spoil material returned to the trench. It is likely that Class 1 and Class 2 streams will require welded sections of mildsteel concrete lined (MSCL) pipe, concrete encased, through the watercourse. Rock protection should be placed over the trench in the stream bed where required, to prevent potential scouring during any high flow events.
Open cut with flow diversion Waterways that are Class 1 (major key fish habitat) and Class 2 (moderate key fish habitat) may require flow diversion during construction of the pipeline crossing. Flow diversion is a modification of the standard open cut method and should be applied where higher water volumes and flows (typically <1,000 L/s) are present or anticipated during the construction period. Flow diversion includes the use of PAGE 67 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
a flume pipe or pump to convey water through or around the work area. Each method requires the construction of two minor dams to create a dry work area within the crossing.
Open cut – minor dam and flume This method concentrates stream flows through a flume pipe to prevent siltation problems that may be created during trenching, lowering in and backfilling. Key considerations of this technique include:
It is not suitable for watercourses with broad channels, low gradients or permeable substrates.
Lower risk of erosion and sedimentation compared with the standard open cut technique due to diversion of flows around the works area.
The footprint of works will likely extend across the full corridor.
Fish passage is temporarily blocked (long, dark pipes create a behavioural barrier to fish movement), although the flow regime is effectively maintained.
Fish trapped in the impounded area require management (relocation of native species, euthanasia of pest species).
Water pumped from the impoundment area may require treatment prior to discharge.
Open cut – minor dam and pumping This method involves pumping water around the work area by constructing barrier dykes / head walls above and below the trenched area, keeping the work area relatively dry. Key considerations of this technique include:
Suitable for low gradient watercourses with a discharge <1,000 L/s.
Risk of malfunction or failure of the pump system.
Lower risk of erosion and sedimentation compared with the standard open cut technique due to diversion of flows around the works area.
The footprint of works will likely extend across the full corridor.
Fish passage is temporarily blocked, although the flow regime is effectively maintained
Fish trapped in the impounded area require management (relocation of native species, euthanasia of pest species).
Water pumped from the impoundment area may require treatment prior to discharge.
6.3.6.3 Construction Controls
Construction methods of waterway crossings shall allow for the free passage of fish downstream and upstream of the works areas at all times.
Any activities requiring the dewatering of a dammed area must ensure that affected water is pumped a minimum 30 m away from the waterway and should not re-enter the waterway. If water is to re-enter the waterway, water quality parameters must not be significantly different to receiving waters (as measured upstream of disturbance areas).
Only the minimum number of snags (large woody debris) should be disturbed within wetted habitat.
Within the Belubula River at Carcoar and Coombing Creek south of Carcoar, in which potential threatened fish habitat has been confirmed, snags must not be impacted by the works. No snags were encountered during the field survey. However snags can be mobile and may be present at the time of construction. DPI Fisheries must be contacted, and approval attained, prior to removing, realigning or relocating any snags at these locations.
Vehicles and machinery should be kept away from the banks of waterways where possible.
Areas for vehicle and machinery maintenance, refuelling, and storage of fuels, lubricants, and batteries, should be bunded in accordance with Australian Standard AS 1940-2004 The storage
PAGE 68 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
and handling of flammable and combustible liquids. Refuelling during construction should be undertaken > 50 m from a waterway.
Maintenance and daily checks of plant and equipment must be undertaken to minimise the risk of hydrocarbon spills or leaks.
Emergency spill kits must be made available and readily accessible for all plant and equipment at all times, and should include equipment for containment and clean-up of spills on dry soils/sediments as well as for water (e.g. floating booms).
Any contaminant spills (including fuel, hydraulic fluid etc.) must be contained (where safe to do so) and immediately reported to the construction manager / environmental advisor to establish a plan for remediation.
6.3.6.4 Reinstatement and Rehabilitation
Stream banks should be reinstated as near as practicable to their original profile. Where required, geofabric, which remains permeable to water and enhances plant growth, should be used to stabilise soil and sediment during re-establishment.
Vegetation should be reinstated to facilitate bank stabilisation. Following construction, reinstatement should be monitored and livestock access temporarily restricted to facilitate rehabilitation.
6.3.6.5 Operation
The Operations Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) will include a procedure for checking that operation of the scour vales is not causing localised scouring.
Pipeline alignment should be patrolled by personnel trained in the identification of weed species likely to be encountered, particularly WoNS and other declared noxious weeds, and in techniques for their management.
6.3.7
CONCLUSION
Sixty five waterways will be intersected by the proposed pipeline, including a number of named watercourses, but mainly smaller tributaries and drainage depressions. The level of impact will be influenced by construction methodologies, environmental factors such as soil and substrate characteristics, vegetation type, flow levels, weather, and rehabilitation efforts. Construction methodologies are expected to include open cut with flow diversion on most Class 1 and 2 waterways, and open cut trenching on most Class 3 and 4 waterways. However, the construction technique adopted will be dependent on the conditions encountered at each of the 63 waterway crossings at the time of construction. Through adoption of appropriate impact mitigation measures, the integrity of receiving waters is unlikely to be affected. The project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on threatened or migratory species or ecological communities recognised as MNES by the EPBC Act. Similarly, the project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats, within the meaning of the FM Act. Consequently, the requirement for a Species Impact Statement is not triggered.
6.4
ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
6.4.1
INTRODUCTION
An assessment in accordance with the Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010) has been undertaken for the Project. In addition to the basic tasks required for a due diligence assessment an extended background review, as well as an archaeological survey in accordance with the Code of Practice for Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010b) was conducted.
PAGE 69 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
A full copy of this specialist assessment is provided in Appendix C. Provided below is a summary of the key findings and required mitigation measures.
6.4.2
SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT
The following is a summary of the major objectives of the Aboriginal heritage assessment:
Conduct background research in order to recognise any identifiable trends in site distribution and location, including a search of the Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS).
Undertake archaeological survey as per the Code of Practice for Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal objects in New South Wales 2010, with particular focus on landforms with high potential for heritage places within the Project area, as identified through background research.
Record and assess sites identified during the survey in compliance with the guidelines endorsed by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH).
Determine levels of archaeological and cultural significance of the Project area.
Make recommendations to mitigate and manage any cultural heritage values identified within the Project area.
6.4.3
ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION
Consultation with the Aboriginal community is not a formal requirement of the Due Diligence process and has not been undertaken as part of this assessment. If Aboriginal heritage items are located during construction and will be impacted by construction then Aboriginal heritage stakeholder consultation must be undertaken as outlined in the Aboriginal cultural heritage consultation requirements for proponents (DECCW 2010c).
6.4.4
LANDSCAPE CONTEXT
6.4.4.1 Ethnohistory The Project area falls within in an area identified as being within the boundaries of the Wiradjuri linguistic group. The Wiradjuri linguistic group covers a large portion of the central west. The linguistic groups Darkinjang and Daruk are located east of Orange and Gandangara and Ngunwal east of Cowra.
6.4.4.2 Previously Recorded Sites A search of the NSW OEH Aboriginal Information Management System (AHIMS) database was conducted on 23 November 2015. The search identified 65 Aboriginal archaeological sites within a 10 km search area, centred on the proposed Project area. None of these registered sites are located within the Project area.
6.4.5
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
A field survey of the Project area was undertaken between the 2 to the 6 November 2015. The field survey sampling strategy, methodology and a discussion of results are provided below.
6.4.5.1 Archaeological Survey Aims The principle aims of the survey were to:
To undertake a systematic survey of the Project area targeting areas with the potential for Aboriginal heritage.
Identify and record Aboriginal archaeological sites visible on the ground surface.
Identify and record areas of Aboriginal archaeological and cultural sensitivity.
PAGE 70 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.4.5.2 Survey Methods The archaeological survey was conducted on foot. Recording during the survey followed the archaeological survey requirements of the Code of Practice for Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010) and industry best practice methodology. Information that was recorded during the survey included:
Aboriginal objects or sites present in the Project Area during the survey.
Survey coverage.
Any resources that may have potentially have been exploited by Aboriginal people.
Landform elements, distinguishable areas of land approximately 40 m across or with a 20 m radius.
Photographs of the site indicating landform.
Ground surface visibility (GSV) and areas of exposure.
Observable past or present disturbances to the landscape from human or animal activities; and,
Aboriginal artefacts, culturally modified trees or any other Aboriginal sites.
Where possible, identification of natural soil deposits within the Project area was undertaken. Photographs and recording techniques were incorporated into the survey including representative photographs of survey units, landform, vegetation coverage, ground surface visibility and the recording of soil information for each survey unit where possible. Any potential Aboriginal objects observed during the survey were documented and photographed. The location of Aboriginal cultural heritage and points marking the boundary of the landform elements were recorded using a hand-held Global Positioning System and the Map Grid of Australia (94) coordinate system.
6.4.5.3 Survey Limits With any archaeological survey there are several factors that influence the effectiveness (the likelihood of finding sites) of the survey. The factors that contributed most to the effectiveness of the survey within the Project area were the high levels of modern disturbance and the low levels of visibility. In most archaeological reports and guidelines visibility refers to ground surface visibility (GSV), and is usually a percentage estimate of the ground surface that is visible and allowing for the detection of (usually stone) artefacts that may be present on the ground surface. There were varying degrees of GSV within the Project Area because of its overall length. The majority of the Project area has a low level of GSV, approximately two to five percent, due to the low-lying vegetation. Exposure refers to the geomorphic conditions of the local landform being surveyed, and attempts to describe the relationship between those conditions and the likelihood the prevailing conditions provide for the exposure of (buried) archaeological materials. Whilst also usually expressed as a percentage estimate, exposure is different to visibility in that it is in part a summation of geomorphic processes, rather than a simple observation of the ground surface. There were also small areas of exposure throughout the Project area, which were the target of spot visits. Disturbance in the Project area is associated with natural and human agents. Natural agents generally affect small areas and include the burrowing and scratching in soil by animals. Some sections of the Project area are currently being used to hold livestock and there is substantial disturbance to the soils as a result. Disturbances associated with recent human activities are also prevalent in the Project area. A large portion of the Project area is located in existing road corridors so there are large areas of disturbances related to the construction of the roads themselves, their associated infrastructure and the residential properties which adjoin them.
PAGE 71 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.4.5.4 Survey Results The Archaeological survey was conducted across four days with two archaeologists. A number of transects were walked within the Project area and other areas were subject to spot visits. The assessment for areas that have low or high archaeological potential within the Project area was based on a number of factors, including environmental conditions, geomorphological processes, past land use activities, results of previous archaeological studies, surveys and test excavations, results of the current survey and site predictive modelling for the region. Based upon the desktop assessment and archaeological survey two areas of high archaeological potential were identified. Table 6.6 – Aboriginal Sites Recorded During Survey
6.4.6
Site Name
Site Description
Site Area (m2)
Carcoar PAD 1
Potential archaeological deposit
33, 283
Carcoar Modified Tree 1
Modified Tree
5
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Carcoar PAD 1: This Aboriginal site is a potential archaeological deposit (PAD) located on the banks of the Coombing Creek. The proposed pipeline alignment will dissect this site. The survey revealed that there is a corridor of disturbance within the site from the installation of a previous pipeline. The mitigation measure for the proposed pipeline is that it be located in the already present area of disturbance, as close to the existing pipeline as possible, no further than 2 meters away. This measure will insure that the proposed pipeline will not impact on the Aboriginal site. Carcoar Modified Tree 1: This site is located outside of the proposed works construction zone. As a result no harm need occur to this site.
6.4.7
MITIGATION MEASURES
The proposed pipeline within the sensitive area adjacent to Coombing Creek will be located in the existing area of disturbance, as close to the existing pipeline as possible (i.e. no further than 2 meters away).
All contractors should be provided maps of the Aboriginal sites.
On the ground sites boundaries should be marked and the impact corridor clearly identifiable.
All Aboriginal objects and Places are protected under the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. It is an offence to knowingly disturb an Aboriginal site without a consent permit issued by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH). Should any Aboriginal objects be encountered during works associated with this proposal, works must cease in the vicinity and the find should not be moved until assessed by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be an Aboriginal object the archaeologist will provide further recommendations. These may include notifying the OEH and Aboriginal stakeholders.
Aboriginal ancestral remains may be found in a variety of landscapes in NSW. If any suspected human remains are discovered during any activity the following must be undertaken. Immediately cease all work at that location with not further movement or disturbance of the remains. Notify the NSW Police and OEH’s Environmental Line on 131 555 as soon as practicable and provide details of the remains and their location Not recommence work at that location unless authorised in writing by OEH.
PAGE 72 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.5
HISTORIC HERITAGE
6.5.1
INTRODUCTION
The historic heritage assessment undertaken has included comprehensive historical research which has encompassed the entire Project footprint and consists of a constraints analysis designed to mitigate impacts to heritage items and where applicable identified further approvals which will be required for the project to proceed. The assessment has identified known and unknown heritage items within the Project area and presented impact mitigation measures for those items. A full copy of this specialist assessment is provided in Appendix C. Provided below is a summary of the key findings and required mitigation measures.
6.5.2
ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES
The following is a summary of the major objectives of the assessment:
Identify and assess the potential heritage values and any potential archaeological deposits in the Project area and any visual impacts to heritage items within the vicinity of the Project area. The assessment aims to achieve this objective by: –
Provide a brief summary of the principle historical influences that have contributed to creating the present – day built and archaeological environment of the Project area through using resources already available and some limited new research.
–
Identification of sites and features within the Project area which are already recognised for their heritage value through statutory and non – statutory heritage listings.
–
Identification of the heritage significance of sites and features within the Project area which are not recognised through statutory heritage listings.
–
Identification of known or potential heritage items and archaeological sites within or adjacent to the Project area.
Assess the impact of the proposed works on the heritage items within the vicinity of the Project area.
Recommend measures to avoid or mitigate any negative impacts on the heritage items within the Project area.
6.5.3
HISTORICAL ANALYSIS
The historical analysis consists of historical research which has been undertaken to identify the land use history of the Project area, identify key phases in its history and identify the location of any archaeological resources within the Project area. The historical research places the history of the Project area into the broader historical context of NSW. Upon the completion of the historical research a site survey was undertaken with the aim of establishing the location of known and previously unidentified heritage values within the Project area.
6.5.3.1 Archival research The historical research mainly focused on published secondary sources. Research using primary sources was undertaken for the Project area at the following locations:
Orange City Library.
State Records NSW.
NSW Department Property Information (LPI) (former Land Titles).
The National Libraries Digital Archive – Trove.
NSW Department of Public Works.
Millthorpe Golden Memories Museum – Millthorpe Historical Society. PAGE 73 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Contextual analysis is undertaken to place the history of a particular site within relevant historical contexts in order to gauge how typical or unique the history of a particular site actually is. This is usually ascertained by gaining an understanding of the history of a site in relation to the broad historical themes characterising Australia at the time. Such themes have been established by the Australian Heritage Commission and the NSW Heritage Office and are outlined in synoptic form in New South Wales Historical Themes, issued by the NSW Heritage Office. A thematic study has been prepared for central west by the NSW Heritage Office.
6.5.3.2 Statutory and Non-Statutory Registers During the historical research the following statutory registers were searched:
The State Heritage register (SHR) - Items that are listed on the SHR have been assessed to be of significance to the state of NSW.
Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Registers - Culturally significant items or places managed or owned by Government agencies are listed on the Heritage and Conservation register.
Local Environmental Plans (LEP) – A LEP is a legal document prepared by local councils and approved by the State Government, to regulate land use and development.
The following non - statutory register was also searched
6.5.4
The Register of the National Estate – The register was established under the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975 (repealed). The Register of the National Estate was closed in 2007 and is no longer a statutory list.
SITE SURVEY
The purpose of the site visit was to better understand the heritage character of existing heritage items and to more accurately determine the nature and extent of the archaeological resources within the Project area. During the site visit all previously identified heritage items were physically assessed. All built structures were inspected externally and a photographic record was prepared. A field inspection of the Project Area was undertaken between the 2 to the 6 November 2015. The principal aims of the survey were to identify heritage items within the Project area, to identify any previously unrecorded heritage items which may be present. An analysis of the potential for the site to contain archaeological remains was undertaken based upon the surface conditions.
6.5.5
ASSESSMENT RESULTS
6.5.5.1 Historical Context The European settlement of the Central West reflects the broader movement of people throughout NSW. In 1813 Surveyor George Evans crossed the Blue Mountains and entered the Central Tablelands, which begun an era of official exploration. It was in 1815 that Surveyor George Evans explored the area around Carcoar, which is within the Project Area. A number of commercial industries contributed in the increase in settlement in the region. The identification and mining of earth materials has been an important industry within the Central West since the 1840s. Settlers were attracted to the area by mining during both the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Within Australia the mineral Copper was first mined in NSW and in 1845 a number of copper mines were in operation in the Central West. Copper was discovered in Carcoar in the 1840s and in 1851 gold was discovered in Bathurst. Within the Project area there are a number of historical items that relate to this era of mining, including the Blayney Copper Mine and the Carcoar Iron Ore quarry. Agriculture was also a large industry that increased settlement in the region, with farmers from east NSW, Victoria and South Australia moving into the area. This industry also brought in a seasonal migration with works associated with the yearly harvest, planting or searing. There are the number of PAGE 74 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
heritage listed farming homesteads and planting throughout the region. The Highfield homestead and tree plantings are one such example within the current Project area. The earliest public enterprise in the Central West was the building of a road over the Blue Mountains, to assist in the movement of settlers. In many areas of NSW the settlement of an area predates the building of major roadways. However, for the Central West the settlement could only occur once this infrastructure was built. The railway line reached Bathurst on the 4 April 1876. The construction of the railway altered settlement patterns. With the twelve years the railway took to reach Carcoar being too long a period for the village to regain its regional importance. Once again the remnants of this era are evident throughout the Project area with a number of heritage items relating to the railway including the Blayney railway subway. A review of the contextual history in conjunction with the Thematic History of the Central West identified a number of historical themes which relate to the occupational history of the Project area.
6.5.5.2 Built Heritage Items As a result of the historical analysis a number of built heritage items and conservation areas have been identified within the project area (refer Table 6.7).
6.5.5.3 Archaeological Assessment The potential archaeological resource relates to the predicted level of preservation of archaeological resources within the Project area. Archaeological potential is influenced by the geographical and topographical location, the level of development, subsequent impacts, levels of on-site fill, factors influencing preservation such as soil type and where the potential archaeological resource has the ability to yield evidence which cannot be derived from any other source. An assessment of archaeological potential has been derived from the historical analysis and the site survey. The archival research and site survey identified a number of archaeological values not recorded on statutory registers which need to be considered. Within the Project area there are eight areas of potential historical archaeological sensitivity (PHAS), as detailed below: PHAS 1: section of the alignment within Orange along Lone Pine Avenue where the works enter the curtilage of the Orange Cemetery the crown plan for this area shows 'huts' and the original Orange cemetery boundaries. PHAS 2: section of the alignment at the junction of Lone Pine Avenue & the Mitchell Hwy where the crown plan indicates a structure called the 'old toll house'. PHAS 3: section of the alignment in Orange, at the junction of Lone Pine Avenue and Blowes Road where the crown plan shows two 'old marked tree line' and a number of built structures. PHAS 4: section of the alignment, along Huntly road and Dane Lane where the crown plan shows a number of 'huts' in association with the railway line. PHAS 5: section of the alignment in Spring Hill, along Whiley Road where the original diagram for the Spring Hill cemetery is shown adjacent to the road reserve. PHAS 6: north of the Mid Western Highway near Carcoar where the crown plan shows a number of built structures within the Project area. PHAS 7: northern section of the alignment through Carcoar where the crown plan from 1882 shows a number of built structures. PHAS 8: southern section of the alignment through Carcoar where the crown plan from 1882 shows a number of built structures
PAGE 75 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.5.6
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
6.5.6.1 Type of Impact Impacts from the proposed works can be classified under three main categories: direct impacts, indirect impacts and no impact. These kinds of impacts are dependent on nature of the heritage item and its associated curtilage.
Direct impacts Direct impacts are where the completion of the project will result in a physical loss or alteration to a heritage item. Direct impacts can be divided into whole or partial impacts. Physical impact - whole: where the project will have a whole impact on a heritage item resulting in the complete physical loss of the item. This normally occurs where a heritage item falls entirely within the proposed works boundary and needs to be demolished. Physical impact - partial: where the project will have a partial impact on an item which could result in the loss or reduction in heritage significance. The degree of impact through partial impacts is dependent on the nature and setting of a heritage item. These impacts are typically minor impacts to a small proportion of a curtilage of an item or works occurring within the curtilage of a heritage item, which may impact on its setting.
Indirect impacts Indirect impacts to a heritage item relate to alterations to the environment or setting of a heritage item, which will result in a loss of heritage value. This includes visual impacts caused during construction and after the implementation of a project. Indirect impacts diminish the significance of an item through altering its relationship to its surroundings; this in turn impacts its ability to be appreciated for its historical, functional or aesthetic values
No impact Where the project does not constitute a measurable direct or indirect impact to the heritage item.
6.5.6.2 Statement of Heritage Impact A statement of heritage impact for each registered heritage item, conservation area and unregistered archaeological relic, within or adjacent to the Project area is detailed in Table 6.7 below.
PAGE 76 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.7 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Statement of Heritage Impacts Biosis ID
Details
Impact
Discussion
Mitigation measures
Management Recommendation
Built Heritage No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
Marsden Family Vault
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B3
Railway subway
Indirect impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is in close proximity to the works.
Maintain a distance of 2 metres from this structure during all construction activities.
Recommendation 1: Proceed with caution.
B4
Cottage and Garden
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B5
Blayney Lime Kilns
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B6
Roman Catholic Church group including Church of the Immaculate Conception and Shalom House of Prayer
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B7
Residence (former Presbyterian Manse)
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B1
Blayney (former)
B2
B8
Copper
Mine
The Saddlery (former)
PAGE 77 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.7 – Statement of Heritage Impacts Details
Impact
Discussion
Mitigation measures
Management Recommendation
B9
Public school buildings and old growth tree plantings
Direct Impact – Partial
During the archival research it is evident that a built structure was previously located within the grounds of the currently heritage listed Public school. During the site visit relics were located within this area. The proposed works will impact this area of the heritage item.
No measures can be taken to avoid this area.
Recommendation 2 and 3: Section 140 permit.
B10
Roman Catholic Presbytery (former) and outbuildings
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B11
“Highfield”, homestead and tree planting
Direct Impact – Partial
The proposed work zone is located within this heritage items curtilage. The built heritage is located in close proximity to the work.
Maintain a 1 metre distance from all built structures and a 2 metre distance from the tree plantings during all construction activities.
Recommendation 1: Proceed with caution.
B12
Carcoar Iron Ore Quarry
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B13
“Coombing homestead outbuildings
Park”, and
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B14
Semi-detached cottages
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B15
“The Wattles”, driveway plantings and garden (Hawthorne bushes).
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
B16
St Canice’s Roman Catholic Church
Direct Impact – Partial
The proposed work boundary is located within the heritage items curtilage. During the site visit relics were located in front of the property. The proposed work will impact the area near the heritage item. This heritage item is also located in close proximity to heritage item M1.
The creation of a 'No go' area, which is temporary fenced for contractors. Work can only be conducted within that designated area. No storage of construction material in this area.
Recommendation 1 and 4: Proceed with caution and a 'No –go' areas.
Biosis ID
PAGE 78 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.7 – Statement of Heritage Impacts Biosis ID
Details
Impact
Discussion
Mitigation measures
Management Recommendation
B17
“Spring Grove”, house, garden and outbuildings (Hawthorne bushes)
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
P7A2
17 Mandurama Street
Direct Impact – Partial
During the site visit a built structure was located.
Maintain a 1 metre distance from the structure.
Recommendation 1 and 6: Proceed with caution and submission of inventory forms.
Carcoar Wooden Bridge
Direct Impact – Partial
During the site visit a wooden bridge was located crossing a tributary of Belubula River. Note: Blayney Shire Council has flagged its intent to replace this bridge in either 2016 or 2017. This replacement has nothing to do with the CTRWSPP and will be subject to separate assessment and Part 5 considerations undertaken by Blayney Council.
Do not impact the structure during construction.
Recommendation 1 and 6: Proceed with caution and submission of inventory forms.
Brick Culverts
Direct Impact – Partial
During the site visit a two brick culverts were located.
Do not excavate above these culverts to a depth further than 1.5 metres. Insure their structural integrity before construction activities.
Recommendation 1 and 6: Proceed with caution and submission of inventory forms.
O1
Orange Cemeteries “Old Portion“
Direct and Indirect Impact – Partial and visual
From the archival research it is evident that the original cemeteries layout was located within the current road reserve, outside of the heritage items boundary. The proposed works would impact this area. Any above ground structures built would affect the aesthetic setting of the heritage item.
No measures can be taken to avoid this area.
Recommendation 1. Proceed with caution.
O2
The Lone Pine
Indirect Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. This heritage item is also located within investigation Phase 2.
Maintain a 2 metre distance from this structure during all construction activities
Recommendation 1: Proceed with caution.
O3
Railway infrastructure, including bridges and culverts
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
O4
Spring Hill Cemetery
Direct Impact – Partial
From the archival research it is evident that the original cemeteries layout was located within the current road reserve, outside of the heritage items boundary. The proposed work would impact this area.
No measures can be taken to avoid this area.
Recommendation 1: Proceed with caution.
P8A3
P9A1
PAGE 79 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.7 – Statement of Heritage Impacts Biosis ID O5
CC1
M1
Details Clearview House
Uniting Church
Millthorpe Cemetery
Discussion
Mitigation measures
Management Recommendation
Indirect impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is in close proximity to the works.
Maintain a 1 metre distance from the root systems of the pine trees associated with the heritage item.
Recommendation 1: Proceed with caution.
No Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
n/a
None
Indirect Impact
The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent / within the heritage items curtilage. This heritage item is located adjacent to heritage item B16.
The creation of a 'No go' area, which is temporary fenced for contractors. Work can only be conducted within that designated area. No storage of construction material in this area
Recommendation 1 and 4: Proceed with caution. And No go areas
Impact
General
Conservation areas CA1
Spring Hill Heritage Conservation Area
Direct impact partial
The proposed work will have an impact within this conservation area.
Do not impact heritage items within this area.
Refer to specific areas heritage items recommendations
CA2
Carcoar Heritage Conservation Area
Direct impact partial
The proposed work will have an impact within this conservation area.
Do not impact heritage items within this area.
Refer to specific areas heritage items recommendations
CA3
Millthorpe Heritage Conservation Area
Direct impact partial
The proposed work will have an impact within this conservation area.
Do not impact heritage items within this area.
Refer to specific areas heritage items recommendations
Archaeology PHAS 1
Refer to O1 above for statement of impact and recommendation.
PHAS 2
-
Direct Impact – Partial
During the archival research on the Crown plans the location of a 'toll house' was marked. During the site visit relics were located in this area. The proposed work zone boundary will be located in close proximity to this area.
Maintain a suitable distance from the relics during all construction activities.
Recommendation 1: Proceed with caution.
PHAS 3
-
Direct Impact – Partial
During the archival research an 'old marked tree line' was identified on the Crown plans. During the site visit approximately 62 pine trees were identified along Blowes road. The proposed works will enter the curtilage of these relics.
Maintain a suitable distance from the trees root system.
Recommendation 1: Proceed with caution
PAGE 80 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.7 – Statement of Heritage Impacts Biosis ID
Details
Impact
No Impact
Discussion The proposed work zone boundary is located adjacent to the heritage item. The heritage item is located sufficiently far outside the proposed work zone boundary as to not be affected. There are no measurable impacts to this heritage item.
PHAS 4
-
PHAS 5
Refer to O4 above for statement of impact and recommendation.
PHAS 7
-
Direct Impact – Partial
PHAS 8
-
Direct Impact – Partial
Mitigation measures
Management Recommendation
n/a
None
During the site visit relics were located within Area 2.
No measures can be taken to avoid this area.
Recommendation 2 and 3: Section 140 permit.
During the site visit relics were located within Area 2. Heritage Item B9 is within this area.
No measures can be taken to avoid this area.
Recommendation 2 and 3: Section 140 permit.
Source: "Insert Table Source or delete line"
PAGE 81 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.5.7
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures to be implemented as part of the Project include compliance with specific recommendations from the historic heritage assessment. These recommendations are detailed below.
Recommendation 1: The works may proceed with caution The proposed works are considered to be appropriate but caution must be taken. Any loss of significance that may be experienced will be mitigated through implementing recommendations 2 to 5. Specific mitigation measures are detailed below:
B3 Railway Subway – maintain a distance of 2 m from this structure during all construction activities.
B11 “Highfield” homestead and tree planting- maintain a 1 m distance from all built structures and a 2 m distance from the tree plantings during all construction activities.
P7A2: 17 Mandurama Street – maintain a 1 m distance from the structure.
P8A3 Carcoar Wooden Bridge - do not impact the structure during construction.
P9A1 Brick Culverts - do not excavate above these culverts to a depth further than 1.5 metres. Ensure their structural integrity before construction activities.
O2 The Lone Pine - maintain a 2 m distance from this structure during all construction activities
O5 Clearview House - maintain a 1 m distance from the root systems of the pine trees associated with the heritage item.
PHAS 2 - 'toll house' shown on old Crown Plans - maintain a suitable distance during all construction activities.
PHAS 3 'old marked tree line' identified on the Crown plans. - maintain a suitable distance from the trees root.
Recommendation 2: Application of a Section 140 Permit A section 140 permit must be obtained for the works to commence. In NSW, archaeological sites of State or Local significance are considered "relics", which are protected by the Heritage Act 1977. In NSW impacts to relics are only permitted with a Section 140 approval (excavation permit) from the Heritage Council of New South Wales. Approval through this permit must also be obtained prior to excavating any land in NSW where there is a possibility that archaeological relics may be disturbed. The NSW Heritage Act 1977 currently affords statutory protection to relics of local or state significance that form part of archaeological deposits. This protection is extended to potential relics, that is, unconfirmed but probably existing archaeological sites. Consultation and discussion with the Heritage Branch should begin well before lodging an application for a permit to disturb or destroy a historical archaeological site. The Heritage Act also provides automatic protection to "relics". The Act defines "relics" as: Any deposit, artefact, object or material evidence that: (a) relates to the settlement of the area that comprises NSW, not being Aboriginal settlement, and (b) is of State or local heritage significance Section 139 of the Heritage Act states that: (1) A person must not disturb or excavate any land knowing or having reasonable cause to suspect that the disturbance or excavation will or is likely to result in a relic being discovered,
PAGE 82 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
exposed, moved, damaged or destroyed unless the disturbance or excavation is carried out in accordance with an excavation permit. (2) A person must not disturb or excavate any land on which the person has discovered or exposed a relic except in accordance with an excavation permit.
Recommendation 3: Archaeological monitoring required The assessment has determined that there is the potential for unrecorded archaeological relics, which are likely to have local significance if encountered, associated with: PHAS 7/P7A2 – Historical relics and structure. PHAS 8/B9 – Public school historical relics. Works associated with implementing an archaeological monitoring program will consist of:
Preparation of a research design and section 140 permit application for submission to the NSW Heritage Division (part of OEH) which will detail the premise, aim, objects and methods which underpin the archaeological monitoring program (see Recommendation 3 for details of the approvals process). Note that NSW Heritage Council has a 28 day timeframe for processing section 140 permit applications.
The conditions of the section 140 permit should be integrated into the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for the project. This will require Council, the construction contractor and nominated excavation director to liaise closely to formulate a program of archaeological monitoring at the four locations outlined above.
Monitoring will need to be conducted by the nominated excavation director and will consist of a process where the archaeological team works with the construction contractor during the excavation of the pipeline to identify and record archaeological remains of significance. Where significant archaeological remains are encountered it will need to be established whether they can be preserved through being left in insitu or if they need to be recorded prior to removal. This will ensure that any impacts to archaeological "relics" considered to be significant at a state or local level are mitigated.
Prior to, during and upon the completion of the monitoring works, the nominated excavation director in accordance with the section 140 approval must keep NSW Heritage Division informed of the proposed timeframe for monitoring, the results and submit a final report which details the findings.
Recommendation 4: 'No go' areas and temporary fencing during construction Two 'No go' areas should be established within B16 (St Canice’s Roman Catholic Church) and M1 (Millthorpe Cemetery). These 'No go' area should be established at an appropriate distance to protect the heritage items, but allow construction to proceed unhindered. 'No go' areas should be marked on all construction plans, physically fenced off at the site and incorporated into inductions/tool box talks with contractors undertaking work within the vicinity. No storage of construction material in this area
Recommendation 5: Retention of existing neighbouring colour schemes Any newly built above ground structures in association with heritage items, or within heritage conservation areas, should adopt the colours associated with the surrounding landscape to integrate the development with the surrounding locality.
PAGE 83 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Recommendation 6: Submission of inventory forms During the site survey three unregistered built heritage items (P7A2 – 17 Mandurama Street, P8A3 – Carcoar Wooden Bridge and P9A1 – Brick culverts) were identified. Inventory forms for these heritage items should to be submitted to the relevant local council for addition into their local environmental plan. The table below provides a breakdown on when these recommendations (mitigation measures) need to be undertaken and who will have responsibility for implementing them Table 6.8 – Responsibilities and Timing for Historic Heritage Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measures
When
Responsibility
1 – Proceed with Caution
During construction
Construction Contractor
2 – Secure s.140 permit
Prior to construction commencing
Construction Contractor
3 - Monitoring
During construction
Construction Contractor
4 – No Go Areas
Prior to construction commencing
Construction Contractor
5 – Colour schemes
During design
Construction Contractor
6 – Inventory Forms
Discretionary
Orange City Council/Central Tablelands Water
6.6
SOIL RESOURCE
6.6.1
SOIL LANDSCAPES
The Soil Landscapes of the Bathurst 1:250 000 Sheet identifies soil landscapes. The proposed pipeline intersects nine mapped soil landscapes including North Orange, Spring Hill, Vittoria-Blayney, CarcoarBarry, Stoke-Burnt Yards, Macquarie, Panuara, Borenore-Lyndhurst and Razorback (refer – Figure 8). For each soil landscape, a summary of geology and soils is provided in Table 6.9.
PAGE 84 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 8:
Distribution of Soil Landscapes (Source: OEH)
PAGE 85 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.9 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Soil Landscapes Soil Landscape North Orange
Spring Hill
Vittoria-Blayney
Carcoar-Barry
Parent Rock
Parent Material
Dominant/Common Soil Type(s)
Medium to soft metasediments including slates, phyllites and siltstones on the Orange Shale Beds, which are largely derived from andesitic volcanics; welded tuffs of intermediate composition, agglomerates, conglomerates and andesitic volcanics.
In-situ and colluvial-alluvial materials derived from parent rocks. Depth of surface materials range from 0 to more than 1 m on crests to more than 4m on lower slopes and drainage depressions.
Red Earths (Dominant): In this soil landscape this soil is well-drained and highly permeable with a moderate erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard.
Basalt flows which are separated by volcanic ash forming layers of clay and slate.
In-situ materials or colluvium derived from Tertiary volcanics. Average depth is 10 m, but ranges from 1 m on crests to >50 m in drainage depressions. Basalt floaters are common on crests and sideslopes.
Krasnozems (Dominant): In this soil landscape this soil is well-drained and moderately permeable with a low erosion hazard and a moderate structural degradation hazard. They are known to have leakage problems during earthworks.
Welded andesitic tuffs and agglomerates, conglomerates, calcareous shales, limestones, breccias and siltstones, slates, schists, fine tuffs and greywackes, many of which have been derived from older andesitic volcanics. Some dacites also occur. Ridge lines are generally associated with the hard andesitic volcanics and drainage depressions with softer metasediments.
In-situ and alluvial-colluvial materials derived from parent rocks are less than 1m deep on crests but may be 10â&#x20AC;&#x201C;40 m deep on lower slopes and in drainage depressions.
Red Earths (Dominant): In this soil landscape this soil is well-drained and moderately permeable with a moderate erosion hazard and a moderate structural degradation hazard. They are known to have minor gullying.
Granite
In-situ and alluvial-colluvial deposits of parent rock.
Yellow Earths (Common): In this soil landscape this soil is moderately well to imperfectly drained and moderately permeable with a moderate erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard. They are known to have minor-moderate gullying.
Yellow Podzolic/Solodic Soil Intergrades (Common): In this soil landscape this soil is poorly drained and slowly permeable with a low erosion hazard and a moderate structural degradation hazard. They are known to have some gullying.
Yellow Earths (Common): In this soil landscape this soil is moderately well to imperfectly drained and moderately permeable with a moderate erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard. They are known to have minor-moderate gullying. Red Podzolic Soils (Dominant): In this soil landscape this soil is well-drained and moderately permeable with a high erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard. They are known to have moderate rill erosion. Yellow Solodic Soils (Common): In this soil landscape this soil is imperfectly drained and slowly-moderately permeable with a high erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard. They are known to have moderate gullying (<1.5m).
Stoke-Burnt Yards
Diorite
In-situ and alluvial-colluvial deposits of parent rock.
Krasnozems (Dominant): In this soil landscape this soil is well-drained and moderately permeable with a low-moderate erosion hazard and a low structural degradation hazard. They are known to have leakage problems during earthworks.
PAGE 86 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.9 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Soil Landscapes Soil Landscape Macquarie
Parent Rock Alluvium, derived from volcanics of the Molong Geanticline, volcanics and metasediments of the Hill End Trough, Tertiary basalts and associated volcanics from the Canobolas Complex.
Parent Material Alluvium
Dominant/Common Soil Type(s) Macquarie River Prairie Soils (Common): In this soil landscape this soil is moderately well-drained and moderately permeable with a low erosion hazard and a moderate structural degradation hazard. They are known to have streambank erosion. Belubula River Alluvial Sands (Common): In this soil landscape this soil is rapidly drained and highly permeable with a lowmoderate erosion hazard and a moderate structural degradation hazard. They are known to have streambank slumping.
Panuara
Andesite, tuff, limestone, siltstone and shale.
In-situ and alluvial-colluvial-alluvial materials derived from parent rock.
Red Podzolic/Brown Podzolic Soils(Dominant): In this soil landscape this soil is moderately well-drained and moderately permeable with a high erosion hazard and a low-moderate structural degradation hazard. They are known to have minor-moderate rilling and gullying.
BorenoreLyndhurst
Shale, limestone, calcareous siltstone, greywacke, quartzo-feldspathic sandstone and slate.
In-situ and alluvial-colluvial-alluvial materials derived from parent rock.
Red Podzolic Soils (Dominant): In this soil landscape this soil is moderately well-drained and moderately permeable with a moderate erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard. Yellow Solodic Soils (Common): In this soil landscape this soil is moderately well-drained and moderately permeable with a moderate erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard. They are known to have minor-moderate rilling of exposed surfaces.
Razorback
Andesite, tuff, feldspathic greywacke and chert.
In-situ and alluvial-colluvial materials derived from parent rock. They are usually deeper on the lower slopes.
Red podzolic/Krasnozem Intergrades (Dominant) In this soil landscape this soil is well drained and moderately-highly permeable with a high erosion hazard and a high structural degradation hazard. They are known to have severe sheet erosion after clearing.
Source: Kovac & Lawrie (1990)
PAGE 87 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.6.2
LAND CAPABILITY
The Land and Soil Capability (LSC) assessment scheme uses the biophysical features of the land and soil including landform position, slope gradient, drainage, climate, soil type and soil characteristics to derive classes for a range of land and soil hazards (OEH, 2012). These hazards include the following:
soil acidification;
water erosion;
soils structure decline;
wind erosion;
shallow soils/rockiness;
salinity;
mass movement; and
waterlogging.
For each soil landscape intersected by the proposed pipeline a class has been identified for each hazard and an overall soil and land capability class has been determined based on the most limiting hazard (refer – Table 6.10 and Figure 9). Land in capability classes 1-3 is capable of a wide variety of uses and requires limited management. Land in capability classes 4-5 is also capable of a variety of land uses but requires careful management to prevent long-term degradation. Land in capability class 6 has limited land capability and is restricted to low-impact land uses. Land in capability class 7 has very low capability and can result in severe impacts if limitations are not managed (OEH, 2012 p. 10). One soil landscape (Razorback) intersected by the proposed pipeline is identified as class 7 land due to a high water erosion hazard, shallow soils and rockiness, and mass movement potential.
PAGE 88 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.10 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Land and Soil Capability Soil Landscape
Hazard Classification
LSC Class
Capability
3
5
Moderate-Low
1
2
2
Very High
3
1
2
4
Moderate
6
1
6
1
7
Very Low
3
1
2
1
1
3
High
1
3
1
1
1
2
4
Moderate
4
4
4
2
3
1
2
4
Moderate
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
3
3
High
4
4
4
3
2
3
1
2
4
Moderate
Soil Acidification
Water Erosion
Soil Structure Decline
Wind Erosion
Shallow Soils/Rockiness
Salinity
Mass movement
Waterlogging
Carcoar-Barry
4
5
3
4
2
3
1
Macquarie
2
2
1
2
1
1
Panuara
4
4
4
4
1
Razorback
3
7
3
2
Spring Hill
3
3
1
Stoke-Burnt Yards
3
4
Vittoria-Blayney
4
BorenoreLyndhurst North Orange
Source: Land and Soil Capability Mapping for NSW (OEH, 2013)
PAGE 89 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 9:
Land and Soil Capability Class Map (Source: OEH)
PAGE 90 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.6.3
ACID SULFATE SOIL
The Australian Soil Resource Information System (ASRIS) on-line database maintained by CSIRO Land and Water (compiled 2008, accessed November 2015) indicates there is a ‘low’ to ‘extremely low’ probability of occurrence of acid sulfate soils (refer Figure 10). It is noted that these are “provisional classifications inferred from surrogate data with no on ground verification”, however based on the soil landscapes, iron sulphide minerals (or their oxidation products) are not considered to be abundant within the soil profile. This, combined with the relatively low watertable and high elevation is considered to be inhibitive to formation of acid sulfate soils.
PAGE 91 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 10:
Probability of Acid Sulfate Soil (Source: CSIRO)
PAGE 92 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.6.4
CONTAMINATED SOIL
A review of the pipeline against the EPA Contaminated Land Record under s.58 of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 and the List of NSW contaminated sites notified to EPA under s.60 of the Act did not identify any registered contaminated sites adjacent to, or intersected by the proposed pipeline. A review of premises currently regulated by an Environment Protection Licence (EPL) under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act) identified two premises adjacent to or intersected by the proposed pipeline alignment holding a current EPL. No non-compliances with licence conditions specified in the either of these EPLs have been reported that are considered likely to have resulted in potential contamination within the proposed pipeline alignment. Analysis of high resolution aerial imagery indicates that the pipeline does not appear to traverse areas that would indicate any prior land use that would be a source of potential contamination. The land impacted by the Project is not land that is within an investigation area, nor on land on which development referred to in Table 1 to the contaminated land planning guidelines is being, or is known to have been, carried out, Pursuant to Clause 7 of State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 – Remediation of Land, there is no apparent reason to consider that land to be impacted by the pipeline would be contaminated, and the adoption of suitable management controls in the event that contaminated material is encountered, can render such land suitable for the pipeline to be installed as proposed.
6.6.5
NATURALLY OCCURRING ASBESTOS
Serpentinite and andesite, which may contain naturally occurring asbestos in the form of chrysotile, may occur on sections of the pipeline corridor. Geotechnical investigations (currently to be commissioned) will help establish whether asbestos associated with serpentine/andesite is a potential contaminant of concern.
6.6.6
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
The disturbance of ground, most specifically trenching to lay the pipeline, will create a suite of risks to the soil resource. These risks are identified below.
Water Erosion
Loss of the soil from the landscape and a subsequent deterioration in the productive capacity of the landscape.
Movement of soil materials and associated nutrients and chemicals into waterways and storages, with consequent reductions in water quality and the storage capacity of dams.
Damage to infrastructure caused by both erosion and deposition of soil materials.
Wind Erosion
Loss of the soil from the landscape and a subsequent deterioration in the productive\capacity of the land. There is a disproportionate loss of nutrients and organic carbon from soils affected by wind erosion as the finer and more nutrient-rich fractions are winnowed out by wind erosion.
Movement of soil materials at close range (saltation) onto fences, roads and buildings that can result in infrastructure damage, or at least the need to remove the deposited soil material at cost.
Movement of suspended soil materials at some distance from the original site. This material is moved as dust clouds that can adversely affect visibility, deposit dust and lead to air quality problems.
PAGE 93 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Soil Structure Decline
Low infiltration and runoff resulting in water erosion and less than optimum use of rainfall for plant growth.
Overall poor plant growth.
Poor germination and emergence of vegetation.
Poor friability of soils making them difficult and costly to till and to sow.
Waterlogging
Can restrict or prevent the supply of oxygen to plant roots, impacting on plant health and survival.
Inhibits vehicular access, tillage and sowing operations and stock management.
Shallow Soils/Rockiness
Exposure of rock during construction may increase runoff velocities and consequently increase the risk of gully or rill erosion.
Impedes vehicle and machinery access.
Reduces volume of soil available for nutrient storage.
Mass Movement
In areas of moderate to steep sloping topography, under certain conditions (i.e. steeper slopes and/or increased rainfall that saturates soils and reduces soil strength), construction activities may cause erosion, slope instability and mass movement.
Contamination
6.6.7
Notwithstanding the absence of identified contamination, potential remains for uncharacterised contamination impacts to be encountered during excavation. This could be in the form of coming across buried waste and potentially contaminated material whilst trenching or loss of a potential contaminant (fuel spill or hydraulic hose burst).
MITIGATION MEASURES
6.6.7.1 Pre-Construction The proposed works should not result in the pollution of land/waters so long as best management practices for erosion and sediment control are undertaken during construction activities, and appropriate remediation measures are implemented on a progressive basis. Priority should be given to achieving a high standard of erosion and sediment control and general site housekeeping throughout the construction period. Prior to works commencing appropriate erosion and sediment controls must be installed. Both the EPA and DPI-Water expect that these controls will be in accordance with the guideline Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction, 4th Edition (Landcom, 2004) (or any revision) as well as the EPA’s addendum publications Volume 2A: Installation of Services (DECC, 2008).
6.6.7.2 Construction
Three principle measures must be adhered to during construction.
1.
At all times, in all locations, the area of ground disturbance should be limited to that which is the smallest possible footprint that is practicably possible.
2.
Erosion and sediment controls must be suitably maintained, including regular monitoring to ensure the measures and controls in place are effective.
PAGE 94 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
3.
Immediate stabilisation of worked sections complemented by progressive rehabilitation of the pipeline installation.
If suspected soil contamination is encountered (i.e. as indicated by hydrocarbon odours or staining) the following controls would be implemented and incorporated into the CEMP: –
Suspect materials segregated and placed into uniquely-identified bunded stockpile pending off-site disposal at a licenced waste disposal facility;
–
Stockpile of suspected contaminated soil should be covered with plastic sheeting to prevent rainfall infiltration and/or soil migration during windy conditions.
–
Soils suspected to be contaminated should be tested prior to off-site disposal for waste classification. Records of the analysis, waste classification and waste disposal dockets will be recorded and retained.
–
Groundwater if encountered within shallow excavations and considered to be contaminated will be managed by tanker truck extraction and off-site disposal at a licensed liquid waste disposal facility.
6.6.7.3 Operations
Pipeline inspections will be undertaken as part of infrastructure maintenance. The Operations Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) will include a protocol for checking soil stability.
6.7
SURFACE WATERS
6.7.1
CATCHMENT
The pipeline will traverse through parts of both the Macquarie-Bogan and the Lachlan catchments, including 63 watercourse crossings. These watercourses include (based on the Strahler stream order classification):
36 x first order streams;
16 x second order streams;
6 x third order streams; and
5 x fourth order streams.
DPI-Water categorise first and second order streams as minor. The 3rd and 4th order watercourses include the following:
3rd order watercourses: –
Spring Creek (350 m upstream of Spring Creek Reserve near Orange).
–
Unnamed creek (hydroline) draining into Summer Hill Creek (1 km east of Spring Hill).
–
Unnamed creek (hydroline) draining into School Creek (1.5 km north east of Carcoar).
–
Three unnamed hydrolines draining into Coombing Creek (between Lake Rowlands and Carcoar WFP).
PAGE 95 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
4th order watercourses: –
Gosling Creek (near Spring Creek Reserve south of Orange)
–
Unnamed hydroline draining into Cowriga Creek (1.8 km south of Millthorpe)
–
Belubula River (Carcoar)
–
School Creek (Carcoar)
–
Coombing Creek (2.6 km south of Carcoar)
None of the pipeline would be located on lands identified as a flood planning area in either Orange or Blayney’s planning instruments (refer – Figure 11).
PAGE 96 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 11:
Flood Planning Areas (Source: NSW Planning Viewer)
PAGE 97 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.7.2
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
The proposed activity would not alter landform and existing hydrology significantly and therefore potential impacts are limited to:
Potential sedimentation from run-off of excavated or disturbed soil during construction and resulting impact to the water quality of nearby waterways and storages.
Potential for the excavated work areas to detain run-off with no active discharge point.
6.7.3
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measures would be implemented to mitigate potential sedimentation and contamination of the catchment during construction:
When working within 40 m of the banks of a watercourse, construction works on this waterfront land are to be consistent with DPI Water Guidelines for Controlled Activities on Waterfront Land.
At all times and at all locations, installation of erosion and sediment control measures to accord with the EPA endorsed publication Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, 4th edition (Landcom, 2004)(or any revision) and the EPA produced addendum publications Volume 2A: Installation of Services (DECC, 2008).
Erosion and sediment control measures only to be removed once the area is restabilised;
Ensure construction materials are not stockpiled in areas at localised flooding risk.
As best as is possible minimise the extent of ground disturbance and associated loss of groundcover to minimise sediment movement.
Implement progressive rehabilitation with a capacity to best utilise seasonally opportunities and needs.
Emergency wet and dry spill kits would be kept on site at all times and all staff would be made aware of the location of the spill kit and trained in its use;
Any fuel, oils or other liquids stored on site would be stored in an appropriately sized impervious bunded at least 120% larger than the greatest container and in an area least 50 m away from water bodies; and
In the field and temporary storage of fuels, chemicals and liquids must be a minimum of 50 m from an watercourse, areas subject to localised flooding or slopes >10%.
Storage, handling and use of hazardous materials in accordance with the WorkCover NSW Guideline for Storage and Handling of Dangerous Goods (2005);
Activities with the potential for spills (refuelling) would not be undertaken within 50 m of any watercourse and a suitable spill response and containment kit available on site whenever and wherever these type of higher risk activities are undertaken.
6.8
LAND USE
6.8.1
OBJECTIVES
The pipeline traverses a range of land use zonings Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 in both Orange City Council’s Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Blayney Shire Council’s Blayney Local Environmental Plan 2012.
PAGE 98 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.11 – Land Zoning Objectives Zoning
Objective
Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 E3 – Environmental Management
RU1 – Primary Production
R2 – Low Density Residential
RU5 – Village
To protect, manage and restore areas with special ecological, scientific, cultural or aesthetic values. To provide for a limited range of development that does not have an adverse effect on those values. To manage development within water supply catchment lands to conserve and enhance the city and district’s water resources. To maintain the rural function and primary production values of the area. To ensure development along the Southern Link Road has alternative access To encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base. To encourage diversity in primary industry enterprises and systems appropriate for the area. To minimise the fragmentation and alienation of resource lands. To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones. To promote the unique agricultural character of Orange and facilitate a variety of tourist and visitor accommodation land uses that are compatible with agriculture. To ensure that development along the Southern Link Road has an alternative access. To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment. To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents. To ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling in close proximity to settlement. To ensure that development along the Southern Link Road has an alternative access. To provide for a range of land uses, services and facilities that are associated with a rural village. To enhance and maintain the unique village character of Lucknow and Spring Hill.
SP2 - Infrastructure
To provide for infrastructure and related uses. To prevent development that is not compatible with or that may detract from the provision of infrastructure.
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 ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling in close proximity to settlement. To ensure development along the Southern Link Road has alternative access
IN1 – General Industrial
To provide a wide range of industrial and warehouse land uses. To encourage employment opportunities. To minimise any adverse effect of industry on other land uses. To support and protect industrial land for industrial uses. To ensure development along the Southern Link Road has an alternative access.
R2 – Low Density Residential
To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment. To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents. To ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling in close proximity to settlement. To ensure that development along the Southern Link Road has an alternative access.
PAGE 99 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.11 – Land Zoning Objectives Zoning R1 – General Residential
Objective
To provide for the housing needs of the community. To provide for a variety of housing types and densities. To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents. To ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling in close proximity to settlement. To ensure that development along the Southern Link Road has an alternative access
B5 – Business Development
To enable a mix of business and warehouse uses, and bulky goods premises that require a large floor area, in locations that are close to, and that support the viability of, centres
B6 – Enterprise Corridor
To promote businesses along main roads and to encourage a mix of compatible uses. To provide a range of employment uses (including business, office, retail and light industrial uses). To maintain the economic strength of centres by limiting retailing activity. To provide for residential uses, but only as part of a mixed use development.
Blayney Local Environmental Plan 2012 RU1 – Primary Production
RU2 – Rural Landscape
RU5 – Village
To encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base. To encourage diversity in primary industry enterprises and systems appropriate for the area. To minimise the fragmentation and alienation of resource lands. To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones. To enable function centres, restaurants and appropriate forms of tourist and visitor accommodation to be developed in conjunction with agricultural uses. To encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base. To maintain the rural landscape character of the land. To provide for a range of compatible land uses, including extensive agriculture. To encourage development that will not have an adverse impact on the environmental and scenic qualities of the existing landscape. To provide for a range of land uses, services and facilities that are associated with a rural village. To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones. To encourage and provide opportunities for population and local employment growth commensurate with available services. To minimise the impact of non-residential uses and ensure those uses are in character and compatible with the surrounding residential development.
SP2 – Infrastructure
To provide for infrastructure and related uses. To prevent development that is not compatible with or that may detract from the provision of infrastructure.
R5 – Large Lot Residential
To provide residential housing in a rural setting while preserving, and minimising impacts on, environmentally sensitive locations and scenic quality. To ensure that large residential lots do not hinder the proper and orderly development of urban areas in the future. To ensure that development in the area does not unreasonably increase the demand for public services or public facilities. To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones.
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
PAGE 100 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.11 – Land Zoning Objectives Zoning
Objective
IN1
To provide a wide range of industrial and warehouse land uses. To encourage employment opportunities. To minimise any adverse effect of industry on other land uses. To support and protect industrial land for industrial uses.
Blayney Local Environmental Plan 1998 Deferred Matter – 1(c) Rural Small Holding
6.8.2
To promote development of land identified as suitable for rural-residential or small holding development, and To identify land suitable for future urban development, and for development for other non-agricultural purposes, in accordance with the need for that development, and To allow a range of rural living styles in appropriate locations within the zone
POTENTIAL IMPACT
Neither the construction nor operation of the Project would be antipathetic to any of the above land use objectives.
6.9
NOISE AND VIBRATION
6.9.1
EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
The pipeline route traverses a range of land uses. This includes:
Within built up residential and commercial areas in the city of Orange, town of Blayney and the villages of Spring Hill, Millthorpe and Carcoar with significant heritage sensitivities.
Open agricultural country (predominantly grazing).
Either within or immediately adjacent to other utility/service provider corridors (e.g. public roads, railway and gas easements).
In addition, large sections of the pipeline are located adjacent to existing pipeline infrastructure.
Privately owned land as well as 55 parcels of land that are classified as Crown Land, predominantly Public Roads.
Sections of the pipeline will traverse areas with low levels of background noise but considerable buffers to any potentially affected receiver. Other sections will traverse areas where background noise levels are higher, but the works would be undertaken in close proximity to potentially affected receptors.
6.9.2
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
6.9.2.1 Construction Noise Assessed against the principles of the Interim (Final) Construction Noise Guidelines (DECC, 2009), the noise management levels applicable would be noise affected and highly noise affected. Noise affected represents the point above which there may be some community reaction to noise. Highly noise affected is the point above which there may be a strong community reaction. Consequently, standard working hours for construction would be from 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday, and from 8am to 1pm on Saturday. No work would be permitted on Sundays or Public Holidays without prior approval from Council. Council would not approve any change without consultation with affected landholders and consideration of any other potentially sensitive receptors. PAGE 101 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
In noise affected areas all potentially affected receptors will be informed of the nature of the works, expected noise levels and duration and contact details. In highly noise affected areas there may be 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 and/or whether the community is prepared to accept longer period for construction in exchange for restrictions on construction times. Whilst predominantly residential there are other sensitive land uses that have management levels when in use. Table 6.12 – Noise at Sensitive Land Uses Land Use
Management Level, LAeq (15 min) (applies when properties are being used)
Classrooms at schools and other educational institutions
Internal noise level - 45dB(A)
Hospital wards and operating theatres
Internal noise level – 45dB(A)
Places of worship
Internal noise level – 45dB(A)
Active recreation areas (characterised by sporting 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)
Community centres
Depends on the intended use of the centre. Refer to the recommended ‘maximum’ internal levels in AS2107 for specific uses.
Source: DECC (2009), Interim Construction Noise Guideline, Table 3.
Due to the broad range of sensitivities that commercial or industrial land can have to noise from construction, the process of defining management levels is separated into three categories. The external noise levels should be assessed at the most-affected occupied point of the premises:
Industrial premises: external LAeq(15 min) 75 dB(A)
Offices, retail outlets: external LAeq(15 min) 70 dB(A)
Other businesses that may be very sensitive to noise are developed on a case by case basis.
Occupants of commercial and industrial premises would be consulted prior to construction activity commencing. During construction occupants would be regularly updated regarding noise levels and hours of work.
6.9.2.2 Traffic Noise Criteria Different categories of road (local v highway/arterial) have different road traffic noise criteria. Table 6.13 – Traffic Noise Criteria Road Category
Assessment Criteria, dB9A0 Day (7am to 10pm)
Night (10pm to 7am)
Highway, arterial and sub-arterial roads
LAeq(15hr) 60 dB(A)
LAeq(9hr) 55 dB(A)
Local roads
LAeq(1hr) 55 dB(A)
LAeq(1hr) dB(A)
Source: DECC (2011), NSW Road Noise Policy
Where noise criteria levels are already exceeded, construction and operational traffic associated with the project should not lead to an increase in existing noise levels of more than 2 dB(A). PAGE 102 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.9.2.3 Vibration Criteria The effects of ground vibration on buildings near construction activity includes:
Disturbance to building occupants;
Effects on building contents; and
Effects on building structures.
Preferred maximum values for continuous and impulsive vibration are defined in the NSW Assessing Vibration: a Technical Guideline (DEC, 2006). Table 6.14 – Vibration Criteria Location
Preferred values3
Assessment Period1
z-axis
Maximum values
x- and y-axes
z-axis
x- and y-axes
Continuous vibration Critical areas2
Day- or night-time
0.0050
0.0036
0.010
0.0072
Residences
Daytime
0.010
0.0071
0.020
0.014
Night-time
0.007
0.005
0.014
0.010
Offices, schools, education institutions and places of worship
Day- or night-time
0.020
0.014
0.040
0.028
Workshops
Day- or night-time
0.04
0.029
0.080
0.058
Critical areas2
Day- or night-time
0.0050
0.0036
0.010
0.0072
Residences
Daytime
0.30
0.21
0.60
0.42
Night-time
0.10
0.071
0.20
0.14
Offices, schools, educational institutions and places of worship
Day- or night-time
0.64
0.46
1.28
0.92
Workshops
Day- or night-time
0.64
0.46
1.28
0.92
Impulsive vibration
Note: 1. Day time is 7:00am to 10:00pm and night-time is 10:00 pm to 7:00 am 2. Examples include hospital operating theatres and precision laboratories where sensitive operations are occurring. There may be cases where sensitive equipment or delicate tasks require more stringent criteria than the human comfort criteria specified above. Stipulation of such criteria is outside the scope of this policy, and other guidance documents (e.g. relevant standards) should be referred to. Source: BS 6472-1992 3. Preferred and maximum weighted rms values for continuous and impulsive vibration acceleration (m/s2) 1-80 Hz Source: DECC (2006). Assessing Vibration: a technical guideline. Table 2.2
6.9.2.4 Blasting Criteria Blasting criteria for noise sensitive receivers are specified in the Technical Basis for Guidelines to Minimise Annoyance due to Blasting Overpressure sand Ground Vibration (ANZEC, 1990). Table 6.15 – Criteria for Blasting Assessment
Criteria Type
Limit
Airblast overpressure
Noise
115 dB(Lin Peak)
Ground Vibration
Vibration
5 mm/s peak particle velocity
PAGE 103 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.9.2.5 Operational Noise Operational noise criteria for the Project are based on the Industrial Noise Policy (EPA, 2000). Table 6.16 – Operational Noise Criteria Type of Receiver
Indicative Noise Amenity Area
Time of Day
Recommended LAeq Noise Level, dB(A) Acceptable
Recommended Maximum
Day
50
55
Evening
45
50
Night
40
45
Day
55
60
Evening
45
50
Night
40
45
Day
60
65
Evening
50
55
Night
45
50
Urban/Industrial Interface – for existing situations only
Day
65
70
Evening
55
60
Night
50
55
All
Noisiest 1-hour period when in use
35
40
Hospital Ward - Internal - External
All All
Noisiest 1-hour period Noisiest 1-hour period
35 50
40 55
Place of worship - internal
All
When in use
40
45
Area specifically reserved for passive recreation (e.g. National Park)
All
When in use
50
55
Active recreation area (e.g. school playground, golf course)
All
When in use
55
60
Commercial premises
All
When in use
65
70
Industrial premises
All
When in use
70
75
Residences
Rural
Suburban
Urban
School internal
Classroom
–
Source: NSW EPA, 2000 Industrial Noise Policy Table 2.1
6.9.3
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
6.9.3.1 Limitations The delivery of the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project will be through awarding Design and Construct contracts. The project proposes construction of infrastructure from Orange to Blayney and Carcoar in seven (7) Stages. Funding is available for construction of Stages 1 to 4 (Blayney to Orange) with the remaining stages (Blayney to Carcoar WFP) subject to timing of additional government funding. Detailed design has yet to be completed, as is development of proposed construction methodologies and schedules for the various Design and Construct contracts that may be awarded.
PAGE 104 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Notwithstanding, there is an adequate understanding of the pipeline alignment and likely construction methodologies to identify likely environmental impacts and requisite measures for minimising these impacts.
6.9.3.2 Construction Construction noise levels are likely to be exceed noised management levels at a large number of receivers. The actual magnitude of exceedance would depend on a number of factors, including:
The intensity of construction activities.
The location of construction activities.
The type of equipment in use.
Existing local noise sources.
Intervening terrain.
Prevailing weather conditions.
Mobile machinery would move about, altering the direction of the noise source for individual receivers. Also, during any given period, construction plant would operate at maximum sound power levels for only brief times. At other times, machinery may produce lower sound levels while carrying out activities not requiring full power. It is highly unlikely that all construction equipment would be operating at their maximum sound power levels at any one time. Finally, certain types of construction would be present on site for only brief periods during construction. For the majority of the pipeline corridor potential impacts would be of short duration only. Assuming a construction rate of 1 to 2 km a week for the pipeline work, the potential for noise at individual receivers could be as short as two weeks. Given the mobile nature of construction activities for the majority of the project, it is expected that sensitive receptors would only be exposed to elevated noise levels for relatively short periods. The potential for construction noise impacts is a common issue with construction site and is best addressed through the implementation of noise management measures defined by a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).
6.9.3.3 Traffic Noise The increase in traffic would be temporary and short term in nature. Assuming, conservatively, that road traffic noise criteria levels are already exceeded, neither construction or operational traffic associated with the project would lead to an increase in existing noise levels of more than 2 dB(A).
6.9.3.4 Construction Vibration The extent and location of construction activities with the potential to generate off-site levels of vibration (such as rock breaking, rolling or compacting) is unknown and is best addressed through the implementation of vibration management measures in a CEMP. The scope of these management measures must include assessment of the potential for the proposed construction technique to cause human discomfort or structural damage.
6.9.3.5 Blasting Whilst the location, extent and hardness of shallow rock has yet to be determined through geotechnical investigations, some shallow rock formations will be located along the alignment. Where rock is encountered blasting may be required. Again, the extent and location of any blasting is unknown and best addressed through the implementation of blast management measures in a CEMP. The scope of these management measures must include assessment of the maximum instantaneous charge weight that would comply with applicable noise and vibration criteria. PAGE 105 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.9.3.6 Operations Noise as a result of the operation of pumps associated with the Project have very limited potential to impact on acoustic amenity values.
Security Mode When operating in water security mode electric pumps would engage with the proposed pump station buildings located at OCC’s Spring Creek Water Filtration Plant and CTW’s Blayney Plumb Street reservoir at Blayney. Design of these pump station buildings will include noise attenuation and pump performance specifications will require demonstrated compliance with external sound power levels that will not exceed either intrusiveness or amenity criteria for any receptor. The buffer to the nearest receptors at Spring Creek WFP is ~100m, and at the Plumb Street reservoir the buffer is ~50 m.
Contingency Mode The drop-in pumps would be in use in the event of a catastrophic failure of either OCC or CTW’s potable supply systems. In this scenario electric pumps and generator sets would be dropped onto pads and run continually until the situation is resolved. This could be 24/7 for a period of up to 3 month. This may happen once in a hundred years. It is provision for emergency situations only. Of the five known locations for the drop-in pumps1, two of these will be housed in the new pump station buildings at Spring Creek reservoir and Blayney’s existing Plumb Street reservoir. The other three would be located at the Carcoar reservoir, at the Carcoar WFP and at Lake Rowlands. Carcoar WFP and Lake Rowlands provide significant buffers to potentially affected receptors. Carcoar reservoir is in a relative sensitive location (at elevation and on the edge of the village of Carcoar).
6.9.4
MITIGATION MEASURES
6.9.4.1 Design Design of the two proposed pump station buildings will include noise attenuation and pump performance specifications will require demonstrated compliance with external sound power levels that will not exceed either intrusiveness or amenity criteria for any receptor.
6.9.4.2 Geotechnical Investigation The results of the geotechnical investigation of the project corridor will identify locations where rock breaking or blasting may be required. This information would be used to confirm construction methods and identify residents that may be impacted by significant noise and vibration generating work.
6.9.4.3 Construction
A noise and vibration management sub-plan would be prepared as part of the Construction Environmental Management Plan(s). It would include the standard measures listed in Table 6.17 and a complaints register and complaints handling procedure.
Where noise level exceedances cannot be avoided consideration would be given it implementing time restrictions and/or providing periods of respite for residents.
1 There is a possibility that additional prop-in pump pads may need to be established between Carcoar Reservoir and Millthorpe, This will not be known until detailed design is complete.
PAGE 106 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.17 – General Measures to Manage Noise and Vibration Impacts Category
Management Measures
General
Plant on site would be positioned to reduce the emission of noise to the surrounding neighbourhood and to site personnel. Any equipment not in use for extended periods would be switched off. Plant and equipment fitted with appropriate mufflers and enclosures where necessary.
Traffic noise
To minimise access road noise impacts, the following feasible and reasonable noise mitigation option would be considered: Appropriate location of private access roads to the construction sites. Regulating time of use. Engine brakes would be minimised in residential areas.
Blasting
If required, blasting noise and vibration levels many be reduced by application of the following: Establish times of blasting to suit local conditions. Building condition surveys would be undertaken to all potentially impacted dwellings. Blasting design configuration.
Vibration
For construction activities undertaken in close proximity to dwellings where there is the potential to cause vibration. A dilapidation report on the state of buildings would be prepared before construction commences.
Community liaison
6.10
A management procedure would be put in place to deal with noise complaints. Each complaint would be investigated and appropriate noise amelioration measures put in place to mitigate future occurrences, where the noise in question is in excess of allowable limits. Good relations with people living in the vicinity of the construction site would be established at the beginning of a project. This would involve keeping people informed of progress and appropriate dealing with complaints. The person selected to liaise with the community would be adequately trained and experienced. Provide the community, reasonably ahead of times, information such as total building time, what works are expected to be noisy, their duration, what is being done to minimise noise and when respite periods will occur. With respect to respite periods, liaison with affected residences to identify least affected periods and the best timing for implementing respite periods should be considered.
TRAFFIC AND ACCESS
6.10.1 ROAD NETWORK Construction of the Project will put traffic onto the following local roads.
Stage 1 (Blayney to Millthorpe): Millthorpe Road, Nyes Gate Road and Blake Street
Stage 2 (Millthorpe to Spring Hill): George Street, Pitt Street, Boomerang Road, Millthorpe Road, Whiley Road, Chapman Street and Carcoar Street.
Stage 3 (Spring Hill to Spring Creek WFP): Forest Road, Aerodrome Road, Huntley Road and Shepherd Road.
Stage 4 (Spring Creek WFP to Icely Road WFP): Elsham Avenue, Blowes Road, Lone Pine Avenue, Icely Road and Wakeford Street.
Stage 5 (Blayney to Carcoar): Mid-Western Highway, Brady Road and Mandurama Street.
Stage 6 (Carcoar to Carcoar WFP): Rodd Street, Coombing Street, Mount Macquarie Road and Fell Timber Road.
Stage 7 (Carcoar WFP to Lake Rowlands) Fell Timber Road.
PAGE 107 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.10.2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS Until the Project (and/or discrete stages of it) is designed and the construction methodology selected, and the construction schedule known (through awarding of Design and Construct contracts), it is not possible to accurately forecast traffic volumes generated by construction works, confirm origindestination routes, or the location of temporary access/egress points. Notwithstanding it is known that haulage of pipe and construction materials will generate additional heavy vehicle traffic on public roads. Potential impacts for the travelling public would be transitory and with appropriate traffic management controls in place the works would not impact significantly on the public road network or private access roads. Minor delays to road users at some locations may occur.
6.10.3 MITIGATION MEASURES To minimise potential adverse impacts to traffic and access, the following mitigation measures should be adopted:
Prior to any works commencing Traffic Control Plans (TCP) must be prepared that identify how construction traffic will safely access and egress construction locations, including consideration of Safe Intersection Site Distances (SISD).
Road dilapidation reports, prepared in consultation with the Appropriate Road Authority would be prepared before and after construction.
Any damage to road surfaces that result from the project would be repaired.
Where required appropriate traffic management controls will be implemented.
Landowners whose private access roads will be affected will be notified of the construction schedule prior to works commencing. Access would be restored and maintained at each property as soon as is practicable as work moves along the pipeline corridor.
6.11
AIR QUALITY
6.11.1 CRITERIA The criteria for particulate matter (PM10) and total suspended solids (TSP) are cumulative dust impacts where the impact from a development is added to the background dust levels. As the majority of the project construction works would be mobile and only expose individual receptors for a short period of time (likely to be in the order of days), the annual average criteria are not appropriate. Similarly, the dust deposition criteria are derived from the monthly average over 12 months. The PM10 24-hour criterion is the relevant criterion. The approved methods criterion for PM10 is 50 micrograms per cubic metre (24-hour average). No site specific ambient air quality information is available for the project area. The project area would however be fairly characterised as having good air quality.
6.11.2 DISPERSION CONDITIONS The transport and dispersion of air emissions from construction will be influenced by the rain and wind climate at the time the works are underway. Meteorological records from the Bureau of Meteorology’s (BOM) Automatic Weather Station at Orange Airport indicate:
average temperatures of approximately 19oC in the summer months;
average temperatures of approximately 6oC in the winter months; PAGE 108 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
relatively uniform rainfall throughout the year, with the driest months of the year still receiving, on average, greater than 35 mm of rainfall.
The average wind speed at Orange Airport in 2010 was 4.34 metres per second, with the average wind speeds across the four seasons being reasonably consistent. The predominant wind directions are from the north to north-west, west to south-west, and east to north-east.
6.11.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS The potential for adverse impacts on air quality would be largely restricted to the construction phase. Movement of plant and equipment on unsealed surfaces has the potential to generate localised dust emissions, as would wind erosion from exposed, disturbed soil surfaces under high wind speeds. As noted in Section 6.6.5 there is also the potential for Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) to occur along the pipeline. Where NOA is disturbed asbestos fibres can become airborne. Breathing in dust containing asbestos fibres can cause asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma. Vehicle exhaust emissions during the construction phase would also have the potential to impact on air quality. This impact is manageable given the limited number of plants likely to be required, the distance to receptors and the transient nature of activity at any one location. Further, plant and equipment in use will be required to be maintained in a serviceable condition such that exhaust emissions meet manufacturer’s specified levels. Beyond construction, air quality impacts associated with maintenance of the pipeline would be negligible. Maintenance crews may need to traverse unsealed access roads and the pipeline easement, but this is expected to be infrequent (twice yearly) and is unlikely to generate dust impacts. The other potential for air quality impacts is when drop-in pumps are run in contingency mode. This scenario would occur if/when there is a catastrophic failure in either OCC or CTW’s potable supply system. As proposed, diesel generators powering the electric pumps would be dropped-in at:
inside the new pump station building at Spring Creek WFP, to push emergency water south to Millthorpe reservoir;
at Lake Rowlands to pump water to the Carcoar WFP;
at the Carcoar WFP to pump water to the Plumb Street reservoir at Blayney: noting that some additional drop-in booster points may be required along this pipeline section; and
inside the new pump station building at the Plumb Street reservoir in Blayney to pump water north to Millthorpe.
Again, the generator sets installed for temporary use would be required to meet manufacturer’s specifications in terms of exhaust emissions. Neither construction nor operation of the pipeline would generate offensive odour emissions.
6.11.4 MITIGATION MEASURES Implementation of the following mitigation measures during construction would minimise potential impacts to air quality:
Limit the area of soil disturbance at any one time.
Place and maintain all disturbed areas, stockpiles and handling areas in a manner that minimises dust emissions (including windblown, traffic-generated or equipment generated emissions).
Where required, utilise dust suppression.
Where required, minimise vehicle movement and speed.
Avoid dust generating activities during windy and dry conditions.
PAGE 109 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Where visible dust emissions occur as a result of increased wind speeds, dust generated works should cease until appropriate additional controls are implemented.
Equipment, plant and construction vehicles will be turned off when not in use.
Ensure all construction plant and equipment are operated and maintained to manufacturer’s specifications in order to minimise exhaust emissions.
Implement prompt mitigation of visible dust emissions when construction is undertaken in close proximity of a sensitive receptor; which may involve a combination of: –
Stabilisation of surface through the application of water sprays.
–
Control of mechanically induced emissions by temporarily suspending activity or reducing the intensity of operations, including speed limit.
Establish contact with local residents and communicate the construction program and progress, and provide advance warning of significant dust generating activities undertaken in close proximity to sensitive receptors.
Consistent with Clause 432 of the Work Health and Safety Regulations 2011 a site-specific Asbestos Management Plan will be prepared where NOA has been identified or is likely to be present. The site-specific Asbestos Management Plan must include information in relation to:
6.12
–
the identification of naturally occurring asbestos;
–
decisions, and reasons for decisions, about the management of NOA, including safe work procedures and control measures;
–
procedures for detailing incidents or emergencies involving NOA; and
–
consultation, responsibilities, information and training for workers carrying out work involving NOA.
SPOIL AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
6.12.1 SPOIL Spoil is material generated by excavation. Spoil would be generated during construction, particularly as a result of installation of the pipeline. The bulk of spoil would be used as backfill. According to OEH’s waste classification guidelines (DECC, 2009), spoil excavated from areas considered to contain naturally occurring asbestos would be considered asbestos waste, and would be managed in accordance with the naturally occurring asbestos management plan (refer Section 7.4.15). All other spoil material would be classified as general solid waste (non-putrescible), virgin excavated natural material or excavated natural material. Opportunities to use any excess spoil as clean fill would also be developed in consultation with landowners. Where off-site disposal is necessary, spoil would be disposed of at legally operating waste facilities.
6.12.2 CONSTRUCTION WASTES In addition to excess spoil, the following wastes may be generated during construction:
vegetation;
rock;
construction material (such as metal off-cuts, timber);
drilling slurry;
PAGE 110 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
general waste from personnel (food scraps, aluminium cans, glass and plastic bottles, paper, cardboard, plastic and office wastes); and
paints and solvents.
The management of waste would be in accordance with the relevant NSW legislation and the principles of the waste management hierarchy set out in the NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy (DECC, 2008).
6.12.3 OPERATIONS WASTE Opening of the scour valves would allow dewatering of the pipeline for emergency repair. The mechanism for dewatering would be determined during detailed design and a procedure for the conduct of this, maintenance activity would be incorporated into the Operations Environmental Management Plan (refer Section 7.5). Scour water could either be discharged from scour pits to the closest receiving water course at controlled velocities, or transferred from the scour pits via a suction tanker truck to OCC or BSC’s sewage treatment plant, or OCC’s stormwater holding pond. It is noted that the pipeline will hold potable quality water.
6.13
GROUNDWATER
6.13.1 RESOURCE A review of NSW Office of Water data (All Groundwater Map) identifies 38 groundwater bores located within 100 m of the proposed pipeline. These bores are used for irrigation, stock/domestic and town water supply. Detail on standing water levels, the depth of the water bearing zones and vulnerability classification is summarised in Table 6.18 below. Table 6.18 – Groundwater bore data within 100 m of proposed pipeline Bore ID
Upper Limit of Water Bearing Zone (m)
Standing Water Level (m)
Water Bearing Zone Type
Purpose
Bores located within High Groundwater Vulnerability Area GW028855
26.2
9.1
Fractured
Irrigation
GW005431
10.7
6.4
Fractured
Irrigation
GW066684
9.1
4.6
Unconsolidated
Stock/Domestic
GW027309
33.2
6.1
Fractured
Irrigation
GW025671
61.0
Not supplied
Fractured
Irrigation
GW059061
41.4
6.1
Fractured
Stock/Irrigation/Domestic
GW058527
24.9
12.3
Fractured
Stock/Domestic
GW049517
24.1
4.6
Unknown
Domestic
GW026490
18.9
Not supplied
Fractured
Irrigation
GW011713
10.7
Not supplied
Unknown
Stock
GW043568
23.1
8.5
Fractured
Stock/Domestic
GW802241
25.0
20.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW802773
30.0
Not supplied
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW804340
29.0
Not supplied
Unknown
Stock
PAGE 111 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Table 6.18 – Groundwater bore data within 100 m of proposed pipeline Bore ID
Upper Limit of Water Bearing Zone (m)
Standing Water Level (m)
Water Bearing Zone Type
Purpose
GW801865
30.0
4.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW801493
32.1
5.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW801623
32.0
16.0
Unknown
Town Water Supply
GW801624
14.0
10.0
Unknown
Town Water Supply
GW802278
27.0
20.0
Unknown
Domestic
GW803706
15.2
6.1
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW703356
18.5
15.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW048408
10.1
Not supplied
Unknown
Town Water Supply
Bores located in Moderately High Groundwater Vulnerability Area GW031502
18.3
16.8
Fractured
Irrigation
GW057034
19.8
6.4
Fractured
Stock
7.4
Not supplied
Fractured
25.2
1.0
Fractured
42.7
Not supplied
Fractured
GW062825 GW047019
Stock/Domestic Stock/Irrigation/Domestic
Bores located in Moderate Groundwater Vulnerability Area GW702830
13.5
8.0
Unknown
GW801364
64.0
46.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW701364
12.1
6.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW703092
21.0
12.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW056811
15.0
Not supplied
Fractured
Stock
GW703110
32.0
18.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW051585
29.0
18.9
Fractured
Stock/Domestic
GW051864
Not supplied
Not supplied
Not supplied
Stock/Domestic
GW023363
21.0
19.8
Fractured
Stock
6.0
Not supplied
Unconsolidated
Irrigation
19.5
6.0
Unconsolidated
21.3
9.1
Fractured
GW702992
18.3
12.0
Unknown
Stock/Domestic
GW700897
Not Supplied
4.5
Not Supplied
Test Bore
GW029319
Stock/Domestic
Analysis of available data indicates:
the upper limit of water bearing zones ranges from 6.0–64.0 m, with an average upper limit of 24.1 m.
the standing water level ranges from 1.0–46.0 m, with an average level of 11.3 m.
Although the shallowest standing water level is recorded at just 1.0 m, the water bearing zone recorded in this bore (GW062825) is from 25.2 –25.5 m. The geology log for this bore also identifies the basalt water supply from 4.3–28.3 m, and is overlain by basalt boulders and clay (0.3–2.2 m) and topsoil (0.00.3 m). Further, this bore is approximately 51.0 m from the pipeline and all other groundwater bores have standing water levels deeper than 4.0 m. PAGE 112 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
A minimum 50 m buffer between the pipeline and a bore has been provided in the alignment concept design. These considerations are relevant given the low potential for the pipeline’s construction or operation to result in groundwater interference.
6.13.2 VULNERABILITY Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC) groundwater vulnerability data for the MacquarieBogan and Lachlan catchments provides a guide to which areas are more susceptible to groundwater contamination in each catchment. There are five classes of vulnerability to describe how susceptible a groundwater resource is to contamination including low, low-moderate, moderate, moderately high, and high. Within the Macquarie-Bogan catchment, the pipeline traverses over areas of groundwater vulnerability ranked moderately high and high. Within the Lachlan catchment areas of low-moderate, moderate and moderately high vulnerability are traversed (refer – Figure 12)
PAGE 113 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Figure 12:
Groundwater Vulnerability Map (Source: DLWC)
PAGE 114 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.13.3 POTENTIAL IMPACT 6.13.3.1
Construction
The potential for impacts to groundwater during construction are minimal and manageable. No significant excavation is required. The pipeline would be highly unlikely to every exceed 3 m depth and most typically be approximately 1.5 –2 m depth. This shallow depth of excavation means it is highly unlikely that works would interfere with any groundwater resource. A burst hydraulic hose on an excavator working in rock, or a diesel spill during plant fuelling, not dealt with immediately and effectively would present a contamination risk. Standard safeguards specified and implemented as part of the contractor’s Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) alleviate this risk.
6.13.3.2
Operation
The operation of the Project will not impact on groundwater.
6.13.4 MITIGATION MEASURES The results of the geotechnical investigation of the project corridor will identify likely spoil material that would be generated and any locations of shallow groundwater. If areas of shallow groundwater are encountered specific measures to protect groundwater would be incorporated into the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).
6.14
VISUAL AMENITY
6.14.1 VISIBILITY Impacts during construction would be highly visible. Post construction, given that the majority of the pipeline infrastructure is below ground and disturbed areas will be progressively stabilised to facilitate revegetation, it is not anticipated that the visual amenity impacts associated with the pipeline would be significant.
6.14.2 POTENTIAL IMPACT Above ground infrastructure would be limited to the pump stations. The drop-in pump stations will be a concrete pad (typically 5 m x 5 m) fitted with flange connections in the event they are required to be used. Use would be restricted to a catastrophic failure of either OCC or CTW’s potable supply systems. When the emergency is over, and the Project no longer operates under contingency mode, the electric pumps and diesel generators would be removed. Of the five known locations for the drop-in pumps2, two of these will be housed inside new pump station buildings The two new pump station buildings will be located at OCC’s Spring Creek Water Filtration Plant WFP and Blayney Council’s Plumb Street reservoir. Neither of these locations have unique landscape features nor form an element to significant vistas for a large number of residents. The buildings proposed are modest structures (roofed, masonry 8m x 5 m building) located where above ground water utility structures re already part of the landscape. Post construction the Project infrastructure will be below ground are largely invisible. Air and scour valve lids will sit at ground level. 2 There is a possibility that additional prop-in pump pads may need to be established between Carcoar Reservoir and Millthorpe, This will not be known until detailed design is complete.
PAGE 115 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
6.14.3 MITIGATION MEASURE It is unlikely that the final design and micro-citing of the two new pump buildings would degrade visual amenities values for any third party. The design of these two buildings will require consideration of the need to provide any landscape plantings for visual screening.
6.15
SOCIAL IMPACTS
Social impacts include significant events experienced by people as changes in one or more of the following are experienced:
peoples’ way of life (how they live, work or play and interact with one another on a day-to-day basis);
their culture (shared beliefs, customs and values); or
their community (its cohesion, stability, character, services and facilities).
The Project can be built and operated without significantly impacting on way of life, culture or community.
6.16
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Water security is a fundamental enabler for economic activity. CTW system is not secure into the future and requires additional sources of water. A bi-directional connection between the OCC and CTW potable water systems would help ensure:
a supply system that satisfies the 5:10:10 rule3 for the forecast demands of the OCC and CTW network for at least 50 years;
improved water security for Orange, Spring Hill, Lucknow, Millthorpe, Blayney and Carcoar and the other centres serviced with water from the Carcoar water filtration plant including Canowindra, Gooloogong, Eugowra, Grenfell, Cargo, Cudal and Manildra and potentially Cowra;
there is time to find alternative solutions for longer term regional water security given the upgrade of Lake Rowlands will not happen, and the prospect of a new dam being built in the foreseeable future is remote;
Blayney WFP could be taken off-line and used on an as needs basis as potable supply could be delivered by the Carcoar WFP; and
various local level of service issues can be rectified and opportunities for future water supply expansion explored.
The Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project will provide regional servicing infrastructure operated in partnership between two neighbouring water utility providers that will provided enhanced security to their customers and support regional growth opportunities.
3
Water security criteria adopted for the project is based on the 5:10:10 design rule (Office of Water Assuring Future Urban Water Security – Draft December 2013). This rule: “requires storages to be sized so as to ensure that full unrestricted demands can be supplied in wet, average and shorter dry periods but that moderate duration, frequency and severity of water restrictions will be required in extended drought periods. Under this design rule, the total time spent in drought restrictions should be no more than 5% of the time, restrictions should not need to be applied in more than 10% of years and when they are applied the water supply system should be able to provide 90% of the unrestricted dry year water demand (i.e. 10% reduction in demand) through a repetition of the worst recorded drought commencing at the time restrictions are introduced. PAGE 116 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Mitigation Measures 7.1
INTRODUCTION
Potential environmental impacts will be minimised and managed through adoption of mitigation measures that will form an intrinsic part of the Project. These measures will be incorporated into all phases of the project, including:
detailed design;
pre-construction activities;
construction; and
operations.
7.2
DESIGN
7.2.1
DESIGN REFINEMENT
The alignment of the pipeline and the position of associated infrastructure (pump station buildings, dropin contingency pump pads, scour and air valves) as shown in the Schedule of Drawings (Version 8), represent a concept alignment that has been refined through preliminary hydraulic modelling, field assessment to minimise works in sensitive environmental areas, and consideration of constructability: noting that geotechnical investigations are yet to be completed. The project alignment and components described in this Review of Environmental Factors may be refined during the detailed design phase as a result of the need to:
avoid ground conditions or services that present significant construction difficulties in terms of logistic, time and/or cost;
reduce the overall construction timeframe;
avoid previously undetected/unknown areas of environmental sensitivity identified following determination;
reduce impacts on residents; or
improve the operation of the project.
Design refinements would not include significant changes to the project. The test for ‘significant change’ would be whether the refinement:
would result in any of conditions of any approvals not being met;
is consistent with the description of the project as described in this REF;
would result in any potential environmental or social impacts of a greater scale or different nature than that considered in this Review of Environmental Factors.
Any design refinement that pushes infrastructure outside the corridor assessed and identified in the concept design (Version 8) would need to be approved by OCC and/or CTW.
PAGE 117 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
7.2.2
WATERCOURSE CROSSINGS
7.2.2.1 Design The pipeline design on land within 40 m of the banks of a watercourse should be consistent with DPI Water Guidelines for Controlled Activities on Waterfront Land.
7.2.2.2 Crossing Technique Standard open cut Waterways that are Class 3 (minimal key fish habitat) and Class 4 (unlikely key fish habitat) are expected to be constructed using the standard open cut (trenching) method. This technique is most suited to dry or low flow conditions. It involves establishing a stable working platform either side of the watercourse and creating a trench using excavators. Tie-in points are located on high ground well away from any water flow. Trench spoil removed from the waterway should be placed above the bank. Trench and backfill activities should be undertaken in a manner that enables bed and bank material to be stockpiled separately and returned to the trench to match original conditions. Joined pipe is laid in the trench and spoil material returned to the trench. Rock protection should be placed over the trench in the stream bed where required, to prevent potential scouring during any high flow events. It is likely that Class 1 and Class 2 streams will require welded sections of mild-steel concrete lined (MSCL) pipe, concrete encased, through the watercourse.
Open cut with flow diversion Waterways that are Class 1 (major key fish habitat) and Class 2 (moderate key fish habitat) may require flow diversion during construction of the pipeline crossing. Flow diversion is a modification of the standard open cut method and should be applied where higher water volumes and flows (typically <1,000 L/s) are present or anticipated during the construction period. Flow diversion includes the use of a flume pipe or pump to convey water through or around the work area. Each method requires the construction of two minor dams to create a dry work area within the crossing.
Open cut – minor dam and flume This method concentrates stream flows through a flume pipe to prevent siltation problems that may be created during trenching, lowering in and backfilling. Key considerations of this technique include:
It is not suitable for watercourses with broad channels, low gradients or permeable substrates.
Lower risk of erosion and sedimentation compared with the standard open cut technique due to diversion of flows around the works area.
The footprint of works will likely extend across the full corridor.
Fish passage is temporarily blocked (long, dark pipes create a behavioural barrier to fish movement), although the flow regime is effectively maintained.
Fish trapped in the impounded area require management (relocation of native species, euthanasia of pest species).
Water pumped from the impoundment area may require treatment prior to discharge.
Open cut – minor dam and pumping This method involves pumping water around the work area by constructing barrier dykes / head walls above and below the trenched area, keeping the work area relatively dry. Key considerations of this technique include:
Suitable for low gradient watercourses with a discharge <1,000 L/s.
Risk of malfunction or failure of the pump system. PAGE 118 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Lower risk of erosion and sedimentation compared with the standard open cut technique due to diversion of flows around the works area.
The footprint of works will likely extend across the full corridor.
Fish passage is temporarily blocked, although the flow regime is effectively maintained
Fish trapped in the impounded area require management (relocation of native species, euthanasia of pest species).
Water pumped from the impoundment area may require treatment prior to discharge.
7.2.3
ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
The design of the proposed pipeline within the sensitive area adjacent to Coombing Creek will be located in the existing area of disturbance, as close to the existing pipeline as possible (i.e. no further than 2 m away).
7.2.4
ACOUSTIC AMENITY
Design of the two proposed pump station buildings will include noise attenuation, and pump performance specifications will require demonstrated compliance with external sound power levels that will not exceed the intrusiveness/amenity criteria for any potentially affected receptor.
7.2.5
VISUAL AMENITY
It is unlikely that the final design and micro-citing of the two new pump buildings would degrade visual amenities values for any third party. Notwithstanding, the design of these two buildings will require consideration of the need to provide any landscape plantings for visual screening.
7.3
PRE-CONSTRUCTION
At certain locations other statutory approvals and requirements must be secured before construction works can commence. These are summarised below.
7.3.1
APPROVALS
7.3.1.1 Dredging and Reclamation Permits OCC, as a local government authority, must not carry out dredging or reclamation work within key fish habitat except under the authority of a permit issued by the Minister pursuant to s.200 of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. CTW is a public authority does not require a permit, although the Minister for DPI Fisheries must be notified of any proposed dredging and reclamation works within key fish habitat. The pipeline will cross nineteen (19) watercourses assessed as potential key fish habitat. Seven of these require a permit and twelve require notification. Contingent on application/notification outcomes, permits may also be required to temporarily or permanently block fish passage under s.219 of the Act.
7.3.1.2 Water Supply Work Approval Pursuant to s.90(2) of the Water Management Act 2000 a water supply work approval authorises its holder to construct and use a specified water supply work at a specified location. A water supply work includes a water pipe that is constructed or used for the purpose of conveying water to the point at which it is to be used. Consultation with DPI – Water has confirmed that for much of the pipeline, pursuant to cl.34(1)(b) Water Management (General) Regulation 2011, OCC and CTW are exempt from the need to secure a water supply work approval under s.91B(1) of the Water Management Act 2000.
PAGE 119 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
This exemption does not apply across the full pipeline length. Specifically, the exemption is not applicable for works undertaken on:
Land that is a heritage conservation area within the meaning of an environmental planning instrument - Spring Hill, Millthorpe and Carcoar. Are heritage conservation areas.
Waterfront land (other than waterfront land relating to a minor stream: noting that a minor stream constitutes a 1st and 2nd order stream under the Strahler stream classification system) - the pipeline will traverse six (6) 3rd order streams and five (5) 4th order streams.
A water supply works approval must be obtained by OCC and CTW for these areas.
7.3.1.3 Section 140 Permit A person must not disturb or excavate any land knowing or having reasonable cause to suspect that the disturbance or excavation will or is likely to result in a relic being discovered, exposed, moved, damaged or destroyed unless the disturbance or excavation is carried out in accordance with an excavation permit issued under s.140 of the Heritage Act 1977. A relic means any deposit, artefact, object or material evidence that relates to the settlement of the area that comprises New South Wales, not being Aboriginal settlement, and is of State or local heritage significance. Heritage investigations have determined that an s.140 permit is required for works within Carcoar in the vicinity of.
PHAS 7/P7A2 – Historical relics and structure.
PHAS 8/B9 – Public school historical relics.
7.3.1.4 Section 138 Consents Pursuant to s.138 of the Roads Act 1993 a person must not erect a structure or carry out a work in, on or over a public road without the consent of the appropriate roads authority.
Council has, as part of route investigations and design refinement, already secured consent from RMS for the underbore of the Mid-Western Highway (HW6) (refer Appendix A).
The construction of the pipeline will entail such works under a number of roads for which Blayney Shire Council is the relevant road authority. Consent will be required from Blayney Shire Council for those works undertaken on roads within the Blayney Local Government Area for which Council is the appropriate roads authority.
7.3.1.5 Lawful Authority Section 155 of the Crown Land Act specifies that it is an offence for any person, except with lawful authority, to (among other things) erect a structure on public land. Lawful authority must be obtained by OCC and CTW pursuant to the Crown Lands Act for the erection of a structure in Crown Land.
7.3.2
SAFETY MANAGEMENT STUDY
Prior to commencing works immediately adjacent to APA Group’s High Pressure Gas Pipeline the contractor will prepare and submit a Safety Management Study (consistent with the scope recommended in APA Group’s Planning and Development of Land in the Vicinity of APA High Pressure Natural Gas Pipelines in New South Wales,) to both OCC and the APA Group.
7.3.3
WATER MAINS PROTECTION
When excavating within 2 m of existing water mains the contractor will be required to develop a methodology and contingency in the event of accidental damage.
PAGE 120 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
7.3.4
PROPERTY INSPECTION
On private property, pre-construction assessments of the corridor condition will be completed. This will include photographs and GPS references. It must also include an inventory of weed infestation. This inspection report will be used as a baseline for tailoring the appropriate weed management protocols relevant to the property and a reference for making good on rehabilitation works when construction is complete.
7.3.5
ROAD DILAPIDATION REPORT
In consultation with the Appropriate Road Authority (Orange City Council, Blayney Shire Council and Roads and Maritime Service), undertake a Road Dilapidation Survey to establish the condition of public roads before construction commences.
7.4
CONSTRUCTION
7.4.1
CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
The seven stages of the Project will be built at different times under different Design and Construct contracts. Under each there will be a requirement for the successful contractor to prepare and have approved a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The proposed construction methodologies adopted by different contractors, and at what times of the year the works occur, will shape the specific procedures for minimising/managing environmental impacts. Notwithstanding, there are universal requirements for all CEMPs to cover certain fundamental safeguards and commitments. An overview of these is provided below.
7.4.2
LANDOWNER CONSULTATION
Early, regular and honest consultations with potentially affected receivers, as construction activity passes through the landscape (of varying receptor types and different land uses) must be a core commitment.
For rural landowners, consultation in relation to disturbances associated with livestock, weeds, pest animals, spoil reuse opportunities and bush fire hazards.
Protocols and procedures for accessing private property.
7.4.3
SOIL AND WATER MANAGEMENT
7.4.3.1 Soil and Water Management Plan The proposed works should not result in the pollution of land/waters so long as best management practices for erosion and sediment control are undertaken during construction activities, and appropriate remediation measures are implemented on a progressive basis. Priority should be given to achieving a high standard of erosion and sediment control and general site housekeeping throughout the construction period. The way this is achieved is through developing and implementing construction activities in accordance with relevant guidelines. Both the EPA and DPI-Water identify these as:
Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction, 4th Edition (Landcom, 2004) (or any revision); and
the EPA’s addendum publications Volume 2A: Installation of Services (DECC, 2008).
PAGE 121 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
A Soil and Water Management sub-plan that complies with these guidelines must form part of the CEMP. A component of this sub-plan must be the Erosion and Sediment Control Plans (ESCP) required for the watercourse crossings.
7.4.3.2 Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans The pipeline will cross nineteen (19) watercourses assessed as potential key fish habitat. Seven of these will require securing a s.200 permit prior to works and twelve (12) require DPI-Fisheries s.199 notification under the Fisheries Management Act. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans (ESCP) will be expected as part of the permit application and notification for these waterway crossing, and will need to demonstrate compliance with, and provide information on:
compliance with DPI-Fisheries Policy and Guidelines for Fish Habitat Conservation and Management (Update 2013);
temporary measures that will result in blocking fish passage (including coffer dams, temporary access tracks or redirecting flows whist works are encountered);
any destabilisation of watercourses with heavy machinery or damage to the bed or banks;
how any bed or bank rehabilitation works would be completed immediately after construction;
efforts to ensure replacement of aquatic and riparian vegetation with native/endemic species where riparian loss occurs;
proposed sediment and erosion controls;
confirmation whether any snags require removal or realignment.
In addition to the above, water supply work approvals under the Water Management Act are required on six (6) 3rd order streams and five (5) 4th order streams. The ESCPs prepared for these crossings will facilitate DPI-Water approval.
7.4.3.3 General Principles Four principle measures must be adhered to during construction. 1.
At all times, in all locations, the area of ground disturbance should be limited to that which is the smallest possible footprint that is practicably possible.
2.
Erosion and sediment controls must be suitably maintained, including regular monitoring to ensure the measures and controls in place are effective.
3.
Immediate stabilisation of worked sections complemented by progressive rehabilitation.
4.
Erosion and sediment control measures only to be removed once the area is successfully rehabilitated.
7.4.4
INCIDENT MANAGEMENT
Adequate procedures should be established including notification requirement to the Appropriate Regulatory Authority and other relevant authorities for incidents that cause or have the potential to cause material harm to the environment.
A procedure for receiving, investigation and reporting any complaint received.
7.4.5
WEED MANAGEMENT
The pipeline traverses open agricultural country (predominantly grazing), a significant portion of which has been mapped as Biophysical Strategic Agricultural Land (BSAL): mapped as extending from Orange to just north of Millthorpe. PAGE 122 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
The Noxious Weeds Act 1993 (NW Act) provides the regulatory framework for controlling weeds in NSW. There are five classes of weeds:
Class 1 – State Prohibited Weeds. The plant must be eradicated from the land and the land must be kept free of the plant. Control Objective: to prevent the introduction and establishment of those plants in NSW.
Class 2 – Regionally Prohibited Weeds. The plant must be eradicated from the land and the land must be kept free of the plant. Control Objective: to prevent the introduction and establishment of those plants in parts of NSW.
Class 3 – Regionally Controlled Weeds. The plant must be fully and continuously suppressed and destroyed. Control Objective: to reduce the area and the impact of those plants in parts of NSW.
Class 4 – Locally Controlled Weeds. The growth of the plant must be managed in a manner that reduces its numbers, spread and incidence and continuously inhibits its flowering and reproduction.
Class 5 – Restricted Plants. It is likely, by their sale or the sale of their seeds or other movement, to spread within or outside of NSW.
A weed that is as a Class 1, 2 or 5 noxious weed is a notifiable weed, for which the relevant officer of the Local Control Authority must be notified of their presence within three days of their detection. The plants must be controlled in order to prevent the introduction of those plants into NSW, the spread of those plants within NSW, or from NSW to another jurisdiction. The NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) identifies weeds that are declared noxious under the NW Act. Across the project area, 121 noxious weeds are identified, 19 of which were recorded during the ecological survey undertaken as part of this REF (with field work done in November 2015). Noxious weeds and Weeds of National Significance (WONS) identified during the survey included:
African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum) – Class 4 noxious, WONS
Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus) – Class 4 noxious, WONS
Chilean needle grass (Nassella neesiana) – Class 4 noxious, WONS (Plate 1)
Montpellier broom (Genista monspessulana) – WONS
Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium) – Class 4 noxious
Serrated tussock (Nassella trichotoma) – Class 4 noxious, WONS (Plate 2)
Sweet briar (Rosa rubiginosa) – Class 4 noxious
Willows (Salix spp.) – Class 4 noxious, WONS.
None of these species are notifiable weeds. Instead, they are locally controlled weeds requiring that their growth be managed in a manner that continuously inhibits the ability of the plant to spread, and they must not be knowingly distributed. The actual extent, prevalence and nature of weed infestation in the project construction footprints can only be confirmed immediately prior to the works scheduling. Weed management principles must include:
Stabilisation measures must be planned to optimise establishment of a healthy groundcover devoid of weeds.
An inventory of noxious or declared weed species occurring within a landowner’s property must be compiled before works commence.
PAGE 123 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Weed management goals and desired outcomes should be established in consultation with landowners and include agreed weed control procedures, such as: –
All machinery, equipment and vehicles brought onto a property must be free of soil, seed or plant material. All soil and organic matter should be removed, including under the vehicle and in the cabin or trays.
–
All machinery, equipment and vehicles taken into private landholdings should be inspected upon entry, and either admitted or refused entry on the bases of presence / absence of soil seed or plant material.
–
Restrict access of vehicles and personnel to areas of known noxious weed infestation. Vehicles exiting such areas may need to be re-cleaned.
–
Construction machinery must be weed free prior to entering a flowing watercourse, or starting construction of a watercourse crossing.
–
Declared noxious weeds must be managed according to the requirements stipulated by the Noxious Weeds Act 1993.
–
Construction machinery shall be blown down on site, then floated off site for washing, following completion of works within a landholding identified as containing Chilean needle grass (Nassella neesiana) or serrated tussock (N. trichotoma).
–
Evidence of compliance with weed biosecurity requirements should be documented.
Transportation of topsoil along the pipeline corridor must be avoided where practicable.
Any weed control activities involving the use of chemicals shall be undertaken in consultation with the relevant landowners, giving due consideration to sensitive land uses (e.g. chemical free, organic and biodynamic farming, run off potential, wind drift and flora and fauna sensitivities).
7.4.6
MINIMISING VEGETATION DISTURBANCE
Excluding specific sections of the pipeline alignment that have been identified as environmentally sensitive and needing specific controls to reduce the construction footprint, all construction activity would be limited within a 20 m wide corridor. This includes storage of pipe, materials and room for construction vehicles and plant to manoeuvre. Within this 20 m corridor in which activity will be undertaken, a more intense physical disturbance associated with the excavation and laying of pipe would be contained with a 6–10 m wide strip. Within this strip the land to be physically cleared of vegetation, topsoil removed and the trench excavated would be limited to approximately 3 m width. In areas of sensitivity the land to be physically cleared will be reduced to as low as reasonably practicable for construction; dropping down to 1 m where machine reach allows.
Existing roads, tracks and areas of disturbance should be used where available, both for locating the pipeline and any lay down areas. Any new access tracks / points should be designed / chosen to avoid impacts on flora, fauna and their habitat.
Clearing activities shall be scheduled so that the time between initial clearing and rehabilitation is minimal.
Clearly mark the location of the construction zone on the plans. All construction activities must be kept within the construction zone. No clearing will occur outside the construction zone.
Flagging or marking tape shall be used to identify ecologically sensitive features adjacent to the impact zone (for strict avoidance during construction.
Vehicle parking shall be restricted to the pipeline construction corridor, easement, roadsides or other specifically designated areas agreed with the landowner in advance when outside of the road corridor.
Parking under trees can damage their roots through soil compaction and impaired water infiltration into the soil, and should be discouraged.
PAGE 124 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Trimming of any native trees over-hanging the construction zone is preferred over removal, where feasible.
Woody vegetation over-hanging the construction zone should be lopped to the minimum extent necessary to achieve safe construction of the pipeline.
Vegetation clearance should be minimised as far as practicable, with any cleared vegetation being stockpiled separately if required for respreading during reinstatement.
Avoid disturbing roots or compacting soil in the drip zone of vegetation to be retained.
Prior to works commencing around the Carcoar reservoir an ecologist would inspect the works area to confirm that Bursaria spinose would not be impacted.
7.4.7
STABILISATION OF WORK SITE Every landowner’s property must be stabilised prior to leaving the property, at all times. Stabilisation means that sedimentation and erosion controls are in place and working and all possible measures to facilitate quick re-establishment of groundcover are in play. Principles for stabilisation and specific measures to maximise groundcover for different types of lands are discussed below.
Private landholdings on strategically important land
Remove excess rock or fill material.
Re-profiling the site in a manner which ensures soil stability and which is as near as practicable to pre-existing contours.
Relieve soil compaction in trafficked areas as necessary (e.g. rip along the contours).
Respreading stockpiled topsoil over the rehabilitation area.
Undertake seeding, where required by the landowner, in consultation with the landowner.
Monitor rehabilitation success, undertaking maintenance and or supplementary seeding as required.
Road corridors and similar areas
Remove excess rock or fill material.
Re-profile the site in a manner which ensures soil stability and which is as near as practicable to pre-existing contours.
Relieve soil compaction in trafficked areas as necessary (e.g. rip along the contours).
Respread stockpiled topsoil over the rehabilitation area, maximising the use of the existing seed bank to regenerate and stabilise disturbed areas.
Monitor rehabilitation success, undertaking maintenance or seeding as required.
Works in proximity to (i.e. within 20 m of) EECs or TECs
Remove excess rock or fill material.
Re-profile the site in a manner which ensures soil stability and which is as near as practicable to pre-existing contours.
Soil compaction relief in trafficked areas as necessary (e.g. rip along the contours).
Respread stockpiled topsoil over the rehabilitation area.
Apply native seed of local species, containing kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra), tussock (P. labillardierei) and/or snow grass (P. sieberiana), in proximity to the EEC at the Icely Road Filtration Plant in Orange.
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) in proximity to the EEC at Millthorpe Cemetery and the EE /TEC 550 m south of Blayney.
PAGE 125 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC at Blayney Golf Course and the EEC on the Mid Western Highway 2.8 km north east of Carcoar .
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei) in proximity to the EEC / TEC north east of Carcoar.
Monitor rehabilitation success, undertaking maintenance and supplementary seeding as required.
Where seeding is adopted to facilitate prompt revegetation and soil stabilisation, the following principles shall be considered: –
seed mixtures shall be formulated with consideration of the vegetation composition of the areas adjacent to the pipeline construction area. When outside of the road corridor, the proposed seed mixture must first be agreed with the landholder.
–
where applied, seed shall be evenly dispersed over the disturbed area
–
seeding shall take place as soon as practicable after reinstatement of the soil profile; reapplication of seed may be required in some areas
–
fertilisers and soil supplements may be necessary to aid germination, but shall only be applied in consultation with landholders, as their application could encourage fastergrowing weed species.
A watering regime should be determined for newly reinstated areas, to facilitate optimum germination of seed stock in the absence of rain.
Rehabilitation should be monitored regularly, with requisite maintenance being undertaken as soon as practicable.
If rehabilitation monitoring determines that erosion is occurring due to inadequate vegetation cover on the easement, consideration should be given to promoting additional growth or installing erosion control structures. Such work should be conducted with prior consultation with the relevant landowner when outside of the road corridor.
Flagging or marking tape, used to identify ecologically sensitive features, shall be removed and correctly disposed of at the completion of construction.
Where possible, any native trees to be removed must be mulched then applied over the pipeline construction footprint to recycle nutrients and to provide surface protection from erosion or access barriers.
Any cleared vegetation must be stockpiled separately in a manner which facilitates respreading and avoids damage to adjacent live vegetation.
During earthwork, topsoil would be stockpiled locally, separately from subsoil, and respread over the disturbed area, progressively on completion of works in a landholding.
Watercourses
Where possible watercourse crossings should be constructed while the waterway is dry using the open cut trenching method.
If flow is present, water should be conveyed across the trench via flume pipes or, alternatively, the watercourse should be temporarily dammed and the water flow pumped around the crossing site.
Stream banks should be reinstated as near as practicable to their original profile. Where required geofabric, which remains permeable to water and enhances plant growth should be used to stabilise soil and sediment during re-establishment.
Vegetation should be reinstated to facilitate bank stabilisation.
PAGE 126 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
7.4.8
FAUNA PROTECTION
Pre-clearance terrestrial fauna surveys/checks must be undertaken by an ecologist or experienced fauna spotter /catcher approximately 1-5 days prior to tree clearing to identify and mitigate against direct impacts on breeding places of threatened species (such as parrots, woodland birds, raptors, microbats and quolls). Any trees or logs observed to contain an active breeding place of a threatened species must be cordoned off and left untouched until young have naturally vacated the immediate area.
If the pre-clearance terrestrial fauna survey/check identifies an occupied nest of a threatened species, nest boxes would be placed into nearby retention areas as an attempt to offset impacted tree hollows for use during subsequent breeding events.
Felling of hollow bearing trees should be avoided where possible.
Prior to clearing, any habitat trees/hollows/hollow logs and other habitat for conservation significant species should be identified and flagged, with a view to re-using such trees/hollows/ hollow logs as fauna habitat.
Joined pipe sections should have temporary end caps installed when the site is not attended, to prevent ingress of fauna.
Measures to prevent fauna entrapment within the pipeline trench, such as minimising the period of time the trench is open, constructing trench plugs at appropriate intervals, with slopes <45° to provide exit ramps for fauna, and use of branches, ropes, hessian sacks, ramped gangplanks or similar to create ‘ladders’ to enable fauna to exit the trench.
An experienced fauna spotter/catcher should be available to advise on tree clearing techniques that will minimise fauna impact and to undertake fauna handling if required; remove trapped fauna if required; and treat (or transport) any animals inadvertently injured (if required).
Project personnel to regularly monitor the open trench and arrange for removal of any trapped fauna by an experienced fauna/spotter; and survey the trench prior to the commencement of pipe laying and backfill activities, notify the fauna spotter /catcher where fauna is present, and wait until such fauna has been removed before proceeding with pipe laying or backfill.
Records of all fauna interactions should be created, listing the species concerned, the nature of the interaction and its GPS coordinates.
7.4.9
FISH HABITAT AND WATER QUALITY
Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plans should be developed for crossings of Class 1 and 2 waterways (as a minimum), and implemented during construction site establishment to minimise the likelihood of construction-related activities mobilising sediments and leading to turbidity and sedimentation of waterways.
Construction methods of waterway crossings should, wherever possible, allow for the free passage of fish downstream and upstream of the works areas at all times.
Any activities requiring the dewatering of a dammed area within the disturbance area must ensure that affected water is pumped a minimum 30 m away from the waterway and should not re-enter the waterway. If water is to re-enter the waterway, water quality parameters must not be significantly different to receiving waters (as measured upstream of disturbance areas).
Only the minimum number of snags (large woody debris) should be disturbed within wetted habitat.
At the Belubula River at Carcoar (and Coombing Creek south of Carcoar, in which potential threatened fish habitat has been confirmed, snags must not be impacted by the works. It is noted that no such snags existed at the time of the survey, however, snags can be mobile and may be present at the time of construction. DPI Fisheries must be contacted, and approval attained, prior to removing, realigning or relocating any snags at these locations.
Vehicles and machinery should be kept away from the banks of waterways where possible.
PAGE 127 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Areas for vehicle and machinery maintenance, refuelling, and storage of fuels, lubricants, and batteries, should be bunded in accordance with Australian Standard AS 1940-2004 The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids. Refuelling during construction should be undertaken > 50 m from a waterway.
Maintenance and daily checks of plant and equipment must be undertaken to minimise the risk of hydrocarbon spills or leaks.
Emergency spill kits must be made available and readily accessible for all plant and equipment at all times, and should include equipment for containment and clean-up of spills on dry soils/sediments as well as for water (e.g. floating booms).
Any contaminant spills (including fuel, hydraulic fluid etc.) must be contained (where safe to do so) and immediately reported to the construction manager / environmental advisor to establish a plan for remediation.
7.4.10 TRAFFIC
Prior to any works commencing Traffic Control Plans (TCP) must be prepared that identify how construction traffic will safely access and egress construction locations, including consideration of Safe Intersection Site Distances (SISD).
Road dilapidation reports, prepared in consultation with the Appropriate Road Authority would be prepared both before and after construction.
Any damage to road surfaces that result from the project would be repaired.
Where required appropriate traffic management controls will be implemented.
Landowners whose private access roads will be affected will be notified of the construction schedule prior to works commencing. Access would be restored and maintained at each property as soon as is practicable as work moves along the pipeline corridor.
7.4.11 HISTORIC HERITAGE Mitigation measures to be implemented as part of the project include compliance with specific recommendations from the historic heritage assessment. These recommendations are detailed below.
7.4.11.1
Proceed with Caution
The proposed works are considered to be appropriate but caution must be taken. Specific mitigation measures are detailed below:
B3 Railway subway – maintain a distance of 2 m from this structure during all construction activities.
B11 “Highfield” homestead and tree planting- maintain a 1 m distance from all built structures and a 2 m distance from the tree plantings during all construction activities.
P7A2: 17 Mandurama Street – maintain a 1 metre distance from the structure.
P8A3 Carcoar Wooden Bridge - do not impact the structure during construction.
P9A1 Brick Culverts - do not excavate above these culverts to a depth further than 1.5 metres. Ensure their structural integrity before construction activities.
O2 The Lone Pine - maintain a 2 metre distance from this structure during all construction activities
O5 Clearview House - maintain a 1 metre distance from the root systems of the pine trees associated with the heritage item.
PHAS 2 - 'toll house' shown on old Crown Plans - maintain a suitable distance during all construction activities.
PAGE 128 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
PHAS 3 'old marked tree line' identified on the Crown plans. - maintain a suitable distance from the trees root.
7.4.11.2
Undertaken Archaeological Monitoring
Undertake monitoring as required by the s.140 permit conditions for works undertaking in the vicinity of:
PHAS 7/P7A2 – Historical relics and structure.
PHAS 8/B9 – Public school historical relics.
Preparation of a research design and section 140 permit application for submission to the NSW Heritage Division (part of OEH) which will detail the premise, aim, objects and methods which underpin the archaeological monitoring program. The conditions of the section 140 permit should be integrated into the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for the project. Monitoring will need to be conducted by the nominated excavation director and will consist of a process where the archaeological team works with the construction contractor during the excavation of the pipeline to identify and record archaeological remains of significance. Where significant archaeological remains are encountered it will need to be established whether they can be preserved through being left in insitu or if they need to be recorded prior to removal. This will ensure that any impacts to archaeological "relics" considered to be significant at a state or local level are mitigated. Prior to, during and upon the completion of the monitoring works, the nominated excavation director in accordance with the section 140 approval must keep NSW Heritage Division informed of the proposed timeframe for monitoring, the results and submit a final report which details the findings.
7.4.11.3
Establish No/Go Areas
Two 'No go' areas should be established at the St Canice’s Roman Catholic Church and Millthorpe Cemetery. These 'No go' area should be established at an appropriate distance to protect the heritage items (refer Schedule of Drawings for distances), but allow construction to proceed unhindered. 'No go' areas should be marked on all construction plans, physically fenced off at the site and incorporated into inductions/tool box talks with contractors undertaking work within the vicinity. No storage of construction material in this area
7.4.11.4
Colour Schemes
Any newly built above ground structures in association with heritage items, or within heritage conservation areas, should adopt the colours associated with the surrounding landscape to integrate the development with the surrounding locality. It is noted that none are currently proposed.
7.4.12 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
All contractors should be provided maps of the Aboriginal sites.
On the ground sites boundaries should be marked and the impact corridor clearly identifiable.
All Aboriginal objects and Places are protected under the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. It is an offence to knowingly disturb an Aboriginal site without a consent permit issued by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH). Should any Aboriginal objects be encountered during works associated with this proposal, works must cease in the vicinity and the find should not be moved until assessed by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be an Aboriginal object the archaeologist will provide further recommendations. These may include notifying the OEH and Aboriginal stakeholders.
PAGE 129 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Aboriginal ancestral remains may be found in a variety of landscapes in NSW. If any suspected human remains are discovered during any activity the following must be undertaken. Immediately cease all work at that location with not further movement or disturbance of the remains. Notify the NSW Police and OEH’s Environmental Line on 131 555 as soon as practicable and provide details of the remains and their location Not recommence work at that location unless authorised in writing by OEH.
7.4.13 FUEL AND CHEMICAL STORAGE
Emergency wet and dry spill kits would be kept on site at all times and all staff would be made aware of the location of the spill kit and trained in its use;
Any fuel, oils or other liquids stored on site would be stored in an appropriately sized impervious bund at least 120% larger than the greatest container and in an area least 50 m away from watercourse and on a slope < 10%.
Storage, handling and use of hazardous materials in accordance with the WorkCover NSW Storage and Handling of Dangerous Goods – Code of Practice (2005).
Activities with the potential for spills (refuelling) would not be undertaken within 50 m of any watercourse and a suitable spill response and containment kit available on site whenever and wherever these type of higher risk activities are undertaken.
Waste Management
Measures to prevent the generation of waste and reduce/reuse/recycle waste where possible.
Suitable waste disposal locations would be identified and used to dispose of litter and other wastes on-site. Suitable containers would be provided for waste collection.
Work sites would be kept free of rubbish and cleaned up at the end of each working day.
Cleared weed-free vegetation will be mulched and reused onsite as part of stabilisation works.
All waste will be disposed at a legally operating waste facility.
If suspected soil contamination is encountered (i.e. as indicated by hydrocarbon odours or staining) the following controls would be implemented: –
Suspect materials segregated and placed into uniquely-identified bunded stockpile pending off-site disposal at a licenced waste disposal facility;
–
Stockpile of suspected contaminated soil should be covered with plastic sheeting to prevent rainfall infiltration and/or soil migration during windy conditions.
–
Soils suspected to be contaminated should be tested prior to off-site disposal for waste classification. Records of the analysis, waste classification and waste disposal dockets will be recorded and retained.
–
Groundwater if encountered within shallow excavations and considered to be contaminated will be managed by tanker truck extraction and off-site disposal at a licensed liquid waste disposal facility.
7.4.14 NATURALLY OCCURRING ASBESTOS Include a plan to manage construction in areas likely to contain naturally occurring asbestos. These areas will be known when the geotechnical investigations are complete.
The plan would be prepared in accordance with the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission’s Code of Practice for the Management and Control of Asbestos in Workplaces (NOHSC: 2018[2005]).
Control methods would be implemented consistent with the guidance provided in Orange City Council’s Asbestos Management Plan (OCC, 2014).
The following requirements will be reflected in the Asbestos Management Plan:
PAGE 130 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
All asbestos removal is required to be undertaken in accordance with the document How to safely remove asbestos: Code of practice published by WorkCover.
All asbestos waste must be transported in accordance with Clause 42 of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005
Asbestos waste (in any form) must only be disposed of at a landfill site that may lawfully receive asbestos waste.
Burial of naturally occurring asbestos on a site from which it originates must be carried out in accordance with an Asbestos Management Plan which complies with Clause 432 of the Work Health and Safety Regulations 2011 and be identified / documented for future owners of the site.
7.4.15 NOISE AND VIBRATION General
Plant on site would be positioned to reduce the emission of noise to the surrounding neighbourhood and to site personnel.
Any equipment not in use for extended periods would be switched off.
Plant and equipment fitted with appropriate mufflers and enclosures where necessary.
Traffic Noise
To minimise access road noise impacts, the following feasible and reasonable noise mitigation option would be considered: –
Appropriate location of private access roads to the construction sites.
–
Regulating time of use.
–
Engine brakes would be minimised in residential areas.
Blasting
Establish times of blasting to suit local conditions.
Undertake building condition surveys at any potentially impacted dwellings.
Consult and notify potentially affected landowners/managers.
Vibration
For construction activities undertaken in close proximity to dwellings where there is the potential to cause vibration. A dilapidation report on the state of buildings would be prepared before construction commences.
Community Liaison
A management procedure would be put in place to deal with noise complaints. Each complaint would be investigated and appropriate noise amelioration measures put in place to mitigate future occurrences, where the noise in question is in excess of allowable limits.
Good relations with people living in the vicinity of the construction site would be established at the beginning of a project. This would involve keeping people informed of progress and appropriate dealing with complaints. The person selected to liaise with the community would be adequately trained and experienced.
Provide the community, reasonably ahead of times, information such as total building time, what works are expected to be noisy, their duration, what is being done to minimise noise and when respite periods will occur.
With respect to respite periods, liaison with affected residences to identify least affected periods and the best timing for implementing respite periods should be considered.
PAGE 131 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
7.4.16 AIR QUALITY
Implementation of the following mitigation measures during construction would minimise potential impacts to air quality:
Limit the area of soil disturbance at any one time.
Place and maintain all disturbed areas, stockpiles and handling areas in a manner that minimises dust emissions (including windblown, traffic-generated or equipment generated emissions).
Where required, utilise dust suppression.
Where required, minimise vehicle movement and speed.
Avoid dust generating activities during windy and dry conditions.
Where visible dust emissions occur as a result of increased wind speeds, dust generated works should cease until appropriate additional controls are implemented.
Equipment, plant and construction vehicles will be turned off when not in use.
Ensure all construction plant and equipment are operated and maintained to manufacturer’s specifications in order to minimise exhaust emissions.
Implement prompt mitigation of visible dust emissions when construction is undertaken in close proximity of a sensitive receptor; which may involve a combination of:
Stabilisation of surface through the application of water sprays.
Control of mechanically induced emissions by temporarily suspending activity or reducing the intensity of operations, including speed limit.
Establish contact with local residents and communicate the construction program and progress, and provide advance warning of significant dust generating activities undertaken in close proximity to sensitive receptors.
If required, implement control methods and monitoring as required by the Asbestos Management Plan (OCC, 2014).
7.4.17 BUSHFIRES
Notwithstanding that the vast majority of the pipeline alignment does not traverse land mapped as bushfire prone, during bush fire season there must be ready access to adequate fire fighting equipment.
7.4.18 INDUCTION
All contractors undertaking any works on-site will, before commencing works, be inducted on the requirements of the CEMP and their specific responsibilities.
7.4.19 ACQUIRE EASEMENTS
7.5
After construction all easements required over private and crown lands would be obtained under the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms) Compensation Act .
OPERATIONS
As each of the seven stages of the Project are commissioned an Operations Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) will be prepared. Input to and responsibilities for implementation will be shared between OCC and CTW in a manner that enables the scheme’s functional elements to be operated as part of an integrated potable supply system. The focus of the OEMP will be restricted to procedures, reporting and allocation of responsibilities intended to minimise impacts. A key element will be land management and monitoring.
PAGE 132 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Notwithstanding contractors will, under the Design and Construct contracts, have responsibility to make good all areas impacted by construction activity, there will an ongoing need to for OCC and CTW as owners of the assets, to check that the rehabilitation of the construction footprint has been effective. Well established groundcover, no localised erosion, and satisfied landowners will be the performance indicators for successful rehabilitation. The procedures for land management would cover weed control, inspection schedules and arrangements for securing landowner sign-off (ie. mutual agreement that rehabilitation has been successful).
The pipeline alignment should be patrolled at least annually by personnel trained in the identification of weed species likely to be encountered, particularly WoNS and other declared noxious weeds, and in techniques for their management. Overall rehabilitation success should also be monitored as part of this patrol.
Follow up weed control should be undertaken, in consultation with the landowner, where it is determined likely that the project has led to their presence.
Maintenance crews should be made aware of weed control requirements and their compliance with weed control requirements monitored as appropriate.
The OEMPs will also include such things as procedures for scour management and procedures for dealing with any complaints.
PAGE 133 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
Conclusion 8.1
CLAUSE 228 FACTORS
There are no specific guidelines in force under Clause 228(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 for the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project as proposed. For an activity of the kind to be undertaken, as identified in this REF, Clause 228 (2) of the Regulation identifies those factors that must be taken into account concerning the impact of this activity on the environment. Each of those factors is addressed below. (a) any environmental impact on a community, Impacts would essentially be limited to the construction phase of the project and can be readily managed through the preparation and compliance with Construction Environmental Management Plans. (b) any transformation of a locality, The activity would not result in the transformation of the locality. (c) any environmental impact on the ecosystems of the locality, Construction of the project would not affect any conservation agreement entered into under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 applying to the whole or part of the land to which the activity relates; any joint management agreement entered into under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, any biobanking agreement entered into under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 that applies to the whole or part of the land to which the activity relates; any wilderness area (within the meaning of the Wilderness Act 1987) in the locality in which the activity is intended to be carried on. The scheme would not have an impact on critical habitat. There is not likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or those habitats, pursuant to s.5A of the EP&A Act. (d) any reduction of the aesthetic, recreational, scientific or other environmental quality or value of a locality, The activity would not reduce an aesthetic, recreational, scientific or other environmental quality or value of the locality. (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, Subject to adoption of the mitigation measures as proposed, impacts on heritage values can be managed. (f) any impact on the habitat of protected fauna (within the meaning of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974), The impact of the activity on the habitat of protected fauna is insignificant and readily managed.
PAGE 134 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
(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 activity would not result in the endangering of any species of animal, plant or other form of life. The activity would not have an impact on critical habitat, nor a significant effect on a threatened species, populations and ecological communities, and their habitats. (h) any long-term effects on the environment, Successful rehabilitation of the areas impacted by construction, and monitoring of scheme impacts as part of an Operations Environmental Management Plan would provide the means for ensuring that long term effects on the environment are minimised. (i) any degradation of the quality of the environment, The quality of the environment would not be degraded. (j) any risk to the safety of the environment, Risks would essentially be limited to the construction phase of the project and can be readily managed through the preparation and compliance with Construction Environmental Management Plans. (k) any reduction in the range of beneficial uses of the environment, The scheme would not result in any reduction in the range of beneficial uses of the environment. (l) any pollution of the environment, The potential for erosion or sedimentation and noise impacts during construction do exist, but can be readily and effectively managed through the installation and monitoring of sedimentation controls and effective consultation with neighbours during the construction phase. The contingency drop-in pumps that would be in use in the event of a catastrophic failure of either OCC or CTWâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s potable supply systems could need to run continuously until the situation is resolved. This could be 24/7 for a period of up to 3 month. This may happen once in a hundred years. It is provision for emergency situations only. (m) any environmental problems associated with the disposal of waste, There are no problems associated with the disposal of wastes. It is noted, however, that if the geotechnical investigations indicate the presence of NOA, all asbestos waste must be transported in accordance with Clause 42 of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005, must only be disposed of at a landfill site that may lawfully receive asbestos waste and, for the burial of NOA on a site from which it originates, must be carried out in accordance with an Asbestos Management Plan which complies with Clause 432 of the Work Health and Safety Regulations 2011 and be identified and documented for future owners of the site. (n) any increased demands on resources (natural or otherwise) that are, or are likely to become, in short supply, A key driver behind the project is that it will provide infrastructure that will enable two neighbouring water utility providers to share water: a resource subject to increased demands. (o) any cumulative environmental effect with other existing or likely future activities. No cumulative effects with other existing or likely future activities are known.
PAGE 135 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
8.1
SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
This Review of Environmental Factors concludes that the construction and operation of the Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project is unlikely to result in a significant adverse environmental impact. In this regard no Species Impact Statement or Environmental Impact Statement is required.
PAGE 136 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS CENTRAL TABLELANDS REGIONAL WATER SECURITY PIPELINE PROJECT ORANGE CITY COUNCIL/CENTRAL TABLELANDS WATER
References APA Group (August 2014) Planning and Development of Land in the Vicinity of APA High Pressure Natural Gas Pipelines in New South Wales [320_PL_HEL_0004] Central Tablelands Water/Orange City Council (2014) Restart NSW Water Security for Region 2014-2015 Department of Environment & Climate Change NSW (2009). Interim Construction Noise Guideline. Sydney Department of Environmental and conservation NSW (2006). Assessing Vibration: a technical guideline. Table 2.2 Geolyse (2013) Integrated Water Cycle Management Evaluation Study GHD (2012) Macquarie River To Orange pipeline project: Environmental Assessment Green D., Petrovic J., Moss P., Burrell M. (2011a) Water resources and management overview: Macquarie-Bogan catchment, NSW Office of Water Green D., Petrovic J., Moss P., Burrell M. (2011b) Water resources and management overview: Lachlan catchment, NSW Office of Water HydroScience Consulting (2009), Central Tablelands Water, Wedding Shire Council, Blayney Shire Council, Cabonne Shire Council Joint Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) Evaluation Study.. HydroScience Consulting (2009), CWBC Joint IWCM Evaluation Study Section 3 Technical Note 3. Kovac, M. & Lawrie, J.A. (1990) Soil Landscapes of the Bathurst 1:250 000 Sheet. Soil Conservation Service of NSW MWH (2011) Business case managed aquifer recharge, Orange City Council NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation (2001) Groundwater vulnerability map explanatory notes – Macquarie Catchment. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.water.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/549240/quality_groundwater_macquarie_map_notes.pdf [Accessed 11 November 2015] NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation (2001). Groundwater vulnerability map explanatory notes – Lachlan Catchment. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.water.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/548585/quality_groundwater_lachlan_map_notes.pdf [Accessed 11 November 2015. NSW Department of Primary Industries (2013). Policy and guidelines for fish habitat conservation and management.. NSW Environmental, Climate Change & Water (2011), NSW Road Noise Policy NSW EPA (2000) Industrial Noise Policy Table 2.1 NSW Government (2011) NSW 2021 baseline report. NSW Land & Property Information (2015). Topographic Data Dictionary – NSW Topographic Data Model No. 8. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.lpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/60931/NSW_Topographic_Data_Dictionaryv8.pdf [Accessed 11 November 2015] NSW Office of Environment & Heritage (2012). The land and soil capability assessment scheme: a general rural land evaluation system for New South Wales. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/soils/20120394lsc2s.pdf [Accessed 11 November 2015] NSW Office of Water (2015) All Groundwater Map. [ONLINE] Available at: http://allwaterdata.water.nsw.gov.au/water.stm [Accessed 11 November 2015] Orange City Council (2014) Asbestos Management Plan
PAGE 137 215327_REF_001B.DOCX
Drawing Schedule
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project: Orange to Lake Rowlands REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Issue Date: 15/12/2015
Drawing No.:
W00271-REF
Alignment Version:
8
Develop by:
In conjunction with:
Geolyse Pty Ltd
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35
154 Peisley Street PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800
Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:200,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: CP0/0 01 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Cover Page
VER: 8
3
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project: Orange to Lake Rowlands
Stage 4: Spring Ck Filtration Plant to Icely Rd Filtration Plant
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
Stage 3: Spring Hill to Spring Ck Filtration Plant Orange City Council
Legend Topographic Features
Cabonne Council
Water Pipeline Features
Contours (no interval indicated) Water Course Railway Line
Conceptual Pipeline Alignment
Cabonne Council
Conceptual Connection Point Conceptual Air Valve Location
Runway
Conceptual Scour Valve Location
Cadastral Features
Stage 2: Millthorpe to Spring Hill
Proposed Pump Station Location (with dimensions)
Local Government Boundary
Lot Boundary (with Lot & DP Number) Crown Land Crossings Survey Mark (with Type & Mark Number) Types: SS State Survey Mark PM Permanent Mark TS Trigonometrical Station CR Cadastral Reference Mark CP Mapping Control Point
Stage 1: Blayney to Millthorpe
Existing Drainage & Water Easements APA Group High Pressure Gas Easement
Blayney Shire Council
APA Group High Pressure Gas Easement
Terrestrial Ecology (with recommendations)
Historic Heritage (with recommendations)
Wildlife Refuge
Historical Heritage Potential Area
Endangered Ecological Communites (EEC) & Threatened Ecological Communites (TEC)
Stage 5: Blayney to Carcoar
Heritage Conservation Areas
Potential Archaeological Deposit
Box-Gum Woodland EEC Box-Gum Woodland EEC & Potential Box-Gum Grassy Woodland TEC
High Potential Low Potential
Tableland Snow Gum Grassy Woodland TEC Box-Gum Woodland EEC or Tableland Snow Gum Grassy Woodland TEC
Modified Tree No Go Areas
Watercourses (with recommendations) Stream Order (Strahler Classification)
Stage 6: Carcoar to Carcoar Filtration Plant
1st Order Stream 2nd Order Stream 3rd Order Stream 4th Order Stream
Stage 7: Carcoar Filtration Plant to Lake Rowlands
Intersected Key Fish Habitats
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:200,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: CP0/0 02 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Site Map & Legend
VER: 8
3
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Issue Date: Drawing No.: Alignment Version:
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
15/12/2015 W00271-REF 8
Stage 1 - Blayney to Millthorpe
Stage 2 - Millthorpe to Spring Hill
Stage 3 - Spring Hill to Spring Creek Filtration Plant
Stage 4 - Spring Creek Filtration Plant to Icely Rd Filtration Plant
Sheet No.
Sheet No.
Sheet No.
Sheet No.
ST1/001 ST1/002 ST1/003 ST1/004 ST1/005 ST1/006 ST1/007 ST1/008 ST1/009 ST1/010 ST1/011 ST1/012 ST1/013 ST1/014 ST1/015 ST1/016 ST1/017 ST1/018 ST1/019 ST1/020
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Plan Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17 Section 18 Section 19
1:50,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
ST2/001 ST2/002 ST2/003 ST2/004 ST2/005 ST2/006 ST2/007 ST2/008 ST2/009 ST2/010 ST2/011 ST2/012 ST2/013
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Plan Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12
1:30,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Plan Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17
1:40,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
ST3/001 ST3/002 ST3/003 ST3/004 ST3/005 ST3/006 ST3/007 ST3/008 ST3/009 ST3/010 ST3/011 ST3/012 ST3/013 ST3/014 ST3/015 ST3/016 ST3/017 ST3/018
Stage 5 - Blayney to Carcoar with Backhouse Spurline
Stage 6 - Carcoar to Carcoar Filtration Plant
Stage 7 - Carcoar Filtration Plant to Lake Rowlands
Sheet No.
Sheet No.
Sheet No.
ST5/001 ST5/002 ST5/003 ST5/004 ST5/005 ST5/006 ST5/007 ST5/008 ST5/009 ST5/010 ST5/011 ST5/012 ST5/013 ST5/014 ST5/015 ST5/016 ST5/017 ST5/018 ST5/019 ST5/020 ST5/021 ST5/022 ST5/023 ST5/024 ST5/025
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Plan Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17 Section 18 Section 19 Section 20 Section 21 Section 22 Section 23 Section 24
1:50,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
ST6/001 ST6/002 ST6/003 ST6/004 ST6/005 ST6/006 ST6/007 ST6/008 ST6/009 ST6/010 ST6/011
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Plan Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10
1:30,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Plan Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7
1:20,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
ST7/001 ST7/002 ST7/003 ST7/004 ST7/005 ST7/006 ST7/007 ST7/008
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
Not Applicable
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
ST4/001 ST4/002 ST4/003 ST4/004 ST4/005 ST4/006 ST4/007 ST4/008 ST4/009
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Plan Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8
1:20,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
CTRWSP: Carcoar Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: CP0/0 03 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Schedule Of Drawings
VER: 8
3
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Stage 1 - Blayney to Millthorpe Issue Date: 15/12/2015 Drawing No.: W00271-REF Alignment Version: 8 Sheet No. ST1/001 ST1/002 ST1/003 ST1/004 ST1/005 ST1/006 ST1/007 ST1/008 ST1/009 ST1/010 ST1/011 ST1/012 ST1/013 ST1/014 ST1/015 ST1/016 ST1/017 ST1/018 ST1/019 ST1/020
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Map Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17 Section 18 Section 19
1:50,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Millthorpe Millthorpe Tank Section 16
Grahams Lane
Section 10
Section 19
Millthorpe Rd Option
Section 5
Browns Creek Road Tank
Section 1
STAGE 1:Site Map
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 1:50,000
Plumb St Tank
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
Blayney
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST1/0 01 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Site Map Section
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 527 DP 738043
Lot 2 DP 881499
Plumb St
Unnamed watercourse
Blayney to Demonrile rail line
Refer to Stage 5 for alignment
Lot 1 DP 1134965
At Plumb St Tank
Lot 1 DP 438959
Plumb St
Lot 528 DP 738043
Refer to insert for location detail
Lot 22 DP 1068877
Lot 4 DP 1005173
Lot 32 DP 1175518
Lot 100 DP 1188406 Lot 21 DP 1068877
Lot 31 DP 1175518
Lot 1 DP 791883
Existing Plumb Street tank
Palmer St
Plumb St
Orange Rd
STAGE 1:Section 1
Conceptual location of pump station building (8.0m x 5.0m approx.)
Blayney Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 02 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 1
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 528 DP 738043
Memorial Dr
Lot 4 DP 5596769
Millthorpe Rd Lot 1 DP 1256397
Lot 1 DP 1134965
Blayney to Demonrile rail line Lot 2 DP 829674
Lot 15 DP1187293 6
STAGE 1:Section 2
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 03 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 2
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 125639
Browns Creek Rd Lot 188 DP 750390
Lot 1 DP 559676 Lot 1 DP 931585
Browns Creek Tank Option
Lot 189 DP 652648
Lot 15 DP1187293
Lot 1 DP 168844 Lot 9 DP 114099
Main Western Railway
Millthorpe Rd Option
Lot 1 DP 1688433 Lot 1 DP 1184615
Lot 68 DP 652647
Millthorpe Rd
STAGE 1:Section 3 Lot 11 DP 1203539
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 04 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 3
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Road
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 186 DP 750390 Lot 187 DP 750390
Browns Creek Tank Option
Lot 188 DP 750390
Crown Land Rego No.: 183219 Crown Land Type: Crown Road
Lot 9 DP 114099
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 71 DP 877670
Lot 68 DP 6526473
STAGE 1:Section 4
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 05 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 4
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 185 DP 750390
Lot 1 DP 33534
Browns Creek Tank Option
Lot 71 DP 877670
Lot 70 DP 877670
At Browns Creek Tank Unnamed watercourse Lot A DP 33533
Crown Land Rego No.: 183219 Crown Land Type: Crown Road
Millthorpe Rd
STAGE 1:Section 5
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST1/0 06 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 5
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 71 DP 877670 Lot 70 DP 877670
Browns Creek Tank Option Lot 1 DP 1070889
Millthorpe Rd Unnamed watercourse
Lot 6 DP 720607
Millthorpe Road Option
Lot 2 DP 1145707
Lot 3 DP 1145707
STAGE 1:Section 6
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST1/0 07 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 6
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 1070889 Lot 31 DP 1094728 Lot 71 DP 877670
Lot 1 DP 875553
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 1 DP 103230
Lot 101 DP 1152020
Limestone La Millthorpe Rd
Lot 6 DP 720607
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 2 DP 1145707
STAGE 1:Section 7
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC
DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATE: 12/15
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST1/0 08 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 7
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 100 DP 1152020 Lot 100 DP 1094728
Lot 101 DP 1152020
Lot 101 DP 1152020
Limestone La
Lot 7773 DP 1208781
Millthorpe Rd
Main Western Railway
Lot 7002 DP 1019794 Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 61 DP 750390
Lot 2 DP 1145707
Lot 1 DP 1184554
STAGE 1:Section 8
Lot 434 DP 701591
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 09 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
DATE: 12/15
Section 8
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 100 DP 1152020
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 7773 DP 1208781
Main Western Railway
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 61 DP 750390
STAGE 1:Section 9
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 10 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 9
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 7 DP 794023
Lot 5 DP 1152776
Lot 100 DP 1152020
Lot 6 DP 794023
Lot 2 DP 1185945
Millthorpe Rd
Main Western Railway
Lot 1 DP 1185945
Lot 7773 DP 1208781
Lot 146 DP 668088
Lot 61 DP 750390
STAGE 1:Section 10
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST1/0 11 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 10
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot A DP 339792 Lot 6 DP 794023
Lot 5 DP 794023 Lot 4 DP 794023
Lot 5 DP 1152776
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 1 DP 1185945
Lot 7773 DP 1208781
Main Western Railway
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 146 DP 668088
Lot 1 DP 32891
Lot 13 DP 114099
STAGE 1:Section 11
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST1/0 12 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 11
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 176 DP 750384
Lot 4 DP 794023
Lot 4 DP 794023
Lot 3 DP 794023
Millthorpe Rd Lot 7773 DP 1208781
Main Western Railway
Lot 1 DP 1152969
Lot 1 DP 32891
STAGE 1:Section 12
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST1/0 13 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 12
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 176 DP 750384
Lot 3 DP 794023
Lot 2 DP 794023
Unnamed watercourse
Millthorpe Rd
Main Western Railway
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 3331 DP 1206829
DPI Permit required
Lot 7773 DP 1208781
Lot 1 DP 32891
STAGE 1:Section 13
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 14 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 13
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 217 DP 596234 Lot 1 DP 794023
Lot 2 DP 794023 Lot 5 DP 263361
Lot 233 DP 750384
DPI Permit required
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 241 DP 750384 Lot 1 DP 1044548 Lot 3331 DP 1206829
Main Western Railway
Lot 1 DP 32891 Lot 3 DP 1047579 Unnamed watercourse
Lot 1 DP 1047579
Nyes Gate Rd
STAGE 1:Section 14 Lot 2 DP 1047579
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 15 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 14
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Clayton La
Millthorpe Rd Lot 6 DP 263361
Back Rd Lot 14 DP 263361
Lot 5 DP 263361
Main Western Railway Lot 13 DP 263361
Lot 1 DP 1092119
Lot 51 DP 11125 Lot 3331 DP 1206829 Lot 3 DP 782217
Lot 12 DP 11125
Lot 1 DP 78716
Unnamed watercourse
Nyes Gate Rd
Lot 1 DP 919556
Lot 2 DP 919556
Lot 14 DP 11125
Lot 15 DP 11125
Lot 16 DP 11125
STAGE 1:Section 15
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 16 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 15
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Millthorpe Rd
Millthorpe
Back Rd Glenorie Rd
Lot 12 DP 11125 Lot 13 DP 11125
Lot 5252 DP 1208478
Elliott St
Main Western Railway Nyes Gate Rd
Lot 1 DP 1713
Lot 1 DP 1182057
Park St
Lot 16 DP 11125
Lot 18 DP 11125
Lot 17 DP 11125
Graham La spur line Prior to excavation, within to cater for existing Millthorpe, a Section 140 Permit is required from the customers
Lot 19 DP 11125
Lot 40 DP 263360
Lot 45 DP 263360
Lot 43 DP 263360
Lot 41 DP 263360
Graham La
Blake St
Heritage Council of NSW
Lot 42 DP 263360
Lot 47 DP 263360 Lot 46 DP 263360
Lot 44 DP 263360
Lot 20 DP 11125
At Millthorpe Tank
STAGE 1:Section 16 Lot 1 DP 113484
Lot 2 DP 614384
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
Refer to Stage 2 for alignment
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/0 17 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 16
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 188 DP 1137017
Lot 189 DP 652648
Lot 68 DP 652647
Lot 9 DP 114099
Millthorpe Rd Option
Greghamstown Rd
Unnamed watercourse
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 3 DP 1137017
Main Western Railway
Lot 3 DP 1137017 Lot 2 DP 1164971
STAGE 1:Section 17 Lot 2 DP 1137017
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/018 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 17
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 71 DP 877670
Lot 68 DP 652647
Millthorpe Rd Option
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 3 DP 1145707
Wombana La Lot 2 DP 1137017
Lot 2 DP 1164971
Main Western Railway
Lot 1 DP 1137017
Lot 2 DP 1137017
STAGE 1:Section 18
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/019 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 18
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Browns Creek Tank Option
Lot 70 DP 877670
Lot A DP 33533
Lot 71 DP 877670
Lot 71 DP 877670
Millthorpe Rd
Millthorpe Rd Option
Lot 2 DP 1145707
Lot 3 DP 1145707
STAGE 1:Section 19
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 1 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST1/020 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 19
VER: 8
20
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Stage 2 - Millthorpe to Spring Hill Issue Date: Drawing No.: Alignment Version: Sheet No. ST2/001 ST2/002 ST2/003 ST2/004 ST2/005 ST2/006 ST2/007 ST2/008 ST2/009 ST2/010 ST2/011 ST2/012 ST2/013
15/12/2015 W00271-REF 8
Drawing Name Site Map Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12
Spring Hill Tank
Spring Hill
Section 12
Scale 1:30,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Section 10
Section 5
Section 1
STAGE 2:Site Map Millthorpe
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 1:30,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
Millthorpe Tank
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 01 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section Site Map
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Park St
Millthorpe
Lot 46 DP 263360
Lot 235 DP 750384
Lot 47 DP 263360
Refer to Stage 1 for alignment
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra), in proximity to the EEC at Millthorpe Cemetery
Blake St
Lot 9 DP 750384
Boomerang Rd Victoria Rd
At Millthorpe Tank George St
Prior to excavation, within Millthorpe, a Section 140 Permit is required from Heritage Council of NSW
Lot 1 DP 113484
Kingham St Lot 30 DP 11125
Lot 29 DP 11125
Lot 2 DP 614384
Lot 34 DP 11125 Lot 33 DP 11125
Pitt St Vittoria Rd
STAGE 2:Section 1
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra), in proximity to the EEC at Millthorpe Cemetery
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
Lot 3 DP 1122378
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 02 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 1
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Millthorpe Cemetery/St Canices Roman Church: Temporary fence the area before construction commences. Do not enter the area during construction and do not store construction material in this area.
Lot 101 DP 872388
Lot 1039 DP 844076
Richards La
Orange City Council
Millthorpe
Lot 1040 DP 844076
Park St Lot 1 DP 1112336
Lot 2 DP 1038469
Lot 1 DP 650739
Lot 1 DP 1122648
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 3 DP 1038469
Millthorpe Cemetery Lot 9 DP 750384
Lot 1 DP 668335
Lot 1 DP 922879 Lot 7302 DP 1157031
NO GO ZONE
Prior to excavation, within Millthorpe, a Section 140 Permit is required from the Heritage Council of NSW
Blayney Shire Council
NO GO ZONE
Lot 7303 DP 1157031
Lot 91 DP 1119710
Lot 7003 DP 1060551
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra), in proximity to the EEC at Millthorpe Cemetery
STAGE 2:Section 2 Lot 3 DP 1122378
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST2/0 03 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 2
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 3 DP 1038469
Clarke Rd
Lot 100 DP 1010105
Lot 1 DP 1012311
Lot 10 DP 1038140
Lot 91 DP 1119710 Unnamed watercourse
Orange City Council
Millthorpe Rd Unnamed watercourse
Blayney Shire Council Lot 2 DP 1122378
STAGE 2:Section 3 Lot 3 DP 1122378
04
3
Lot 3 DP 1084874
Lot 10 DP 1038140
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 2 DP 1122378
Lot 1 DP 717257
Lot 1 DP 1122378
Blayney Shire Council
Lot 212 DP 750406
Orange City Council
STAGE 2:Section 4
Bowd Rd
Lot 22 DP 852060
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Lot 176 DP 750406
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 05 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 4
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 3 DP 1084874 Lot 1 DP 1035675
Lot 2 DP 1035675
Millthorpe Rd
Lot 100 DP 1091009
Lot 176 DP 750406
STAGE 2:Section 5
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 06 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2
DATE: 12/15
Section 5
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 3 DP 1035675
Lot 2 DP 1035675
Chapman La
Lot2 DP 1035675
Millthorpe Rd
Williams La
DPI Notification required
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 100 DP 1091009
Lot 100 DP 1091009
Lot 100 DP 1091009
STAGE 2:Section 6
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 07 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 6
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 3 DP 1035675
Chapman La
Lot 200 DP 1171415
Lot 1 DP 161437
Millthorpe Rd
Williams La
Lot 200 DP 1171415
Lot 100 DP 1091009
STAGE 2:Section 7
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST2/0 08 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 7
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 200 DP 1171415
Lot 201 DP 1171415
Whiley Rd Unnamed watercourse
DPI Notification required
Millthorpe Rd
STAGE 2:Section 8
Lot 200 DP 1171415
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 09 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 8
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 200 DP 1171415
Lot 1 DP 1043518
Lot 2 DP 104318
Unnamed watercourse Unnamed watercourse
Whiley Rd
Lot 201 DP 1171415
Lot 4 DP 1076666
Lot 3 DP 1076666
STAGE 2:Section 9
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 10 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 9
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 7003 DP 1020290
Warburton La Spring Hill Cemetery: Proceed with caution
Lot 3 DP 1043518
Lot 2 DP 104318
Prior to excavation, within Spring Hill, a Section 140 Permit is required from Heritage Council of NSW
Whiley Rd
Lot 4 DP 1076666
Lot 5 DP 1076666
Lot 1 DP 1076666
Lot 1 DP 1015958
Lot 1 DP 117870
STAGE 2:Section 10
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/011 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 10
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 19 DP 1131133 Lot 8886 DP 1208442
Warburton La Spring Hill Cemetery: Proceed with caution
Melaleuca La Lot 7 DP 668090
Existing 450mm dia x12.0m long pipe under railline
Lot 17 DP 1131133
Lot 18 DP 1131133
Lot 2 DP 804164
Prior to excavation, within Spring Hill, a Section 140 Permit is required from Heritage Council of NSW
Lot 16 DP 1131133
Cabonne Council
Whiley Rd Chapman St Lot 6 DP 806008
Lot 31 DP 1073906
Lot 5 DP 806008
Orange City Council
Lot 7 DP 758921
Orange St
Spring St Lot 52 DP 750406 Lot 1 DP 117870 Lot 1 DP 809208
STAGE 2:Section 11
Grove St
Lot 229 DP 750406
Main Western Railway
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Lucknow St
Lot 4 DP 809208
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST2/0 12 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 11
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Strachan Rd
Refer to Stage 3 for alignment Lot 13 DP 1131133
Lot 1 DP 1177075
Lot 2 DP 1177075
Lot 11 DP 1177075
Lot 10 DP 1177075
Lot 3 DP 1177075
Cabonne Council
Lot 1 DP 905110
Carcoar St Prior to excavation, within Spring Hill, a Section 140 Permit is required from Heritage Council of NSW Lot 16 DP 1131133
Orange City Council Lot 229 DP 750406
Seaton St
Baker St
To Spring Hill Tank
Lucknow St
Lot 17 DP 1131133
Lot 20 DP 830953
Lot 21 DP 830953
Hill St Worboys St
Chapman St
STAGE 2:Section 12
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 2 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST2/0 13 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 12
VER: 8
13
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Stage 3 - Spring Hill to Spring Creek Filtration Plant Issue Date: Drawing No.: Alignment Version: Sheet No.
ST3/001 ST3/002 ST3/003 ST3/004 ST3/005 ST3/006 ST3/007 ST3/008 ST3/009 ST3/010 ST3/011 ST3/012 ST3/013 ST3/014 ST3/015 ST3/016 ST3/017 ST3/018
Spring Creek Filtration Plant
Orange Section 17
15/12/2015 W00271-REF 8
Drawing Name
Site Map Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17
Scale
1:40,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Section 12
Orange Airport Spurline
Section 6
Section 1
STAGE 3:Site Map
Spring Hill SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 1:40,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
Spring Hill Tank
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 01 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section Site Map
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Carcoar St
Refer to Stage 2 for alignment
Seaton St
Lot 11 DP 1177075
Lot 7 DP 1177075
To Spring Hill Tank Lot 1 DP 905110
Lot 200 DP 1204199
Prior to excavation, within Spring Hill, a Section 140 Permit is required from Heritage Council of NSW
Lot 2 DP 9524223
Cabonne Council
Lot 1 DP 952422
Worboys St Forest Rd Lot 100 DP 1117146
Beasley Rd
Orange City Council Lot 37 DP 750387
STAGE 3:Section 1
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 02 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 1
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 40 DP 750387
Davis Rd Lot 7 DP 1177075
Lot 39 DP 657442
Lot 1 DP 952423
Cabonne Council
Lot 1 DP 954144
Forest Rd
Orange City Council
Lot 37 DP 750387
Lot 11 DP 1187717
Lot 38 DP 661268
STAGE 3:Section 2
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/003 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 2
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 40 DP 750387
Lot 220 DP 657441
Lot 219 DP 650504
Lot 11 DP 1187717
Lot 218 DP 650505
Lot 39 DP 657442 Lot 1 DP 954791
Lot 1 DP 952423
Cabonne Council
Lot 1 DP 954144
Unnamed watercourse
DPI Permit & DPI Notification required Lot 305 DP 1061640
Forest Rd
Orange City Council Adrians La Lot 38 DP 661268 Lot 307 DP 1061640
STAGE 3:Section 3
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 04 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 3
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 218 DP 650505
Lot 217 DP 650506
Cabonne Council
Lot 2 DP 1176364
Nixon Rd
Orange City Council
Lot 1 DP 954852 Lot 1 DP 954791 Lot 1 DP 858478
Forest Rd
APA Group high pressure gasline easement 20.0m wide
Lot 303 DP 880738
Lot 302 DP 880738 Lot 21 DP 624975
Aerodrome Rd
Lot 305 DP 1061640
DPI Permit required
STAGE 3:Section 4
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 307 DP 1061640
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 05 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 4
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 10 DP 1208693
Unnamed watercourse
APA Group high pressure gasline easement 20.0m wide
DPI Permit required
Lot 21 DP 624975
STAGE 3:Section 5
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 06 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 5
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 10 DP 1208693
APA Group high pressure gasline easement 20.0m wide
Lot 384 DP 1045095
Aerodrome Rd Lot 21 DP 624975 Lot 200 DP 1195298
To Orange Airport Tanks Lot 2 DP 230430
STAGE 3:Section 6
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 07 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 6
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 18 DP 750387
Lot 383 DP 1045095
APA Group high pressure gasline easement 20.0m wide
Aerodrome Rd
APA Group high pressure gasline easement 15.0m wide Huntley Rd
Lot 7 DP 559537
Lot 384 DP 1045095
Huntley Rd
STAGE 3:Section 7
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 08 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 7
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 6 DP 559537
APA Group high pressure gasline easement 20.0m wide
Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 453 DP 8101737
Lot 7 DP 559537
Huntley Rd
STAGE 3:Section 8
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC
DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATE: 12/15
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 09 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 8
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 7 DP 559537
APA Group high pressure gasline easement 20.0m wide
Lot 6 DP 559537
Lot 453 DP 8101737
Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Huntley Rd Lot 288 DP 750387
Lot 2 DP 600453
Lot 1 DP 600453
Lot 8 DP 975553
STAGE 3:Section 9
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 10 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 9
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Hiney Rd Lot 8 DP 975553
Lot 567 DP 1099188
Unnamed watercourse
Huntley Rd
Lot 1 DP 600453
Lot 2 DP 600453
STAGE 3:Section 10
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 11 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 10
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 231605
Lot 567 DP 1099188
Lot 201 DP 1016486
Lot 202 DP 1016486
Lot 211 DP 1016486
Huntley Rd
Lot 211 DP 1016486 Lot 200 DP 1042614
Lot 2 DP 600453
Lot 201 DP 1042614
Lot 269 DP 750387 Lot 101 DP 102936
STAGE 3:Section 11
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 12 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 11
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Spring Creek Lot 211 DP 1016486
Lot 31 DP 805519
Lot 212 DP 1016486 Lot 202 DP 1016486
Lot 203 DP 1016486
Lot 206 DP 1016486
Lot 213 DP 1016486
Huntley Rd
Lot 208 DP 1016486
Lot 211 DP 1016486
Lot 32 DP 805519
Lot 32 DP 805519
Lot 32 DP 8055194
DPI Permit required
Lot 1 DP 47923
Lot 297 DP 705292
Lot 205 DP 1016486
Lot 209 DP 1016486
Main Western Railway
Lot 101 DP 1025936 Lot 1 DP 195413
Lot 201 DP 1042614
STAGE 3:Section 12
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 13 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 12
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 31 DP 805519
Lot 32 DP 805519
Huntley Rd
Lot 1 DP 794629 Lot 209 DP 1016486
Main Western Railway
Lot 1 DP 1086060
Lot 1 DP 1086060
STAGE 3:Section 13
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST3/0 14 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 13
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 163 DP 750387
Lot A DP 187672
Lot 30 DP 805519
Lot 31 DP 805519
Lot 21 DP 212647
Huntley Rd
Lot 1 DP 794629
Main Western Railway
Lot 1 DP 1086060
Lot 1 DP 152629
STAGE 3:Section 14
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 15 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 14
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot A DP 187672
Lot 34 DP 664921
Lot 1 DP 520160
DPI Permit required Lot 1 DP 794629
Main Western Railway Huntley Rd Unnamed watercourse
Shepherd Rd
Lot 1 DP 152629
Lot 10 DP 1065133
Lot 11 DP 1065133
STAGE 3:Section 15
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/016 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 15
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 520160
Huntley Rd
Main Western Railway
Lot 10 DP 1065133
Shepherd Rd Lot 2 DP 779034
Louie La
Lot 11 DP 1065133
Lot 1 DP 1015084
Lot 25 DP 986204
Lot 7001 DP 1020291
STAGE 3:Section 16
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 17 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 16
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 520160
Huntley Rd
Dane La Lot 34 DP 1150385
Main Western Railway
Lot 61 DP 999272
Shepherd Rd
Lot 1 DP 779034 Lot 51 DP 605570
Gosling Creek
Lot 2 DP 779034
Refer to Sheet ST4/002 for pump station location details
Lot 4 DP 182864 Lot 2 DP 183816
Lot 1 DP 184562
Lot 2 DP 774471
DPI Permit required Lot 8082 DP 1185617
To Spring Creek Filter Plant
Lot 1 DP 339226
Lot 1 DP 182864
STAGE 3:Section 17 Spring Creek Reservoir
Lot 555 DP 801745
Lone Pine Ave
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
Refer to Stage 4 for alignment
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 3 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST3/0 18 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 17
VER: 8
18
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Stage 4 - Spring Creek to Icely Rd Flitation Plant
To Icely Rd Filtation Plant Orange
Issue Date: 15/12/2015 Drawing No.: W00271-REF Alignment Version: 8 Sheet No. ST4/001 ST4/002 ST4/003 ST4/004 ST4/005 ST4/006 ST4/007 ST4/008 ST4/009
Drawing Name Site Map Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8
Section 8
Scale 1:20,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Section 5
Section 1
To Spring Creek Filter Plant
STAGE 4:Site Map
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 1:20,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST4/001 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section Site Map
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 2 DP 774471
Lot 1 DP 774471
Lot 2 DP 774471
To Spring Creek Filter Plant
Proposed pipeline alignment to cross crown land parcel Crown Land Rego No.: 76269 Crown Land Type: Crown Road Lot 1 DP 184561
Lot 52 DP 605570
Lot 584 DP 749425
To Spring Creek Tank
Lot 1 DP 184562
Refer to insert for pump station location detail
Existing services easement combined 5.03m wide Lot 81 DP 792268
Existing disused Spring Creek Filtration Plant
Lot 555 DP 801745
Lot 556 DP 801745
Lot 629 DP 836599
Conceptual location of pump station building (8.0m x 5.0m approx.)
STAGE 4:Section 1
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Lot 30 DP 255071
Lot 27 DP 255071
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST4/0 02 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 1
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Orange Lot 4 DP 621383
Proposed pipeline alignment to cross crown land parcel Crown Land Rego No.: 76269 Crown Land Type: Crown Road
Ash St
Lot 584 DP 749425
Lot 3 DP 714365
SP 76110
Existing sewer & water easement combined 5.03m wide (DP 255071 & DP 606726 along boundary
Lot 3 DP 621383
Lot 2 DP 714365
Lot 22 DP 1198009
Lot 4 DP 714365
Elsham Ave Old marked tree line: Maintain a suitable distance from the tree root system
Lot 30 DP 255071
Lot 100 DP 1111123
Lot 27 DP 255071
Lot 75 DP 842714
Lot 100 DP 739023
Blowes Rd
Lot 101 DP 1111123
Leewood Dr
Lot 101 DP 739023
Leewood Dr
Torulosa Wy Lot 2 DP 255071
STAGE 4:Section 2
Lot 6 DP 255071
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST4/0 03 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 2
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Orange
Kurim Ave Torulosa wy
Lot 75 DP 842714
Old marked tree line: Maintain a suitable distance from the tree root system
Currong Cres
Attunga Pl
Pindari Cres Lot 75 DP 718706
Blowes Rd
Lot 6 DP 255071
Lot 17 DP 788486
Lot 1 DP 747766 Lot 3 DP 255071
Lot 16 DP 788486
Lot 15 DP 788486 Lot 4 DP 255071
Lot 5 DP 255071
Lone Pine Ave
STAGE 4:Section 3 Leewood Dr
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST4/0 04 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 3
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Orange
Lot 15 DP 788486
Blowes Rd
Currong Cres Lot 2 DP 626587
Lot 16 DP 788486
Lot 17 DP 788486
Lone Pine Ave Clearview House: Maintain a 1.0m distance from the tree root system of the pine trees associated with the heritage item Lot B DP 155722
Lot 7 DP 793145
Lot 104 DP 790162
Old marked tree line: Maintain a suitable distance from the tree root system
Steeles La
Dairy Creek Rd
STAGE 4:Section 4
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST4/0 05 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 4
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Orange
Lot 13 DP 807799
Currong Cres
Kurim Ave
Leumeah Rd
South Terrace
Adina Cres
Lone Pine Ave Lot 1 DP 270204 Lot 4 DP 270204
Lot 7 DP 793145
Lot 1 DP 72811
Lot 5 DP 270204
Lot 1 DP 153167
Lot 2 DP 270204
Lot 6 DP 270204
STAGE 4:Section 5
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST4/0 06 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 5
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Orange
Orchard Grove Rd Bathurst Rd
Lot 13 DP 807799
Lot 102 DP 842161
Lot 103 DP 842161
Lone Pine Ave
Lone Pine Ave
Lot 1 DP 270204
Lot 5 DP 270204
Lot 574 DP 836044
Lot 1 DP 1011930
Lot 1 DP 724209
Orange Cemetries Old Portion: Proceed with caution
Cameron Pl
Mitchell Hwy
Lot 7308 DP 1161793
The Lone Pine: Maintain a 2.0m distance from this structure during construction
STAGE 4:Section 6
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST4/0 07 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4
DATE: 12/15
Section 6
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Orange
Frederica St
Austin St
Lone Pine Ave
Icely Rd
Wakeford St
Blackley St
Winter St Lot 11 DP 516911
Lot 7308 DP 1161793
Orange Cemetries Old Portion: Proceed with caution Lot 12 DP 516911
Lot C DP 432936
Paterson Gardens
STAGE 4:Section 7 Lot 8 DP 31351
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST4/0 08 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 7
VER: 8
9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Jessie Rise Lot 8 DP 516911
Paterson Estate
Orange The Snowy Way
Lot 1 DP 418091 Lot 1 DP 505681
Lot 2 DP 505681
Lot 13 DP 8480040
Apply native seed of local species, containing kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra), tussock (P. labillardierei) and / or snow grass (P. sieberiana), in proximity to the EEC at the Icely Road Filtration Plant
Lot 4 DP 507528
Apply native seed of local species, containing kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra), tussock (P. labillardierei) and / or snow grass (P. sieberiana), in proximity to the EEC at the Icely Road Filtration Plant Lot 30 DP 210751
To 20Ml Tank at Icely Rd Filtration Plant
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800
Lot 6 DP 1045535
Lot 1 DP 7784190 Lot 1 DP 778419
Icely Rd
Apply native seed of local species, containing kangaroo grass (Themeda triandra), tussock (P. labillardierei) and / or snow grass (P. sieberiana), in proximity to the EEC at the Icely Road Filtration Plant
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited
Lot 1 DP 773551
Lot 1 DP 404774
Existing easement 7.50m wide & variable (DP 778419 along road access)
STAGE 4:Section 8
Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Barton Dr
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
Lot 96 DP 1200262
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 4 Review of Environmental Factors
09 SHEET No.: ST4/0 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 8
VER: 8 9
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Stage 5 - Blayney to Carcoar with Backhouse Spurline
Blayney Plumb St Tank
Issue Date: 15/12/2015 Drawing No.: W00271-REF Alignment Version: 8 Sheet No. ST5/001 ST5/002 ST5/003 ST5/004 ST5/005 ST5/006 ST5/007 ST5/008 ST5/009 ST5/010 ST5/011 ST5/012 ST5/013 ST5/014 ST5/015 ST5/016 ST5/017 ST5/018 ST5/019 ST5/020 ST5/021 ST5/022 ST5/023 ST5/024 ST5/025
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Map Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17 Section 18 Section 19 Section 20 Section 21 Section 22 Section 23 Section 24
1:50,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Section 1
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/ Anahdale Wildlife Refuge Section 5
Stanfield Wildlife Refuge
Backhouse Spurline
Section 24 Section 10
Section 21 Section 15 Section 20
Carcoar Tank
Carcoar
STAGE 5:Site Map
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 1:50,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 01 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section Site Map
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 1106952 Lot 2 DP 881499
Railway subway: Maintain a distance of 2.0m from this structure during construction
Lot 2 DP 881499
At Plumb St Tank
Lot 1 DP 133855
Blayney to Demonrile rail line
Refer to Stage 1 for alignment
Lot 1 DP 402949 Lot 1 DP 438938
Lot 7 DP 911038
Lot 1 DP 1199093
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 1 DP 1165306
Lot 10 DP 6188
Lot 5 DP 1121918
Lot 8 DP 6188
Lot 11 DP 6188
Refer to Sheet St1/002 for pump station location details Plumb St
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge Piggott Pl
STAGE 5: Section 1
Blayney
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/002 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 1
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot E DP 25352
Blayney to Demonrile rail line
Lot 2 DP 1135974 Lot 5 DP 911038 Lot 2 DP 881499
Unnamed watercourse Lot 2 DP 580748
Lot G DP 25352 Lot 6 DP 911038 Unnamed watercourse
Lot 5 DP 1121918
Lot 2 DP 1126532
Lot 7 DP 911038
Lot 1 DP 1141681
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 17 DP 561948
Lot 1 DP 1165306
Lot 1 DP 1135974
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge
STAGE 5: Section 2
Blayney SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 03 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 2
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge
Lot 202 DP 875880
Lot 2 DP 1135974
Lot 202 DP 875880 Lot 2 DP 44140
Lot 2 DP 580748
Lot 2 DP 1126532
Mid Western Hwy
Lucks La Lot a DP 421297
Lot 1 DP 580748
Lot 379 DP 659194
Lot 189 DP 750380
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 1 DP 131658
Lot 2 DP 1126532
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC on the Mid Western Highway
STAGE 5: Section 3
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 04 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 3
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 202 DP 875880
Lot 101 DP 849065
Lot 202 DP 875880
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge
Lot 202 DP 875880
Mid Western Hwy
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC on the Mid Western Highway
Lot 233 DP 750380
Lot 231 DP 750380
Lot 1 DP 242701
Lot 238 DP 750380
Lot 189 DP 750380
Lucks La
STAGE 5: Section 4
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 05 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 4
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC at Blayney Golf Course
Lot 202 DP 875880
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 7011 DP 1023246
Lot 1 DP 240749
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 2 DP 240749 Lot 233 DP 750380
Lot 318 DP 750380 Lot 316 DP 750380
Blayney Golf Course
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC at Blayney Golf Course
Lot 3 DP 240749 Lot 7006 DP 1023241
STAGE 5: Section 5
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 06 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 5
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge
Lot 202 DP 875880
Lot 300 DP 750380
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC at Blayney Golf Course
Lot 2 DP 804822
Mid Western Hwy
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 316 DP 750380
Lot 24 DP 568101
Lot 7011 DP 1023246
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC at Blayney Golf Course
Blayney Golf Course
Lot 321 DP 750380
STAGE 5: Section 6
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 07 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 6
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 309 Lot 750380
Lot 311 DP 750380
Lot 7005 DP 1023221
Lot 1 DP 804822
Lot 2 DP 804822
Unnamed watercourse
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 25 DP 568101
Lot 24 DP 568101
STAGE 5: Section 7
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 08 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 7
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge Lot 311 DP 750380
Lot 312 Lot 750380
Lot 310 DP 750380
Unnamed watercourse
Mid Western Hwy
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 25 DP 568101
STAGE 5: Section 8
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 09 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 8
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge
Lot 310 DP 750380
Lot 7004 DP 1023218
Mackenzies Waterholes Creek
Lot 319 DP 750380
Mid Western Hwy
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 2 DP 583426
Lot 25 DP 568101
STAGE 5: Section 9
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 10 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 9
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 210 DP 750380
Lot 209 DP 750380
Aziel-Te-Ar-Maru/Anahdale Wildlife Refuge
Mid Western Hwy Lot 310 DP 750380
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 215 DP 657389
Lot 2 DP 583426
Lot 39 DP 750380
STAGE 5: Section 10
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/011 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5
DATE: 12/15
Section 10
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 144 DP 750380
Lot 211 DP 750380
Lot 212 DP 750380
Lot 210 DP 750380
Mid Western Hwy
Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 215 DP 657389
Lot 1 DP 1136871
Lot 1 DP 1136871
STAGE 5: Section 11
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 12 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 11
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 144 DP 750380
Lot 1 DP 944500
Lot 212 DP 750380
Mid Western Hwy
Unnamed watercourse Lot 1 DP 1136871
Lot 2 DP 1136871
STAGE 5: Section 12
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 13 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 12
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 944500
Lot 1 DP 944500
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 3 DP 34966
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 2 DP 1136871
Carcoar Dam Rd
Lot 8 DP 101951
STAGE 5: Section 13
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 14 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 13
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Central Tablelands Livestock Exchange
Lot 800 DP 1150368
Stanfield Wildlife Refuge
Hahn Rd
Lot 143 DP 581175
Lot 1 DP 944500
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 1 DP 34966
Lot 2 DP 34966
Lot 3 DP 34966
Carcoar Dam Rd
STAGE 5: Section 14
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/015 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
DATE: 12/15
Section 14
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Central Tablelands Livestock Exchange
Lot 800 DP 1150368
Lot 514 DP 719187
Lot 3 DP 244959
Hahn Rd
Lot 4 DP 244959
Lot 5 DP 244959
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 1 DP 809410
Lot 1 DP 34966
Lot 6 DP 244959
Lot 194 DP 750380
STAGE 5: Section 15
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/016 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 15
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 2 DP 131707
Lot 514 DP 719187
Lot 2 DP 809410
Backhouse Spurline Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC on the Mid Western Highway
Lot 4 DP 244959 Lot 3 DP 244959
Lot 20 DP 773756
Unnamed watercourse
Mid Western Hwy Reserve
Lot 1 DP 1120742
Fullers La
Apply native seed of local species, dominated by tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC on the Mid Western Highway
Lot 1 DP 809410
STAGE 5: Section 16
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 17 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 16
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 121 DP 750380
Lot 1 DP 131707
Lot 2 DP 131707
Apply native seed of local species, codominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Mid Western Hwy
Apply native seed of local species, codominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Lot 1 DP 1120742
STAGE 5: Section 17
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 18 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5
DATE: 12/15
Section 17
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Lot 104 DP 750380
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Carcoar Rd
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 121 DP 750380
Unnamed watercourse
DPI Notification required Lot 32 DP 1212655
Brady Rd
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 1 DP 626899
Lot 1 DP 1120742
Brick Culverts: Do not excavate above these culverts to a depth further than 1.5 metres. Ensure structural integrity before construction commences.
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Lot 1 DP 1120742
STAGE 5: Section 18
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/019 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 18
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 435 DP 750380
Lot 32 DP 1212655
Rothery St
Prior to excavtion, within Carcoar, a Section 140 Permit is required from the Heritage Council of NSW
Lot 434 DP 750380
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Belubula St
Wirraway La Lot 32 DP 1212655
Brady Rd 17 Mandurama Street: Works cannot be undertaken until a permit is issued by NSW Heritage Council Mandurama St
Lot 363 DP 652030
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Apply native seed of local species, co-dominated by kangaroo grass (T. triandra) and tussock (P. labillardierei), in proximity to the EEC / TEC north of Carcoar
Lot 1 DP 626899
Mid Western Hwy
STAGE 5: Section 19 Lot 1 DP 1120742
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 20 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 19
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Rothery St
Belubula St
Refer to Stage 6 for alignment
Lot 32 DP 1212655
Rodd St
Lot 7 DP 36120 Lot 6 DP 36120
17 Mandurama Street: Works cannot be undertaken until a permit is issued by NSW Heritage Council
Coombing St
Lot 1720 DP 1085792
Lot 1 DP 833757
Lot 16 DP 8842 Section 11
Collins St
Lot 2 DP 833757
Lot 11 DP 758225
Mandurama St Lot 12 DP 1083140
At Carcoar Tank
Section 10
Section 5
Lot 20 DP 758225
Prior to excavtion, within Carcoar, a Section 140 Permit is required from the Heritage Council of NSW
Carcoar Lot 1 DP 758225
Section 6
STAGE 5: Section 20
Prior to works commencing around the Carcoar reservoir an ecologist would inspect the works area to confirm that Bursaria spinose would not be impacted.
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Lot 363 DP 652030
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 21 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 20
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 514 DP 719187
Lot 1 DP 1197601 Lot 1 DP 1189153
Backhouse Spurline
Lot 2 DP 809410
Lot 514 DP 719187
Lot 84 DP 750380
STAGE 5: Section 21
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 22 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 21
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 1 DP 1197601
Lot 83 DP 750380
Lot 82 DP 750380 Lot 1 DP 131645
Unnamed watercourse
Backhouse Spurline
Lot 84 DP 750380
Lot 800 DP 1150368
STAGE 5: Section 22
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST5/0 23 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 22
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 149 DP 750380
Lot 1 DP 1197601
Lot 82 DP 750380
Backhouse Spurline
Lot 148 DP 750380
Lot 800 DP 1150368
STAGE 5: Section 23
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
SCALE:
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 24 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 23
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Stanfield Wildlife Refuge
Mackenzies Waterhole Creek
Lot 1 DP 132992
Unnamed watercourse Lot 376 DP 750380
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Road
Lot 148 DP 750380
Backhouse Spurline Lot 1 DP 132991
Lot A DP 33206
STAGE 5: Section 25
Lot 1 DP 1202495 Lot 144 DP 581175
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 5 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST5/0 25 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 24
VER: 8
25
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Stage 6 - Carcoar to Carcoar Water Filtration Plant Issue Date: Drawing No.: Alignment Version: Sheet No. ST6/001 ST6/002 ST6/003 ST6/004 ST6/005 ST6/006 ST6/007 ST6/008 ST6/009 ST6/010
Carcoar Stokefield Wildlife Refuge
15/12/2015 W00271-REF 8
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Map Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9
1:30,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Stage 5 Pipeline
Section 1
School Creek
Belubula River
Mount Macquarie Rd Spurline
Section 5
Coombing Creek Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Section 9
STAGE 6:Site Map
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 1:30,000
Carcoar Water Filtration Plant
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST6/0 01 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section Site Map
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Belubula St
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Parcel
Lot 7012 DP 1023248
Belubula River
Section 8 Section 16
DPI Notification required Lot 2 DP 823397
Lot 8 DP 758225
Lot 9 DP 758225
Lot 9 DP 758225
Lot 1 DP 758225
Coombing St
Lot 93 DP 579351
Lot 7013 DP 1056291
Lot 92 DP 579351
School Creek
Icely St
Lot 20 DP 758225
Lot 1 DP 758225
Lot 10 DP 1043599
Lot 20 DP 758225
Prior to excavtion, within Carcoar, a Section 140 Permit is required from the Heritage Council of NSW
Section 10 Public School Carcoar: Works cannot be undertaken until a permit is issued by NSW Heritage Council
Mid Western Hwy
Lot 1 DP 758225
Carcoar
Collins St
Section 11
Refer to Stage 5 for alignment
Bridge near Public School Carcoar: Do not disturb bridge during pipeline construction
Rodd St
Mandurama St
STAGE 6: Section 1
To Stage 5 Pipeline
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST6/0 02 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 1
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Nalyor St
Lot 57 DP 255576
Carcoar
Fell Timber Rd
Eulamore St Belubula River
Mid Western Hwy
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Parcel
Mount Macquarie Rd
Lot 1 DP 248801
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Waterway Prior to excavtion, within Carcoar, a Section 140 Permit is required from the Heritage Council of NSW
Lot 20 DP 1126303
DPI Notification required
Lot 2 DP 248801
Coombing St
Lot 1 DP 1121522 Lot 62 DP 255576
Lot 102 DP 1181800
Lot 10 DP 1151752
Danvers St
Lot 7006 DP 1023336
STAGE 6: Section 2
Lot 101 DP 1181800
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST6/0 03 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 2
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Highfield Homestead: Maintain a 1 metre distance from all built structures and a 2 metre distance from the tree plantings during all construction activities
Lot 1 DP 57729 Lot 58 DP 255576
Lot 57 DP 255576
Mount Macquarie Rd
Mount Macquarie Rd Spurline
Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 62 DP 255576
STAGE 6: Section 3
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST6/0 04 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 3
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 1 DP 156278
Lot 58 DP 255576
Unnamed watercourse
DPI Notification required
Unnamed watercourse
STAGE 6: Section 4
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST6/005 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 4
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Lot C DP 160649
Fell Timber Rd
Lot 1 DP 156279
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Waterway DPI Notification required Lot 1 DP 156278
Coombing Creek
Potential Archaeological Deposits: Stay within the previously disturbed 2.0m corridor surrounding the existing pipeline
Thring Wildlife Refuge
STAGE 6: Section 5
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST6/0 06 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 5
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot C DP 160649
Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Fell Timber Rd
Lot 1 DP 156279
Thring Wildlife Refuge Coombing Creek
STAGE 6: Section 6 Lot 1 DP 156278
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST6/0 07 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 6
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot C DP 160649
Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Fell Timber Rd
Lot 1 DP 156279
Thring Wildlife Refuge
STAGE 6: Section 7
Coombing Creek Lot 1 DP 156278
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST6/0 08 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 7
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Lot C DP 160649
Modified Tree: Maintain a suitable distance from the tree during all construction activites
Fell Timber Rd Lot 253 DP 750408 Lot 1 DP 156279
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Lot 253 DP 750408
STAGE 6: Section 8
Coombing Creek Lot 1 DP 156278
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST6/0 09 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6
DATE: 12/15
Section 8
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot C DP 160649
Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Lot 2 DP 234454 Lot 253 DP 750408
To Carcoar Water Filtration Plant
Lot 253 DP 750408
Lot 2531 DP 914108
Fell Timber Rd
Refer to Stage 7 for alignment
Lot 253 DP 750408
Thring Wildlife Refuge
STAGE 6: Section 9
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000 DATUM: Australian Height Datum ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
CHECKED BY:
DATE: 12/15
Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST6/010 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 6
DATE: 12/15
Section 9
VER: 8
10
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Schedule of Drawings: REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Stage 7 - Carcoar Water Filtration Plant to Lake Rowlands Issue Date: Drawing No.: Alignment Version: Sheet No. ST7/001 ST7/002 ST7/003 ST7/004 ST7/005 ST7/006 ST7/007 ST7/008
15/12/2015 W00271-REF 8
Drawing Name
Scale
Site Map Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7
1:20,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000 1:2,000
Coombing Creek Section 1
Carcoar Water Filtration Plant
Section 7
Thring Wildlife Refuge Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Lake Rowlands Pipeline
STAGE 7:Site Map
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:20,000 1:2,000
Lake Rowlands Wildlife Refuge
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC
DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATE: 12/15
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST7/0 01 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section Site Map
VER: 8
8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Coombing Park Wildlife Refuge
Lot 253 DP 750408
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Lot C DP 160649
To Carcoar Water Filtration Plant Lot 253 DP 750408
Refer to Stage 6 for alignment
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 2531 DP 914108
DPI Notification required
Lot 253 DP 750408
STAGE 7: Section 1
Fell Timber Rd
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST7/0 02 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 1
VER: 8
8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 129 DP 750408
Coombing Creek
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Lot 253 DP 750408
DPI Notification required for both stream crossings
Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 118 DP 750408
STAGE 7: Section 2
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST7/0 03 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 2
VER: 8
8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Coombing Creek
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 118 DP 750408
Lot 106 DP 750408
STAGE 7: Section 3
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST7/0 04 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 3
VER: 8
8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 2 DP 130387
Coombing Creek
Lot 106 DP 750408
Unnamed watercourse
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Lot 84 DP 750408
STAGE 7: Section 4
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
SHEET No.: ST7/0 05 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 4
VER: 8
8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 2 DP 130387
Lot 84 DP 750408
Coombing Creek
Lot 1 DP 565348 Unnamed watercourse
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Road
Unnamed watercourse Lot 13 DP 750408
Thring Wildlife Refuge
Lot 100 DP 750408
STAGE 7: Section 5
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited 154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800 PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Orange City Council Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC
DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATE: 12/15
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
06 SHEET No.: ST7/0 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 5
VER: 8 8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 2 DP 130387
Coombing Creek
DPI Notification required
DPI Notification required
Coombing Creek Unnamed watercourse
Unnamed watercourse
Lot 1 DP 565348
Lake Rowlands Wildlife Refuge
STAGE 7: Section 6
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST7/0 07 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 6
VER: 8
8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Lot 3 DP 130251
Coombing Creek
Lake Rowlands Wildlife Refuge Lot 56 DP 750407 Lot 4 DP 130251
Lake Rowlands
Lot 8 DP 130251
To Lake Rowlands Pipeline
Crown Land Rego No.: Unknown Crown Land Type: Crown Waterway
Lot 1 DP 565348
STAGE 7: Section 7
SCALE:
Geolyse Pty Limited
Orange City Council
154 Peisley Street Orange NSW 2800
Civic Centre Cnr Byng Street & Lords Place PO Box 35 Orange NSW 2800
PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Telephone: (02) 6393 5000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 5050 Email: orange@geolyse.com
Telephone: (02) 6393 8000 Facsimile: (02) 6393 8199 Email: council@orange.nsw.gov.au
All levels are in metres All other dimensions are in metres unless specified These plans must to be read inconjunction with REF Report by Geolyse
1:2,000
DATE: 11/15 SURVEYED BY: GEOLYSE & OCC DATE: 12/15 DESIGNED & DRAWN: GEOLYSE & OCC
DATUM: Australian Height Datum
CHECKED BY:
ORIGIN of LEVELS: MGA94 Zone 55
APPROVED BY: GEOLYSE
DATE: 12/15
DRAWING No.: W00271-REF
CTRWSP: Carcoar - Stage 7 Review of Environmental Factors
SHEET No.: ST7/0 08 No. of SHEETS:
GEOLYSE DATE: 12/15
Section 7
VER: 8
8
ISSUE DATE: 15/12/2015
A3
Appendix A AGENCY CONSULTATION
From: Paul Crain [mailto:paul.crain@crownland.nsw.gov.au] Sent: 17 November 2015 2:26 PM To: dwalker@geolyse.com Subject: Orange- Carcoar Pipeline David, Your email concerning the proposed pipeline has been forwarded to me at DPI Lands for response. Basically, Crown lands would require the relevant Council (Orange/Blayney or CTW) to acquire easements over the crown lands required for pipeline under the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms) Compensation Act . In regard to any crown public roads (if the pipeline is to run along the road) it would be simplest to transfer these roads to the relevant Council under section 151 of the Roads Act 1993. Once transferred, Crown Lands would no longer have any interest in the roads and any consents to works within the roads would be a matter for the relevant Roads Authority. If you wish to discuss feel free to call me. Paul Crain | Natural Resource Management Project Officer | NSW Department of Primary Industries, Lands. 92 Kite St | ORANGE NSW 2800 PO Box 2185 | DANGAR NSW 2309 T: 02 6391 4312 | F: 02 49253517 | E: Paul.Crain@Crownland.nsw.gov.au W: www.crownland.nsw.gov.au Generic T: 1300 886 235 | F: 02 4925 3517 | E: orange.crownlands@crownland.nsw.gov.au | W: www.crownland.nsw.gov.au
This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of their organisation.
From: Alix Carpenter [mailto:Alix.Carpenter@planning.nsw.gov.au] Sent: Monday, 20 July 2015 1:47 PM To: John Boyd Subject: RE: Modification to Macquarie Pipeline Consent
Hi John Following on from our earlier conversation regarding the Macquarie Pipeline project, I have discussed the future proposals with my Director and we do not think that you will require a modification to the current approval. This is based on the information you provided to me that you would still be able to comply with the conditions in B4 – Operating Rules, specifically condition (b)(v) regarding not exceeding the flow restrictions. If you believe that the future proposals will cause non‐compliance with any specific conditions, please let me know and we can discuss further, otherwise these future proposals can be processed under Part 5 of the EP&A Act. If you have any queries regarding the above please contact me on (02) 9228 6472. Regards Alix Alix Carpenter Team Leader – Infrastructure Projects Department of Planning and Environment 23-33 Bridge Street | GPO BOX 39 Sydney NSW 2001 T 9228 6472 E Alix.Carpenter@planning.nsw.gov.au Working: Mon, Tues, Thurs and Fri
You'll also find Planning and Environment on Facebook, Twitter and Linked In Please consider the environment before printing this email.
From: John Boyd [mailto:JBoyd@orange.nsw.gov.au] Sent: Thursday, 9 July 2015 1:53 PM To: Alix Carpenter Cc: Roxanne Betts Subject: Modification to Macquarie Pipeline Consent
Hi Alix, As discussed Orange Council is intending to build a pipeline from Orange to Carcoar in conjunction with Central Tablelands Water as per the attached submission. In addition Cabonne Council intend to build a pipeline from Orange to Molong Creek Dam then to Yeoval (Cabonne’s submission in following email ). Given Orange Council will not change the Macquarie pipeline pumping triggers for transferring potable water to Central Table Lands Water we would assume that there is no requirement to modify the approval for the Macquarie Pipeline for this project. Could you please confirm that this is the case. With respect to the Cabonne project water will be extracted from the Macquarie pipeline before it enters Suma park dam. Given the quantum to be extracted is small can you please advise if a modification to the Macquarie Pipeline consent is required? Kind regards John Boyd
FE15/739
C15/401
6 November 2015 Andrew Brownlow Geolyse Pty Ltd PO Box 1963 ORANGE, NSW, 2800 Dear Andrew Re: Proposed Orange to Carcoar Water Pipeline – Review of Environmental Factors Thank you for your email dated 23rd October 2015 seeking DPI Fisheries comments regarding the preparation of a Review of Environmental Factors for the proposed pipeline between Orange and Carcoar. DPI Fisheries are responsible for ensuring that fish stocks are conserved and that there is “no net loss” of key fish habitats upon which they depend. To achieve this, the Department ensures that developments comply with the requirements of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (namely the aquatic habitat protection and threatened species conservation provisions in Parts 7 and 7A of the Act respectively) and the associated Policy and Guidelines for Fish Habitat Conservation and Management (Update 2013). DPI Fisheries requests that the REF refers to the Department’s requirements as outlined in the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (described below) and Policy and Guidelines for Fish Habitat Conservation and Management (Update 2013) as outlined on the Department’s website under at www.dpi.nsw.gov.au In relation to required approvals/permits, a permit will be required by Orange City Council for any proposed dredging and reclamation works within Key Fish Habitat in accordance with section 200 of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (the Act). In relation to required approvals/permits, the Minister for DPI Fisheries must be notified of any proposed dredging and reclamation works within Key Fish Habitat by a public authority such as Central Tablelands Water in accordance with section 199 of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. Such works may include, but is not limited to construction of temporary crossings/sidetracks, bridges, creek diversions, pipeline waterway crossings, geotechnical investigations, excavating or reclaiming the bed or banks of any waterways. The REF should describe the type and extent of such proposed works within Key Fish Habitats. Permits may also be required to temporarily or permanently block fish passage under section 219 of the Act. Such works may include the bunding of waterways during waterway construction and other similar works. The REF should describe the type, extent and duration of such works. Specifically DPI Fisheries requests that the following issues are addressed in the REF for the proposed works: 1.
Waterway Crossings - The design and construction of pipeline crossings across all waterways within Key Fish Habitat should be undertaken in accordance with the Department's Policy and Guidelines for Fish Habitat Conservation and Management (Update 2013). The waterway crossings need to ensure that the works are undertaken with minimal impact on the aquatic environment within the immediate vicinity of the proposed works. DPI Fisheries need to be consulted with regards to any temporary
FISHERIES AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT BRANCH TAMWORTH AGRICULTURAL INSTITUTE 4 Marsden Park Road CALALA NSW 2340
www.industry.nsw.gov.au Tel: 02 6763 1255 Fax: 02 6763 1265
measures that will result in blocking fish passage. This includes coffer dams, temporary access tracks or redirecting flows whilst works are conducted. 2.
Bank Stabilisation and Rehabilitation – DPI Fisheries seeks information on any destabilisation of any watercourses with heavy machinery or damage to the bed or banks. DPI Fisheries requests that any bed and bank rehabilitation works be completed immediately after the completion of works. Proposals to ensure replacement of aquatic and riparian vegetation with native/endemic species are encouraged.
3.
Loss of Riparian Vegetation There is also the likelihood of a loss of riparian vegetation due to access routes and pipeline construction. The “degradation of native riparian vegetation” has been listed as a Key Threatening Process under the provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. DPI Fisheries have a ‘no net loss’ policy to ensure that that fish stocks are conserved and the key fish habitats upon which fish depend on is conserved. Where riparian loss occurs there should be rehabilitation /replanting within the riparian zone.
4.
Sedimentation and Erosion Controls – DPI Fisheries requests information on any proposed sediment and erosion controls required during construction works near waterways.
5.
Removal, realignment of snags - DPI Fisheries requests information on any proposal to remove, realign or relocate snags (large woody debris) during works. Proposed works should be outlined within the REF. Snags should not be removed, realigned or relocated without first contacting DPI Fisheries. Note: that the removal of large woody debris is listed as a Key Threatening Process under the FM Act.
6.
Threatened species –The REF must address the threatened species provisions of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 for species, populations or communities listed under schedules 4 and 5 whose historical geographical distribution extends to the area of works. The proposal should address whether there are likely to be any significant impacts on the listed threatened species.
If you have any queries do not hesitate to call me on 6763 1255 or 0429 908 856. Yours sincerely
David Ward Regional Assessment Officer (Tamworth)
FISHERIES AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT BRANCH TAMWORTH AGRICULTURAL INSTITUTE 4 Marsden Park Road CALALA NSW 2340
www.industry.nsw.gov.au Tel: 02 6763 1255 Fax: 02 6763 1265
V15/2812 OUT15/32146
Mr Andrew Brownlow Manager Geolyse Pty Ltd PO Box 1963 ORANGE NSW 2800
Email: abrownlow@geolyse.com
Dear Andrew Proposed Water Pipeline from Orange to Carcoar Request for Input into REF requirements Thank you for the information regarding the above proposal in an email dated 23 October 2015 regarding input from NSW Agriculture into any issues that should be included in the Review of Environmental Factors. The impacts of the pipelineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s construction and its impacts on agricultural operations in its vicinity should be assessed. In particular the following issues are highlighted: a) Assessments of current resources and land uses that will help assess considerations that the proposal must take account of in relation to the installation and subsequent rehabilitation. This should include local soil landscape information (including topography), land and soil capability and/or agricultural land suitability, vegetation growth and adjacent agricultural land uses (where applicable). b) Management of soil resources pre and post pipeline construction. The removal and stockpiling of the surface soils in the process that will be immediately remediated the management of these topsoils, subsequent respreading and management of the area for final land use should be considered in the operational aspects of this proposal. c) Consultation with adjoining rural stakeholders particularly in relation to disturbances associated with livestock. d) Weed, pest animal, biosecurity and bush fire hazards would be best dealt with by an overall management plan as part of pipeline installation operations.
Cnr Hampden and Cobra Sts, Dubbo NSW 2830 Tel: 02 68811270 Fax: 02 68811295 www.industry.nsw.gov.au
The guideline “Infrastructure Proposals on Rural Lands” provides further information on the issues and information that can help guide some aspects to be included in a REF and can be accessed at: http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/resources/lup/developmentassessment/infrastructure-proposals Agriculture NSW, a division of Department of Primary Industries (DPI), is concerned with the protection and growth of agricultural industries and the resources upon which these industries depend. The proposed pipeline does cross lands mapped as Biophysical Strategic Agricultural Land which indicates that the land is of high significance to New South Wales in terms of agricultural potential. Although this proposal is not mining or coal seam gas related, it should be acknowledged that some of the pipeline’s installation area is on or adjacent to land of strategic importance to agriculture in the region so care in the installation of the pipeline on these areas should be considered fully.
Please contact myself for further enquiry. Yours sincerely
Electronically signed Mary Kovac Resource Management Officer Central and Far West, (DUBBO) 16 November 2015
PAGE 2 OF 2
Hi Andrew, Thanks for the information, I have forwarded it on to others in the organisation who may be better placed to comment. Regards Diana Diana Kureen, Senior Strategic Land Services Officer Local Government Central Tablelands Local Land Services 66 Corporation Avenue | PO Box 20 | Bathurst NSW 2795 T: 02 6333 2322 | F: 02 6331 6915 | M: 0427 298 939 E: diana.kureen@lls.nsw.gov.au
W: www.lls.nsw.gov.au | Like Central Tablelands / Central West LLS on facebook On 23 October 2015 at 14:05, Andrew Brownlow <abrownlow@geolyse.com> wrote: Diana Orange City Council (OCC) in conjunction with Central Tablelands Water (CTW) have secured a Restart NSW Water Security for Regions Grant for a water pipeline from Orange to Carcoar via Springhill, Milthorpe and Blayney. The project comprises a ~57 km potable pipeline and pump stations for bi-directional water transfers. This project will deliver an improved secure yield to the customers of Central Tablelands Water catering for future growth. Orange City Council will gain access to emergency water in the case of a catastrophic system failure such as a fire at the water filtration plant and also be able to ensure water quantity and quality to the Airport and Spring Hill. The works will in effect replace the pipeline from Carcoar through to Blayney and Millthorpe and offer the opportunity to temporally mothball the use of the Blayney water filtration plant, minimizing water production costs. The project will also remove the need to upgrade Lake Rowlands. Please see attached the preliminary pipeline alignment. Geolsye has been engaged by Orange City Council to prepare a Review of Environmental Factors (REF) for determination under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The purpose of this communication is to provide LLS with the opportunity to identify any matters that it would like considered in the REF. The project schedule is for completion of the REF by 18 December. To this end input by the 6 November would be very much appreciated. Of course if there is anything you would like to discuss please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Regards Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd
Andrew Brownlow From: Sent: To: Subject:
Gary Hinder <Gary.Hinder@environment.nsw.gov.au> 29 October 2015 11:56 AM abrownlow@geolyse.com Orange to Carcoar Pipeline
Hi Andrew, In reference to your email dated 23 October 2015, requesting matters that should be included in the Review of Environmental Factors. I recommend that the following matters should be included REF: • The REF should identify if there are any listed or potential heritage items within the proposed project area. If any listed or potential heritage items are likely to be affected, a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) must be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced heritage consultant as part of the review. The HIA should assess how the development would impact on any places of heritage significance in or surrounding the SSD site. • A historical archaeological assessment should be prepared by a suitably qualified historical archaeologist in accordance with the Heritage Division, Office of Environment and Heritage Guidelines 'Assessing Significance for Historical Archaeological Sites and 'Relics' 2009. This assessment should identify what relics, if any, are likely to be present, assess their significance and consider the impacts from the proposal on this potential resource. Where harm is likely to occur, it is recommended that the significance of the relics be considered in determining an appropriate mitigation strategy. In the event that harm cannot be avoided in whole or part, an appropriate Research Design and Excavation Methodology should also be prepared to guide any proposed excavations. • The proposal should have regard to any impacts on places, items or relics of significance to Aboriginal people. Where it is likely that the project will impact on Aboriginal heritage, adequate community consultation should take place regarding the assessment of significance, likely impacts and management/mitigation measures. Kind regards Gary Gary Hinder State Heritage Assessments Officer Heritage Division Office of Environment & Heritage Locked Bag 5020 PARRAMATTA NSW 2124 T: (02) 9873 8547 F: (02) 9873 8599 W: www.environment.nsw.gov.au www.heritage.nsw.gov.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This email is intended for the addressee(s) named and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and then delete it immediately. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. 1
PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING THIS EMAIL
2
Andrew Brownlow From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:
MCINTYRE Andrew R <Andrew.MCINTYRE@rms.nsw.gov.au> on behalf of Development Western <development.western@rms.nsw.gov.au> 17 November 2015 3:51 PM Andrew Brownlow Development Western RE: 215327 - RMS Consultation
Dear Andrew, Thanks for your email and I apologise for the delay in my reply. Council has previously met with RMS Area Maintenance Manager Jay Ratnayake to discuss the project and inspect the proposed pipeline crossings of State roads. Approval, subject to conditions, was granted to Orange City Council for the crossing of State roads on 2 November 2015. With regard to the REF, an assessment of the impact of traffic generated by construction works such as traffic volumes, interaction with background traffic, origin‐destination, temporary and permanent accesses, etc needs to be included. The documentation should include, or an undertaking to prepare, a traffic management plan which identifies how construction traffic will safely access and egress construction locations along the pipeline. In undertaking this assessment, consideration of Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) provided in part 4A of Austroads Guide to Road Design needs to be included. I hope this information is of assistance. If you require any further information or need to discuss further, please contact me. Kind regards, Andrew McIntyre Development Assessment Officer Network Management | Journey Management T 02 6861 1453 M 0417 431 982 www.rms.nsw.gov.au Every journey matters Roads and Maritime Services Level 1 51-55 Currajong Street Parkes NSW 2870 From: Andrew Brownlow [mailto:abrownlow@geolyse.com] Sent: Friday, 23 October 2015 2:14 PM To: Development Western Cc: 'Orange Document Control' Subject: 215327 - RMS Consultation
To Whom It May Concern Orange City Council (OCC) in conjunction with Central Tablelands Water (CTW) have secured a Restart NSW Water Security for Regions Grant for a water pipeline from Orange to Carcoar via Springhill, Milthorpe and Blayney. The project comprises a ~57 km potable pipeline and pump stations for bi‐directional water transfers. This project will deliver an improved secure yield to the customers of Central Tablelands Water catering for future growth. Orange City Council will gain access to emergency water in the case of a catastrophic system failure such as a fire at the water filtration plant and also be able to ensure water quantity and quality to the Airport and Spring Hill. The works will in effect replace the pipeline from Carcoar through to Blayney and Millthorpe and offer the opportunity to temporally mothball the use of the Blayney water filtration plant, minimizing water production costs. The project will also remove the need to upgrade Lake Rowlands. Please see attached the preliminary pipeline alignment. 1
Geolsye has been engaged by Orange City Council to prepare a Review of Environmental Factors (REF) for determination under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The purpose of this communication is to provide RMS with the opportunity to identify any matters that it would like considered in the REF. The project schedule is for completion of the REF by 18 December. To this end input by the 6 November would be very much appreciated. Of course if there is anything you would like to discuss please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Regards Andrew Andrew Brownlow Manager - Environmental / Director (CEnvP) Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley St PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Ph: 02 6393 5000 Fx: 02 6393 5050 Mob: 0417 210 253 Email: abrownlow@geolyse.com Web: www.geolyse.com Facebook | LinkedIn
...................................................................................... IMPORTANT This e-mail and any attachments may contain material which is proprietary, privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. This e-mail, together with any attachments, is for the exclusive and confidential use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use of, or reproduction without prior written consent is strictly prohibited. If received in error, please delete all copies and advise the sender immediately. Geolyse Pty Ltd does not warrant or guarantee this message to be free of errors, interference or viruses.
Right-click here to download pictures. To help p ro tect y our priv acy , Outlook prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Logo
Before printing, please consider the environment IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email and any attachment to it are intended only to be read or used by the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistaken transmission to you. Roads and Maritime Services is not responsible for any unauthorised alterations to this email or attachment to it. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of Roads and Maritime Services. If you receive this email in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or use any part of this email if you are not the intended recipient.
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect y our priv acy , Outlook prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Logo
2
Gary Edwards From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments:
Parker, Michael <Michael.Parker2@apa.com.au> Wednesday, 28 October 2015 11:43 AM Gary Edwards John Marshall; John Boyd RE: Orange to Carcoar Pipeline: Condition to locate alignment adjacent to HP Gasline Easement 320-PL-HEL-0004[1].pdf
Hello Gary, Following our previous conversation, APA Group’s tenure extends to the boundary of the easement (delineated by DP 499030 – Gazette No. 454 (Special) 09/09/1986). Providing the alignment of the proposed pipeline is adjacent but not within the easement, APA group has no legal ability to impose restrictions on the project activity. However, please note that in accordance with the State Environment Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 – Clause 55. The consenting authority must ‘be satisfied that the potential safety risks or risks to the integrity of the pipeline that are associated with the development […} have been identified, and […] take those risks into consideration.’ To aid you in understanding the process, please have a look at the attached guidance to development adjacent to APA Group’s High Pressure Natural Gas Pipelines. Any questions, please give me a call. Kind regards Mike
Michael Parker Land Agent (NSW) APA Group Heritage, Environment & Lands Unit 3/1105, Argyle Street Wilton NSW 2571 Direct: +61 2 4630 0102 Mobile: +61 439 153 288 Fax: +61 2 4630 0199 Email: michael.parker2@apa.com.au www.apa.com.au
From: Gary Edwards [mailto:GEdwards@orange.nsw.gov.au] Sent: Monday, 12 October 2015 12:00 PM To: Parker, Michael Cc: John Marshall; John Boyd Subject: Orange to Carcoar Pipeline: Condition to locate alignment adjacent to HP Gasline Easement
Michael, I’m aware that you have been on leave from work for the past week or more but you can access your emails. 1
We are looking to confirm conditions for aligning the Orange to Carcoar Pipeline adjacent to the High Pressure Gasline around the Orange Airport area. We are awarding a Review of Environmental Factors tender by the end of this week and we will need to confirm with the winner contractor our alignment and confirmation from APA on easement conditions will need to be a part of this. Is it possible to have, in writing, these conditions so it can be passed on the winning contractor for next part of this investigation stage. We expect during the design and construct phase that the contract will investigate the alignment adjacent to the easement fully. Regards Gary Gary Edwards Geographical Information Systems Assistant | Technical Services Orange City Council 135 Byng Street PO Box 35 ORANGE NSW 2800 Phone: +61 02 6393 8186 +61 02 6393 8199 Fax: Email: gedwards@orange.nsw.gov.au Website: www.orange.nsw.gov.au
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail This e-mail, together with any attachments, is for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use of, or reproduction without prior written consent is strictly prohibited. Views expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual, except where specifically stated otherwise. Orange City Council does not warrant or guarantee this message to be free of errors, interference or viruses.
The content of this e-mail message has been scanned by: McAfee Email Gateway
APA Group â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Delivering Australiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s energy This message (including attachments) may be confidential or privileged. If you received it in error, you may not disclose or use it - please notify us then delete it. We do not guarantee the reliability, completeness or confidentiality of any email communication, or its freedom from harmful viruses or software.
The content of this e-mail message has been scanned by: McAfee Email Gateway 2
From: Trent Wray [mailto:Trent.Wray@jemena.com.au] Sent: Monday, 30 November 2015 3:42 PM To: Gary Edwards; Dianita Soeparman Cc: John Marshall; John Boyd Subject: TRIM: RE: Jemena Gas - Easement conditions & Locating new services adjacent/across gas lines
Hi Gary As discussed if working near a Jemena High Pressure pipeline ( or Secondary Steel Gas Main ) you are required to book a Jemena technician to supervise you works , this can be done by calling 1300 665 380, well in advance of the works to arrange the appointment. When working around Jemena gas network mains please maintain separation between our asset and the asset you are installing , at least 200 – 300 mm. You are required to pothole to locate the asset to avoid any damage to our asset. Regards Trent Wray Network Protection / DBYD Specialist
Jemena Level 14, 99 Walker Street North Sydney, NSW 2060 P O Box 1220 , North Sydney, NSW 2059 (02) 9867 7354 | 0402 059 814 Trent.wray@jemena.com.au | www.jemena.com.au www.gonaturalgas.com.au
From: Gary Edwards [mailto:GEdwards@orange.nsw.gov.au] Sent: Thursday, 12 November 2015 2:04 PM To: Trent Wray; Dianita Soeparman Cc: John Marshall; John Boyd Subject: Jemena Gas - Easement conditions & Locating new services adjacent/across gas lines
Trent & Dianita, Orange City Council organised a lot of DBYD data in July as part of a proposed water pipeline between Orange & Carcaor. We have finalised our conceptual alignment for the purpose of developing the REF and Geological Assessments and we are looking to get understandings on your conditions for locating the water pipeline adjacent and across your existing services to ensure our alignment works with your approval. We have some sections of pipeline which will cross and parallel your medium pressure gas lines around the Leewood Estate area in Orange as well as potentially numerous domestic lines within Orange itself. We would like to know what conditions/requirements you impose or require for any new service that will crosses or parallels these gas lines. We want to ensure our conceptual design process and any future design/construction activities run smoothly within all known parameters. We already have the conditions and an ‘Approval in Principle’ from APA National on their high Pressure Gas Lines for our conceptual design and will include these as a part of our Design & Construct Tender Document which is expect to be advertised mid next year. We want to also include any conditions that Jemena imposes within this tender as well. Furthermore, during the Design & Construction stage we expect that the winning tenderer will liaise with all service providers to ensure all conditions and procedures are adhered to and followed. Regards Gary Edwards Geographical Information Systems Assistant | Technical Services Orange City Council
Appendix B ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ecological Assessment FFeebbrruuaarryy 22001166
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project Ecological Assessment 9 February 2016
Prepared for: Geolyse Pty Ltd 154 Peisley Street PO Box 1963 Orange NSW 2800 Prepared by: DPM Envirosciences Pty Ltd ABN: 54 602 226 460 46 Tibouchina Street, Mountain Creek QLD 4557 PO Box 1298, Mooloolaba QLD 4557 Ph: 0427 694 433 DPM Ref: DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project – Ecological Assessment
DISTRIBUTION Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project – Ecological Assessment 9 February 2016
Copies 1 ecopy
Recipient Andrew Brownlow Manager – Environmental / Director Geolyse Pty Ltd
1 ecopy
DPM Files
Copies
Recipient
This document was prepared for the sole use of Geolyse Pty Ltd and their client Orange City Council, the only intended beneficiaries of our work. No other party should rely on the information contained herein without the prior written consent of DPM Envirosciences Pty Ltd, Geolyse Pty Ltd or Orange City Council.
By DPM Envirosciences Pty Ltd ABN: 54 602 226 460 PO Box 1298 Mooloolaba QLD 4557
____________________________________ David Moore Principal Environmental Scientist
Technical Peer Reviewer:
Date:
9 February 2016 Melody Stoneham Principal Ecologist, Gaia Environmental Consulting
DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
i
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project – Ecological Assessment
CONTENTS 1
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1 1.1
2
3
Scope of work ................................................................................................. 1
BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 2 2.1
Project description .......................................................................................... 2
2.2
Regional setting .............................................................................................. 2
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK AND RELEVANT GUIDELINES.................................. 4 3.1
Commonwealth legislation.............................................................................. 4 3.1.1
3.2
4
3.2.1
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 ....................... 4
3.2.2
Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 .................................. 6
3.2.3
National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 .............................................. 6
3.2.4
NSW State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 (SEPP 44) – Koala Habitat Protection ........................................................ 7
3.2.5
Fisheries Management Act 1994 .................................................... 7
3.2.6
Noxious Weeds Act 1993 ................................................................ 8
4.1
Project area .................................................................................................... 9
4.2
Taxonomic nomenclature ............................................................................... 9
4.3
Determination of significance level ................................................................. 9
4.4
Desktop assessment .................................................................................... 10
4.5
Field survey .................................................................................................. 11 4.5.1
Survey timing ................................................................................ 11
4.5.2
Terrestrial flora survey .................................................................. 12
4.5.3
Threatened ecological communities ............................................. 13
4.5.4
Fauna habitat assessment ............................................................ 16
4.5.5
Fauna observations....................................................................... 16
4.5.6
Aquatic habitat attributes............................................................... 16
Assumptions and limitations ......................................................................... 19
EXISTING ENVIRONMENT......................................................................................... 20 5.1
ii
State legislation and policy ............................................................................. 4
METHODS ..................................................................................................................... 9
4.6 5
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 .......................................................................................... 4
Terrestrial flora.............................................................................................. 20 5.1.1
Vegetation communities ................................................................ 20
5.1.2
Threatened flora ............................................................................ 26
5.1.3
Other native flora ........................................................................... 30
5.1.4
Weeds ........................................................................................... 30
5.2
Terrestrial fauna ........................................................................................... 35
5.3
Aquatic habitats ............................................................................................ 46 5.3.1
Catchments ................................................................................... 46
5.3.2
Waterways..................................................................................... 46
5.3.3
Key fish habitats ............................................................................ 46
5.3.4
Endangered ecological communities (aquatic) ............................. 52
5.3.5
Aquatic habitat .............................................................................. 52 DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project – Ecological Assessment
6
5.3.6
Threatened fishes ......................................................................... 52
5.3.7
Turtles ........................................................................................... 55
5.3.8
Platypus......................................................................................... 55
5.4
Critical habitat ............................................................................................... 55
5.5
Ecologically sensitive areas.......................................................................... 55
POTENTIAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................... 57 6.1
6.2
6.3
Flora.............................................................................................................. 57 6.1.1
Vegetation communities ................................................................ 57
6.1.2
Threatened species....................................................................... 58
6.1.3
Noxious weeds and WoNS ........................................................... 58
Terrestrial fauna ........................................................................................... 58 6.2.1
Habitat loss.................................................................................... 58
6.2.2
Connectivity and habitat fragmentation......................................... 59
6.2.3
Threatened and migratory species ............................................... 59
Aquatic ecology ............................................................................................ 60 6.3.1
6.4 7
Threatened aquatic species and endangered ecological community ..................................................................................... 61
Reversible versus non-reversible impacts.................................................... 61
MITIGATION MEASURES .......................................................................................... 62 7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
Planning ........................................................................................................ 62 7.1.1
Flora .............................................................................................. 62
7.1.2
Terrestrial Fauna ........................................................................... 62
7.1.3
Aquatic Ecology ............................................................................ 63
Construction.................................................................................................. 63 7.2.1
Flora .............................................................................................. 63
7.2.2
Terrestrial Fauna ........................................................................... 64
7.2.3
Aquatic Ecology ............................................................................ 65
7.2.4
Waterway crossing construction ................................................... 65
Reinstatement and Rehabilitation ................................................................ 67 7.3.1
General.......................................................................................... 67
7.3.2
Private landholdings on strategically important land ..................... 67
7.3.3
Road corridors and similar areas .................................................. 67
7.3.4
Works in proximity to (i.e. within 20 m of) EECs or TECs ............. 68
Operation ...................................................................................................... 69
8
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 70
9
REFERENCES............................................................................................................. 72
TABLES Table 1 Section 111 of the EP&A Act – Duty to Consider Environmental Impact – Ecologyrelated triggers............................................................................................................................... 5 Table 2 Location and method for each survey site in the Project area ....................................... 11 Table 3 Determining factors for Threatened Ecological Communities (including Endangered Ecological Communities) known or likely to occur within the Project area ................................. 14 Table 4 Key fish habitat and associated sensitivity classification scheme (NSW DPI 2013)...... 17 Table 5 Classification of waterways for fish passage (NSW DPI 2013)...................................... 18 Table 6 Plant Community Types within the pipeline ROW (20m wide corridor) ......................... 22 DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
iii
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project – Ecological Assessment
Table 7 Rare or threatened flora, or their habitat, identified from the search area (within at least 10 km of the proposed alignment) ............................................................................................... 27 Table 8 Plants declared noxious for the Orange and Blayney LGAs, including those identified from the desktop search area and surveyed Project area .......................................................... 31 Table 9 Threatened and migratory fauna species, or their habitat, identified from the search area (within at least 10 km of the proposed alignment) .............................................................. 36 Table 10 Summary of Strahler stream order and waterways intersected by the CTRWSPP alignment ..................................................................................................................................... 46 Table 11 Waterways, aquatic habitat sensitivity and key fish habitats intersected by the proposed CTRWSPP alignment .................................................................................................. 47 Table 12 Threatened fish and invertebrate species recorded from the Lachlan and Macquarie River catchments ......................................................................................................................... 53 Table 13 Vegetation communities impacted by the proposed CTRWSPP ................................. 58 Table 14 Fauna species recorded in the Project area 2-7 November 2015 ............................. 117
FIGURES Figure 1 Regional context ............................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2 Daily rainfall, minimum and maximum temperatures at the Orange Airport meteorological station 063303 in the two months leading up to the survey ............................... 12 Figure 3 NSW vegetation classification hierarchy (based on OEH 2015b) ................................ 12 Figure 4 Existing vegetation mapping ......................................................................................... 24 Figure 5 Ground-truthed vegetation mapping ............................................................................. 25 Figure 6 Ecologically sensitive areas .......................................................................................... 56
PLATES Plate 1 Chilean needle grass (Nassella neesiansa) (left) and seed (right), collected from site OC-57.4 on Felltimber Rd, Carcoar, 6 November 2015 .............................................................. 31 Plate 2 Serrated tussock (Nassella trichotoma) (left) and seed enclosed by glumes (b), collected from site S7-1.7 between the Carcoar Filtration Plant and Lake Rowlands, 6 November 2015 . 31 Plate 3 Open cut construction of watercourse crossing (Source: SKM 2012) ............................ 66
APPENDICES Appendix A: Vegetation / Flora Site Descriptions Appendix B: Fauna Habitat Site Descriptions Appendix C: Aquatic Habitat Site Descriptions Appendix D: Fauna Species Detected Appendix E: Assessments of Significance
iv
DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project – Ecological Assessment
1
INTRODUCTION
DPM Envirosciences Pty Ltd (DPM) was commissioned by Geolyse Pty Ltd (Geolyse) to undertake an ecological assessment, as part of a broader Environmental Assessment (EA), for the proposed Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project (CTRWSPP). Orange City Council (OCC) has commissioned Geolyse to prepare the EA for an approximately 66 km long potable water pipeline from Orange to Lake Rowlands via Springhill, Millthorpe, Blayney and Carcoar. Pump stations for bi-directional water transfer would also be constructed as part of the Project. The EA is in the form of a Review of Environmental Factors (REF) prepared under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). This ecological assessment forms part of the REF, providing the technical baseline information to enable identification of key aquatic and terrestrial ecological values, assessment of their condition, and the likely impacts of the Project on these ecological values. The findings discussed in this report are based on a desktop assessment of readily available information for the Project site supplemented by field survey undertaken 2-7 November 2015.
1.1
Scope of work
The scope of work for this ecological assessment consisted of the following tasks:
identify current legislation, policy and guidelines relevant to the ecological assessment
conduct a desktop review of available data and previous studies in the vicinity of the Project, and conduct database searches for threatened species, populations and ecological communities
conduct a field survey of the Project area to ground-truth ecological values, with an emphasis on ecological values of conservation significance. This includes: -
fauna habitat assessment of target sites identified from the desktop assessment
-
fauna survey of target sites identified from the habitat assessment
-
refinement of vegetation mapping along the alignment (extending approximately 50 m either side of the alignment) (the Project area)
-
targeted searches for threatened and protected flora species
-
aquatic habitat assessment at key watercourses intersected by the alignment, to confirm aquatic habitat features and suitability of proposed pipeline construction techniques from an ecological perspective
-
assessment of potential route changes to avoid or reduce impacts on identified ecological values
identify and describe any listed threatened species, populations or ecological communities encountered along the alignment
prepare an ecological assessment report that identifies the methods and results of the desktop and field studies, assesses the likely ecological impacts of the Project, and recommends appropriate impact mitigation measures where necessary.
DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
1
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ecological Assessment
2
BACKGROUND
2.1
Project description
OCC, in conjunction with Central Tablelands Water (CTW), plan to construct a pipeline from Orange to Lake Rowlands via Springhill, Millthorpe, Blayney and Carcoar, to be known as the CTRWSPP. In addition to the pipeline, pump stations for bi-directional water transfers will be constructed. The CTRWSPP is separated into seven stages (Figure 1), representing the proposed order of priority and subsequent construction schedule. The Project has two operational components: regional water security and contingency. Water security would be achieved by sharing water resources between various sources. Water could be moved from OCC to CTW, or vice versa, depending on needs and water availability. Water supply contingency would be provided through linkage of the major water filtration plants in the region providing contingency in the event of plant failure or water contamination within either supply system For the purposes of this assessment, the Project area is the focus area for vegetation and habitat assessments, being a 100 m wide corridor centred on the CTRWSPP alignment. The Right of Way (ROW) falls within the Project area and is a zone of disturbance up to 20 m wide, centred on the CTRWSPP alignment, in which all construction activities will be contained. Within the ROW, land to be physically cleared for the pipeline construction, i.e. vegetation cleared and topsoil stripped, will be limited to 3 m wide.
2.2
Regional setting
The CTRWSPP falls within the Orange and Blayney Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Central West NSW (Figure 1). Rural land use dominates both the Orange and Blayney LGAs, at 73% and 96% respectively (GHD 2008). The CTRWSPP falls within the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion, which covers the dissected ranges and plateau of the Great Dividing Range that are topographically lower than the Australian Alps (OEH 2011). This bioregion extends to the Great Escarpment in the east, to the western slopes of the inland drainage basins, and south into Victoria. The South Eastern Highlands Bioregion exhibits a temperate climate characterised by warm summers and no dry season. Due to the higher elevation of the Orange region, the study site experiences mild summers and cold winters. There are 88 flora species listed in the schedules of the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) in the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion (OEH 2011). Of these, 36 are listed as endangered, 50 are listed as vulnerable, and two species (Stammacantha australis and Galium australe) are considered extinct. There are 88 fauna species listed in the schedules of the TSC Act in the South Eastern Highlands Bioregion (OEH 2011). Of these, 25 are listed as endangered and 63 as vulnerable. A general trend of decline in woodland bird species such as robins, treecreepers and many small honeyeaters has been reported in this bioregion (OEH 2011). The CTRWSP falls within the Macquarie River catchment in the north, and within the Lachlan River catchment in the south, each forming part of the broader Murray-Darling Basin.
2
DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ecological Assessment
Figure 1 Regional context
DPM15013_RPTFinal.doc
3
998
Lower Lewis Ponds
Livingstone HillDPM Mine Envirosciences does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of information displayed in this map and any person using it does
reek
so at their own risk. DPM Envirosciences shall bear no responsibility or liability for any errors, faults, defects, or omissions in the information
Ammerdown
Borenore
910
Clifton Grove
g lon Mo
Th
Mount Bulga
ad Ro
e Escor tW ay
Bletchington
Lewis Ponds Mine Limestone Hill
Stage 4
910
ORANGE
Bowen
Icley Road Filtration Plant
Calare
970
Narrambla
Canobolas
1,010
Lewis Ponds Mount Britannia
Suma Park
Glenroi
Stage 3 Bloomfield 1,004
Summer Hill
971 1,048
Towac
Mount Canobolas
Emu Swamp
Lucknow
LGA
ORANGE CITY
LGA
CABONNE
Tottens Hill
Springside
947
Huntley Shadforth
Stage 2 1,130
1,010
Spring Hill
LGA
CABONNE Guyong
1,010
Byng Spring Terrace Four Mile Creek Waldegrave
Waldebar (waldergrave) Mine
Cadia Mine
Forest Reefs
Cadia
Mount Harris Mine
970
770
Beneree 710
Panuara
Stage 1
e) Orange Spur (Young - Lithgow Gas Pipelin
1,001
Millthorpe
1,018
Greghamstown 956
PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT 1,043
Kings Plains
Tallwood
Last Chance Mine
Flyers Creek
1,026
By North-west Mine Desmond Hill
LGA
ENVIRONMENT D E S I G N & H E R I TAG E
E:\Projects\100243 Orange to Carcoar Pipeline (DPM)\FIGURES\100243 F1 Regional Context 27 11 2015 TO Rev B
657
Browns Creek
BLAYNEY
Browns Creek Mine
BLAYNEY
Athol
Errowanbang
Cheesemans Mountain
1,058
Fern Hill
710
Burnt Yards
Glendale Mine
New 968
CARCOAR
ERN
Sheahan-grants Mine
National Park and Wildlife Estate State Forest
MID
Recreation Area Cultivated Area
AY HW HIG
WEST
Stage 5
Mandurama
Existing Pipeline
Dummy Hill
Mount Macquarie
Barry
Stage 7
Highway Main Road
710
Carcoar Filtration Plant
Bald Hill
Minor Road Railway
1,010
Mine/Quarry
Stage 6
Spot Elevation
Discovery Ridge
20km
0
Learys Hill
865
804
Garland
REGIONAL CONTEXT Mcintyres Hill
993
Hobbys Yards Ecological Assessment Central Tablelands Regional Water Security Pipeline Project Neville
FIGURE 1 1,071