capital metro light rail stage 1 — gungahlin to civic · 1.1 purpose of this document 1 1.2...

Capital Metro Light Rail Stage 1 — Gungahlin to Civic

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

12 June 2015

Prepared for:

Capital Metro AgencyGPO Box 158Canberra ACT 2601

Contact: Cindy Williams, Project Officer, Planning and DesignT 02 6205 3639E [email protected]

Prepared by:

Parsons BrinckerhoffLevel 2, 54 Marcus Clarke StreetCanberra ACT 2600

Contact: Alex McDonald, Principal Environmental ScientistT: 02 9272 1418E: [email protected]

Land to be developed for the Project:

Land to be developed for the Project would predominantly consist of existing roadways includingHibberson Street, Flemington Road, the Federal Highway and Northbourne Avenue. Some development onother blocks of land and realignment to existing Territory land or lease boundaries would be required (refer tosection 2.2.4 of the Environmental Impact Statement).

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC i

Capital Metro Authority Capital Metro Light Rail Stage 1 — Gungahlin to CivicDraft Environmental Impact Statement

ContentsPage number

Abbreviations and Glossary xvii

Executive summary xxiii

Part A – Introduction and background information 1

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Purpose of this document 1

1.2 Capital Metro – Canberra’s Light Rail 1

1.2.1 Background 11.2.2 Overview of the Project 21.2.3 Project need and justification 5

1.3 Structure of this EIS 6

2. Project details 7

2.1 Project location and current land uses 7

2.2 Description of the Project 9

2.2.1 Project overview 92.2.2 Built form of the light rail 152.2.3 Construction of the Project 322.2.4 Territory land and lease boundary realignment requirements 522.2.5 Operation of the Project 62

2.3 Project objectives and justification 68

2.3.1 Project vision and objectives 682.3.2 Project need and justification 70

2.4 Alternatives considered 72

2.4.1 Consideration of strategic transport options 722.4.2 Light rail design options 752.4.3 Other project element options 85

2.5 Future stages 88

2.5.1 Extension to Russell 882.5.2 Future light rail master plan network 88

Part B – EIS process 91

3. Legislative context 91

3.1 Overview 91

3.2 Planning approvals process 91

3.2.1 Land administration 91

ii 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


Contents (Continued)

Page number

3.3 Statutory requirements 93

3.3.1 Overview 933.3.2 National Capital Authority 933.3.3 ACT Government 943.3.4 Commonwealth matters 99

3.4 Other requirements 101

3.4.1 Strategic planning context 101

3.5 Principles of ecologically sustainable development 105

3.6 Territory Plan strategic directions 107

4. Pre-mitigation risk assessment 111

4.1 Overview 111

4.2 Risk assessment methodology 111

4.2.1 Assessment of risk 1114.2.2 Evaluating likelihood 1124.2.3 Evaluating consequence 1124.2.4 Impact significance level 1154.2.5 Risk assessment workshop 115

4.3 Pre-mitigation risk assessment 115

4.4 Post-mitigation risk assessment 115

Part C – Assessment of potential impacts 127

5. Biodiversity 129

5.1 Environmental conditions and values 129

5.1.1 Species of plant recorded 1305.1.2 Vegetation types 1305.1.3 Fauna habitat 1365.1.4 Threatened species of plant 1375.1.5 Threatened species of animal 1435.1.6 Migratory birds 143

5.2 Investigations 144

5.2.1 Desktop assessment 1445.2.2 Likelihood-of-occurrence assessment 1455.2.3 Field survey and condition assessment 145

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC iii



Page number

5.3 Potential impacts 146

5.3.1 Loss and modification of vegetation and associated habitat 1465.3.2 Fragmentation, connectivity and edge effects 1475.3.3 Death/injury to fauna 1475.3.4 Lighting impacts on fauna 1475.3.5 Noise and vibration impacts on fauna 1485.3.6 Direct and indirect impacts on threatened flora 1485.3.7 Direct and indirect impacts on threatened, migratory and common fauna 148

5.4 Proposed mitigation measures and offsets 149

5.5 Expected conditions 151

5.6 Residual risks 151

6. Non-Indigenous and Indigenous Heritage 153


6.1.1 Historical overview of the route 1546.1.2 Non-Indigenous heritage 1556.1.3 Historical archaeology 1566.1.4 National Heritage Listed areas 1626.1.5 Aboriginal land 163



6.3.1 Direct and indirect impacts on existing heritage places 1656.3.2 Impacts to the Federal Highway and Northbourne Avenue heritage values 1676.3.3 Impacts to National Heritage Listed areas 1686.3.4 Potential impacts to Aboriginal heritage 1706.3.5 Potential impacts to burial sites 1716.3.6 Potential impacts to registered historical archaeology sites 172




7. Noise and vibration 179


7.1.1 Existing noise environment 1797.1.2 Noise sensitive receivers 180

iv 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff



Page number


7.2.1 Assessment approach 1897.2.2 Identification of noise sensitive receivers 1907.2.3 Ambient noise surveys and monitoring locations 1907.2.4 Unattended noise monitoring 1917.2.5 Attended airborne noise measurements 192


7.3.1 Construction noise assessment 1927.3.2 Construction vibration assessment 1947.3.3 Operational noise assessment 1967.3.4 Operational vibration assessment 203




8. Planted trees 211




8.3.1 Construction impacts 2138.3.2 Operation 214




9. Landscape and visual 223


9.1.1 Landscape character precincts 2239.1.2 Viewpoints 225


9.2.1 Landscape character assessment 2289.2.2 Visual impacts assessment 228


9.3.1 Construction 2299.3.2 Operation 231

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC v



Page number


9.4.1 Detailed design 2399.4.2 Construction 2399.4.3 Operation 240



10. Traffic and transport 243


10.1.1 Existing road network 24310.1.2 Existing public transport 24810.1.3 Pedestrian and cyclist usage 24910.1.4 Crash analysis 249





10.4.1 Construction 26610.4.2 Operational 268



11. Air quality and greenhouse gases 271








vi 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff



Page number

12. Water and hydrology 283


12.1.1 Existing groundwater conditions 28312.1.2 Existing surface water conditions 285


12.2.1 Groundwater 29512.2.2 Surface water 295


12.3.1 Construction impacts 29612.3.2 Operational impacts 299


12.4.1 Groundwater 30112.4.2 Surface water 302



13. Contamination and soils 307


13.1.1 Existing geology, topography and soils 30713.1.2 Potential contamination sources and locations 30813.1.3 Sensitive receptors 309


13.2.1 ACT EPA online notice records database search 31013.2.2 Phase 1 and Phase 2 contamination assessments 310


13.3.1 Impacts on land stability, soils and geological 31113.3.2 Contamination impacts during construction 31213.3.3 Contamination impacts during operation 313


13.4.1 Land stability, soils and geological 31313.4.2 Contamination management plan 314


13.5.1 Residual risks 315

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC vii



Page number

14. Social and economic 317




14.3.1 Positive economic impacts 32014.3.2 Negative economic impacts 32214.3.3 Social impacts 32314.3.4 Health impacts 32514.3.5 Significance of socioeconomic impacts 327




15. Utilities and services 333








16. Waste, energy and resources 339

16.1 Overview 339



16.3.1 Construction resource and waste management 34016.3.2 Operational resource and waste management 341



viii 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff



Page number

17. Land use 345








18. Climate change 355


18.1.1 Existing climate conditions 355


18.2.1 Predicted climate condition scenarios 356


18.3.1 Predicted future climate conditions 35718.3.2 Potential impacts to the Project 358




19. Hazard and risk 363



19.3 Potential hazards and risks 364

19.3.1 Construction hazards and risks 36419.3.2 Operational hazards and risks 366




Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC ix



Page number

20. Bushfire 371


20.1.1 Fire prone land 37120.1.2 Asset Interface – land use 37120.1.3 Site conditions 374





20.4.1 Construction bushfire management measures 38020.4.2 Operation Bushfire Management Measures 38120.4.3 Potential asset protection zones 382



Part D – Additional information and recommendations 387

21. Community and stakeholder consultation 387

21.1 Communication consultation objectives 387

21.2 Project stakeholders 388

21.3 Communication and consultation methodology 388

21.3.1 Early design and scoping phase 38821.3.2 Draft EIS preparation 389

21.4 Consultation activities and outcomes 390

21.5 Public exhibition of the Draft EIS 400

21.5.1 Consideration of community consultant feedback 401

21.6 Summary of issues and representations regarding the Project 401

21.7 Actions in response to the consultation 401

22. Recommendations 403

22.1 Summary of environmental mitigation measures 403

22.1.1 Construction phase environmental management commitments 40322.1.2 Operating phase environmental management commitments 41822.1.3 Consideration of cost effectiveness of proposed measures 428

x 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff



Page number

22.2 Summary residual risk assessment 428

22.3 Proposed management and monitoring 434

22.3.1 Construction environmental management 43422.3.2 Operational environmental and sustainability management 43622.3.3 Environmental auditing and compliance 438

23. Justification and conclusion 439

23.1 Project justification 439

23.2 Conclusion 440

24. References 441

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xi


List of tablesPage number

Table ES.1 Summary of key potential construction and operational impacts of the Project xxxTable 2.1 Estimated construction and commissioning phases for the Project 33Table 2.2 Anticipated construction activities for each stage of the Project 33Table 2.3 Estimated earthwork quantities 37Table 2.4 Estimated bulk material quantities 39Table 2.5 Indicative plant and equipment requirements 40Table 2.6 Proposed construction compound sites 47Table 2.7 Estimate vehicle trips 49Table 2.8 Proposed construction parking 50Table 2.9 Proposed construction parking 52Table 2.10 Land impacts outside existing road reserve in order from north to south 53Table 2.11 Capital Metro Light Rail Stage 1 — Gungahlin to Civic Project objectives 68Table 2.12 Strategic transport-based Project options considered 72Table 2.13 Alternative stop locations not pursued for the Project 79Table 3.1 Consideration of zoning for road works outside of the main transport corridor 95Table 3.2 Consideration of Project elements with respect to Schedule 4 of the P&D Act 95Table 3.3 Incorporation of ESD principles in the Project 106Table 4.1 Evaluation of likelihood 112Table 4.2 Evaluation of consequence 113Table 4.3 Qualitative risk assessment matrix – significance level 115Table 4.4 Environmental risks register 116Table 5.1 Initial biodiversity risks associated with the Project 129Table 5.2 Identified vegetation communities 136Table 5.3 Field survey summary 145Table 5.4 Potential impacts associated with the Project 146Table 5.5 Management and mitigation recommendations 149Table 5.6 Residual biodiversity risks 151Table 6.1 Initial non-Indigenous and Indigenous heritage impacts risks associated with the

Project 153Table 6.2 Non-Indigenous heritage places and objects within the vicinity of the Project 155Table 6.3 Historical Archaeological features registered within the study area 156Table 6.4 Northbourne Avenue potential NHL values and attributes, sensitivity to change and

potential heritage impacts 169Table 6.5 Residual non-Indigenous and Indigenous heritage risks 177Table 7.1 Initial noise and vibration impact risks associated with the Project 179Table 7.2 Precincts and noise catchment areas 180Table 7.3 Existing noise and vibration sensitive receivers 188Table 7.4 Ambient noise survey locations 190Table 7.5 Qualitative construction noise assessment 193Table 7.6 Airborne light rail noise triggers for residential land use 196Table 7.7 Airborne light rail noise triggers for sensitive land uses other than residential 196Table 7.8 AS 2107 recommended ‘satisfactory’ internal noise levels 197Table 7.9 Ground-borne noise triggers – RING 198Table 7.10 Residential operational airborne noise impacts 201Table 7.11 Assessment of Non-Residential Noise Sensitive Receivers 202Table 7.12 Preferred and maximum vibration dose values for intermittent vibration 204Table 7.13 Predicted human comfort operational vibration dose values 204Table 7.14 Residual noise and vibration risks 208Table 8.1 Initial planted tree impacts risks associated with the Project 211Table 8.2 Residual planted tree risks 222

xii 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


Table 9.1 Initial noise and vibration impact risks associated with the Project 223Table 9.2 Existing landscape and visual character of each precinct 223Table 9.3 Assessment of landscape character impacts (construction) 229Table 9.4 Assessment of visual impacts (construction) 231Table 9.5 Assessment of landscape character impacts (short-medium term operation) 232Table 9.6 Assessment of landscape character impacts (short-medium term operation) 234Table 9.7 Assessment of landscape character impacts (long term operation) 235Table 9.8 Assessment of visual impacts (short-medium term operation) 236Table 9.9 Assessment of visual impacts (long term operation) 237Table 9.10 Residual landscape and visual risks 241Table 10.1 Initial traffic and transport impact risks associated with the Project 243Table 10.2 Existing regular passenger bus services 248Table 10.3 Impacts to road network during construction 251Table 10.4 Traffic impacts from staff parking at construction compounds 252Table 10.5 Network performance 2021 254Table 10.6 Travel time summary by section 2021 255Table 10.7 Impacts to intersection performance at intersections within each proposed zone 256Table 10.8 Network performance 2031 258Table 10.9 Travel time summary by section 2031 258Table 10.10 Impacts to intersection performance at intersections within each proposed zone 259Table 10.11 Qualitative summary of impacts and benefits 264Table 10.12 Residual traffic and transport risks 269Table 11.1 Initial air quality and greenhouse gas impacts risks associated with the Project 271Table 11.2 Background air quality data 272Table 11.3 Estimation of GHG emissions for the main construction materials 277Table 11.4 Summary of GHG emissions for the Project 278Table 11.5 Breakdown of GHG emissions for the Project by scope 278Table 11.6 Residual air quality and greenhouse gas risks 282Table 12.1 Initial surface water and groundwater impacts risks associated with the Project 283Table 12.2 Residual water and hydrology risks 306Table 13.1 Initial contamination and soil impacts risks associated with the Project 307Table 13.2 Residual contamination and soils risks 315Table 14.1 Initial social and economic impacts risks associated with the Project 317Table 14.2 Population living with 500 metres of a light rail stop 319Table 14.3 Potential sensitive receivers 319Table 14.4 Summary assessment of potential socioeconomic impacts associated with the

Project 327Table 14.5 Residual social and economic risks 331Table 15.1 Initial utility and service risks associated with the Project 333Table 15.2 Residual utility and services risks 338Table 16.1 Initial waste, energy and resources impacts risks associated with the Project 339Table 16.2 Residual waste, energy and resources risks 343Table 17.1 Initial land use risks associated with the Project 345Table 17.2 Residual land use risks 353Table 18.1 Initial climate change impacts risks associated with the Project 355Table 18.2 Summary of the projected changes for the ACT 357Table 18.3 Potential climate change impacts on the Project 358Table 18.4 Residual climate change risks 361Table 19.1 Initial planted tree impacts risks associated with the Project 363Table 19.2 Indicative list of hazardous materials potentially required on site during construction 364Table 19.3 Residual hazard and risks 370Table 20.1 Initial planted tree impacts risks associated with the Project 371Table 21.1 Stakeholders consulted, key discussions and issues 390Table 21.2 Utility agencies consulted, key discussions and issues 395

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xiii


Table 21.3 Consultation with landholders 396Table 21.4 Consultation with community/recreation/business groups 397Table 22.1 Construction phase management measures 403Table 22.2 Operating phase management measures 418Table 22.3 Residual environmental risks associated with the Project 428

List of figuresPage number

Figure ES.1 Project overview xxvFigure 1.1 Capital Metro Light Rail Stage 1 — Gungahlin to Civic Project 4Figure 2.1 Project location 8Figure 2.2a Key features of the Project 10Figure 2.2b Key features of the Project 11Figure 2.2c Key features of the Project 12Figure 2.2d Key features of the Project 13Figure 2.2e Key features of the Project 14Figure 2.3 Typical LRV only/pedestrian friendly zone cross-section (Gungahlin) 16Figure 2.4 Typical Flemington Road cross-section (northern end) 16Figure 2.5 Typical Flemington Road cross-section (southern end) 16Figure 2.6 Typical Federal Highway cross-section 17Figure 2.7 Typical Northbourne Avenue cross-section (Civic) 17Figure 2.8 Typical stop configuration and elevation 19Figure 2.9 Typical stop platform and canopy layouts along the alignment 20Figure 2.10 Project interchange facilities 22Figure 2.11 Typical layout of the Hibberson Street light rail only zone 23Figure 2.12 Indicative layout of the Mitchell stabling depot and maintenance facility 27Figure 2.13 Indicative section of the LRV stabling area at the Mitchell stabling depot and

maintenance facility 28Figure 2.14 Visualisation of the stabling depot and maintenance facility at Mitchell 28Figure 2.15a Construction footprint and construction compounds 42Figure 2.15b Construction footprint and construction compounds 43Figure 2.15c Construction footprint and construction compounds 44Figure 2.15d Construction footprint and construction compounds 45Figure 2.15e Construction footprint and construction compounds 46Figure 2.16 Proposed construction haulage and main delivery routes 51Figure 2.17a Proposed property acquisition and leasing requirements 57Figure 2.17b Proposed property acquisition and leasing requirements 58Figure 2.17c Proposed property acquisition and leasing requirements 59Figure 2.17d Proposed property acquisition and leasing requirements 60Figure 2.17e Proposed property acquisition and leasing requirements 61Figure 2.18 Indicative Project corridor under a bus rapid transit scenario (Northbourne Avenue) 73Figure 2.19 Indicative Project corridor under a light rail scenario (Northbourne Avenue) 74Figure 2.20 Potential stop location options identified for the Project 75Figure 2.21 Potential stop location options identified for the Project 80Figure 2.22 Indicative Gungahlin terminus location options 81Figure 2.23 Indicative Civic terminus location options 83Figure 2.24 Indicative light rail master plan network 89Figure 3.1 Administrative authority jurisdictions 92Figure 3.2 ACT planning approvals process for preparation of an EIS 98Figure 3.3 Proposed structural plan for Civic as shown in the Canberra City Plan 104Figure 4.1 Risk assessment development methodology 112

xiv 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


Figure 5.1a Vegetation communities 131Figure 5.1b Vegetation communities 132Figure 5.1c Vegetation communities 133Figure 5.1d Vegetation communities 134Figure 5.1e Vegetation communities 135Figure 5.2a Threatened species habitat 138Figure 5.2b Threatened species habitat 139Figure 5.2c Threatened species habitat 140Figure 5.2d Threatened species habitat 141Figure 5.2e Threatened species habitat 142Figure 6.1a Non-Indigenous heritage sites within the vicinity of the Project 157Figure 6.1b Non-Indigenous heritage sites within the vicinity of the Project 158Figure 6.1c Non-Indigenous heritage sites within the vicinity of the Project 159Figure 6.1d Non-Indigenous heritage sites within the vicinity of the Project 160Figure 6.1e Non-Indigenous heritage sites within the vicinity of the Project 161Figure 6.2 Detail from the draft NHL boundary map provided as part of the ‘Canberra, the

Planned National Capital’ nomination showing Northbourne Avenue and citystreets 162

Figure 6.3 Aerial view of the proposed stabling depot and maintenance facility site (outlined ingreen) showing the area of PAD (outlined in blue) 171

Figure 7.1a Noise catchment areas and sensitive receivers along the Project alignment 181Figure 7.1b Noise catchment areas and sensitive receivers along the Project alignment 182Figure 7.1c Noise catchment areas and sensitive receivers along the Project alignment 183Figure 7.1d Noise catchment areas and sensitive receivers along the Project alignment 184Figure 7.1e Noise catchment areas and sensitive receivers along the Project alignment 185Figure 7.2 Stabling yard and maintenance facility predicted noise levels – no specific noise

mitigation 199Figure 7.3 Stabling yard and maintenance facility predicted noise levels – with noise

mitigation 200Figure 8.1a Planted trees potentially impacted by the Project 215Figure 8.1b Planted trees potentially impacted by the Project 216Figure 8.1c Planted trees potentially impacted by the Project 217Figure 8.1d Planted trees potentially impacted by the Project 218Figure 8.1e Planted trees potentially impacted by the Project 219Figure 8.2 Tree procurement and development strategy along Northbourne Avenue 221Figure 9.1 Key plan of character precincts identified along the Project alignment 226Figure 9.2 Key viewpoint locations along the Project alignment 227Figure 9.3 Artist’s impression of the proposed terminus on Hibberson Street, Gungahlin 237Figure 9.4 Artist’s impression of the proposed stop along Flemington Road at Nullarbor

Avenue 238Figure 9.5 Artist’s impression of the proposed stop along Northbourne Avenue at Condamine

Street 238Figure 9.6 Artist’s impression of proposed Civic terminus along Northbourne Avenue at

Alinga Street 239Figure 10.1 Project study area – Existing road network 246Figure 10.2 Existing off-street parking locations – Civic 247Figure 10.3 Proposed intersection Northbourne Avenue and Swinden Street 260Figure 11.1 Construction phase GHG assessment boundary 274Figure 12.1 Geology and existing groundwater bores 284Figure 12.2 Groundwater dependant ecosystems 286Figure 12.3 Surface water features 287Figure 12.4 Inner North Reticulation Network – Flemington Road Ponds 289Figure 12.5a 1 percent AEP flood extents and levels 290Figure 12.5b 1 percent AEP flood extents and levels 291

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xv


Figure 12.5c 1 percent AEP flood extents and levels 292Figure 12.5d 1 percent AEP flood extents and levels 293Figure 12.5e 1 percent AEP flood extents and levels 294Figure 14.1 Population density along the Project alignment 318Figure 17.1 Existing land use/custodianship along the Project alignment 346Figure 20.1 Fire prone land in the vicinity of the Project alignment 372Figure 20.2 Asset interface land use in the vicinity of the Project alignment 373Figure 20.3 Length of potential fire runs from the Project alignment 379Figure 20.4 Existing and proposed asset interface management zones (north) 383Figure 20.5 Existing and proposed asset interface management zones (south) 384

List of AppendicesAppendix A Final Scoping DocumentAppendix B Scoping document referenceAppendix C Proponent's environmental historyAppendix D Information sourcesAppendix E Study teamAppendix F ResearchAppendix G Stakeholder groupsAppendix H Contamination management plan

Technical PapersVolume 2

Technical Paper 1 – BiodiversityTechnical Paper 2 – Non-Indigenous and Indigenous heritageTechnical Paper 3 – Noise and vibration

Volume 3

Technical Paper 4 – Landscape and visualTechnical Paper 5 – Traffic and transportTechnical Paper 6 – Air qualityTechnical Paper 7 – Greenhouse gasesTechnical Paper 8 – GroundwaterTechnical Paper 9 – HydrologyTechnical Paper 10 – Social and economicTechnical Paper 11 – Climate ChangeTechnical Paper 12 – Bushfire

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xvii


Abbreviations and GlossaryACM asbestos containing material

ACT Australian Capital Territory

ACT EPA ACT Environmental Protection Authority

ACTPLA ACT Planning and Land Authority

AIA Australian Institute of Architecture

ALS Australian Laboratory Services Pty Ltd

ANU Australian National University

APZ asset protection zone

AQMS air quality monitoring station

ARA Australian Rail Association

ARI average recurrence interval

AS Australian Standard

ASS acid sulfate soils

ASSMAC Acid Sulfate Soils Management Advisory Council

BGL below ground level

BH borehole

BIA Biodiversity Impact Assessment

BOM Bureau of Meteorology

BPA bushfire prone areas

BRA beneficial reuse assessment

BRT bus rapid transit

BTEX compounds (compounds of) benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene xylene

BTRE Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics

CCIA climate change impact assessment

CCTV closed-circuit television

CEMP construction environmental management plan

xviii 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


CERP construction emergency response plan

CMA Capital Metro Agency

CMIP5 coupled model intercomparison project phase 5

CMP contamination management plan

CNVMP construction noise and vibration management plan

CO carbon monoxide

CO2 carbon dioxide

CPTED crime prevention through environmental design

CRC CARE Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination Assessment and Remediationof the Environment

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

CSM conceptual site model

CSR combined services route

CTMP construction transport management plan

DA development application

dBA decibel (A-weighted)

DBYD Dial-Before-You-Dig

DC direct current

DDA Disability Discrimination Act 1992

DO dissolved oxygen

DQO data quality objective

EC electrical conductivity

EIS environmental impact statement

EMF electromagnetic fields

ENSO El-Nino Southern Oscillation

Envirolab Envirolab Services Pty Ltd

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

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

EPD Environment and Planning Directorate

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xix


EPIC Exhibition Park In Canberra

ESA environmental site assessment

ESCP erosion and sediment control plan

ESD ecological sustainable development

ESDD (former) Environment and Sustainable Development – now EPD

ESL ecological screening level

ESR environmental assessment report

FEMP flood emergency management plan

GDE groundwater dependent ecosystems

GIL groundwater investigation level

GML Godden Mackay Logan Heritage Pty Ltd

GPT gross pollutant traps

ha hectare

IAPZ inner asset protection zone

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IS infrastructure sustainability

JSEA job safety and environmental analysis

LCA life cycle assessment

LOR laboratory limit of reporting

LRT light rail transit

LRV light rail vehicle

mBGL metres below ground level

MNES matters of national environmental significance

NARCliM NSW and ACT Regional Climate modelling

NATA National Association of Testing Authorities

NC Act Nature Conservation Act 1980

NC Noise Catchment

NCA National Capital Authority

NCP National Capital Plan

xx 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


NEPC National Environment Protection Council

NEPM National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination)Amendment Measure 2013 (No. 1)

NGA National Greenhouse Accounts

NHL National Heritage List

NOHSC National Occupational Health and Safety Commission

NOx nitrogen

NTG Natural temperate grasslands

NVIA noise and vibration impact assessment

O&M operation and maintenance

OAPZ outer asset protection zone

OCC operations control centre

OCPs organochlorine pesticides

OEH NSW Office of Environment and Heritage

OLE overhead line equipment

ONVR operational noise and vibration review

OPESP operating phase environment and sustainability plan

OPERP operating phase emergency response plan

OPPs organophosphate pesticides

P&D Act Planning & Development Act 2007

P&LM Act Planning and Land Management Act 1988 (Commonwealth)

PA public address

PAD potential archaeological deposit

PAHs polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

PASS potential acid sulfate soils

PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls

PEA preliminary environment assessment

PHA preliminary hazard analysis

PIDS passenger information display systems

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xxi


PNVIA preliminary noise and vibration impact assessment

PPE personal protective equipment

PPP public private partnership

PRA preliminary risk assessment

Project (the) The design and construction of a 12 kilometres light rail route from Gungahlin tothe City with associated stops, depot, road, signalling, preparatory and otherworks; and includes the ongoing operation and maintenance of that light railsystem.

Project Co The nominated construction contractor and operations consortium

Project impact footprint Refers to the area that would be directly impacted by the Project including theproposed light rail tracks, stops and other infrastructure such as preliminarysubstation locations and the depot and maintenance facility in Mitchell.

RING Rail Infrastructure Noise Guideline

SAQP sampling, analysis and quality plan

SBMP strategic bushfire management plan

SLR SLR Consulting Pty Ltd

SO2 sulphur dioxide

SPOCAS suspension peroxide oxidation combined acidity and sulphur

study area Encompasses the Project impact footprint site and a buffer zone which hasbeen applied to identify the constraints nearby to the Project which may or maynot be indirectly impacted by the Project.

The buffer area generally represents an area within 200 metres of thealignment or up to 500 metres at interchange and terminus locations atGungahlin, Dickson and Civic (depending on the specialist assessmentrequirements).

SWMS safe work method statements

TAA total actual acidity

TAMS Territory and Municipal Services

TCP traffic control plan

TIA traffic impact assessment

TP total phosphorus

TP Act Tree Protection Act 2005

TPA titratable peroxide acidity

Track directions ‘inbound’ track (heading towards Alinga Street Stop away from Gungahlin Place

xxii 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


Stop)

‘outbound’ track (heading away from Alinga Street Stop towardsGungahlin Place Stop)

TRH total recoverable hydrocarbons

UPT utilities project team

US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

UUS underground utility survey

VDV vibration dose value

VENM virgin excavated natural material

VHT vehicle hours travelled

VOC’s volatile organic compounds

WHS work health and safety

WQMP water quality management plan

WSUD water sensitive urban design

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xxiii


Executive summaryCapital Metro – Canberra’s Light RailThe ACT Government supports a sustainable Canberra, evidenced by its complementary policy documents,the ACT Planning Strategy and the Transport for Canberra policy that establish a strong framework for theintegration of transport and land use planning to deliver a compact and sustainable city and Territory.

The ACT Government has identified Canberra’s need for accessible, high capacity and high quality publictransport to increase the transport mode share and reduce private vehicle dependence. In November 2012,the ACT Government committed to delivering an operational light rail network by 2018/2019. To achieve thisgoal, Capital Metro Agency (CMA), a statutory independent authority, was established with the principleobjective of managing all aspects of the planning, design and delivery of Stage 1 of a light rail network for theTerritory.

Planning for Stage 1 of the proposed light rail network has commenced with CMA identifying the proposedalignment as the Capital Metro Light Rail Stage 1 — Gungahlin to Civic Project (hereafter, referred to as theProject), a 12 kilometre light rail service linking the fast-developing area of Gungahlin in the north, to the City.The City to Gungahlin corridor is an important part of the Transport for Canberra policy, which maps outways to deliver faster, more convenient and sustainable transport options for Canberra over the next20 years.

What are the objectives of the Project?

The Project’s vision is ‘to boost Canberra's sustainable growth by changing and improving transport options,settlement patterns and employment opportunities’. In meeting this vision, eight objectives have beenidentified to guide the development of the Project. These objectives are to:

increase the mode share of public transport

optimise frequency and service reliability

provide the Project at affordable capital and operational costs

grow a more diversified Canberra economy

stimulate sustainable, urban re-development along the corridor

increase social and economic participation

revitalise the Northbourne Avenue corridor

reduce carbon and other emissions.

What are the key features of the Project?The alignment would follow Hibberson Street, Flemington Road, the Federal Highway andNorthbourne Avenue, and would be the primary transport corridor connecting Canberra’s growing northernsuburbs with the City and the south.

xxiv 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


The Project would include the following key features:

the construction of approximately 12 kilometres of light rail track primarily within the central median stripof existing road corridor

13 stops including major transport interchanges at Gungahlin, Dickson and Civic

a light rail only/pedestrian friendly zone in Hibberson Street, Gungahlin

platforms at all stops designed to a minimum of 33 metres and capable of extension to accommodate45-metre long LRVs (allowing for extended LRVs as part of future operations)

overhead line equipment providing traction power and seven electrical substation facilities for theprovision of power along the route

upgrade to existing bridge structures and construction of a new bridge along Flemington Road

a series of crossovers and turnback facilities to allow light rail vehicles to turn back at certain pointsalong the alignment

the provision of new traffic signals at up to nine intersections that are currently not signalised

passenger information systems at stops and on light rail vehicles

a stabling depot and maintenance facility in Mitchell incorporating the Control Centre, the operator’smanagement. maintenance and administrative teams, the LRV maintenance building and stabling forthe fleet of LRVs

upgrades to the road layout in some sections of the route (e.g. modifications to slip lanes, right/leftturns, footpaths and kerbs, etc.)

upgrades of existing underground and overhead utilities and new drainage infrastructure

changes to some parking conditions along the route

public domain improvements including paving, street trees, lighting and street furniture.

An overview of the key components of the Project is shown in Figure ES.1.

The Project would commence with an initial fleet of approximately 14 LRVs about 33-metres long.The Project would operate between 6.00 am and midnight Monday to Thursday, 6.00 am and 1.30 am onFridays and Saturdays and between 8.00 am and midnight on Sundays. The Project would commenceoperations at a frequency as follows:

six minutes between 7.00 am and 9.00 am and between 4.00 pm and 6.00 pm on weekdays

10 minutes between 9.00 am and 4.00 pm on weekdays

15 minutes at other times on weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays.

The journey time is anticipated to be 25 minutes from Gungahlin to Civic, with no significant differencebetween peak and off-peak.

Construction of the Project would take approximately three years, with work beginning at multiple sites alongthe alignment from the fourth quarter of 2016 (subject to planning approval). The Project is expected tobecome operational in the fourth quarter of 2019/early 2020.

Construction would be staged to minimise disruption to residents, businesses and existing transportoperations. Some construction work may be required outside of normal construction hours such as workacross major intersections, utility diversion works or works that can occur without exceeding night-time noisecriteria at the closest residential receivers. A number of temporary construction compounds would berequired during the construction phase. The full construction program and methodology is detail insection 2.2.3 of this Draft environmental impact statement (EIS).

xxvi 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


Why is the proposal needed?Canberra’s CBD and northern suburbs are proposed to house up to 10 percent of the ACT’s populationgrowth over the next 20 years accommodating a total population of over 600,000 by 2050. This increase willput pressure on the existing transport network (road and bus) and associated infrastructure. Improvementsare therefore required to meet the transport network capacity, efficiency and reliability expectationsassociated with the projected population growth. The Transport for Canberra –– Transport for a SustainableCity 2012–2031 Policy (Transport for Canberra) has set the foundation for the improvement of transport forthe next 20 years. This policy aims to create a transport system that puts people first and links newdevelopment to investment in public transport.

The City to Gungahlin corridor has a range of current and emerging issues that are intertwined and which areto be resolved to meet the needs of Canberra’s population in the future. These issues include:

1. growing road congestion

2. high levels of private vehicle dependency

3. a fast growing population

4. a mismatch between population and employment

5. low land productivity

6. diminishing corridor amenity

7. high greenhouse gas intensity.

All of the issues outlined above impede on achieving goals and objectives as outlined by the ACTGovernment. Issues 1 to 5 are associated with delivering public transport capacity, managing roadcongestion, supporting Canberra’s core advantages, improving equity and liveability. Issue 6 provides ahindrance to achieving the goal of maintaining and improving the amenity along the Project corridor, andIssue 7 is represents an impediment towards creating an environmentally friendly transport system.

The Project would assist in generating a number of economic and social benefits. Without intervention, futuregrowth within the Project corridor would lead to a further decline in traffic speeds, increasing travel timewhich impedes access to employment, community facilities, social and recreational activities. The Projectwould assist the city centre in realising its full potential as a vibrant, lively and attractive core to a prosperousCanberra. Urban renewal and transformation along the transport corridor is expected to drive newopportunities for Canberra as a whole, such as employment opportunities and new investment.

Key benefits

The introduction of light rail to Canberra would change the way transport services are delivered and used inCanberra. Construction of a new high-capacity, frequent and reliable mode of transport would unlockadditional capacity and provide a better experience to customers. Key benefits of the Project include:

Create jobs — construction of the Project would support up to 3,500 jobs (approximately 1,400 directand approximately 2,100 indirect jobs). Additionally, the corridor development could result in up to26,000 additional jobs along the corridor. Taking into account the flow-on jobs from industry andconsumption effects results, this could result in up to 50,000 additional jobs along the corridor.Approximately 125 jobs are anticipated to be directly created as a result of the Project (Ernst andYoung, 2014).

Encourage investment — The Project has already attracted significant investor interest in Australia andoverseas.

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xxvii


Revitalise the city — Light rail is proven to attract people and economic activity to the areas surroundingstops. In Canberra, light rail is being used to help stimulate urban renewal along theNorthbourne Corridor and in the City, supporting the City Plan and City to Lake initiatives. Light rail willalso help manage population growth by supporting urban intensification along transport routes as setout in the ACT Government’s planning strategy.

Increase accessibility and connectivity — The Project would link the City to the rapidly developingsuburbs of the north and Dickson Town Centre. Improved public transport infrastructure and urbanintensification along transport routes will also support social inclusion by allowing greater numbers ofpeople to live close to services with reduced dependence on private vehicle use.

Encourage a more active lifestyle — Current research shows people will walk up to 1.6 kilometres forlight rail, a much higher distance than for buses where people will walk on average 400 metres(SMEC Australia, 2013).

Provide a reliable, frequent and well integrated transport system — The Project would provide a reliableservice every 6 minutes during peak periods. Based on other light rail networks, the Project wouldoperate with up to 97 percent of light rail services running on time.

Encourage smarter land use — The ACT population is projected to reach over 600,000 by the 2050s,urban intensification along transport routes such as the Northbourne Corridor will allow Canberra todevelop as a more compact and efficient city.

Reduce congestion — Canberra congestion costs are predicted to reach $200 million per annum by2020, an 82 percent increase from $110 million in 2005. The provision of a new high-capacity, frequentand reliable mode of transport presents an opportunity to reduce congestion on the existing roadnetwork.

Reduce pollution — Increasing public transport use reduces direct emissions from private cars,improving local air quality. Electrically-powered light rail also has a greater opportunity to reduce theoverall greenhouse gas emissions from transport by using renewable energy sources, in line withthe ACT Government’s target of 90 percent renewable energy use by 2020.

The planning, design and approval processHow was the proposal developed?

The development of the Project has been an iterative process that has considered issues arising from earlycommunity and stakeholder involvement and preliminary environmental investigations. A range ofalternatives have been developed based on the ACT Government’s strategic transport plan for Canberra.These included:

1. consideration of strategic transport option alternatives including:

conversion of existing traffic lanes into bus only lanes

providing new transport options such as additional bus lanes, bus rapid transit or light rail

other non-transport strategic options (such as road pricing)

2. consideration of project options including:

track alignment options – including consideration of median running and side running alignments

stop locations – which included consideration of terminus and intermediate stop locations

stabling depot and maintenance facility location options

light rail power supply options – including the potential for side versus centre pole arrangements,substation locations and alternative power supply options

landscaping and tree planting options along the Federal Highway and Northbourne Avenue.

xxviii 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


This process involved developing and assessing the feasibility of alternative options to deliver the necessarytransport system capacity for the Gungahlin to Civic corridor. Further discussion of the options assessmentundertaken for the Project is provided in section 2.4 of this Draft EIS.

The planning and design process is ongoing and the Project may be subject to further refinement as a resultof ongoing design development, representations received in response to the public exhibition of thisDraft EIS and further consultation during detailed design (should the Project be approved).

What is the planning approval process?

The planning approvals process for the Project comprises a mix of both Territory and Commonwealthrequirements as the Project corridor falls under the administrative authority of both the National CapitalAuthority (NCA) and the ACT Government Environment and Planning Directorate (EPD). All land in the ACTbelongs to the Commonwealth and, under the Australian Capital Territory Planning and Land ManagementAct 1988, is divided into either:

National land – managed by the NCA, or

Territory land – managed through the Territory Plan by EPD under the Planning & DevelopmentAct 2007.

Additionally, the Planning and Land Management Act 1988 also provides for ‘designated areas’. These areasmay include National or Territory land. The NCA has planning responsibility for designated areas howevervarious agencies in the ACT Government may have custodianship and manage designated areas on a dayto day basis.

The Project section from the Gungahlin town centre to the Flemington Road/Federal Highway junction (alongthe transport corridor and adjacent lands) and land adjacent to designated land south of theFlemington Road and Federal Highway junction is Territory land under ACT Government administration.Environmental approval for the light rail and associated infrastructure along this section of the alignmentwould therefore be required from EPD.

The Project corridor from the Flemington Road/Federal Highway junction to the Canberra civic centre isTerritory land, however it is zoned designated land in the National Capital Plan (NCP). Northbourne Avenueand the Federal Highway are specifically identified under the NCP designated areas under the category of‘Main Avenue and Approach Routes’. As a result, the NCA would be ultimately responsible for environmentalplanning and development decisions for this section of the Project. A separate NCA works approval for thiscomponent of the Project would therefore be required.

This Draft EIS has been prepared to meet the requirements for consideration and environmental assessmentby both EPD and the NCA.

Further discussion of the legislative context and planning approvals process for the Project is provided inChapter 3.

How have the community and stakeholders been involved?

Early consultation with key stakeholders and the community has occurred since 2013. The consultationstrategy has been designed to inform the community and key stakeholders and encourage participation toallow the Project’s development to benefit from stakeholder and community input. Consultation activitieswould continue as the Project progresses to detailed design and construction.

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xxix


The Draft Environmental Impact StatementWhat is the purpose of the EIS?

This Draft EIS has been prepared to assess and document the potential environmental impacts of theconstruction and operation of the Project. It also presents the key features of the Project, including the likelyconstruction method and operation. The Project would be constructed and operated in accordance with themitigation measures proposed in this Draft EIS and any submissions report or preferred infrastructure report,and the Minister’s conditions of approval.

The Draft EIS has been prepared to assess a range of environmental and social impacts associated with theProject and addresses all matters specified within EPD’s scoping document requirements dated14 October 2014, in accordance with Section 212 of the Planning and Development Act 2007 and otherrelevant legislation.

How were the impacts assessed?

The Draft EIS was prepared through initial community and stakeholder consultation and detailed specialistassessment of key environmental issues, including surveys, data analysis and predictive modelling whereappropriate. The Draft EIS process included a detailed environmental risk analysis to scope the level ofassessment required, identify key risks and confirm those issues that require management and mitigation.

The detailed specialist assessments are contained as Volume 2 and Volume 3 of this Draft EIS.

What are the key findings of the Draft EIS?

Key impacts (positive and negative impacts) during operation and construction of the Project aresummarised below in Table ES.1.

xxx 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


Table ES.1 Summary of key potential construction and operational impacts of the Project

Key issue Potential impacts during construction Potential impacts during operation

Heritage(Non-Indigenousand Indigenous)(Chapter 6)

Direct and indirect impacts on listed heritage items (negative):Disturbance to and temporary changes to the setting, context andappreciation of various heritage items and heritage conservationareas along the alignment. No direct impacts to listed heritageitems are anticipated.

Impacts to Nationally Heritage Listed items (negative): Removalof trees and development of new infrastructure alongNorthbourne Avenue would have the potential to impact on theexisting heritage values of this corridor.

Visual impacts on heritage items (negative): Visual impacts onheritage items would occur as a result of temporary constructionworks, the establishment of site compounds and stockpilingthroughout the construction phase.

Impacts to Nationally Heritage Listed items (negative and positive): Constructionimpacts (refer right) would also be permanent impacts in the short to medium term. Inthe long term, the Project would assist in meeting the intentional use of this corridoras a transit corridor (identified in the Griffin Plan).

Noise andvibration

(Chapter 7)

Construction airborne noise impacts (negative): Predicted noiselevels not expected to exceed adopted guidelines during thedaytime at most locations (except for Gungahlin town centre).Exceedances of the adopted criteria are predicted during night-time periods.

Construction during night time periods (negative): Constructionactivities during night time periods would have the potential toresult in highly intrusive noise impacts (where this is required tobe undertaken).

Ground vibration during construction (negative): The separationdistance(s) between the proposed works and the nearestreceivers would be sufficient so that nearby buildings areunlikely to suffer ‘cosmetic damage’.

There is potential for ground vibration levels to exceed thehuman comfort criteria depending on the duration and nature ofthe construction activity.

Noise impacts from light rail vehicle (LRV) passbys (negative and positive): For manyreceivers, airborne noise generated by the adjacent existing road traffic networks,and by the LRVs themselves would be expected to mask ground-borne noise.

The noise levels in residential and other noise sensitive receivers are predicted tocomply with the daytime noise trigger levels, but exceedances of the RING night-timetrigger levels have been identified at some residential receivers. Reasonable andfeasible mitigation measures will be implemented to manage these exceedances

Ground vibration from LRV passbys (negative): Expected to be below cosmeticdamage criterion with implementation of proposed vibration monitoring. Potential forground vibration levels to exceed human comfort criteria for short durations at somelocations and potential sensitive receivers along the alignment, such as potentiallyvibration sensitive equipment at The National Archives of Australia.

LRV warning bells (neutral): Noise from LRV warning bells would not result in anysignificant impacts on the basis they would only be required in emergency situationsor where the driver considers there to be a danger to public safety.

Substations (mainly neutral): Without noise attenuation measures electricalsubstations would exceed the operational night time zone noise standards(depending on their location). The electrical substations at all locations could bedesigned to meet the noise goals by implementing appropriate sound attenuatingenclosures.

Operational noise (positive): Removal of traffic along Hibberson Street would reducenoise impacts from existing traffic within this area. Other areas would also experiencea benefit from reduced car and bus levels.

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xxxi



Planted trees

(Chapter 8)

Removal of planted street trees along the alignment (negative):A large number of planted trees would be removed along to thealignment, including a number of significant trees alongNorthbourne Avenue.

Impact to ACT registered trees (positive): No impacts to ACTregistered trees would occur as part of the construction (oroperation) of the Project.

Removal of planted trees along the alignment (short to medium-term negative):Construction impacts (refer left) would also be permanent impacts in the short tomedium term, where trees removal is not able to be mitigated or until the landscapestrategy has reached a substantial level of maturity.

Replacement of existing trees (long term positive): Enhanced tree planting along thealignment, in particular along Northbourne Avenue would occur throughimplementation of a landscape strategy which would provide a positive long-termaffect.

Landscape andvisual

(Chapter 9)

Visual impacts during construction (negative): The overallimpacts of the Project during construction would are adverse,largely due to the negative impacts of machinery, hoarding ofconstruction sites, limited pedestrian and vehicular access, andgeneral adverse change to the existing landscape character ofthe views, including tree loss.

Short to medium term visual impacts during operation (negative): short to mediumterm, visual impacts would result in a range of impacts from highly adverse to highlybeneficial. This is primarily due to the influence of the planted trees within the existingviews, which during the short to medium term stage, would not be establishedenough to provide the optimal landscape benefits.

Long term visual impacts during operation (negative): the Projects visual impactswould result in a range of beneficial impacts represented by the final establishment ofthe landscape and planted trees within the view. Once established, the view wouldoffset the majority of the adverse impacts present during the short-medium term.

Traffic andtransport

(Chapter 10)

Road network performance (negative): Road network isexpected to function satisfactorily during the construction of theProject. Traffic and access impacts during construction would beassociated with

increased numbers of heavy vehicle traffic increased general traffic on local roads potential traffic diversions full and partial road closures — in particular closure of majorintersections along Northbourne Avenue (as required).

Disruptions to existing bus services (negative): Some diversionsof routes may be required. Potential minor increase in traveltimes and distances for some bus services as a result.

Temporary impacts on land use and property (negative): Sometemporary disruption to land uses affected by the Project impactfootprint, such as the existing car park opposite EPIC and theexisting car parks to the south of London Circuit.

Transport and access benefits (positive): Substantial regional transport benefits,including a notable increase in public transport carrying capacity and reliability alongthe Gungahlin to Civic corridor. Enhanced access to major event locations (such asCanberra Racecourse, EPIC etc.) and community/education and other similarfacilities within the corridor.

Road network performance (mainly neutral, some negative): Negligible impactsacross the wider road network would occur as a result of the Project. This is largely aconsequence of the proposed route being located mostly within existing medianstrips on Northbourne Avenue, Federal Highway and Flemington Road (north of WellStation Drive). Interactions and potential impacts to general traffic, cyclists andpedestrians are limited to intersection locations along the corridor.

In the morning peak period, modelling suggests there would be a slight decrease intotal vehicle volume when comparing the base case to 2021 with light rail. For theafternoon peak period, average delay and the vehicles remaining within the networkhave been estimated to increase by approximately 50 percent, indicating significantcongestion within the network.

xxxii 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff



Traffic andtransport

(cont.)

Disruption to pedestrians/cyclists (negative): Diversions ofpedestrian and cyclist routes and restrictions in pedestriancrossings in some locations to allow for safe construction.

Disruptions to emergency access (neutral): Access would bemaintained along the alignment. No significant disruptionsanticipated with the application of adequate traffic managementmeasures.

Pedestrians (negative): Some diversions would be necessary;however, existing pedestrian movements parallel to thealignment would also be maintained along footpaths for mostconstruction works. Movements crossing the alignment wouldbe maintained at existing pedestrian crossing facilities.

Revised bus network (positive and negative): Changes to the bus network wouldhave a perceived negative impact from existing commuters who currently use theservices. Potential negative impacts also associated with the need to changetransport modes for passengers not originating along the alignment. Positive impactsassociated with the revised bus network would include the ability to reallocatedexisting north-south bus services to provide new or additional services in other areas,including improved east-west connections.

Permanent removal of parking spaces along the Project alignment (negative):The only direct impact from the Project on parking would be associated with thepedestrianisation of Hibberson Street, where 24 spaces are proposed to be removedbetween Gungahlin Place and Hinder Street, and another 16 spaces between HinderStreet and Kate Crace Street. Changes to private property access (negative): Accessto private property would be maintained; however, some access arrangements wouldbe changed, including limiting access to left-in left-out arrangements at locationsalong the alignment, in addition to some minor changes to specific property access,such as the Yowani Country Club.

Social andeconomic

(Chapter 14)

Impacts on community values (negative): Some disruptionexpected to amenity, character, human health and well-being,access to community facilities and public spaces, and urbanconnectivity during construction.

Adverse economic impacts (negative): Including (in particularGungahlin town centre) disruptions to deliveries, distribution andcustomer access; reduced trade due to amenity impacts,especially for outdoor dining areas (predominantly Gungahlinand Civic); reduced passing trade due to changes in vehicle andpedestrian flows; travel time impacts on workplace productivityand vehicle operating costs; and utility shutdowns.

Other economic benefits (positive): Including (in some locationssuch as Gungahlin, Dickson and Civic) increase in passingtrade, especially for businesses at pedestrian crossing points;trade increases for businesses close to construction sites andsignificant growth in demand for construction-relatedbusinesses.

Impacts on community values (positive): Significant benefits expected in relation toamenity, character and human health/well-being, enhanced regional access to publicspaces and community facilities, enhanced urban connectivity, and improvements tosocial sustainability and communities by linking communities across suburbs in theGungahlin to Civic corridor.

Regional planning and land use implications (mainly positive): Planning and land usechanges could occur to take advantage of predicted improvements in amenity and/oraccessibility, and/or changes to planning and land use controls where factors likeimproved access have the potential to create pressure for development. Pressure fordevelopment is likely to be focused around stops and interchanges, such asGungahlin and Dickson, linking to the existing master plans for these areas.

Other economic benefits (positive): Including (in some locations) improved customeraccess and enhanced passing trade; stimulation and support of capacity and floorspace density increases and activities close to the Project; increases in commercialrents (benefits for property owners); and benefits for business viability.

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC xxxiii



Property andland useimpacts

(Chapter 17)

Amenity-related impacts (negative): Amenity-related impacts onadjacent land use would be largest in areas where residentialproperties or other sensitive land uses are either located directlyadjacent to the Project construction sites or whereresidential/sensitive receivers have an unscreened view of theconstruction areas. The amenity impacts would result from:

noise from construction works

dust generated by construction works

traffic disruption associated with construction traffic andpotential temporary road closures

visual impacts associated with construction activities.

Permanent impacts on land use and property (negative): Permanent loss of someopen space land uses (e.g. for substations), however this would be minimal.Some permanent impacts on private properties, in particular as Yowani Country Clubwhich would require Lease Land Boundary realignment.

Revitalisation of the public domain and creation of open space (positive):Opportunities to revitalise and improve the existing public domain in areas such asGungahlin town centre, Dickson and Civic.

Amenity impacts to adjoining land uses (negative): The operation of the Project wouldresult in some adverse amenity impacts for some adjoining land uses due to noisefrom LRVs and stop operations.

xxxiv 2207526A-ENV-RPT-007 RevC | Parsons Brinckerhoff


The following environmental issues were also considered during the preparation of the EIS, but were notconsidered to present key environmental issues associated with the Project:

biodiversity (Chapter 5)

air quality and greenhouse gases (Chapter 11)

water and hydrology (Chapter 12)

contamination and soils (Chapter 13)

utilities and services (Chapter 15)

waste, energy and resources (Chapter 16)

climate change (Chapter 18)

hazard and risk (Chapter 19)

bushfire (Chapter 20).

How would the impacts be managed?

A large suite of management and mitigation measures are proposed to be implemented to reduce thepotential adverse impacts of the Project (refer Chapter 22 this EIS). These measures would be incorporatedinto the final construction environmental management plan (and other management documents as outlinedin section 22.3 of this EIS).

Provided the measures and commitments specified in the EIS are applied and effectively implementedduring the design, construction and operational phases, the identified environmental impacts are consideredto be acceptable and manageable.

capital metro light rail stage 1 — gungahlin to civic · 1.1 purpose of this document 1 1.2...

Documents