visual impact assessment - strathfield council · located and an assessment of the potential visual...

Visual Impact Assessment

Proposed Materials Recycling Facility

14-82 Madeline Street

South Strathfield

Report Number 610.14992 - R3

9 November 2015

MRA Consulting Group

Suite 413 Henry Lawson Building

19 Roseby Street

DRUMMOYNE, NSW 20147

Version: Final

MRA Consulting Group Visual Impact Assessment Proposed Materials Recycling Facility Street South

Report Number 610.14992 - R3 8 September 2015

Final

Visual Impact Assessment

Proposed Materials Recycling Facility

14-82 Madeline Street

South Strathfield

PREPARED BY:

SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd ABN 29 001 584 612 2 Lincoln Street Lane Cove NSW 2066 Australia (PO Box 176 Lane Cove NSW 1595 Australia) T: +61 2 9427 8100 F: +61 2 9427 8200 [email protected] www.slrconsulting.com

This report has been prepared by SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the timescale and resources allocated to it by agreement with the Client.

Information reported herein is based on the interpretation of data collected, which has been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.

This report is for the exclusive use of MRA Consulting Group. No warranties or guarantees are expressed or should be inferred by any third parties. This report may not be relied upon by other parties without written consent from SLR.

SLR disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the work.

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Reference Status Date Prepared Checked Authorised 610.14992 – R3 Final 9 November 2015 Nathan

Thompson LF NT

610.14992 - R3 Final Draft 9 September 2015 Nathan Thompson

NT

610.14992 - R3 Draft 1 25 August 2015 Nathan Thompson

LF NT

SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd



Final

Executive Summary

SLR Consulting (Australia) Pty Ltd (SLR) has been commissioned by MRA Consulting Group (MRA) on behalf of Recyclecare Services Pty Ltd (Recyclecare) to conduct a Visual Impact Assessment for inclusion in the submission of an Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Waste Recycling Facility at 14-82 Madeline Street South Strathfield (Project Site).

The Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) addresses the “visual” element of Department of Planning and Infrastructure Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEAR) 915.

Recyclecare proposes to construct a new Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) in order to process dry, recyclable Commercial & Industrial (C&I) waste and source-separated municipal solid waste (MSW). In addition, existing Paper and cardboard operations will be relocated (within the existing operational site).

This VIA involved an evaluation of the visual character of the landscape in which the MRF will be located and an assessment of the potential visual impact that could result from the proposal.

This Visual Impact Assessment has determined that the proposed Materials Recovery Facility will have an overall negligible visual significance on the surrounding landscape including residential dwellings, public open spaces and transport routes.

This overall negligible visual impact can be attributed to the following:

• The appropriate location of the project site within an existing established General Industrial Area,

• Negligible changes the current operational site’s configuration (including lighting),

• Majority of activities are to be conducted inside existing buildings,

• Existing screening provided by neighbouring industrial facilities and premises,

• Existing established street trees and vegetated corridors along the Cooks River and Cox’s Creek.

• The recommended general, lighting and litter mitigation measures will assist in ensuring that visual impact remains negligible.




Final

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION 6

2 OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY 6

3 PROJECT LOCATION 7

4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 13 4.1 Equipment List 16

4.2 Hours of Operation 17

5 LANDSCAPE EFFECTS 17

5.1 Visual Landscape 17

6 LIGHTING EFFECTS 34

6.1 Lighting design 34 6.2 Lighting Criteria 34

6.2.1 Lighting terminology 34 6.2.2 Light Spill Criteria 34

6.3 Light spill analysis 36 6.3.1 Residential properties to the north 36 6.3.2 Residential properties to the southeast 36 6.3.3 Surrounding commercial properties 37

7 VISUAL SIGNIFICANCE 37

7.1 Visual Significance Assessment 37

7.2 Summary of Visual Significance 42

8 MITIGATION MEASURES 42 8.1 General Mitigation 42

8.2 Lighting Mitigation 42

8.3 Litter Mitigation 43

9 CONCLUSION 43

TABLES Table 1 SEAR’s 6 Table 2 Equipment required for the Project Site – MRF and PCR 16 Table 3 Proposed Hours of Operation for the MRF and PCR 17 Table 4 Lighting Terminology (Consistent with AS4282) 34 Table 5 Typical Illuminance Levels for Various Scenarios 35 Table 6 Recommended Maximum Values of Light Technical Parameters (AS4282) 36 Table 7 Matrix Assessment Criteria 37 Table 8 Visual Significance Matrix 40




Final

Table of Contents

FIGURES Figure 1 Project Location 9 Figure 2 Project Locality 10 Figure 3 LEP Zoning 11 Figure 4 Project Site 12 Figure 5 Proposed Development 14 Figure 6 Indicative Site Layout (Source: MRA 2015) 15 Figure 7 Photograph Locations 18 Figure 8 Visual Significance Receivers 39 Figure 9 Minimise Light Spill 42 Figure 10 Minimise Glare 43

PHOTOS Photo 1 Recyclecare 14-82 Madeline Street South Strathfield 17 Photo 2 Site Offices 19 Photo 3 Panoramic View from Northern Boundary of Project Site toward MRF Building 1,

Entrance and Offices 20 Photo 4 Panoramic View from North Eastern Boundary of Project Site toward MRF Receival

Area 21 Photo 5 Panoramic View Northeast from Project Site toward Cooks River 22 Photo 6 Panoramic View Northeast towards Project Site from opposite side of Madeline

Street 23 Photo 7 Panoramic View West away from Project Site toward Container Facility on opposite

side of Madeline Street 24 Photo 8 Panoramic View North towards Project Site from Cooke Park 25 Photo 9 Panoramic View North towards Project Site from Reserve / Easement at end of

Chisolm Street 26 Photo 10 Panoramic View South towards Project Site from opposite side of Cooks River 27 Photo 11 Panoramic View South towards Project Site and 2 Madeline Street Development

from opposite side of Cooks River 28 Photo 12 Panoramic View South towards Project Site from Dean Reserve on opposite side

of Cooks River 29 Photo 13 Panoramic View South towards Project Site from Dean Reserve on opposite side

of Cooks River 30 Photo 14 View South East towards Project Site from Corner Madeline Street and Cleveland

Street 31 Photo 15 Residential Townhouses Adjacent to Dean Reserve 32 Photo 16 Typical Residential Street 1 (source Google Earth) 32 Photo 17 Typical Residential Street 1 (source Google Earth) 33 Photo 18 Established Native and Introduced Vegetation surrounding Cox’s Creek and Cooks

River 33


MRA Consulting Group Visual Impact Assessment Proposed Materials Recycling Facility 14-82 Madeline Street South Strathfield


Final

1 INTRODUCTION

SLR Consulting (Australia) Pty Ltd (SLR) has been commissioned by MRA Consulting Group (MRA) on behalf of Recyclecare Services Pty Ltd (Recyclecare) to conduct a Visual Impact Assessment for inclusion in the submission of an Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Waste Recycling Facility at 14-82 Madeline Street South Strathfield (Project Site).

The Visual Impact Assessment addresses the “visual” element of Department of Planning and Infrastructure Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEAR) 915.

Recyclecare proposes to construct a new Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) in order to process dry, recyclable Commercial & Industrial (C&I) waste and source-separated municipal solid waste (MSW). In addition, existing Paper and cardboard operations will be relocated (within the existing operational site).

The following waste streams are proposed to be recovered:

• Paper and cardboard;

• Mixed metals (steel/tin/aluminium);

• Glass; and

• Mixed plastics.

2 OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

The objective of this VIA is to determine likely visual significance of the proposed MRF on people living, working or travelling through the landscape surrounding the Project Site. Specifically this document addresses the Key Issues as detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 SEAR’s

The EIS must include an assessment of all potential impacts of the proposed development on the existing environment (including cumulative impacts if necessary) and develop appropriate measures to avoid, minimise, mitigate and/or manage these potential impacts. As part of the EIS assessment the following matters must also be addressed. Visual – including an impact assessment at private receptors and public vantage points

This VIA addresses the above requirement through 3 key components:

• Description of Existing Landscape and Visual Values (see Section 5 LANDSCAPE EFFECTS).

• Lighting Impact Assessment (see Section 6 LIGHTING EFFECTS).

• Description of potential residual impacts and identifiable mitigation measures (see Section 7 VISUAL SIGNIFICANCE).

The methodology used in this assessment included:

1. Review of literature and documentation relevant to the project.

2. Desktop analysis of localized and regional visual character.

3. Site Visit and collection of photographic evidence

4. Description of existing visual character




Final

5. Assessment of the proposal with regard to impact on existing landscape and visual character.

3 PROJECT LOCATION

The proposed project is located at 14-82 Madeline Street South Strathfield NSW. Figures 1 – 4 provide a visual context to the spatial location of the proposed project.

The proposed project site occurs within the Strathfield Local Government Area. Strathfield LGA is bordered by Auburn Council, the City of Canada Bay Council, Burwood Council, Canterbury City Council, and Bankstown City Council in Sydney’s inner/central west (Figure 1). South Strathfield is a large suburb adjacent to Strathfield in the north, Belfield in the South East and Greenacre to the west (Figure 2).

The site is located in an area predominantly defined by industrial development, large scale buildings and major rail and road transport infrastructure.

The site and its immediate surrounds are zoned INI – General Industrial in the Strathfield LEP 2012 (Figure 3). The surrounding industrial area is populated with a variety of industrial and commercial facilities including:

• Transport & logistics (container) firms,

• Panel Beaters / Car Repair Workshops,

• Cleaning Chemical production facilities,

• Engineering and fabrication businesses,

• Furniture and Woodworking Workshops, and

• Sydney Meat Market.

The proposed project site is currently operating as a paper and cardboard recycling facility.

The site is adjacent to a major electricity transmission corridor featuring overhead high voltage transmission towers and lines. These transmission towers largely follow the Cooks River and the network of public recreation and open spaces that feature along the watercourse.

Existing roads service the industrial estate and connect via major arterials to the M4 (Western Motorway) as well as the Hume Highway / Liverpool Rd in the north, and the M5 (South Western Motorway) in the South. Due to the industrial nature of the area, and its standing as a major employment area, on-street parking of passenger and commercial vehicles is prevalent.

The industrial estate is well established and consistent with the surrounding suburbs, with many of the contained buildings estimated to be more than 50 years old. The industrial area makes up part of the approximately 9% (1.25km2) Industrial Zoned land that occurs within the Strathfield LGA. The existence of mature street trees, as well as the sites’ proximity to open space and vegetated areas close to the Cooks River and Cox’s Creek give the area the impression of being a long established operational industrial area.

The nearest residential areas are again long standing mostly post WWII housing stock. The majority of the residences located nearby are visually shielded from the site by well-established tree stands of mixed native and introduced species.




Final

Beyond the immediate surrounds of the industrial zoning, the landscape can be broadly defined as being long established urban residential suburbia.

The MRF proposal is to occur on the southern part of Lot 2 DP556743, which is known as Proposed Lot 23A (Figure 2).

On the north-eastern boundary of the project site, on the adjoining Lots 5 DP243043, Lot 34 DP243042 and Lot 100 DP1058394 between the project site and the Cooks River, at 2 Madeline Street a new industrial warehouse development including ancillary offices, café, hardstand, car parking areas and landscaping has been approved and is currently under construction.

Of note surrounding the project site, but not specifically attributable to the existing Paper and Cardboard recycling facility is the presence of a small amount of general litter. This appears to be a common occurrence in industrial parks/ estates/ areas generally.




Final

Figure 1 Project Location




Final

Figure 2 Project Locality




Final

Figure 3 LEP Zoning




Final

Figure 4 Project Site




Final

4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed MRF and PCR facilities will be fully contained within existing buildings (Building 1 and Building 2, respectively on site) Figure 5. It has been proposed that the facility’s time of use will be increased to 24 hours per day and therefore the lighting on the site will need to be assessed during the additional hours.

The new MRF facility would process dry, recyclable C&I waste and source-separated MSW (yellow-topped bins), recovering the following waste streams:

• Paper and cardboard;

• Mixed metals (steel/tin/aluminium);

• Glass; and

• Mixed plastics.

A glass cleaning system would be incorporated as part of the MRF, resulting in the production of clean glass fines that would be suitable for input into a glass recycling process. The new PCR facility would receive and bale source-separated high-quality paper and cardboard from the C&I sector, with minimal sorting required. Once operational, the entire facility would be capable of processing up to a total of 99,900 tonnes of recyclable waste per annum (tpa). Of this:

• 69,900 tpa would be processed by the new MRF; and

• 30,000 tpa processed by the new PCR facility.

The target waste recovery rate is 94% (MRF) and >99% (PCR) when the facility is fully operational.

The approximate total recyclable product break-up of the MRF would be:

• 54% Paper and Cardboard;

• 30% Glass;

• 6% Plastics;

• 3% Steel;

• 1% Aluminium; and

• 6 % Residual Waste (to landfill).

The layout of the site is shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6. There are currently three large industrial buildings on the Project Site.

• Building 1 is in the centre of the site and is approximately 139 m by 44 m and 11 m in height. It is constructed of brick and steel and would house the MRF equipment and be an operating MRF facility. Building 1 has seven roller doors;

• Building 2 is on the eastern corner of the site and is 80 m by 18 m and 11 m in height. It is constructed of sheet metal and would house the PCR machinery and be an operating PCR facility; and

• Building 3 on the southern corner of the site and is 49 m by 32 m and 11 m in height. It is constructed of metal sheeting and would be a storage facility.

Existing hard-standings, pavement and car parking will remain unchanged, however metal plate flooring will be installed within the existing buildings.

The exterior of the site buildings have a number of floodlights and security lights to light the site at night. It has been proposed that there will be no change to the amount of lighting under the proposed operating times.




Final

Figure 5 Proposed Development




Final

Figure 6 Indicative Site Layout (Source: MRA 2015)




Final

4.1 Equipment List

A summary of the mobile and stationary equipment to be used at the Project Site is shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Equipment required for the Project Site – MRF and PCR

Building Equipment

MRF (Building 1) 42 20MPM Lumberjack conveyor belts of varying lengths (between 3.5 and 21.5 metres) 1 30MPM Lumberjack conveyor belt 5.5 metres in length 4 40MPM Rough Top conveyor belts 7 metres in length 1 main screening trammel 1 fine glass screening trommel 1 paper cleaning trommel 1 plastic cleaning trommel 1 main glass disc screen 1 overhead magnetic conveyor 1 eddy current 1 RTT 2m wide optic sorter with conveyor 1 air compressor/dryer/air tank Primary sort platform MP sort platform Plastic sort platform Conveyor/equipment support structures Conveyor chutes/hoppers/product transfers Bounce conveyor support structures Glass screen chutes Glass screen service platform Eddy current support structure Eddy current service access platform RTT optic support structure RTT service access platform 2 mag towers Main trommel support structure Glass trammel support structure Plastic trammel support structure Paper trammel support structure 16mm Steel Floor & Steel Box Wall 1 Cardboard and paper baler Twin ram plastic/alloy cans baler Steel can baler Waste baler

PCR (Building 2) 1 cardboard baler fitted with a 1.8m wide chain conveyor 1 Godswill baler, model GBF-1108F, fitted with 1.2m wide chain conveyor Forklifts: 1x Komatsu FG35AT17; 2x FH40; 1x Nissan PJ02A25U (with tyre attachment, only used occasionally Compact wheel loader: 1x Volvo L45F and 1x L2OB as a stand-by unit

Source: MRA 2015




Final

4.2 Hours of Operation The proposed hours of operation of the Project Site and shift patterns are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Proposed Hours of Operation for the MRF and PCR

Day Hours of Operation MRF Shifts PCR Shifts

Monday – Saturday 24 hours per day (MRF: 4am Monday – 4am Sunday) (PCR: 00.01am Monday – 7am Sunday)

Shift 1: 4am-4pm Shift 2: 4pm-4am

Shift 1: 7am-3pm Shift 2: 3pm-11pm Shift 3: 11pm-7am

Sunday No work during most hours (MRF: Closed 4am Sunday until 4am Monday) (PCR: Closed 7am Sunday until 11.59pm Sunday)

4am-4pm Plant maintenance and cleaning only

No shifts

5 LANDSCAPE EFFECTS

5.1 Visual Landscape

A series of individual and panoramic digital photographs were taken during the course of the fieldwork to illustrate the existing visual landscape in the vicinity of the project.

The panoramic photographs presented have been annotated to identify local features within and beyond the Project Site. The photograph locations are illustrated in Figure 7 and the photographs illustrated in Photos 1 to 17.

Photo 1 Recyclecare 14-82 Madeline Street South Strathfield




Final

Figure 7 Photograph Locations




Final

Photo 2 Site Offices




Final

Photo 3 Panoramic View from Northern Boundary of Project Site toward MRF Building 1, Entrance and Offices




Final

Photo 4 Panoramic View from North Eastern Boundary of Project Site toward MRF Receival Area




Final

Photo 5 Panoramic View Northeast from Project Site toward Cooks River




Final

Photo 6 Panoramic View Northeast towards Project Site from opposite side of Madeline Street




Final

Photo 7 Panoramic View West away from Project Site toward Container Facility on opposite side of Madeline Street




Final

Photo 8 Panoramic View North towards Project Site from Cooke Park




Final

Photo 9 Panoramic View North towards Project Site from Reserve / Easement at end of Chisolm Street




Final

Photo 10 Panoramic View South towards Project Site from opposite side of Cooks River




Final

Photo 11 Panoramic View South towards Project Site and 2 Madeline Street Development from opposite side of Cooks River




Final

Photo 12 Panoramic View South towards Project Site from Dean Reserve on opposite side of Cooks River




Final

Photo 13 Panoramic View South towards Project Site from Dean Reserve on opposite side of Cooks River




Final

Photo 14 View South East towards Project Site from Corner Madeline Street and Cleveland Street




Final

Photo 15 Residential Townhouses Adjacent to Dean Reserve

Photo 16 Typical Residential Street 1 (source Google Earth)




Final

Photo 17 Typical Residential Street 1 (source Google Earth)

Photo 18 Established Native and Introduced Vegetation surrounding Cox’s Creek and Cooks River




Final

6 LIGHTING EFFECTS

6.1 Lighting design

SLR conducted a lighting survey at the site on the 15 July 2015. The exterior of the site buildings have a number of floodlights and security lights to light the site at night. It has been proposed that there will be no change to the amount of lighting under the proposed operating times.

6.2 Lighting Criteria

6.2.1 Lighting terminology

A description of the common terminology used for the lighting study, taken from AS 4282: Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting, is shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Lighting Terminology (Consistent with AS4282)

Obtrusive light Spill light which, because of quantitative, directional or spectral attributes in a given context, gives rise to annoyance, discomfort, distraction or a reduction in the ability to see essential information, e.g.: traffic lights.

Spill light Light emitted by a lighting installation which falls outside the boundaries of the property on which the installation is sited.

Residential property Land upon which a dwelling exists or may be developed, e.g.: land zoned for residential development.

Dwelling A building in which people normally reside, especially during the hours of darkness, e.g. house, hotel, motel, hospital.

Illuminance The luminous flux arriving at a surface divided by the area of the illuminated surface. Unit: lux(lx); 1 lx = 1 lm/m2

Luminous intensity The concentration of luminous flux emitted in a specific direction. Unit: candela (cd).

Luminous flux The measure of the quantity of light. For a lamp or luminaire it normally refers to the total light emitted irrespective of the directions in which it is distributed. Unit: lumen (lm).

Luminaire Apparatus which distributes, filters or transforms the light transmitted from one or more lamps and which includes, except for the lamps themselves, all the parts necessary for fixing and protecting the lamps and, where necessary circuit auxiliaries together with the means for connecting them to the electrical supply.

Glare Condition of vision in which there is a discomfort or a reduction in the ability to see, or both, caused by an unsuitable distribution or range of luminance, or to extreme contrast in the field of vision

(a) Disability Glare – Glare that impairs the visibility of objects without necessarily causing discomfort.

(b) Discomfort Glare – Glare that causes discomfort without necessarily impairing the visibility of objects.

6.2.2 Light Spill Criteria

The effect of light spill from outdoor lighting impacting on residents, transport users, transport signalling systems and astronomical observations is governed by the Australian Standard: AS 4282-1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effect of Outdoor Lighting.

The adverse effects of light spill are due both to an increase in general illuminance that can lead to sleep deprivation, and from the direct view of the light source that can cause glare issues.

The adverse effects of light spill from outdoor lighting are influenced by a number of factors:




Final

• The topology of the area. Light spill is more likely to be perceived as obtrusive if the lighting installation is located higher up than the observer. Lighting installations are usually directed towards the ground and an observer could hence have a direct view of the luminaire.

• The surrounding area. Hills, trees, buildings, fences and general vegetation have a positive effect by shielding the observer from the light installation.

• Pre-existing lighting in the area. Light from a particular light source is seen as less obtrusive if it is located in an area where the lighting levels are already high, e.g. in cities. The same lighting installation would be seen as far more bothersome in a dark residential area.

• The zoning of the area. A residential area is seen as more sensitive compared to commercial areas where high lighting levels are seen as more acceptable.

Typical illuminance levels for a variety of circumstances are given in Table 5 for comparison.

Table 5 Typical Illuminance Levels for Various Scenarios

Lighting Scenario Horizontal Illuminance (lux)

Moonless overcast night 0.0001

Quarter Moon 0.01

Full Moon 0.1

Twilight 10

Indoor office 300

Overcast day 1,000 Indirect sunlight clear day 10,000-20,000

Direct sunlight 100,000-130,000

6.2.2.1 Time of operation

The applicable limits for adverse spill light depend on the time of operation for the lighting installation. Operation taking place during pre-curfew hours, between 6am and 11pm, is less likely to give cause to complaints from adjacent residential properties, while a more restrictive limit is applicable to curfew hours.

As it has been proposed that the facility will operate 24 hours a day the lighting will be on during the night. Therefore the limits for curfew hours will apply to the site between the hours of 11pm and 6am.

6.2.2.2 Requirements

The maximum recommended values of light technical parameters for the control of obtrusive lights are given in Table 6.

The vertical illuminance limits for curfew hours apply in the plane of the windows of habitable rooms or dwellings on nearby residential properties. The vertical illuminance criteria for pre-curfew hours apply at the boundary of nearby residential properties in a vertical plane parallel to the boundary. Values given are for the direct component of illuminance, i.e. no reflected light is taken into account.

Limits for luminous intensity for curfew hours apply in directions where views of bright surfaces of luminaires are likely to be troublesome to residents, from positions where such views are likely to be maintained.




Final

Limits for luminous intensity for pre-curfew hours apply to each luminaire in the principal plane, for all angles at and above the control direction.

Table 6 Recommended Maximum Values of Light Technical Parameters (AS4282)

Light Technical Parameter

Time of Operation

Commercial Areas

Residential Areas Light Surrounds

Dark Surrounds

Illuminance in vertical plane (Ev)

Pre-curfew hours 25 lx 10 lx 10 lx

Curfew hours 4 lx 2 lx 1 lx

Luminous Intensity emitted by luminaires (I)

Pre-curfew hours 7,500 cd (for a medium to large area with Level 1 control)

100,000 cd (for a large area with Level 1 control)

100,000 cd (for a large area with Level 1 control)

Curfew hours 2,500 cd 1,000 cd 500 cd Threshold Increment (TI)

Limits apply at all times where users of transport systems are subjected to a reduction in the ability to see essential information

20% based on adaption luminance (L) of 10 cd/m2

20% based on adaption luminance (L) of 1 cd/m2

20% based on adaption luminance (L) of 0.1 cd/m2

Due to its location it is reasonable to assume that the area immediately around the site can be classed as being in a commercial area therefore light spill from the site on the facades of the surrounding buildings should be kept below 4 lux during the curfew hours of 11pm till 6am.

It is reasonable to assume that the nearest residential properties can be classed as being in a residential area with light surrounds therefore light spill from the site on the facades of the surrounding residential dwellings should be kept below 2 lux during the curfew hours of 11pm till 6am.

6.3 Light spill analysis

As there is no detailed information on the specifications of the lighting equipment used on the site SLR has conducted a qualitative study of the possible light spill impacts on nearby sensitive receivers. The main factors used in determining the impact are

• Amount of site lighting.

• Distance between the site and the receiver.

• Presence of any shielding elements.

6.3.1 Residential properties to the north

There is significant shielding from vegetation in this direction. The distance from the site to these properties is approximately 250 metres. Based on our engineering judgement and past experience it is unlikely that there will be any light spill onto these properties above the limiting requirements.

6.3.2 Residential properties to the southeast

Again based on our engineering judgement and past experience significant vegetation and distance make it unlikely that there will be any light spill onto these properties above the limiting requirements.




Final

6.3.3 Surrounding commercial properties

Properties to the north of the Cooks River Cycleway have shielding from vegetation and are approximately 150 metres from the site. The limiting requirement is also higher in these areas when compared to residential areas. Based on our engineering judgement and past experience it is unlikely that there will be any light spill onto these properties above the limiting requirements.

Properties on the other side of Madeline Street have some shielding from vegetation and there are few lights directed toward the street. Based on our engineering judgement and past experience it is unlikely that there will be any light spill onto these properties above the limiting requirements.

7 VISUAL SIGNIFICANCE

7.1 Visual Significance Assessment

Due to the fact that:

a. The project is to be contained entirely within an existing industrial site that is already operating as a Cardboard and Paper recycling facility, and

b. That the proposed MRF will be housed within existing buildings, and

c. That the site location is within a zoned Industrial Area, and

d. That underlying topography, vegetation and surrounding built environment precludes the Project site from being visible from many locations further than 500 metres away

six representative receiver locations have been chosen based on the desktop study and field investigation to be representative receivers for the assessment of visual effects of the project.

The visual significance receiver locations are shown on Figure 8.

Visual significance criteria are outlined in Table 7 and are used as a guide to determine significance of visual impact. The significance of visual impact for each view location is also considered against other factors, which include the overall visibility of the Project from surrounding view locations and other elements noted during the desktop investigation, field study and project location description.

The Visual Significance Matrix displayed as Table 8 presents the assessment and determination of visual impact significance for the selected receivers.

Table 7 Matrix Assessment Criteria

Measure Definition of Measure Predicted Impact:

Adverse Predicted impact of the Project on existing view is likely to be negative.

Neutral Predicted impact of the Project on existing view is likely to be neutral.

Beneficial Predicted impact of the Project on existing view is likely to be positive.

Nature of Impact:

Temporary Visual impact will be temporary in nature.

Permanent Visual impact will be permanent in nature.

Reversible Visual impact will be considered reversible (for example constructed elements may be removed at the decommissioning and rehabilitation stage).

Irreversible Visual impact will be considered irreversible (for example proposed alteration to existing infrastructure associated with the Project will be both permanent and




Final

irreversible).

Magnitude of Impact:

High Total loss or major change to pre-development view or introduction of elements which are uncharacteristic to the existing landscape features.

Medium Partial loss or alteration to pre-development view or introduction of elements that may be prominent but not necessarily uncharacteristic with the existing landscape features.

Low Minor loss or alteration to pre-development view or introduction of elements that may not be necessarily uncharacteristic with the existing landscape features.

Negligible Very minor loss or alteration to pre-development view or introduction of elements which are not uncharacteristic with the existing landscape features (resulting in a no change situation).

Receiver Sensitivity:

High Residential locations.

Medium Public open space. Low Local access roads.

Visual Significance:

High The Project will be a significant and dominant feature within the surrounding landscape and at complete variance with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape. The Project will have the capacity to cause a significant deterioration in the existing view. The Project’s visual effects may not be minimised by mitigation measures and cumulative impacts may result in an increased level of impact.

Moderate The Project will be a recognisable feature, but not dominate views within the surrounding landscape. The Project will be out of scale and discordant with the landform, scale and pattern of the landscape and have the capacity to cause a noticeable deterioration in the existing view. The Project’s visual effects may be partially mitigated through appropriate measures.

Low The Project will form a visible element within the surrounding landscape but is unlikely to constitute a marked effect on existing views. The Project will complement the scale, landform and pattern of the surrounding landscape and will not create a noticeable deterioration in the existing view. The Project’s visual effects will be positively mitigated through appropriate measures.

Negligible The Project will result in no discernible deterioration in the existing view.




Final

Figure 8 Visual Significance Receivers




Final

Table 8 Visual Significance Matrix

Viewpoint Receiver

View Direction to Project Site

Distance to Project Site (m)

View Description Predicted Impact

Nature of Impact

Magnitude of Impact

Receiver Sensitivity

Overall Visual Significance of Project to Viewpoint Receiver

1 South 300 Incorporates a view from an elevated position at the top of Dean Reserve toward the Project Site. The outlook is reflective of that likely to be viewed by pedestrians, cyclists and other recreational observers using Dean Reserve open spaces. Available views toward the Project Site are largely interrupted by the vegetation along the Cooks River Corridor as well as High Voltage Electricity Transmission Towers and lines. Views of the project site will be entirely limited from this location in the future by the Industrial Development currently under construction at 2 Madeline Street (Photo 13).

Neutral Reversible Negligible Medium Negligible

2 South East 350 Captures the first view of the Project Site when rounding the corner from Cleveland Street onto Madeline street. This view is most likely to be encountered by motorists driving through the industrial area for the purpose of visiting a commercial premise, or as through traffic. The direct view to the project site will be partially blocked upon completion of the development at 2 Madeline Street. The views will be interrupted by High Voltage Electricity Transmission Towers and lines to the southeast with a street scape and industrial units along Madeline Street to the South and west (Photo 14).

Neutral Reversible Negligible Low Negligible

3 East 150 This view is the nearest Viewpoint Receiver being close to the corner of Pilcher and Madeline street, almost directly opposite the

Neutral Reversible Negligible Low Negligible




Final

current entry driveway for the project site. This view is the most direct view of the site. The view from this location is entirely street-scape with industrial units surrounding in all directions. This view will remain entirely unchanged by the project (Photo 1).

4 North 250 This viewpoint location incorporates views from Madeline Street near the Cooke Park children’s playground and Strathfield South Skate park. The views also include open space in the form of sports fields and the tributary of Cox’s Creek and its surrounding vegetation. The project site is not immediately visible from these locations as a result of screening by watercourse vegetation corridors and other industrial units (Photo 8, Photo 18).


5 North West 200 This view captures the North Western view toward the Project Site from the nearest residential receivers (near the end of Chisolm Street). The view incorporates a watercourse easement adjacent to Cox’s Creek and the Cooks River. Also captured in the view are the vegetation corridors along these two watercourses as well as the High Voltage Electricity Transmission Towers and lines. The direct view of the South Eastern side of the Project Site will not be changed by the proposal. However, this view will be disrupted to the north by the Industrial Development currently under construction at 2 Madeline Street (Photo 9).

Neutral Reversible Negligible High Negligible

6 South 150 This view covers the Cooks River Cycle path and the nearest proximity of the project site to the Cooks River. Like viewpoint receiver 1, the view of the Project Site from this location will be significantly disturbed by the Industrial Development currently under construction at 2 Madeline Street. ( Photo 10, Photo 11).





Final

7.2 Summary of Visual Significance

The majority of receiver locations surrounding the Project Site, including private residential dwellings, road corridors and public spaces, have been determined to have an overall negligible significance with regard to the project. The negligible visual significance results from a combination of factors which include:

• Appropriate location of the project site within an existing established General Industrial Area,

• Negligible changes the current site configuration,

• Majority of activities to be conducted inside existing buildings,



8 MITIGATION MEASURES

8.1 General Mitigation

Whilst the overall visual significance of the project and the surrounding landscape has been shown to be negligible, mitigation measures should still be considered to minimise residual or cumulative impacts. The following general mitigation methods for minimising visual impacts include:

• Retaining existing mature screening trees (including street trees and incidental landscaping).

• Minimise visual contrast of any new, or newly employed project components thereby ensuring compliance with the existing theme (that of a long term existing operational site).

• Where necessary, employment of additional visual impedances such as shade cloth or other screen hoardings.

8.2 Lighting Mitigation

As noted in Section 6 LIGHTING EFFECTS it is unlikely that there will be any light spill onto nearby sensitive receivers. However if there is a need to further reduce light spill the general principles as laid out in AS4282-1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effect of Outdoor Lighting should be followed.

• Direct lights downward as much as possible.

• Use luminaires that are aimed to minimise light spill, e.g. full cut off luminaires where no light is emitted above the horizontal plane. Less spill light mean that more of the light output can be used to illuminate the area and a lower power output can be used. The energy consumption for the fitting can thus be reduced without decreasing the illuminance of the area. Refer Figure 9

Figure 9 Minimise Light Spill




Final

• Do not waste energy and increase light pollution by over-lighting.

• Keep glare to a minimum by keeping the main beam angle less than 70°. Refer Figure 10

.

Figure 10 Minimise Glare

• Use floodlights with asymmetric beam where possible.

• Direct the site lighting away from sensitive locations such as residential properties.

• Where possible position site lighting as far away from site boundaries as possible

To ensure there is no light spill above the limiting requirements falling on nearby sensitive receivers SLR could conduct the following checks during the detail design stage of the project:

• Conduct a night time survey to quantify the physical light levels at the site and at the sensitive receivers.

• Produce a light model using the lighting software AGi 32 to estimate the light levels in the vicinity of the site.

8.3 Litter Mitigation

As mentioned in Section 3 PROJECT LOCATION the surrounding landscape is affected by the presence of a small amount of litter.

As a mitigation measure Recyclecare should ensure that appropriate litter management strategies such as daily clean-up, litter patrols and litter boundary fencing be employed to minimise the site’s possible contribution to the broader litter situation within the industrial area.

9 CONCLUSION

Through the production of this VIA SLR concludes that overall the activities and operations associated with this project will have a negligible visual impact on people living in or travelling through the landscape surrounding the proposed Material Recovery Facility. Views toward the Project Site will remain unchanged.

The overall negligible visual impact will be due to the following factors:

• The appropriate location of the project site within an existing established General Industrial Area,

• Negligible changes to the current operational site’s configuration (including lighting),

• Majority of activities are to be conducted inside existing buildings,



• The recommended general, lighting and litter mitigation measures will assist in ensuring that visual impact remains negligible.




Final


visual impact assessment - strathfield council · located and an assessment of the potential visual...

Documents