Skip to main content
Back to Main Project

SSI Modifications

Determination

Modification 1 Wicks Road Construction Support Site

North Sydney

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. Prepare Mod Report
  2. Exhibition
  3. Collate Submissions
  4. Response to Submissions
  5. Assessment
  6. Recommendation
  7. Determination

A construction support site about six kilometres from the approved construction boundary. The site would be used as a materials storage and stockpiling location, a car parking area for construction personnel, and a precast concrete facility.

Attachments & Resources

Modification Application (8)

Response to Submissions (2)

Agency Advice (3)

Determination (3)

Consolidated Approval (1)

Submissions

Filters
Showing 1 - 7 of 7 submissions
Beatrice Elizabeth Riley
Comment
KILLARA , New South Wales
Message
Subject: WARRINGAH FREEWAY UPGRADE - WICKS ROAD SUPPORT SITE FEEDBACK
Date:202201122

Dear Sir/Madam,

I attended one of the Community Consultation Sessions at North Ryde School of Arts in September and also the Online Forum in November and whilst some questions raised were addressed, I still have grave concerns about development of part of the Porters Creek area as a temporary construction site related to the Warringah Freeway Upgrade. Its impact on the environment and residents especially those across the Lane Cove Valley in Albert Drive Killara and other streets directly facing the site such as Bradfield Road West Lindfield have not been sufficiently considered.

The proposal appears to be a significant extension of the present footprint and intensity of activity to that currently conducted at the site. The proposal would therefore likely have a consequential and likely additional negative impact on the local community including local businesses and residents that border the Lane Cove Valley, the local bushland and park users. Given this change, the proposal would likely increase risks or present new hazards and thus, possibly introduce new or increased potential harm to the community and environment.

In the following points I outline my concerns relating to certain areas of risk that need to be addressed:
• Traffic: I note the report states that there will be little additional traffic on local roads, but we would imagine there would be significant additional traffic on the arterial roads from the works site to this facility, additional congestion in and around turning lanes from the main arterial roads toward the proposed facility as well as additional traffic along Wicks Road. This is potentially disruptive to the road users including local community and businesses. There are no mitigation measures stated to address this heightened risk.
• Noise: I have significant concern over the likely noise levels during normal operations, particularly in relation to any plant movements and concrete crushing activities. Noise travels through the valley and the echo of current spoil movement and truck movement operations are clearly heard from the streets which adjoin the Lane Cove Valley. The increase of this activity will likely affect the amenity of local residents to the valley and may impact park users and the environment. The 24/7 nature and over such an extended period of time (5 years) of operations would add further noise impacts. Whilst it is noted that mitigations will include limiting the noisiest activities to daytime construction hours and the building of a container noise wall, it is not believed that this will be sufficient to address the increased noise pollution. The extent of the container wall is insufficient to cover and protect facing residents. Further, given the topography of the site and compared to the residential areas across the valley, the height of the wall would be too low resulting in considerable noise escape and therefore impact residents. Noise reflection and deflection would not be managed with just containers and additional containment and noise mitigation measures should be implemented. The proposed mitigation would unlikely be effective. This impact is absolutely unacceptable and a major concern.
• Lights: 24/7 lighting to manage operations at the site will undoubtedly impact local residents and the increased light pollution will impact the environment. There appears to be no mitigations listed to manage this potential risk. Directing the lights downward as indicated in the Consultation Session is unlikely to sufficiently reduce the light problem.
• Dust: Dust is a significant concern to local residents. Dust generated from this and nearby sites has been visible to park users in the past. The mitigations do not appear to fully address the risk of dust from stockpiled materials, crushing and screening activities. This is unacceptable.
• Water quality contamination from spills/ runoff / stockpiled materials: Does the facility have adequate measures including physical bunding, run-off controls and spill response to mitigate any risks of spills and contaminated run-off (including sediment laden materials) from storage and processing operations including plant and equipment as well as car parking facilities? Given this proposal will see and extension and change in the land use it is important this risk is addressed. The absence of this being identified as a risk and no listing of any mitigation measures is unacceptable.
• Visual: It is unclear what the height of the facilities will be or if they will be visible from vantage points around the valley. Further detail needs to be provided on this to determine if it will have an adverse impact on the local community and park users.
• Discovered contaminated materials: Can the team assure the local community that there will be no risk of contaminated or suspected contaminated materials including asbestos containing material being transported to site? What is the protocol to ensure no contaminated waste is transported to the facility? Is there a protocol proposed that ensures the protection and safeguarding of public health?
• Duration: 5 years is a significant period for this activity, with its potential cumulative negative impacts on the local community and environment to endure. It could impact house prices, long term enjoyment of the park, the environment and general amenity of the neighbouring residential areas and potentially impact the mental health of local residents. This is not acceptable.
• Time: 24/7 activities are unacceptable. Whilst it is noted that high noise generating activities will be restricted to standard construction hours, noise pollution is a considerable concern to residents and would adversely impact on the local environmental and general amenity of the local area. The adjacent Lane Cove Park is an oasis in the city. It is a small but important remnant of bushland connected to a larger wildlife and flora preservation corridor, a vital area of biodiversity and holds significant indigenous and non-indigenous cultural heritage. Impacts on it must be avoided at all costs - ongoing and accumulated impacts chip away at its integrity. It must be protected for future generations. The impacts of this operation for such a long duration including moderate noise generating activities, light pollution and dust impacts are not acceptable on an ongoing basis.
Comment on the consultation process
In addition to the areas of risk and concern outlined above I feel I must indicate that the consultation process and dissemination of information has been less than satisfactory
Consultation with the communities most likely to be affected by the proposed development at Wicks Road has been less than ideal with many residents not being aware of the proposed development. Numerous residents have indicated that it was not until the 416 Group (a residents’ action group) undertook a letter box drop in the West Killara -West Lindfield area that they knew about the development. One almost feels that this poor communication has been a deliberate ploy by the NSW Transport and the Construction Company involved in the Warringah Freeway Upgrade to minimise dissemination to the residents to be most affected.
• Use of North Shore Times I understand that notifications of the proposed Wicks Road development, were placed in the North Shore Times, however, residents in the Albert Drive area and nearby streets have not had delivery of this paper for some years. Surely the Community Liaison Officer should have ascertained that the paper would have been distributed to the areas most likely to be impacted by the Wicks Road development.
• The Community Consultation at the North Ryde School of Arts was at times that meant basically only retired or non- working residents could attend. Notification arrived in letter boxes in Albert Drive Killara only the day before the sessions were to be held. Further, very few residents in the street actually received the brochures and as far as we can discover no-one in Bradfield, Edmund, Knox and lower Fiddens Wharf Roads received any fliers.
• Notification of the Online Forum only arrived in our letter box the morning of the Forum and registration closed at 12 noon! Anyone not able at home would have been too late to join. Small wonder there were less than 10 of us!
• We were informed at the online forum (November) that 2500 residents were informed of the proposed development at Wicks Road, however Community Liaison Representative did not specify their location of the letter box drops. Kuring-Gai Council were not informed of the development despite the fact that residents across the Lane Cove Valley in that council area were potentially more likely to be affected by the development than residents on North Ryde.
The lack of timely consultation is disappointing and counterproductive. It makes for a less than positive attitude by residents towards the proposed construction and undermines confidence in government and business. This lack of credibility is not a satisfactory situation for all parties involved. Some further communication is needed.
Given the sensitivities of the local environment and potential impact to local residents and park visitors, it is strongly preferred that this project not locate its activities at this site and find an alternative location. If the proposed development at Porters Creek proceeds, can we be assured the issues raised above are adequately addressed?

Thank you for taking the time to read my submission outlining my concerns about using part of the Porters Creek area as a temporary construction site related to the Warringah Freeway Upgrade.

Yours Sincerely,
Elizabeth Riley
Steven Riley
Object
KILLARA , New South Wales
Message
Two suggestions:

1. Use of containment shed, which would greatly reduce noise, light pollution, sediment and pollution runoff. Since the site is likely to be used in the future for similar activities, why not do the necessary infrastructure work, as was found to be necessary for the nearby waste station.
2. Monitoring risks is not best practice. You should have a detailed plan in place to address problems (consequences of risks) before they occur. e.g. Noise pollution at night keeping children awake - its too late to do anything about it when a child has been kept awake all night by the noise. Best practice is to address possible problems before they arise and to have action plans in place should a risk be realised, to enable immediate action to address the consequences of the risk being realised.
Name Withheld
Object
KILLARA , New South Wales
Message
“Western Harbour Tunnel and Warringah Freeway Upgrade Wicks Road Construction Support Site - Modification Report” dated 21/10/2022

Significant noise

The report states that, in regard to Wicks Road Site

heavy 30 ton truck movements will be permitted on this site every 7 minutes between 8pm and 7am, every single night for 5 years (in addition to daytime trucks)

the operation of the 50,000 ton spoil storage site site will require materials storage and stockpiling for spoil from each truck, 24 hours per day, with an expected noise level of 111 dBA

in addition, concrete crushing during the day until 8pm has an additional noise level of 118 dBA

and Precast of concrete barriers a further additional noise level of 113 dBA

————————————————————————————
Minimal noise mitigation proposed

The report states that

proposed noise mitigation is a part circle of shipping containers, two high, around approximately 30% of the site- some containers over 80 metres from the noise generation area.
————————————————————————————
I object to the purported truth of the statement in the report:

“What are the main adverse outcome?

…Minor noise impacts from out-of-hours works associated with operation of the site”

————————————————————————————

Significant change of use


The report states clearly that the area is currently used as a ‘construction waste management facility’, so use would not result in a substantial change in land use, thereby minimising impacts to nearby receivers during operation of the site. However current operation of the site is 8am to 5pm, weekdays, and no operation at night, and currently by one piece of plant equipment. Concrete crushing is currently performed twice a year during the day. Information from current site operator.

The proposed operation is therefore greatly different from “existing use”, and requires more than “minimal site establishment’”. The report's conclusion “would not result in a substantial change in land use” and “thereby minimising impacts to nearby receivers during operation of the site” is therefore grossly misleading.

————————————————————————————
Not acceptable elsewhere

The report also states that selection of this site would be critical because these “outside approved construction hours operations” are not available or permitted in other areas of Sydney.
————————————————————————————
My proposal:

There should be no night operations at the Wicks Road site. I object to night operations on the grounds of noise.

More extensive noise mitigation structures should be constructed and then evaluated for effectiveness after construction. The current report proposes a mockery of noise mitigation.

Independent monitoring of noise levels should be a fundamental part of regulatory approval.


References:
References to Report statements and quotations used in this letter are available on request. Some bold type emphasis is added by me.
Robert McLoughlin
Object
KILLARA , New South Wales
Message
Please see attachment
Attachments
416 Group
Object
KILLARA , New South Wales
Message
See attached submission
Attachments
Ian Stuart
Object
LINDFIELD , New South Wales
Message
Apart from the likelihood of increased noise and its adverse impact on nearby residences I'd urge you to consider the impact the site will have on the wildlife in Lane Cove National Park. The Powerful Owl nests near the riverside drive bridge over Porters Creek. Inappropriate activity should not be located close to this important fauna site. Our national parks form the cornerstone of biodiversity conservation in Australia, containing vital habitat that provides safe havens in which animals and plants can survive and thrive. Together with other protected areas, they provide a ‘backbone’ of core conservation areas that can be linked by conservation efforts across different tenures, supporting a diverse, healthy and resilient environment. A well-connected landscape is essential for saving NSW’s 1,000 threatened species, 70% of which occur in our national parks. In addition our protected areas provide life-sustaining services vital for the wellbeing of our environment and society, such as protection of urban water catchments and climate amelioration. The proximity of the Wicks Road Construction Support Site potentially damages these natural values.

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSI-8863-Mod-1
Main Project
SSI-8863
Assessment Type
SSI Modifications
Development Type
Road transport facilities
Local Government Areas
North Sydney
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Director

Contact Planner

Name
Jonathan Blackmore