Horsley Drive Business Park Stage 2 Building 1 State

Horsley Drive Business Park Stage 2 –

Building 1

State Significant Development

Application (SSD 10404)

Part of Western Sydney Parklands (Cnr.

Cowpasture Road and Trivet Street, Wetherill

Park (Lots 17-22 on DP 13961 & Lot 2 on DP

1212087))

Submitted to Department of Planning, Industry

and Environment

On behalf of Charter Hall

25 June 2020 | 2190880

CONTACT

Angus Halligan Associate Director [email protected] 0405 909 726

Reproduction of this document or any part thereof is not permitted without prior written permission of Ethos Urban Pty Ltd.

This document has been prepared by: This document has been reviewed by:

Roisin Cosgrave 25 June 2020 Angus Halligan 25 June 2020

Reproduction of this document or any part thereof is not permitted without written permission of Ethos Urban Pty Ltd. Ethos Urban operates under a Quality Management System. This

report has been prepared and reviewed in accordance with that system. If the report is not signed, it is a preliminary draft.

VERSION NO. DATE OF ISSUE REVISION BY APPROVED BY

V1 25 June 2020 Roisin Cosgrave Angus Halligan

Ethos Urban Pty Ltd

ABN 13 615 087 931.

www.ethosurban.com

173 Sussex Street, Sydney

NSW 2000 t 61 2 9956 6952

mailto:[email protected]

SSD 10404 Horsley Drive Business Park Stage 2 | Response to Submission | June 2020

Ethos Urban | 2190880 2

1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Overview of the Original Proposal 4 1.2 Amendments to the proposal 5 1.3 List of design changes 5

2.0 Overview of Submissions 7

3.0 Report Structure 7

4.0 Response to Submission 8 4.1 Department of Planning & Environment 8 4.2 Fairfield City Council (FCC) 17 4.3 Department of Transport for New South Wales

(TfNSW) 19 4.4 Heritage Council of NSW 19 4.5 WaterNSW 20 4.6 Environment, Energy and Science Group (EES) in

the Department of Planning, Industry and

Environment (DPIE) 20 4.7 Endeavour Energy 20

5.0 Proposed Amendments 21

6.0 Updated Mitigation Measures 22

7.0 Conclusion 27

Tables

Table 1: Surrounding Sensitive Receivers 11 Table 2: Process Description 14 Table 3: Stakeholder Consultation 17 Table 4: Mitigation Measures 22

Appendices

A Detailed Response to Submissions

Ethos Urban

B Amended Architectural Plans and List of Proposed Changes

Leffler Simes Architects

C Air Quality Addendum Statement

SLR

D Updated ESD Report

Northrop

E Updated Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment

SLR

F Revised Civil Assessment Report and Plans

Costin Roe

G Updated Transport Assessment Report

Ason Group

H Biodiversity Assessment Report Addendum Letter

Eco Logical

I Historical Heritage Advice

Biosis

J Amended Landscape Plan

Geoscapes Landscape Architects



K BCA Report

Blackett Maguire + Goldsmith



1.0 Introduction

An Environmental Impact Statement for a State Significant Development Application (SSD 10404) for the

Horsley Drive Business Park Stage 2 – Building 1 (Customer Fulfilment Centre) project was publicly exhibited for a

period of 30 days, ending on 17 April 2020.

Public exhibition occurred in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act

1979 (EP&A Act). During exhibition, a total of seven (7) submissions were received from government agencies,

organisations, and Fairfield City Council. No submissions were received from the public.

Charter Hall and its consultant team have considered all issues raised in the submissions and prepared a detailed

Response to Submission (RTS) addressing the matters raised in each of these submissions. This RTS has been

prepared to satisfy the provisions of Section 4.39 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A

Act) and Section 85A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (EP&A Reg).

1.1 Overview of the Original Proposal

The SSDA package, as placed on public exhibition, relates to construction of a light industrial warehouse facility to

operate as a customer fulfilment centre. The application proposes the following:

• a light industrial warehouse facility to operate as a customer fulfilment centre. This will include ambient and

chilled warehouse space, freezer chamber, bakery, plant, data centre and energy areas and ancillary office.

The main office will be fitted with a canteen, kitchenette/lunchroom, end-of-trip facilities, amenities, training and

meeting rooms and outdoor areas

• The rear of the warehouse accommodates a dispatch office, waste room and waste compactor facilities, truck

loading/waiting areas and driver amenities

• a total gross floor area of 45,305m2 is proposed over 2 storeys – an upper and lower mezzanine

• 539 car parking spaces (including 10 accessible spaces);

• service vehicle parking, including:

- 306 van parking spaces

- 21 trailer parking spaces

- 25 truck waiting spaces

• a total of 20 bicycle and 29 motorcycle parking spaces

• 2 maintenance parking bays are located at truck entry and loading areas

• associated hardstand vehicle parking, access, loading and manoeuvring areas. This includes dedicated truck

and van entry-only/exit-only points. A separate car entry/exit aisle is also provided to the car park. All access

will be provided to and from the internal access road and not Cowpasture Road

• parking and manoeuvring areas are configured in a contraflow and include weighbridges for trucks to ensure

compliance with road transport regulations. All truck and van accesses are secured by gatehouse and boom

gate checkpoints

• site utilities and infrastructure, including fire pump room and fire sprinkler tanks, a goods lift, protection railing

along site boundaries, bio-retention basin, solar panels and mechanical equipment on the roof and the like

• site landscaping works along the eastern boundary of the site between the staff car park and truck entry

driveway

The customer fulfilment centre is intended to receive, store, handle and dispatch food and groceries associated with

online retailing. Operations will include product delivery, storage, retrieval, packaging, preparation (bakery) and

ancillary office administration.



Articulation of built form will be achieved through a combination of materials, styles, colours and textures, such as

metal sheeting, Colorbond and aluminium cladding, precast concrete panels, louvred screens, glazing, shade sails

and feature signage to give the warehouse an industrial character and amenity.

1.2 Amendments to the proposal

To address issues raised in submissions, a range of documentation has been prepared. The following consultants’

reports and supporting information either update and replaces the material originally submitted in support of the EIS

or constitutes new information:

Detailed response to submissions table prepared by Ethos Urban (Appendix A)

Amended Architectural Plans and List of Proposed Changes prepared by Leffler Simes Architects (Appendix B)

Air Quality Addendum Statement prepared by SLR (Appendix C)

Updated ESD Report prepared by Northrop (Appendix D)

Updated Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment prepared by SLR (Appendix E)

Revised Civil Assessment Report and Plans prepared by Costin Roe (Appendix F)

Updated Transport Assessment Report prepared by Ason Group (Appendix G)

Biodiversity Assessment Report Addendum Letter prepared by Eco Logical (Appendix H)

Historical Heritage Advice prepared by Biosis (Appendix I)

The revised supporting documentation will enable the Department of Planning and Environment (the Department) to

complete its assessment of the proposal. This report should be read in conjunction with the EIS prepared by Ethos

Urban and dated 27 February 2020, as relevant.

1.3 List of design changes

Following public exhibition and in response to the issues and concerns raised by the Department and other

government agencies, minor design changes have been made to the proposal.

The changes are illustrated in the updated Architectural Plans in Appendix B, and described in detail in Section 5

of this report, and have been considered where relevant in the assessment of the proposal in Sections Error!

Reference source not found. and Error! Reference source not found..

In summary, the changes are:

Fire Sprinkler tanks and pump room relocated to north-west corner of site

Extra fire sprinkler tank added

16 trailer parking bays along north boundary relocated for sprinkler tank

CCR1 communication room relocated

Van Entry driveway widened

Van Hardstand parking layout altered

Truck & Van driveway exits combined

Extra lane added to Staff car park driveway

Covered pedestrian awning added from street to main office

Truck weighbridge setback off northern boundary

Fuel Bay location layout altered in van hardstand

Van Wash Bays location and layout altered



CCR2 communications room relocated from southwest corner of site to northwest corner

Battery Disposal Cage shifted south

Truck trailer parking and truck waiting bays along western boundary rotated 45 degrees

Waste room on west façade deleted and altered to waste finger dock

6 trailer bay parking spaces added to northwest corner of building

VI Hut, Data Room 1, external access stairs and ramps altered on north façade

Outdoor dining area off main office shifted south

First Floor Main Office façade altered above main entry to provide weather protection

Loading bay added to staff car parking northern end

Security turnstiles and access gate added separating van hardstand from pedestrian walkway

Pedestrian covered way added along west side of staff car park

Covered bicycle parking added

Covered smokers hut added

LPG Bullet added. Located between staff car park and east boundary truck driveway

Gas Bullet refuel parking bay added

4 truck waiting bays added along east boundary truck driveway

Energy Centres 1 & 2 layout and configuration altered

Truck driveway gradient along southeast corner boundary altered to keep height of retaining wall on south

boundary to 3m maximum

Data Centre 2 relocated from east façade to south façade

Rainwater harvest tanks added along buildings south façade

4 truck waiting bays deleted from southern driveway adjacent building.

2 truck waiting bays added along south boundary truck driveway

Extent of canopy extended in southwest corner of building to shelter pallet storage area



2.0 Overview of Submissions

In total, seven (7) submissions were received in response to the public exhibition of the EIS. The submissions were

received from:

Fairfield City Council

Department of Transport for New South Wales

Heritage Council of NSW

WaterNSW

Environment, Energy and Science Group (EES) in the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment

(DPIE)

Endeavour Energy

Simpson Earth

Six (6) of the seven (7) submissions provided additional commentary and/or recommended conditions for the

application. No submissions were received from the public.

In addition to the above, the Department of Planning and Environment (Department) has prepared a letter outlining

additional information or clarifications required prior to the final assessment and determination of the application.

Based on a review of the submissions received and analysed, the main issues identified during public exhibition

relate to:

Scope of SSD-10404

Site layout;

Hazards and risk;

Landscaping;

Traffic impacts and access arrangements;

Consultation;

Ecosystem credits;

Stormwater management;

Heritage;

Development contributions;

Construction Management.

These issues are addressed in the proceeding sections of this report.

3.0 Report Structure

This report includes the following sections:

Section 4.1 to Section 4.7 of this report provides response to submissions from Government agencies

including the letters received from the Department;

Section 5.0 – Description of amendments proposed in response to submissions.

A detailed response to each individual submission is provided at Appendix A.



4.0 Response to Submission

4.1 Department of Planning & Environment

The Department issued an overarching letter seeking clarification and additional information on a number of issues.

As mentioned earlier within this report, a detailed response to each issue raised in that issues letter is provided at

Appendix A. The main issues raised within this letter and the applicant’s response to each is discussed below.

These include:

Report inconsistencies

Scope of SSD-7664 Mod 1

Site Layout

Technical Studies and other information

4.1.1 Scope of SSD-10404

1. it is unclear on reading the EIS and specialist reports if they have been written on the basis that SSD 7664

– Modification 1, which is currently before the Department, will be approved as submitted. This requires

clarification.

Applicant’s Response

SSDA 10404 is submitted on the basis SSDA 7664 MOD 1 is approved.

2. the Response to Submissions (RTS) needs to clearly set out what aspects form part of SSD-10404, SSD

7664, or SSD 7764 Modification 1.


SSDA 10404, the subject of this RTS, is for the proposed Customer Fulfillment Centre on proposed Lot 1.

SSDA 7664 & MOD 1 are separate SSDAs for all site works, estate roadworks and offsite roadworks and

associated services including land consolidation and subdivision.

The SSD 7764 MOD 1 seeks the following changes to approved SSD 7664:

Adjusted drainage layout to facilitate the new Masterplan Layout, road alignment and lot configuration;

Adjusted layout of the estate stormwater management basin to suit revised masterplan geometry;

Realignment of the inter-allotment drains and overland flow paths from the western boundary to suit the access

road being approximately 75m north;

Relocation of the open overland flow path previously located on the eastern boundary and north of the access

road, from the north of the access road to the south of the access road. This again is due to the access road

being moved north from the currently approved location;

Overall catchments draining to upstream catchments and diversion paths remain consistent with documents

approved under SSD 7664.

Overall storages and attenuation of both upstream catchments and internal catchments remain consistent with

documents approved under SSD 7664.

The essence of the approved development design remains unaffected.

SSD 7764 MOD 1 consolidates Lot 1 and 2 to accommodate the CFC which results in a reduction in the total GFA

approved in southern portion of the site by 2,477m². SSD 7764 allowed for the establishment of up to 88,700m² of

Gross Floor Area for general industrial, light industrial, warehouse and distribution and ancillary office land uses.

The proposed modification will not result in any change to the approved maximum Gross Floor Area over the site.



SSD 7764 MOD 1 does not a significant cumulative change across the Stage 2 business park.

SSD 10404 is limited to the detailed design associated with the consolidated Lot 1 for the purpose of the Customer

Fulfilment Centre as described above in Section 1.1 and outlined within the Amended Architectural Plans prepared

by Leffler Simes Architects (Appendix B). For reference, the Overall Site Plan is provided below at Figure 1.

Figure 1 Overall Site Plan

4.1.2 Site Layout

3. an amended site plan which clearly illustrates for example existing lot boundaries, topographic contours, lot

sizes, building envelopes, easements, existing infrastructure.


Lot consolidation is being sought under SSD 7664 MOD 1 and is not relevant to SSD 10404.

The existing lots that form part of approval SSD 7664 include Lots 17-22 DP 13961 and Lot 2 DP 1212087.



As demonstrated on the Proposed Plan of Subdivision Plan submitted with the Modification Application (SSD 764

MOD 1) and detailed below in Figure 2, the modification sought approval to consolidate the existing 7 lots into 4.

Figure 2 Proposed Plan of Subdivision

An amended site plan demonstrating the consolidated lot boundary is attached at Appendix B.

4. confirm that Lots 17 and 18 do not form part of SSD 10404.




SSDA 7664 MOD 1 included the consolidation and subdivision of the land as per Figure 2 above.

SSD 10404 relates to proposed Lot 1 and does not include in any works in the northern portion of the site.

SSD 10404 excludes Lot 17, 18 and 19 in DP13691 and is limited to Lots 20, 21 and 22 in DP 13961 and Lot 2 in

DP 1212087.

5. confirm if lot consolidation is being sought under SSD 10404. If so, the amended site plan should reflect

this and a plan of consolidation, provided.


Lot consolidation/ subdivision on is being sought under SSDA 7664 & Mod 1. The Overall Site Plan for SSDA 10404

(provided at Figure 1) demonstrates the consolidated lots as per approval under SSD 7764 MOD 1 with the CDC

facility located on Lot 1.

6. clarify what the site area and development footprint are.


The proposed site area of the development is 87,924 m² and the development footprint is 57,614m².

7. confirm distances to sensitive receivers from the site boundary of SSD 10404 and not SSD 7664.


Distances to sensitive receivers from the site boundary stated in the Operational Noise and Vibration Impact

Assessment for SSD 10404 is correct.

Table 1: Surrounding Sensitive Receivers

Address Type Distance (m) from Site Boundary

28 Trivet Street, Wetherill Park (82

Cowpasture Road, Wetherill Park)

Residential 180 m northeast of HDBP Stage 2 Lot 1

34 Ferrers Road, Horsley Park Residential 250 m west of HDBP Stage 2 Lot 1



HDBP Stage 1 Industrial /Commercial 60 m south of HDBP Stage 2 Lot 1

Wetherill Park Industrial Precinct Industrial /Commercial 90 m east of HDBP Stage 2 Lot 1

4.1.3 Technical Studies and Other information

8. the ‘qualitative risk-based approach’ within Appendix O – Air Quality Assessment has not been adequately

justified in lieu of a quantitative assessment and is not supported.


As outlined within the Air Quality Addendum Statement prepared by SLR (Appendix C), while a quantitative

(modelling) assessment in accordance with the NSW Environment Protection Authority document Approved

Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW (the Approved Methods) could be prepared for

the construction phase of the Project to predict particulate concentrations and dust deposition levels at nearby

sensitive receptors, the inputs into the model would be subject to a high degree of uncertainty.

The high level of uncertainty associated with the output of such studies means it would be of limited value and

would not (in itself) assist with the identification of air quality control measures to actively manage the risks.



The adopted quantitative assessment approach identifies the appropriate mitigation measures based on the level of

risk during each phase of the construction works and is therefore deemed to be a more appropriate methodology

than quantitative modelling.

Additional mitigation measures have been identified to further reduce the risk of any air quality impacts and these

have been included within the Updated Mitigation Measures outlined in Section 6 of this report.

9. the EIS and Appendix Q – ESD Report provides no notable consideration of the roof mounted solar system

that is shown on drawing DA110 Rev C. There is little to no consideration of issues such as power

generation / consumption or water consumption / reuse for example.


The generation and consumption of power and water will be addressed in the following ways:

Energy - Energy consumption will largely be driven by lighting, HVAC and equipment. These loads will be

reduced through efficient product selection and further reductions in energy demand provided using onsite

generation in the form of a 2MW solar array. It is expected that these measures will offset more than 60% of the

sites operational energy demand from the grid (compared to a standard practice building.)

Water Sensitive Urban Design - The project will look to incorporate a strong focus on water sensitive urban

design with the external landscape design assisting to minimise water use for irrigation. The inclusion within the

design of landscaped area will also assist in the reduction of site stormwater discharge and assist in the

management of the projects broader impact on urban stormwater flows.

Rainwater capture and reuse - A 250,000L rainwater capture and reuse system is proposed for installation to

offset the sites water usage for washdown, cooling towers, toilet flushing and irrigation. This system is expected

to offset the majority of the sites potable water usage with initial calculations showing that up to 70% of potable

water consumption could be avoided.

Please refer to the amended ESD Report prepared by Northrop at Appendix D.

10. no details or plans showing the extent of the cut and fill requirements of the development (including batters

or retaining walls) have been provided, including an absence to any references to natural ground levels,

approved surface levels, or to be approved surface levels on any of the elevations or section drawings. This

level of information should be provided, including a cut / fill heat map.


There are no earthworks (other than minor trimming) proposed over Pad 1 associated with the CFC facility due to

the fact that these earthworks are being completed through the estate works approved under the Concept Approval

SSD 7664 and subsequently modified under SSD 7664 MOD 1.

The reporting and technical responses submitted with SSD 104040 reflect that the cut and fill requirements over

Pad 1 have been approved under the Concept Approval and as such, no additional earthworks drawings have been

submitted in support of SSD 10404.

11. an assessment of construction noise associated with the construction of this facility has not been provided.


An assessment of construction noise and vibration associated the facility is provided within the Updated Noise and

Vibration Assessment at Appendix E. The key findings of this report include:

No exceedance of the Noise Management Levels is predicted at any receivers during all construction activity in

Lot 1 during standard construction hours.

Construction traffic is not predicted to increase daytime road traffic noise levels by more than 2 dBA at the

nearest sensitive receivers.

Vibration levels at the nearest receiver are unlikely to be above the cosmetic damage criteria



12. Matters of National Environmental Significance have not been addressed.


Australia’s national environmental law is called the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

1999 (the EPBC Act). The EPBC Act makes sure that ‘nationally significant’ animals, plants, habitats and places are

identified, and any potential negative impacts on them are carefully considered before changes in land use or new

developments are approved.

Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) have been identified as having the potential to occur within

the development site. This report assesses impacts to MNES and concludes that the development is not likely to

have a significant impact on MNES.

A Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) was prepared by Ecoplanning (dated 24 November 2016)

in support of SSD 7664 as part of the approval for Concept Proposal and Stage 1 works for the establishment of a

warehouse, distribution and industrial facility at the Horsley Drive Business Park Stage 2 within the Western Sydney

Parklands (WSP).

The BDAR identified that although most of the development site is dominated by non-native vegetation such as

blackberry and pasture grasses, two native vegetation types were identified.

Most native vegetation within the development site is consistent with the description of Cumberland Plain Woodland

in the Sydney Basin Bioregion, a critically endangered ecological community (CEEC), listed under the NSW

Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) (NSW SC 2014).

Field survey confirmed that, due to the degraded condition of the vegetation onsite and the distance between

patches, the areas of CPW do not meet the definition of the threatened ecological community as listed on the

Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (CoA 2010).

SSD 7664 is currently the subject of a Modification Application for which an updated BDAR has been prepared by

EcoLogical (dated 7 April 2020). The updated BDAR recognises that the EPBC Act establishes a process for

assessing the environmental impact of activities and developments where MNES may be affected.

Under the Act, any action which “has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of MNES” is

defined as a “controlled action”, and requires approval from the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and

Energy (DoEE), which is responsible for administering the EPBC Act.

A habitat assessment and Likelihood of Occurrence was completed for listed threatened species that represent

MNES. One MNES, Pteropus poliocephalus (Grey-headed Flying-fox), was assessed under the EPBC Act.

Given Matters of National Environmental Significance have been dealt with under SSD 7664 and the subsequent

Modification Application, further assessment as part of SSD 10404 is not warranted.

Provided the SSD-7764 modification is approved and the works undertaken in accordance with the approval, the

construction of Building 1 for SSD-10404 will have no biodiversity impacts.

13. confirm whether site access and amendments to Cowpasture Road and Trivet Street are being sought

under SSD-10404 or SSD 7664 Modification 1.


Site access and road reconfiguration is subject of SSDA 7664 MOD 1.

14. provide a process description and illustration of how the development will operate.




As outlined in the Table 2 below and the attached architectural drawings (Appendix B), the proposed CFC Facility

processes have been designed with a considered approach to functionality, efficiency and safety.

Table 2: Process Description

Process Description

Traffic flow and good delivery to and from the site

Traffic flow around the site Traffic flow around the site will be aided by the following initiatives: -inbound truck management via reporting to the gatehouse.

-inbound van management via traffic signalised queue management

and audio connection to yard manager to direct vans accordingly. - all vehicles directed around the site via an extensive digital directional signage installation covering all areas of the site.

Traffic flow, bulk inbound bulk product Inbound goods from the distribution DC or direct from suppliers arrive

in B-doubles or 19m articulated semi-trailers.

These laden vehicles enter the truck entry driveway and report to the

gatehouse.

From the gatehouse they are directed to a delivery dock or truck

waiting bay, then to a delivery dock.

After unloading has taken place the empty vehicle then exits the site

through the Truck Exit driveway.

Traffic flow, bulk outbound bulk product Outbound goods from the CFC depart in 19m articulated semi-trailers, bound for smaller cross-dock distribution centres.

The unladen vehicles are waiting in storage bays within the hardstand and are directed to the relevant despatch dock for loading.

These laden vehicles exit the Truck Exit driveway after crossing the weighbridge for a load compliance check.

After delivering the unladen truck will return and enter the truck entry driveway and report to the gatehouse.

From the gatehouse they are directed to a storage bay or despatch dock accordingly.

Traffic Flow; Vans Vans deliver multiple customer orders based on a geographic ‘delivery run’.

After a previous delivery run, Vans enter the site through the dedicated Van Entry driveway and queue at the signalised queuing bay.

They communicate with the yard manager via audio intercom and are directed according to their requirements including

- refuelling - washing - internal cleaning

- repairs or direct to the Van Random Access bays.

When required Vans will move from the Random Access Bays to the Vehicles inspection bays for quality checking.

Upon passing inspection the Van will move to the relevant van dock, or Van Pen Parking then the relevant van dock; for loading.



Process Description

Upon loading the Van will return to the Van Pen Parking then/or exit the site via the Van Exit driveway after crossing the Van weighbridge for a load compliance check.

After deliveries are complete the van will re-enter the site as previous and the cycle repeats.

Goods flow within the building

General System The warehouse operating system generally comprises an ambient (temperature controlled) and refrigerated ’hive’ for storage of

consumer grocery product in stacked plastic storage totes.

Bulk palletised product is broken down and inducted into the hive for medium term storage, sent to picking stations for order collation into

delivery totes.

The remaining bulk product is re-inducted into the system, whilst the order is inducted into the hive in delivery totes for short term storage.

Upon requirement for despatch, the order comprising multiple delivery totes is collated into delivery frames and loaded into a van for despatch on a delivery run of multiple orders in similar geographic

locations.

4.1.4 Hazards and Risk

15. it is noted that there is a wide variety of dangerous goods listed in the Dangerous Goods (DG) Assessment,

please provide the representative products that may represent DG Class 1.4s and DG Class 5.1 and

describe how these products are being handled in the proposed development.


Class 1.4s products include party poppers, sparklers and general birthday party goods in small containers. These

products are considered to be low risk, with only a minor quantity of explosive in each component.

Class 5.1 products are typically hydrogen peroxide-based hair dyes which contain between 8-12% hydrogen

peroxide. These are also considered low risk as the hydrogen peroxide will only decompose into oxygen and

hydrogen when dried and exposed to a high temperature.

16. confirm the location of the diesel storage.


The diesel storage is proposed in a packaged fuel tank/dispensing facility nominated as "Van Re-fuel" on the overall

site plan (DA 020). Please refer to the Architectural plans attached at Appendix B.

17. clarify whether the forklifts are fuelled by LPG, diesel or electricity. Please also indicate the forklift filling or

charging location.


All forklifts are intended to be fuelled by LPG using small refill bottles. Gas (bullet) is located external to the facility in

hardstand and only handled during re-fill.

18. confirm whether all DG products to be handled within the proposed Automated System warehouse are

household packaged product.


It is confirmed that all DG products to be handled within the proposed Automated System warehouse are household

packaged retail products.



The following ancillary products are not stored within the proposed Automated System warehouse:

Diesel for van re-fuel is handled within the van re-fuel location in hardstand external of the facility.

Gas (bullet) is located external to the facility in hardstand and only handled during re-fill.

Ammonia for refrigeration is handled within the plantroom, not located within warehouse.

19. how will the DG products be categorised within the distribution centre? Is there the potential for

incompatible substances to be stored together?


The storage logic can be programmed to dedicate particular storage areas to a DG class. Only DG classes which

align with that designation can be stored within that location.

The separation table from AS 3833 will be used to guide the DG separation within the automated warehouse

system to minimise the potential for co-location.

In addition, the DGs are stored in self-contained totes; hence any spillage from a package would be contained

within a tote and unlikely to mix with other products during storage.

Only undamaged products are introduced into totes so the potential for damage to occur once located in a tote is

minimal.

20. it is stated in the Preliminary Hazard Analysis that Ammonia/Glycol is low charge with 500g. Where will this

refrigeration unit and the associated ammonia storage be located?


In review of the Preliminary Hazard Analysis, the appointed refrigeration contractor has confirmed that the

Ammonia/Glycol will be low charge with 300g and is to be stored in the plant room.

4.1.5 Inconsistencies

21. there are a number of inconsistencies within the EIS and specialist reports – for instance:

• Section 4.3 of the EIS states that the detailed design guidelines under the concept plan have a

nominated building height of 15 metres, whereas Condition A10 of the concept plan provides a

maximum building height of 16 metres. The development controls of SSD 7664 have not been

adequately addressed; and

• Appendix H – Civil Engineering Report SSD 10404 – Section 6.2 states that “Indoor and outdoor water

demand and rainwater tank sizing will be based on individual site requirements and form part of

separate future development applications…”. Clarification as to what future development applications

would submit this level of information, rather than SSD 10404 is required. Alternatively, it would be

expected that this detail would be provided as part of this development.


Chapter 4.3 of the EIS makes an incorrect reference to the maximum building height approved under SSD

7764.

In accordance with Condition A10, Table 1; Development Controls under Schedule 2 Conditions of Consent for

Concept Development (SSD 7664), the maximum building height is 16 metres.

The proposed CFC facility sought under SSD 10404 proposes a maximum building height of 15.7 metres in

accordance with the Concept Approval.

A 250,000L rainwater capture and reuse system is proposed for installation to offset the sites water usage for

washdown, cooling towers, toilet flushing and irrigation. This system is expected to offset the majority of the



sites potable water usage with initial calculations showing that up to 70% of potable water consumption could be

avoided (Please refer to the amended ESD Report prepared by Northrop at Appendix D)

Appendix F – Civil Engineering Report SSD 10404 has been updated to reflect indoor and outdoor water

demand and rainwater tank sizing for the development.

4.2 Fairfield City Council (FCC)

FCC provided comment on the proposed application and identified the following matters for consideration:

Traffic management

Biodiversity Assessment Development Report

Heritage

Landscaping requirements

Catchment management

Environmental management (noise, odour)

Dangerous goods storage

Applicants response:

A detailed response to the matters raised by Council has been provided within the Response to Submissions Table

provided at Appendix A.

Council’s submission specifically raised the proposed access arrangements at Trivet Street and Cowpasture Road

and that the owners of the following lots be should consulted and their agreement provided in relation to the revised

access arrangements:

105 Cowpasture Road, Wetherill Park.

109 Cowpasture Road, Wetherill Park.

115-119 Cowpasture Road, Wetherill Park.

121-123 Cowpasture Road, Wetherill Park.

As outlined within the EIS, a letter was prepared and provided to nearby stakeholders and community members

most likely considered to be impacted by the development. The letter provided the following elements;

details of the proposed development.

details of changes to the surrounding road network.

details of changes to the Concept Masterplan per SSD 7664.

details of the proposed CDC facility.

Following the lodgement of SSD 10404, the Applicant has undertaken the following additional consultation in

response to Fairfield City Council’s request.

Table 3: Stakeholder Consultation

Address Comment

105 Cowpasture

Road, Wetherill Park

Tuesday 9/6/2020

Applicant had an onsite meeting with Owner to discuss the proposed access

modification.



Address Comment

The Applicant and Owner discussed the proposed realignment of Cowpasture

Road and Trivet Street.

Owner noted that they did not have any major concerns as long as B-Double

access to and from his site is not impacted by the modified arrangement;

Owner mentioned that some heavy vehicles will have concerns with the extra

stop start on the uphill section but acknowledged this as unavoidable.

Owner acknowledged that the proposed arrangement would resolve safety

concerns he has previously raised with trucks coming down Cowpasture Road

(north to south).

Applicant issued the Owner with a follow up email including link to the

Department website and civil diagrams indicating changes to the crossover.

The Owner has not responded any further to the email correspondence.

109 Cowpasture


Friday 5/6/2020

Applicant called the Owner to discuss the application and query any potential

concerns.

No immediate concerns were raised by the Owner but highlighted that they

were not fully across the detail.

Owner noted the crossover to Cowpasture Road is to be an exit to their

proposed depot only.

Applicant issued the Owner with a follow up email including link to the

Department website and civil diagrams indicating changes to the crossover.

The Owner has not responded any further to the email correspondence.

115-119 Cowpasture


Friday 5/6/2020


concerns.

Owner noted they were not objecting to the amendments but was interested in

discussing the layout further.

Applicant and Owner agreed to meet on site to discuss the proposal.

Owner noted they are purchasing the rear lot (121-123 Cowpasture Road).

Tuesday 9/6/2020

Applicant had an onsite meeting with owner to discuss the proposed access

modification.

Owner noted he had no objections, as long as crossovers are reinstated and

that B-Double access to both 115 and 121 Cowpasture Road are maintained.

Owner acknowledged left out only from slip road.

Owner requested that landscaping to nature strip between slip road and

revised Cowpasture Road alignment be minimal to not reduce exposure for his

properties.

121-123 Cowpasture


Friday 5/6/2020


concerns.

No concerns raised.



Address Comment

Owner agreed that having a separate slip road to service 2/3 lots is an

advantage.

Owner noted that they were selling parcel to neighbour at the front (115-119

Cowpasture Road).

As demonstrated above, the affected stakeholders have now had an opportunity to provide formal comment during

the public notification period and further, to discuss the application directly with the Applicant and at no stage have

any objections to the proposal been raised.

4.3 Department of Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW)

The TfNSW submission notes that the majority of impact of the proposed development will be at the intersection of

Cowpasture Road and Trivett Street, Wetherill Park. The TfNSW submission suggests extra capacity or alternate

access onto The Horsley Drive should be considered.

Applicant’s Response:

The SIDRA analysis indicates that the resulting development’s traffic would cause Cowpasture Road / Victoria

Street roundabout to decrease from Level of Service (LOS) B to LOS C. This decrease in LOS occurs for the AM

peak right turn movements from Cowpasture Road to Victoria Street as a result of a 9-10 second increase in delay

from 20.9 to 30.2 seconds. The worst delay of 34.1 seconds occurs for the U-turn movement with only 2 vehicles

per hour projected to utilise this movement.

Under the RMS Guide, LOS C occurs between 29-42 seconds of delay. As such, the primary right turn movement is

only 1.2 seconds higher than a LOS B which indicates that the resulting LOS decrease is only marginal. This is an

acceptable outcome as it indicates that the roundabout would still operate satisfactorily. We note that The Horsley

Drive upgrade would be undertaken in the future which would provide additional capacity along The Horsley Drive

and reduce the future PM peak hour delays at the existing roundabout.

4.4 Heritage Council of NSW

The Heritage Council of NSW submission recommends that the conditions of the Historical heritage advice

prepared by Biosis (22 January 2020) be implemented to avoid impact on the heritage significance of the Upper

Canal System. The submission also recommended the if unexpected archaeological deposits or relics are

discovered on the site, work should cease in the affected area(s) and the Heritage Council of NSW be notified.


The Applicant notes the recommendation from the Heritage Council of NSW that the conditions of the Historical

heritage advice prepared by Biosis (22 January 2020) be implemented to avoid impact on the heritage significance

of the Upper Canal System.

Further, the recommendations outlined in the Historical Heritage Advice prepared by Biosis (Appendix I) will be

addressed (as relevant) by the applicant prior to commencement or during construction phases.

The CEMP prepared by Charter Hall incorporates an Unexpected Finds Procedure to ensure that all actual or

potential heritage items uncovered during construction are protected. This includes Aboriginal objects, Historic (non-

Aboriginal heritage items) and Human Skeletal remains.

Additional mitigation measures have been identified to ensure any unexpected archaeological deposits or relics

discovered on the site are protected and these have been included within the Updated Mitigation Measures outlined

in Section 6 of this report.



4.5 WaterNSW

WaterNSW acknowledges that the key issues relating to environmental management practices required during the

physical construction and operation of the facility have been assessed and the EIS considers WaterNSW’s SEARs

comments. The submission requested several conditions relating to stormwater management, earthworks, erosion

and sediment controls, vibration, bulk water supply infrastructure, fencing, heritage and consent.

Applicants response

The applicant has reviewed the recommendations and appreciates that several of these can be addressed by way

of a condition of consent. Accordingly, the applicant is prepared to address these (as relevant) prior to

commencement or during construction phases.

4.6 Environment, Energy and Science Group (EES) in the Department of Planning, Industry and

Environment (DPIE)

EES provided commentary on the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (ACHAR), BDAR waiver and

flooding. ABHAR and BDAR waiver issues have been resolved and the department advised the submitted

documentation regarding flooding is considered adequate for the management of local drainage and flooding

problems within the development site and the downstream areas.

4.7 Endeavour Energy

Endeavor Energy raised no issues with the proposed development. The submission included advice regarding

potential connections for the proposed development, noting that the development may require existing overhead

powerlines to be moved underground. The submission also requested a condition of consent that requires

satisfactory arrangements have been made for the connection of electricity to the proposed development, prior to

the release of the Construction Certificate / commencement of works.


A submission for power will be made to Endeavor Energy prior to commencement of work.



5.0 Proposed Amendments

The SSDA package, as amended during the Response to Submissions phase of the project, relates to construction

of a light industrial warehouse facility to operate as a customer fulfilment centre with the Horsley Drive Business

Park Stage 2 – Building 1. The application proposes the following:

• a light industrial warehouse facility to operate as a customer fulfilment centre. This will include ambient and

chilled warehouse space, freezer chamber, bakery, plant, data centre and energy areas and ancillary office.

• a total gross floor area of 45,305m2 is proposed over 2 storeys – an upper and lower mezzanine;

• 539 car parking spaces (including 10 accessible spaces);

• service vehicle parking, including:

- 306 van parking spaces;

- 21 trailer parking spaces;

- 25 truck waiting spaces;

• a total of 20 bicycle and 29 motorcycle parking spaces;

• 2 maintenance parking bays are located at truck entry and loading areas;

An amended set of Architectural Drawings prepared by Leffler Simes Architects is submitted with this response at

Appendix B. The scope of the application has not changed; however, the following amendments have been made:

Fire Sprinkler tanks and pump room relocated to north-west corner of site

Extra fire sprinkler tank added

16 trailer parking bays along north boundary relocated for sprinkler tank

CCR1 communication room relocated

Van Entry driveway widened

Van Hardstand parking layout altered

Truck & Van driveway exits combined

Extra lane added to Staff car park driveway

Covered pedestrian awning added from street to main office

Truck weighbridge setback off northern boundary

Fuel Bay location layout altered in van hardstand

Van Wash Bays location and layout altered

CCR2 communications room relocated from southwest corner of site to northwest corner

Battery Disposal Cage shifted south

Truck trailer parking and truck waiting bays along western boundary rotated 45 degrees

Waste room on west façade deleted and altered to waste finger dock

6 trailer bay parking spaces added to northwest corner of building

VI Hut, Data Room 1, external access stairs and ramps altered on north façade

Outdoor dining area off main office shifted south

First Floor Main Office façade altered above main entry to provide weather protection

Loading bay added to staff car parking northern end

Security turnstiles and access gate added separating van hardstand from pedestrian walkway



Pedestrian covered way added along west side of staff car park

Covered bicycle parking added

Covered smokers hut added

LPG Bullet added. Located between staff car park and east boundary truck driveway

Gas Bullet refuel parking bay added

4 truck waiting bays added along east boundary truck driveway

Energy Centres 1 & 2 layout and configuration altered

Truck driveway gradient along southeast corner boundary altered to keep height of retaining wall on south

boundary to 3m maximum

Data Centre 2 relocated from east façade to south façade

Rainwater harvest tanks added along buildings south façade

4 truck waiting bays deleted from southern driveway adjacent building

2 truck waiting bays added along south boundary truck driveway

Extent of canopy extended in southwest corner of building to shelter pallet storage area

6.0 Updated Mitigation Measures

The collective measures required to mitigate the impacts associated with the proposed works have been updated to reflect the amended design and updated technical studies. The Updated Mitigation Measures are detailed in Table 4 below. These measures have been derived from the previous assessment the EIS and those detailed in appended consultants’ reports.

Table 4: Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures

Traffic and transport

• The Transport Assessment recommends the Preliminary CTMP, provided for information purposes, would be further

detailed in consultation with the relevant authorities at CC stage in response to the expected condition of consent.

Noise and Vibration

The Acoustic Report recommends the drafting of a noise management plan outlining all reasonable and feasible

methods for the reduction of noise impact including:

• Briefing the work team and contractors to create awareness of the proximity of noise-sensitive residential receivers

and the importance of minimising noise emissions.

• Using ‘quiet’ work practices to minimise noise, where possible.

• Use of less noise-intensive equipment, where feasible and reasonable.

• Adjusting reversing alarm volume on heavy equipment to make them ‘smarter’, by limiting the acoustic range to

immediate danger area, where acceptable under the relevant safety procedures.

• Enclosure of outdoor fixed plant (such as mechanical plant) where practicable

• For equipment with enclosures, ensure door and seals are well maintained and kept closed when not in use.

• Vibration screening criterion of 50 mm/s is applicable for the Upper Canal structure.

• The proposed construction works near the Retaining Wall 2 at the western boundary of Lot 1 has a minimum slant

distance of less than 15 m to the Upper Canal visible structures.

• Where vibration intensive construction activities are proposed within the minimum working distances, these works

will be confined to less sensitive periods where practicable.



Mitigation measures

• In general, mitigation measures that should be considered are summarised as follows:

• Relocate vibration generating plant and equipment to other areas within the site in order to lower the vibration

impacts.

• Investigate the feasibility of rescheduling the hours of operation of major vibration generating plant and equipment.

• Use lower vibration generating items of plant and equipment where possible e.g. smaller capacity vibratory rollers.

• If vibration intensive works are required within the safe working distances, vibration monitoring or attended vibration

trials would be undertaken to ensure that levels remain below the cosmetic damage criterion.

• Where buildings are located within the minimum working distances for cosmetic damage, building condition surveys

would be completed both before and after the works to identify existing damage and any damage due to the works.

Soil and Water

The following recommendations were made in the Civil Engineering Report as part of the Soil and Water Management

Plan:

• Clearly visible barrier fencing shall be installed as shown on drawing Co11492.18-DA20 and elsewhere at the

discretion of the site superintendent to ensure traffic control and prohibit unnecessary site disturbance. Vehicular

access to the site shall be limited to only those essential for construction work and they shall enter the site only

through the stabilised access points.

• Soil materials will be replaced in the same order they are removed from the ground. It is particularly important that

all subsoils are buried and topsoils (landscaped areas only) remain on the surface at the completion of works.

• The construction program should be scheduled so that period of time from starting land disturbance to stabilisation

is minimised.

• Notwithstanding this, schedule works so that the duration from the conclusion of land shaping to completion of final

stabilisation is less than 20 working days.

• Land recently established with grass species will be watered regularly until an effective cover has properly

established and plants are growing vigorously. Further application of seed might be necessary later in areas of

inadequate vegetation establishment.

• Where practical, foot and vehicular traffic will be kept away from all recently established areas

• Earth batters shall be constructed in accordance with the Geotechnical Engineers Report or with as law a gradient

as practical but not steeper than:

- 2H:1V where slope length is less than 7 metres

- 2.5H:1V where slope length is between 7 and 10 metres

- 3H:1V where slope length is between 10 and 12 metres



- 6H:1V where slope length is greater than 27 metres

• All earthworks, including waterways/drains/spillways and their outlets, will be constructed to be stable in at least the

design storm event of 1 in 2 year ARI (Q2).

• During windy weather, large, unprotected areas will be kept moist (not wet) by sprinkling with water to keep dust

under control. In the event water is not available in sufficient quantities, soil binders and/or dust retardants will be

used or the surface will be left in a cloddy state that resists removal by wind.

Stormwater

The design of the proposed development aims to ensure that adverse impact on stormwater quality or quantity does not eventuate. Given this, the main mitigation measures associated with stormwater relate to the regular maintenance and monitoring of the systems in place, including the water quality treatment train. An indicative maintenance schedule has been included in the Civil Engineering Report (Section 3.5) for reference.



Mitigation measures

Hazards and risks

Dangerous goods

• The site shall be designed to contain any spills or contaminated water from a fire incident within the boundaries of

the site.

• The warehouse and/or site boundaries shall be capable of containing 612 m3 which may be contained within the

warehouse footprint, site stormwater pipework and any recessed docks or other containment areas that may be

present as part of the site design.

• The civil engineers designing the site containment shall demonstrate the design can contain at least 612 m3.

• A storm water isolation point (i.e. penstock isolation valve) shall be incorporated into the design. The penstock shall

automatically isolate the storm water system upon detection of a fire (smoke or sprinkler activation) to prevent

potentially contaminated liquids from entering the water course.

Bushfire

• The warehouse site is to have a defendable space between the building and the site boundary including the

following:

- A minimum 6 m wide carriageway fire access road located between the warehouse and the boundary.

- Continuous thoroughfare for fire pumpers between the warehouse and site boundary linking back to the internal access road.

• The defendable space is to be clear of vegetation.

• Vegetation and landscaping across the business park is to comply with the performance objectives of an Inner

Protection Area (IPA) standard as described by PBP.

• The site requires fire hydrants to be installed to comply with AS 2419.1 – 2005 Fire Hydrant Installations - System

Design, Installation and Commissioning (AS 2419) so that all sides of a building envelope are within 70 m of a

hydrant by lay of the hose (or 90 m with a tanker parked in-line maximum 20 m from the hydrant).

• Any gas services are to be installed and maintained in accordance with AS/NZS 1596-2014 The storage and

handling of LP gas.

Biodiversity

A Biodiversity Assessment Development Report (BDAR) that assess the impacts of the civil works is in preparation and will be submitted with the modification application to SSD-7764 for Horsley Drive Business Park Stage 2. Please refer to Appendix H – Biodiversity Waiver for more information.

Heritage

• Ensuring that no physical impacts occur within the curtilage of the Upper Canal (Lot 1 DP 596354).

• Building envelope setbacks from the western edge of the lots to ensure that the current development and future

applications do not have an adverse impact on the heritage significance of the Upper Canal.

• Developing a landscaped area along the canal as a soft barrier to protect its setting.

• If possible, effort should also be made to ensure that buildings along the frontage do not present blank high walls.

• The proposed works should comply with the Guidelines for Development Adjacent to the Upper Canal and

Warragamba Pipelines (WaterNSW 2018).

• Further assessment of any alterations to the design to determine whether it would impact the Upper Canal.

In addition to the above, the following general mitigation measures for unanticipated discoveries include:

• Should any Aboriginal objects be encountered during works associated with this proposal, works must cease in the

vicinity and should not be moved until assessed by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be an

Aboriginal object the archaeologist will provide further recommendations. These may include notifying the OEH and

Aboriginal stakeholders.

• Should any historical relics be discovered during the project, work in the vicinity must cease and an archaeologist

contacted to make a preliminary assessment of the find. The Heritage Council will require notification if the find is

assessed as a relic.



Mitigation measures

• If any suspected human remains are discovered during any activity, the project team must:

• Immediately cease all work at that location and not further move or disturb the remains

• Notify the NSW Police and OEH’s Environmental Line as soon as practicable and provide detail of the remains and

their location

• Not recommence work at that location unless authorised in writing by OEH.

Waste

Waste management strategies which will be implemented during the construction and operational phases of

development include:

• During construction: the stockpiling of construction materials waste (likely in a skip) to be transported off Site for

recycling or disposal

• During operation: the storage of waste in designated areas, pallets/crates or compactor and collected on a regular

basis (daily, 1-2x per week or weekly) by a specific contractor.

Air Quality

• Air pollution control devices may be implemented to further reduce emissions where complaints are received in

relation to nuisance odour or where prolonged smoke is visible during normal or peak operations (i.e. not during

start up or shut down).

• Good housekeeping be maintained on all areas of the Project Site, including regular cleaning of all internal and

external areas

• Physical controls (including ventilation fans, exhaust stacks, extraction hoods, grease traps, air pollution control

devices etc.) should be designed to allow for easy and safe cleaning and maintenance. It is recommended that

regular cleaning of physical controls be undertaken as per manufacturer’s requirements.

• All generated waste is identified and separated into common material streams or categories at the point of

generation for separate collection.

• General environmental awareness training be provided to relevant staff and contractors.

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Energy Efficiency

• Changing Surface Temperatures will be addressed through the;

- Use of high reflectivity roofing to minimise heat gain and heat island effects

- Integration of solar panels to provide shading to areas of the roof and provide increased power to the site when

peak energy use for cooling is required.

- Incorporation of heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) systems designed to modulate in the event of

changing outside air temperatures. Equipment will be rated to continue operating during higher temperatures.

- Use of waterless heat rejection system to reduce increased demand for water as a result of increased average

temperatures.

• An increase in rainfall intensity will be managed through the;

- Inclusion of rainwater and stormwater storage systems to modulate flows exiting the site

- Ability to provide increased finished floor level (FFL) designed to be 0.30 m above freeboard requirement to account for increased flooding potential at the site.

- Inclusion of awnings to the entry access points to promote allow continued operation during adverse conditions.

• An increase to wind speed intensity will be addressed through;

- The metal deck roof design incorporating roof bracing to fasten the roof onto the building structure to account for south-easterly winds on site and prevent damage to the roof due to prevailing winds.

- Improved structural integrity to ensure that the building is not significantly impacted in the event of high intensity wind loads. This includes wind loading on the façade of the office spaces.

• Decrease in humidity and increased drought conditions will be addressed through;

- Increased capacity within the fire safety systems to assist in the management of bushfire risk associated with dryer conditions



Mitigation measures

- Additional non potable water supply for irrigation needs and, the integration of native and drought tolerant vegetation.



7.0 Conclusion

This Response to Submissions has been prepared to satisfy the provisions of Section 4.39 of the EP&A Act and

Section 85A of the EP&A Regulation. Each of the submissions received during the public exhibition period have

been collated, analysed and addressed through the provision of additional information and design amendments.

A majority of the issues raised within the submission are proposed to be addressed by way of conditions of consent

which will monitor and ameliorate impacts during the construction and operational phase.

The mitigation measures provided within the EIS have been updated where necessary to respond to the

submissions received, and these updated measures will further reduce the overall environmental impacts during

both the construction and operation of the proposal.

Having regards to biophysical, economic and social considerations, including the principles of ecologically

sustainable development, the carrying out of the project is justified for the following reasons:

The built form and density proposed for the site in consistent with that approved Horsley Drive Business Park

Stage 2 under the Concept Plan Approval (SSDA 7664) and subsequent MOD approval;

The building is considerate of its surrounds and complements it setting through articulation of the built form and

sympathetic choice of good quality materials;

It has been demonstrated that the proposed works will result in minimal environmental impacts, all of which can

be managed or mitigated through the recommendations outlined in the relevant specialist reports;

The proposal involves the provision of approximately 45,305m2 of warehouse floorspace and will contribute to

achieving the anticipated employment growth for the Fairfield LGA, without a discernible impact on overall

capacities across the Greater Western Sydney region.

Given the merits described above it is requested that the application be approved.

Documents

Horsley Drive Business Park Stage 2 Building 1 State