Project: Development Application for Project No. 237236 Prescribed Tidal Works, Kingfisher Prepared for: FCRC Parade Seawall 26 August 2013

Development Application for Prescribed Tidal Works, Kingfisher Parade Seawall

Date | 26 August 2013 Revision | 2

Aurecon Pty Ltd ABN 54 005 139 873 Level 14, 32 Turbot Street QLD 4000 Locked Bag 331 Brisbane QLD 4001 Australia

T +61 7 3173 8000 F +61 7 3173 8001 E [email protected] W aurecongroup.com

Contents

List of abbreviations 4 1 Introduction 6 1.1 Background 6 1.1.1 Previous consultation 7 1.1.2 Jurisdictional boundaries 7 1.2 Purpose of the report 8 1.2.1 Related approvals 8 ♦ Marine Park Permit 8 ♦ Clearing Permit 9 2 Subject site and locality description 10 2.1 Locality 10 2.2 Subject land 12 2.2.1 Tenure 12 2.2.2 Land use 12 2.3 Environmental features 14 2.3.1 Local context and protected areas 14 2.3.2 Coastal environment and geomorphology 15 2.3.3 Marine water and sediment transfer 16 2.3.4 Marine flora and fauna 16 2.3.5 Indigenous Cultural Heritage 16 2.4 Native Title 17 3 Project description 18 3.1 Background 18 3.1.1 Coastal impacts 18 3.1.2 Management arrangements 20 3.2 Seawall design 21 3.2.1 Physical testing 21 3.2.2 Design criteria 21 3.2.3 Rock seawall 21 3.3 Construction methodology 22 3.3.1 Construction schedule 22 3.3.7 Construction water 24 3.3.8 Site rehabilitation 24 4 Planning assessment 25

p 0

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

4.1 Overview 25 4.1.1 Applicant details 25 4.2 Commonwealth regulatory framework 25 4.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 25 4.2.2 Native Title Act 1993 26 Relevance to project 26 4.3 State regulatory framework 26 4.3.1 Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) 26 Relevance to the project 26 4.3.1.1 Owner’s Consent 27 4.3.1.2 Assessment manager 27 4.3.1.3 State Assessment and Referral Agency 27 4.3.1.4 State planning policies 28 4.3.2 Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (Coastal Act) 29 4.3.2.1 Overview 29 4.3.2.2 Prescribed Tidal Works 29 ♦ Assessment of prescribed tidal works 30 ♦ Certification of Tidal Works 30 ♦ Water Area Allocation Plan 30 ♦ Coastal Plan and Coastal Protection State Planning Regulatory Provision 2013 31 4.3.3 Marine Parks Act 1994 31 Relevance to the project 31 4.3.4 Fisheries Act 1994 31 Relevance to the project 32 4.3.5 Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) 32 Relevance to the project 32 4.3.6 Vegetation Management Act 1999 33 4.3.7 Land Act 1994 33 Relevance to the project 33 4.3.8 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 33 Relevance to the project 34 4.3.9 Environmental Protection Act 1994 34 Relevance to the project 34 4.4 Local government regulatory framework 34 4.4.1 Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan 2011 34 4.4.2 Planning Scheme (2006) 35

p 1

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Relevance to the project: 35 5 Potential impacts and mitigation measures 37 5.1 Summary of potential impacts 37 5.2 Coastal geomorphology 37 5.3 Heritage values 38 5.3.1 Non-Indigenous cultural heritage 38 5.3.2 Indigenous cultural heritage 38 5.4 Flora/fauna impacts 39 5.4.1 Terrestrial ecology 39 5.4.2 Marine plants 39 5.4.3 Marine fauna 40 5.5 Marine water and sediment 41 5.5.1 Acid sulphate soils 41 5.6 Noise 41 5.7 Traffic impacts 42 5.8 Public health and safety 42 5.9 General environmental duty 42 6 Conclusion 43 7 References 44

Appendices

Appendix A Appendix A - Application forms & owners consent Appendix B Appendix B - Smart Maps and Property Titles Appendix C Appendix C - Engineering drawings and RPEQ Certification Appendix D Appendix D - SDAP Assessment Appendix E Appendix E - SPRP Assessment Appendix F Appendix F - IDAS Code for Prescribed Tidal Works Appendix G Appendix G – Environmental Searches

p 2

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Appendix H Appendix H Design Report Appendix I Appendix I Ecological assessment

p 3

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

List of abbreviations

Abbreviation/Acronym Definition ASS Acid Sulfate Soils CHMP Cultural Heritage Management Plan CMD Coastal Management District DAFF Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry DATSIMA Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs DEHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection DNRM Department of Natural Resources and Mines DTMR Department of Transport and Main Roads DNPRS aR Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing. EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 FCRC Fraser Coast Regional Council HAT Highest Astronomical Tide IDAS Integrated Development Assessment System LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide MHWS Mean High Water Springs MSQ Maritime Safety Queensland NES National Environmental Significance RPEQ Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland SEWPaC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities SPA Sustainable Planning Act 2009 SP Reg 2009 Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009

p 4

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Executive Summary

Applicant: Fraser Coast Regional Council C/- Aurecon Locked Bag 331 BRISBANE QLD 4001

Proposal: The Fraser Coast Regional Council (FCRC) proposes to undertake erosion protection works involving development of a rock armour seawall of approximately 370 m in length, located alongside the esplanade at , Queensland.

Application type: Application for a Development Permit for Operational Works (Prescribed Tidal Works) within a local government tidal area under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) Operational Works for the removal, destruction or damage to marine plants under the SPA and the Fisheries Act 1994 (Fisheries Act)

Land Tenure: Land tenure associated with the proposed development is identified below.

Lot Plan Tenure Street Owner Trustee address

N/A N/A Road Reserve Esplanade, The State of Queensland Fraser Coast Regional Kingfisher (Represented by the Council Parade Department of Natural Resources and Mines)

Unallocated State Land Owned by the State of - Queensland (Represented by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM))

p 5

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

1 Introduction

.

1.1 Background Over recent years, the combined action of storm waves and tides has resulted in significant erosion at the Toogoom shoreline in the vicinity of Beelbi Creek. The buffer (or ‘esplanade’) adjoining the residential properties located at 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade, has experienced significant land loss of between 1 m to 2 m per year, influenced by the impacts of significant storm events (such as the Australia Day 2013 storm, originating from Tropical ). Investigations regarding an appropriate solution for erosion protection at Toogoom have been ongoing since 2005. Since this time, the erosion problem has become so severe that immediate action is required to protect people and properties. Most susceptible to erosion impacts are the properties located 58 to 78 Kingfisher Parade where the dune buffer has been reduced to only few metres from the erosion scarp. Consultation regarding an appropriate erosion control solution for Toogoom has been undertaken between the residents of Kingfisher Parade, and State and local government representatives since the initial project conception in 2005. These discussions have resulted in general support for a seawall to be developed in this location, subject to the appropriate design and environmental assessments being undertaken. As a result, Aurecon was engaged in July 2013 to undertake preliminary design for the Project. Preliminary investigations identified that a rock armour seawall of approximately 370 m in length developed within the coastal ‘esplanade’ fronting 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade, provided the most effective solution in terms of capital costs, constructability, and importantly, protection from coastal hazards. The Fraser Coast Regional Council (FCRC) Policy for Shoreline Erosion Protection Structures (Policy Number #2260297v2) specifies that the council will take the lead agency role for the initial capital cost of shoreline protection works, to be recovered through a special rate charged on benefited properties. As such, the project is being initially funded and managed by the FCRC, with capital costs to be recovered from the residents through a special levy. Following construction, the seawall asset will be transferred to FCRC for ongoing management. Accordingly, Aurecon, on behalf of the FCRC, and the residents of 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade, is now seeking the necessary authorisations for construction of a rock armour seawall.

p 6

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

1.1.1 Previous consultation A pre-lodgement meeting was held between Aurecon, FCRC and relevant State agencies at Toogoom on the 26 July 2013, and a second meeting in Brisbane on the 2 August 2013 to discuss the project and specifically the proposed alignment. State agencies involved in the initial consultation included: ° Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) ° Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) ° Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) ° Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (DSDIP) ° Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing (DNPRSaR) During initial consultation, it was highlighted that the current alignment of the seawall (previously referred to as ‘Option A’) had been determined based on a consensus by State government agencies (including DEHP, DAFF, DNPRSaR, and DNRM) that the seawall must be separated a distance of 10 m from the front boundary of private properties in order to simplify future maintenance requirements and maintain public access. However, Aurecon advised that by following this alignment, the toe of the seawall would extend within the boundaries of the Great Sandy Marine Park and potentially the Beelbi Fish Habitat Area. Subsequently, an alternative alignment (i.e. ‘Option B’) was also presented in which the seawall was attempted to be kept outside of the boundaries of the marine park (i.e. above the 2004 survey line). This solution proved impractical due to the additional construction and material costs required, and also as it did not provide adequate provision for public access due to the need for a reduced separation (5 m) from private properties at the eastern end of the seawall. At the second consultation meeting it was highlighted that ‘Option A’ was the preferred design solution. Since this time the design has been refined following the results of physical testing (refer Section 3.2.1) however, the current alignment of the seawall remains consistent with the initial ‘Option A’. It is noted that the size and scale of the seawall has been designed according to the nature of the erosion problem in this location, and relative to the specific coastal geomorphology and desired level of protection from coastal hazards.

1.1.2 Jurisdictional boundaries Following the pre-lodgement meetings, a number of discussions have been held between Aurecon, DNRM, DAFF and the DNPRSaR regarding the location of jurisdictional boundaries in the project area, and the resulting approval requirements for the project under the SPA. These discussions have resulted in the following determinations being made by the State government agencies: ° The tenure boundary of the ‘Esplanade’ (as confirmed by DNRM) is determined from a survey undertaken in 1981, and illustrated in the historic survey drawings within Appendix C. ° The boundary of the Great Sandy Marine Park (as confirmed by the DNPRSaR) is determined from the HAT line as surveyed in 2004. ° The boundary of the Beelbi FHA (as confirmed by the DNPRSaR and DAFF) is taken to be the boundary of the ‘Esplanade’. The location of each of these boundaries can be seen on the proposal drawings within Appendix C, and relevant correspondence is included within Appendix J. As the proposed works will be located entirely within the boundary of the ‘Esplanade’, as determined by DNRM as the boundary of the 1981 survey, the proposed works will not require approval for works located within a FHA. However, the alignment extends within boundary of the Marine Park and therefore a Marine Park Permit is required (Refer further detail in Section 1.2.1).

p 7

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

1.2 Purpose of the report This report has been prepared to support the following development application to authorise the proposed works: ° Operational Works that are Tidal Works in a Coastal Management District (CMD) under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) and the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (Coastal Act) ° Operational Works for the removal, damage, or destruction to marine plants under SPA and the Fisheries Act 1994 (Fisheries Act) The purpose of this report is to: ° Describe the subject land and locality ° Describe the proposed erosion protection works ° Outline the legislative framework applying to the development ° Provide an assessment of how the project meets the planning objectives of applicable Commonwealth, State and local laws ° Outline potential impacts and proposed mitigation measures associated with the project Materials that form part of this application include: ° Development Application Report ° Application forms (Appendix A): ° IDAS Form 1 – Application Details ° IDAS Form 23 – Tidal works and development within coastal management districts ° IDAS Form 26 - Marine plants and declared fish habitat areas ° SmartMap and Property Titles for the affected land parcels (Appendix B) ° Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ) certified engineering drawings and RPEQ Certification of design of tidal work (Appendix C) ° Planning Assessment – State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAP) (Appendix D) ° Planning Assessment – Coastal Protection State Planning Regulatory Provision (Appendix E) ° Planning Assessment – IDAS Code for Prescribed Tidal Works (Appendix F) ° Environmental Searches (Appendix G) ° Erosion Control Concept Design Report (Appendix H) ° Ecological Assessment Report (Appendix I) ° Correspondence (Appendix J)

1.2.1 Related approvals

♦ Marine Park Permit The project also triggers assessment under the Great Sandy Marine Parks (Great Sandy) Zoning Plan 2006 and the Marine Parks Regulation (2006) as the development involves works requiring permission within a Marine Park. An application for a Marine Park Permit was submitted to the DNPRSaR on the 16 August 2013, and will be assessed concurrently with the current application for Prescribed Tidal Works.

p 8

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

♦ Clearing Permit The clearing of native vegetation within the project area will require an application for a Clearing Permit to be obtained under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 . This permit will be sought concurrently with this application.

p 9

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

2 Subject site and locality description

2.1 Locality The proposed seawall will be located at Kingfisher Parade, Toogoom, Queensland, within the . Toogoom is a small coastal community comprising low density residential and holiday homes stretching along the coastline. Toogoom is located within the Wide Bay Burnett coastal region of Queensland, located approximately 15 km north-west of Hervey Bay. The region is both nationally and internationally recognised for its significant natural features, containing the Fraser National and World Heritage Area; and the - a declared Ramsar and State Marine Park. The region also supports various protected flora and fauna species including extensive areas of and habitat, shorebird habitat, and significant populations of . The site is also located approximately 70 km south of the southern extent of the Marine Park and World Heritage Area, and 600 m south-east of the Burrum Coast Nationally Important Wetland. Figure 2.1 below provides an indication of the subject locality, and Figure 2.2 illustrates the location of protected features under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

p 10

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Figure 2.1 Subject locality and project site indicated by the blue star (Source: The State of Queensland)

Figure 2.2 Location of protected matters under the EPBC Act, project site indicated by the blue star (Source: http://www.environment.gov.au/webgis-framework/apps/pmst/pmst.jsf )

p 11

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

2.2 Subject land

2.2.1 Tenure The legal description and tenure of the subject land for this application is summarised in Table 2.1 below. Relevant SmartMaps and historic survey plans for the project site are contained within Appendix B.

Table 21 Land tenure details

Lot Plan Tenure Street Owner Trustee address

N/A N/A Road Reserve Esplanade, The State of Queensland Fraser Coast Regional Kingfisher (Represented by the Council Parade Department of Natural Resources and Mines)

Unallocated State Land Owned by the State of - Queensland (Represented by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM))

The proposed seawall is located at the boundary of Unallocated State Land (tidal land below HAT) and coastal land designated as an ‘esplanade’. As indicated in Table 2.1 and the survey plans within Appendix B, the tenure of the ‘esplanade’ on which the proposed seawall will be located is a road reserve designated under Section 93 of the Land Act 1994 . The ‘esplanade’ is therefore State owned land administered by the FCRC for the benefit of the public.

2.2.2 Land use The subject site for the proposed works is the coastal ‘esplanade’ located at Toogoom and fronting properties 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade. The site is within the FCRC local government tidal area and the boundaries of the Wide Bay Burnett Coastal Management District. The project site is also located adjacent to the Beelbi Creek coastal estuary and wetland, situated approximately 350 m west of the project site. Figures 2.3 and 2.4 provide an aerial view of the subject site, including an indication of the seawall footprint.

p 12

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Figure 2.3 Aerial view of the project site at Kingfisher Parade, Toogoom (Source: the State of Queensland 2013)

Figure 2.4 Aerial view of the project site at Kingfisher Parade, Toogoom (Source: the State of Queensland 2013)

p 13

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

As illustrated above, the project site is a small coastal community characterised by low density residential dwellings extending along the foreshore. Areas of dense vegetation also exist at the eastern and western edges of the proposed seawall footprint.

2.3 Environmental features

2.3.1 Local context and protected areas Toogoom is located outside of the boundaries of the Great Sandy Strait World Heritage Area. However coastal land adjoining the project site is identified as being located within the ‘Conservation Park Zone’ of the Great Sandy (State) Marine Park, and is also mapped as a declared Fish Habitat Area (FHA). Mapping showing the location of protected areas in the adjoining the site is provided in Figures 2.5 and 2.6 below.

Figure 2.5 Zoning – Marine Parks (Great Sandy) Zoning Plan 2006 (Project site indicated by the blue star)

p 14

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Figure 2.6 Beelbi Fish Habitat Area boundaries (Project site indicated by the blue star)

According to advice received from the DNPRSaR, the landward boundary of the Great Sandy Marine Park is taken to be the HAT boundary at the time of the declaration of the marine park, which relates to a survey undertaken of the area in 2004. The location of this boundary is illustrated within the proposal drawings in Appendix C. DNPRSaR and DAFF have confirmed that the boundary of the Beelbi FHA is consistent with the ‘Esplanade’ boundary (Refer also Section 1.1.2).

2.3.2 Coastal environment and geomorphology The coastal geomorphology of the project site is consistent with that in the wider Great Sandy Region and is noted to contain the following natural features: ° Extensive mangrove stands, mudflats and seagrass beds ° Important habitats for dugong and turtle species; and providing nursery and feeding areas for numerous species of fish and prawns ° One of only four examples of sand passage landscapes in Queensland and contains the southern most coral reefs on the eastern Australian coastline The near shore profiles of in the area can be described as relatively flat, resulting in large mud-flat and intertidal zones. Due to a prevailing easterly wind pattern and shelter provided by , beaches within the region are reasonably well protected from significant wave action for most of the year (Cardno, 2011). Calm conditions within the region are particularly conducive to the growth of and seagrass communities, which assist sediment capture and promote shoreline growth. However at the project site, the sheltering effect of Fraser Island is less pronounced. profiles are characterised by prevailing wind and wave direction. The coastal environment in the vicinity of the project site is also influenced by the entrance of waters from the Beelbi Creek. The entrance of waters from the Beelbi Creek to the coast has resulted in the development of an offshore flood shoal in excess of 2km wide each sides of the estuary.

p 15

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

2.3.3 Marine water and sediment transfer The beach at Toogoom is consistent with those throughout the Great Sandy Strait region, comprising a flat profile with a large intertidal zone. Sediment transport at Toogoom is in the cross shore direction with a predominant east to west transport pattern. An analysis of long term sediment transport patterns within the region noted that the net sediment transport is occurring in the western direction at a rate of 8,000m 3 per year under small wave conditions. However only 30% of this transport occurs on the upper beach (70% of the transport occurs on the Beelbi Estuary flood shoal). During storms, the sediment transport is (briefly) reversed, and directed towards the east. A study undertaken by James Cook University in 2004 to assess the erosion impact at the Kingfisher Parade foreshore identified that the upper dune width was narrowing by an average rate of 1 m to 2 m per year. Close to the Beelbi estuary the dune width was increasing by about 1 m per year, resulting in the development of a sand-lobe in this location. Further detail on sediment transfer is included within the ‘ Kingfisher Parade Seawall Preliminary Design Report ‘prepared by Aurecon and included in Appendix H.

2.3.4 Marine flora and fauna Vegetation within the project site is mapped by the DEHP as a ‘least concern’ mixed regional ecosystem (RE 12.2.11). There are no mapped endangered regional ecosystems within the project site. In addition, a search of the EPBC Act protected matters online search tool undertaken for an area within a 5 km radius of the project site, identified 34 threatened species and 50 migratory species as potentially occurring within the area. The results of ecological searches undertaken for the project area are contained within Appendix E. An ecological assessment undertaken within the project footprint (Refer Appendix I) confirmed the terrestrial ecology is consistent with a disturbed environment, containing a high proportion of non- native and weed species. A total of 69 flora species were identified within the project footprint. Of these species, 31 (45%) were native species and 38 (55 %) were non-native (ie exotic). Six non-native species observed during field investigations are declared as Class 3 pests under the provisions of the Queensland Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002 . Four species that were observed within the area of proposed works are recognised as marine plants under the provisions of the Fisheries Act, as they are considered to provide potential habitat for fish. In addition, during the field survey 15 native bird species were identified, including the Eastern (Pandion cristatus ), which is listed as a Migratory and Marine species under the provisions of the EPBC Act.

2.3.5 Indigenous Cultural Heritage A search of the Cultural Heritage Database was undertaken on the 30 July 2013 and did not identify any recorded heritage sites within the area of proposed works. Whilst no recorded sites have been identified within the immediate vicinity of the site, the Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and Multi-cultural Affairs (DATSIMA) also advises that although the area does not contain recognised cultural heritage items, it is possible that due to insufficient cultural heritage surveys in the past the subject site may still contain remnants of cultural significance. DATSIMA has advised the Cultural Heritage Body for the area is:

p 16

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

QC09/5 – QUD288/09 Land & Sea Claim #2 Principal Legal Officer Queensland South Native Title Services Ltd. Level 4, 370 Queen Street (PO Box 10832, Adelaide St) Brisbane, QLD 4000 Ph: (07) 3224 1200 Fax: (07) 3229 9880 The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 protects all aboriginal cultural heritage within Queensland. Under this legislation, all parties carrying out an activity under this legislation must take every reasonable and practical measure to ensure the activity does not harm indigenous cultural heritage. In complying with the Duty of Care requirement, appropriate procedures will be implemented during construction through the development of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to ensure any unexpected finds are managed appropriately.

2.4 Native Title Searches have been undertaken of the Native Title Register administered by the Native Title Tribunal to identify any Native Title Claims existing over the project site. The search results indicate a current native title claim ‘ QC09/5 Butchulla Land and Sea Claim #2’ applicable to the project area. As the works will be undertaken on State land, Native Title is not extinguished over the project area. Therefore notification is required under Section 24KA of the Native Title Act 1993 and will be undertaken on behalf of the FCRC prior to the commencement of construction.

p 17

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

3 Project description

3.1 Background Investigations regarding an appropriate solution to mitigate erosion impacts at Toogoom have been ongoing since 2005. Initially, the FCRC proposed to develop a geo-container seawall as a ‘last line of defence’ to the threat, and Aurecon was engaged to undertake preliminary design and cost estimate for the works. However, the geo-container seawall was never constructed and since this time erosion has been managed in an ad hoc fashion through the emergency replacement of sand following significant storm events, including that of the Australia Day 2013 storm event. In recent years, the erosion problem has become so severe that immediate action is now required to protect people and properties from the impact of coastal hazards. It is estimated that approximately 1 m to 2 m of sand is being eroded per year in this location, further exacerbated by the impacts of king tides and storm events. Most susceptible to erosion impacts are the properties located 58 to 78 Kingfisher Parade where the coastal dune buffer between these properties has been reduced to only few metres from the erosion scarp. Consultation regarding an appropriate erosion control solution for Toogoom has been undertaken between the residents of Kingfisher Parade, and State and local government representatives (including FCRC, DEHP, DAFF and DNPRSaR) since the initial project conception in 2005. These discussions have resulted in general support for a seawall to be developed in this location, subject to the appropriate design and environmental assessments being undertaken. As a result, Aurecon was engaged in July 2013 to undertake preliminary design and secure all necessary development approvals for the Project.

3.1.1 Coastal impacts As noted previously, sediment transport at Toogoom is in the cross shore direction with a predominant east to west transport pattern. It is estimated that approximately 8,000m 3 of sediment is transported in the western direction each year. At the Kingfisher Parade foreshore, the upper dune width is estimated to be narrowing at an average rate of 1 m to 2 m per year. Figures 3.1 to 3.3 illustrate the current appearance of the site and the extent of erosion in the area of the proposed seawall.

p 18

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Figure 3.1 Photo of Toogoom foreshore environment and extent of erosion fronting 48 Kingfisher Parade, July 2013 (Photo taken looking east)

Figure 3.2 Photo of Toogoom foreshore environment and extent of erosion fronting 66 Kingfisher Parade, July 2013 (Photo taken looking east).

p 19

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Property boundary

Figure 3.3 Photo of Toogoom foreshore environment and extent of erosion in the approximate location of 74 Kingfisher Parade, July 2013 (Photo looking east).

As illustrated in Figures 3.1 to 3.3, the impacts of ongoing erosion and storm tide has result in the formation of a significant erosion scarp of between 1 m to 2 m in height. Figure 3.3 illustrates the current dune buffer between private property and the beach in the most affected area comprising only a few meters in width.

3.1.2 Management arrangements The FCRC is currently in the process of developing a Shoreline Erosion Management Plan (SEMP) to identify management objectives to address the impacts of coastal erosion and hazards throughout the Fraser Coast local government area. However, in the interim, whilst the SEMP is being developed, the development of erosion control structures is undertaken in accordance with the Fraser Coast Regional Council (FCRC) Policy for Shoreline Erosion Protection Structures (Policy Number #2260297v2). This policy states that the FCRC will take the lead agency role to fund the initial capital cost of shoreline protection works, the cost of which would be recovered through a special rate charged on benefited properties. As such, the current project is being initially funded and managed by the FCRC, with the capital costs intended to be recovered from the residents through a special levy on their rates. Following construction, the seawall asset will be transferred to FCRC who will be responsible for on-going management and maintenance of the structure.

p 20

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

3.2 Seawall design

3.2.1 Physical testing To optimise the seawall layout for 50 year average recurrence interval (ARI) design scenario, physical testing was undertaken at the UNSW Water Research Laboratory using three seawall cross sections at a scale of 1:30. The physical model sought to investigate the integrity of the structure and the impact of waves, storm tide and overtopping. Testing highlighted that the storm tide level, including wave set-up, is slightly lower than the crest height of the seawall. During the 50 year design event conditions, the overtopping is extreme and would cause significant coastal flooding landward of the structure. At a distance of 10 m landward from the crest of the seawall, submergence of land due to wave action is in the order of 1 m to 1.5 m in height during the larger wave sets. The intensity of seawater flow at the crest experienced during the design event is likely to damage structures, scour building foundations and present a very significant safety hazard. It is understood that the FCRC is currently in the process of developing evacuation procedures for Toogoom. Adherence to these procedures will be critical to ensure safety during an event of this magnitude. As a result of the outcomes of physical testing, the orientation and placement of rock armour was amended to provide a design which is better able to withstand the forces of the 50 year design event. The current design is illustrated within the proposal drawings in Appendix C.

3.2.2 Design criteria Preliminary investigations undertaken by Aurecon identified that a rock armour seawall between properties 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade provided the most effective solution in terms of capital costs, constructability, and importantly, protection from coastal hazards The design standard for the seawall is to provide protection (with minimum damage) in a 50 year ARI cyclone event, including allowance for a of 0.3 m to 2063. These criteria equate to a design water level of +2.85m AHD for this location. With recognition to the applicable storm tide levels, tidal boundaries, and wind and wave patterns for the locality, the required height of the seawall has been determined to be +3.6m AHD to provide a standard 50 year design life for the structure. Further detail regarding the design criteria for the seawall is included within the design report included in Appendix H.

3.2.3 Rock seawall To mitigate erosion occurring at the foreshore fronting 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade, it is proposed to construct a rock armour seawall of approximately 370 m in length. Drawings indicating the design and footprint of the seawall are included in Appendix C. The proposed alignment of the seawall runs parallel to the existing shoreline, with the exception of each end where a 5 m return has been provided to mitigate scouring effects. Following advice received from State government agencies (including DEHP) the alignment of the seawall has been intentionally separated 10 m from the boundaries of private properties to maintain public assess along the foreshore. As illustrated in Drawing No. ‘LA-0003’, the cross section of the seawall is comprised of a geotextile layer (Elcomax or approved equivalent) underneath the wall, overlaid with two layers of secondary armour (comprising rocks with a mass of 150 kg), and two layers of primary armour (comprising rocks

p 21

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

with a mass of 1500 kg). Additional capping stones (comprising a mass of 4000 kg) are placed at the crest of the wall, with a top layer constructed in a special placement arrangement. As noted above, the seawall has been designed with a crest level at 3.6m AHD, corresponding to approximately 1 m above the existing ground level (recognising the varying level of the shoreline). To mitigate the effect of beach scour during extreme storm events, the toe of the seawall is proposed to be buried at -1.0 m AHD with two scour protection stones (comprising a mass of 2000 kg) positioned at the base of the seawall. Between properties located at 66 and 70 Kingfisher Parade, the seawall will include provision for a timber staircase and boardwalk to connect with the existing public thoroughfare from Kingfisher Parade, and maintain public access across the structure. A timber staircase overlaid across the rock armour is proposed due to the results of physical testing where it was determined that the seawall required a uniform alignment (with no breaks) to maintain integrity during the design event.

3.3 Construction methodology The following section provides a brief summary of the intended construction methodology for the proposed works. It is noted that the information provided is preliminary only, and details of the construction methodology cannot be confirmed until a construction contractor has been engaged. It is intended that further detail regarding the construction methodology for the works and methods to minimise environmental impact would be outlined within a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to be developed prior to construction.

3.3.1 Construction schedule Construction works are expected to commence in late 2013 following FCRC obtaining all relevant development approvals and a contractor being engaged. The construction period is likely to comprise three to five months.

3.3.2 Vegetation clearing Subject to the FCRC obtaining all necessary development approvals, the first stage in the construction process would involve clearing of the project footprint. The clearing footprint would be delineated with appropriate signage and markings, and vegetation removal limited to the minimum extent possible to enable construction. Significant trees would be retained where possible, where these root systems are unlikely to interfere with the seawall structure. Any trees adjacent to the clearing footprint which require specific protection would be marked, and appropriate procedures established through the CEMP to ensure no damage occurs. Following the completion of vegetation clearing, it is intended that materials would be mulched for use during re-vegetation where possible.

3.3.3 Seawall Construction of the seawall will be undertaken in stages such that disturbance of the foreshore is limited to the daily extent of works. A long reach excavator will be used to dig a trench on the dune, erosion scarp and beach along the seawall alignment. This trench will be approximately 3 m wide at the base and likely to be relatively small length, approximately 10m long, in order to reduce short term slope instabilities and manage erosion during construction. The excavator will reach foundation level at -1.0 m AHD, which is

p 22

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

approximately 300mm below the Mean Low Water Neap level. As such, the bottom of the trench is likely to be filled with water, even at low tide. The excavated material from the trench would be placed on the beach to form a temporary bund around the excavation area. The bund will allow corrective action to be taken, should acid sulphate soils be encountered during the excavation (discussed further below). Following digging of the trench, the seawall would be constructed from bottom to top. The filter layer (secondary armour) is placed on a geotextile and the primary armour stacked on top of the filter layer. Capping stones are then placed on top of the seawall in a special pattern placement to ensure the integrity of the structure (note the design of the armour placement is currently subject to refinement). Once construction is complete, the temporary ‘bund’ would be removed, and the seawall backfilled to the natural shoreline level. Excavated material would be used to backfill the crest of the wall and to reinstate the shoreline profile around the toe.

3.3.4 Material supply and laydown Material for the proposed erosion protection works is intended to be sourced from the Dundowran quarry, located approximately 10 km south east of the site. It is intended that rock supply for the construction of the revetment and seawall would be sourced and transported to the site in stages as required. However, there may be a need for temporary stockpile (laydown) of machinery or materials during the construction period. Where the temporary stockpile of material or machinery is required, it is intended that this would be located within either (or both) of the coastal esplanade (once cleared), or within private land at number 52 Kingfisher Parade, which is currently vacant. Where laydown is required within the coastal esplanade, the necessary authorisation would be obtained from the FCRC and the DNRM. It is also expected that no vegetation removal would be required to enable use of number 52 Kingfisher Parade. It is anticipated that a Traffic Management Plan would be developed by the contractor, prior to the commencement of construction works, detailing routes for the transport of materials to site and the intended arrangements for laydown and storage.

3.3.5 Machinery Machinery required for construction activities will consist principally of a long reach excavator to undertake all excavation and filling activities, and a ‘rock-grab’ (Photo 3.1) to enable rocks to be transported and placed in their required position. Trucks will also be required to transport material to the site along with smaller machines such as a bobcat and utility vehicles.

Photo 3.1 Illustration of a rock-grab.

p 23

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

3.3.6 Acid sulphate soils As the works will require excavation below 5m AHD, there is the potential that acid sulphate soils (ASS) will be encountered during construction. An acid sulfate soil management plan (ASSMP) was developed for the project area in 2004. The 2004 geotechnical investigation did not encounter ASS above the water table, which at the time was at -1.5m AHD, however there is the potential that ASS may be present at depth. It is intended that the existing ASSMP would be updated and implemented for this project. The ASSMP will include methods to mitigate potential environmental impacts through the implementation of appropriate controls for handling, managing and treating ASS material, should these soils be encountered during excavation works. If material requires treatment the ASSMP covers a number of possible alternative options for treatment (such as liming).

3.3.7 Construction water During the construction period, a water supply may be necessary for the compaction of materials whilst laying the foundation of the seawall. It is intended that seawater would be used for this purpose, obtained by either use of an excavator bucket or a temporary pump. Authorisation for the use of seawater during construction is being sought from the DNPRSaR through the application for a Marine Park Permit.

3.3.8 Site rehabilitation Following completion of construction activities the site is intended to be re-vegetated where possible. Re-vegetation within the seawall footprint is likely to consist of the establishment of dune stabilising species such as Salt Couch. At the ends of the seawall where a greater dune buffer is available, additional species may be utilised. Specific details of re-vegetation objectives, including species types and planting densities are subject to confirmation by the FCRC.

p 24

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

4 Planning assessment

4.1 Overview The proposed works, relevant to this development application, trigger the following assessable development under Queensland legislation: ° Operational Works that are Tidal Works in a CMD under Schedule 3 Table 4 Item 5 of the Sustainable Planning Regulations (2009) (SP Reg) ° Operational Works for the removal, damage, or destruction to marine plants under SPA and the Fisheries Act

4.1.1 Applicant details Fraser Coast Regional Council PO Box 1943 Hervey Bay QLD 4655 Contact Name: Lisa Desmond Email: [email protected] Phone: 4197 4318

4.2 Commonwealth regulatory framework

4.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The EPBC Act provides that any action (ie a project, development, undertaking, activity or series or activities) that has, will have or is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance (NES), or other matters protected under the Act such as the environment of Commonwealth land, requires approval from the Commonwealth Environment Minister (the Minister). If a project is likely to impact on any of these matters of NES a referral, under the EPBC Act must be made to the Minister. Relevance to project: Searches were undertaken of the ‘EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool’ on the 7 August 2013 for an area within a 5km radius of the project site. The EPBC search results identified the following matters of NES protected under the Act (refer search results within Appendix G): ° No threatened ecological communities ° 34 Threatened Species ° 50 Migratory species ° One place on the Register of the National Estate (Great Sandy Strait Ramsar Wetland)

A CEMP will be developed prior to the commencement of construction activities, detailing measures for the protection of the environment during this period, including potential impacts to terrestrial and marine species. For these reasons, the proposed works are not considered to impact on any matters of NES under the EPBC Act, and further assessment is not considered to be required.

4.2.2 Native Title Act 1993 The Native Title Act 1993 (NT Act) provides the legal principles for the recognition of native title and the integration of this form of property right into the existing land title system. The Act establishes the processes involved in having native title recognised and the role and responsibilities of the different bodies involved in this process. Where native title has not been extinguished, the procedural requirements of the NT Act are required to be met prior to securing an appropriate tenure or undertaking works within areas of Unallocated State Land (USL).

Relevance to project As the works will be located on State land, Native Title has not been extinguished over the project area. Therefore notification to the registered native title party or claimant and the relevant land council will be required under the NT Act.

Searches have been undertaken of the Native Title Register administered by the Native Title Tribunal to identify any Native Title Claims existing over the project site. The search results indicate a current native title claim ‘ QC09/5 Butchulla Land and Sea Claim #2’ applicable to the project area. As the works are being undertaken by the FCRC and constitute public works which will not impact on access to the coast; notification will be undertaken in accordance with Section 24KA of the Act (Facilities for Service to the Public ). Therefore, the ‘non-extinguishment principle’ of the Act applies, and no compensation will be applicable for this project.

Native title notification will be undertaken prior to construction commencing and will consist of issuing a letter to the native title party and the land council to advise them of the proposed works, and inviting their comments. A public notice will also be published in the local paper.

4.3 State regulatory framework

4.3.1 Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) The SPA is the legislation that governs planning in Queensland. The SPA seeks to achieve ecological sustainable outcomes for development within Queensland by coordinating and integrating planning mechanisms at local, regional and state levels, managing the effects of development on the environment, and managing the process by which development takes place. Development that is prescribed by the State in Schedule 3 or by local government through their planning scheme as assessable development requires an application for development approval under the SPA, with the Assessment Manager identified in Schedule 6 of the SP Reg.

Relevance to the project The proposed works trigger the following assessable development under Schedule 3 of the SP Reg: ° Operational Works that are Tidal Works in a CMD (Schedule 3 Table 4 Item 5)) ° Operational Works for the removal, damage, or destruction to marine plants under SPA and the Fisheries Act (Schedule 3 Table 4 Item 8)

p 26

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

4.3.1.1 Owner’s Consent In accordance with Section 263 of the SPA, owner’s consent is required to support a development application if the application is for: “(a) a material change of use of premises or reconfiguring a lot; or (b) work on land below high-water mark and outside a canal as defined under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995; or (c) work on rail corridor land as defined under the Transport Infrastructure Act.” As the proposed development will involve works below the high-water mark, owner’s consent has been obtained from the DNRM and is included within IDAS Form 1 in Appendix A. Owner’s consent is not required from the FCRC for works within the area of the ‘esplanade’ as the works above the high water mark do not involve a material change of use, or reconfiguring a lot.

4.3.1.2 Assessment manager As the proposed works are located entirely within a local government tidal area (i.e within 50m of MHWS), the FCRC will act as the Assessment Manager for the development application under SPA, in accordance with Schedule 6 Table 1 Item 1 of the SP Reg. The State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA) (via DSDIP) will coordinate the State agency interests for the project during the referral period under SPA.

4.3.1.3 State Assessment and Referral Agency Following the commencement of SARA on 1 July 2013, the Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (DSDIP) will coordinate the assessment of development applications where a State agency has a concurrence agency jurisdiction. In accordance with Schedule 7 of the SP Reg, the following referral triggers have been identified for the application and are summarised in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Referral agencies and their jurisdiction

Agency interest Matter Jurisdiction

DEHP Table 2 Item 13 Concurrence Agency Operational work, other than prescribed tidal work in a canal, made assessable under schedule 3, part 1, table 4, item 5

DTMR (Marine Safety Table 2 Item 15 Concurrence Agency Queensland (MSQ)) Operational work made assessable under schedule 3, part 1, table 4, item 5, that is: (a) tidal works (b) disposing of dredge spoil or other solid waste material in tidal water (c) reclaiming land under tidal water (d) constructing a canal, if the canal is associated with reconfiguring a lot

p 27

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Table 2 Item 15A Concurrence Agency Operational work that is tidal work made assessable under schedule 3, part 1, table 4, item 5 Table 3 Item 2 Concurrence Agency An aspect of development identified in schedule 9 that— (a) is for a purpose mentioned in schedule 9, column 1; and (b) meets or exceeds the threshold— (i) for development in LGA population 1—mentioned in schedule 9, column 2 for the purpose; or (ii) for development in LGA population 2—mentioned in schedule 9, column 3 for the purpose. Department of Agriculture, Table 2 Item 30 Concurrence Agency Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) Operational work that is the removal, destruction or damage of a marine plant made assessable under schedule 3, part 1, table 4, item 8 Table 2 Item 27 Concurrence Agency Development on land that adjoins a declared fish habitat area made assessable under schedule 3, part 1.

4.3.1.4 State planning policies A State Planning Policy (SPP) is a statutory instrument developed by the Queensland State Government on matters of State interest. SPPs apply when development is assessed, land is designated for community infrastructure, and when proposed new planning schemes are made or amended under SPA. There are currently thirteen (13) SPPs and one temporary SPP, three (3) of which apply to the proposed development, as demonstrated in Table 4.2 below.

Table 4.2 Application of state planning policies

SPP Compliance

SPP 1/92 - Development and the Not applicable. The development is not located on land identified Conservation of Agricultural Land as Good Quality Agricultural Land.

SPP 1/02 - Development in the Vicinity of Applies. The project site is located within close proximity to the Certain Airports and Aviation Facilities Hervey Bay airport which is triggered under Annex 2 of the SPP. The proposed works will not impact on the operational airspace of the Hervey Bay airport.

SPP 2/02 - Planning and Managing Applies. The proposed works will involve earthworks below 5m Development Involving Acid sulphate AHD. Measures for the management of Acid Sulfate Soils will be Soils established through an ASSMP to be implemented during the

p 28

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

SPP Compliance construction phase. Therefore the development is considered to comply with SPP 2/02.

SPP 1/03 - Mitigating the Impacts of Applies. The site is located in an area contained in Annex 2. The Flood, Bushfire and Landslide development will be designed to minimise the risk of safety hazards, and measures to ensure public health and safety will be established through the CEMP to be implemented during the construction phase. Therefore the development is considered to comply with SPP 1/03.

SPP 1/07 - Housing and Residential Not applicable. The proposal does not involve housing and Development residential development.

SPP 2/07 - Protection of Extractive Not applicable. The site is not located in a Key Resource Area. Resources

SPP 1/09 – Reconfiguration of a lot code Not applicable. The proposal does not involve reconfiguring a lot. for land in indigenous local government areas to which a planning scheme does not apply.

SPP 2/10 – South East Queensland Not applicable. The proposed development is not located in the Koala Conservation South East Queensland Region.

SPP 3/10 – Acceleration of Compliance Not applicable. The proposal does not require Compliance Assessment Assessment.

SPP4/10 Healthy Waters Not applicable. SPP4/10 does not apply to development for Operational Works under SPA.

SPP5/10 Air, Noise and Hazardous Not applicable. The proposed works do not involve reconfiguration Materials of a lot, a material change of use, or development of a sensitive land use.

SPP 4/11 – Protecting of high Not applicable. The subject site is not located within an area ecological significance in Great Barrier defined in Annex 2 of the SPP. Reef catchments

SPP1/12 Protection of Queensland’s Not applicable. The project site is not identified as Strategic Strategic Cropping Land Cropping Land.

4.3.2 Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (Coastal Act)

4.3.2.1 Overview Development within the coastal zone is regulated by DEHP under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (Coastal Act). DEHP is responsible for making decisions on development proposals in coastal areas (ie CMDs) for their impacts on “coastal management”. The Coastal Act includes “coastal management” as the protection, conservation, rehabilitation, management and ecologically sustainable development of the coastal zone.

4.3.2.2 Prescribed Tidal Works Tidal works is defined under the Schedule to the Coastal Act as “ work that is undertaken on land that is in, on, or above, land under tidal water, or land that will, or may be, under tidal water because of development on or near the land, and work that is an integral part of the relevant work, wherever located”. No tidal works may be carried out in, on or above land under tidal water in the State of

p 29

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Queensland without a Development Approval in the form of a Development Permit pursuant to the provisions of SPA. Under Section 14 of the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2003 (Coastal Regulation), tidal works that are completely or partly located within a local government tidal area are defined as ‘prescribed tidal works’. A local government tidal area is defined as the area within 50 m seaward of the mean high water mark. Therefore, the proposed works are defined as ‘Prescribed Tidal Works’ as they are being undertaken entirely within a local government tidal area. Prescribe Tidal works is identified as assessable development under Schedule 3 Table 4 Item 5 of the SP Reg.

♦ Assessment of prescribed tidal works Applications for prescribed tidal works are assessed against the following planning regulations developed under the Coastal Act: ° Coastal Protection State Planning Regulatory Provision (the Draft SPRP) (refer further detail below); and ° IDAS Code for the Assessment of Prescribed Tidal Works. In addition, following the commencement of SARA, tidal works also require assessment against the relevant State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAP) (ie. Module 10: Coastal protection ). An assessment of the proposed works against the SDAP requirements is included within Appendix D ; an assessment against the Draft SPRP is contained in Appendix E ; and an assessment against the IDAS Code for the Assessment of Prescribed Tidal Works is included in Appendix F.

♦ Certification of Tidal Works All design drawings referenced in this document have been reviewed and certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ). A certificate of design, included in Appendix C, has also been signed by a RPEQ certifying that: ° The proposed prescribed tidal works are structurally adequate for their anticipated usage ° The proposed prescribed tidal works comply with all relevant codes – including DEHP’s operational policy, Building and engineering standards for tidal works

♦ Water Area Allocation Plan A Water Area Allocation Plan is a document that illustrates how a development satisfies navigational and marine safety requirements, and the maintenance of access to tidal waters from private properties. Water Area Allocation Plans must show any quay line requirements of the area and consider the navigable water space of adjoining and neighbouring properties. A Water Area Allocation Plan is required for applications for tidal works involving the construction of structures that: ° Occupy water space within the navigable waterway ° Could hinder navigable access between adjoining waterfront properties and between adjacent approved structures The current proposal is not located within a navigable waterway and is related to the provision of public works for the purpose of erosion protection. Additionally, the works adjoin a public reserve and will therefore not hinder access to the coastal environment from adjoining private properties. For these reasons, a Water Area Allocation Plan is not considered to be required for this project.

p 30

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

♦ Queensland Coastal Plan and Coastal Protection State Planning Regulatory Provision 2013 The Queensland Coastal Plan (the Coastal Plan) was adopted on 3 February 2012 and replaces the former State Coastal Management Plan (2001). The Coastal Plan has the purpose to provide a vision and direction for coastal management within Queensland and to identify specific policy outcomes and standards to be applied in the assessment of development proposals within the coastal zone. As part of the Coastal Plan, SPP 3/11: Coastal Protection (SPP3/11) was also created to satisfy, in part, the object of the Coastal Act and provide criteria for land-use planning, coastal activities and development assessment. However in October 2012 SPP3/11 was suspended to facilitate a review of the Coastal Plan, and was replaced with the Coastal Protection State Planning Regulatory Provision (the Draft SPRP). In accordance with Part 2.1 of the Draft SPRP, the provisions are applicable the current application, as the works involve “ development in a coastal management district by an agency with jurisdiction under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995”. An assessment of the provisions of the Draft SPRP is included within Appendix E.

4.3.3 Marine Parks Act 1994 The Marine Parks Act has the purpose to declare and regulate development within Queensland’s State marine parks. Marine parks established over tidal lands and waters protect and conserve the values of the natural marine environment while allowing for its sustainable use. Marine Park boundaries can be established over tidal lands and waters up to the highest astronomical tide. The Great Sandy Marine Park was declared under the Marine Parks Act in 2006, and extends from Baffle Creek in the north to Double Island Point in the south. Development in the Great Sandy Marine Park is regulated under the Marine Parks (Great Sandy Zoning) Plan 2006 (the Zoning Plan). The Zoning Plan has the purpose to establish individual zones within the marine park, and define the objectives and policies for use and development within each zone. The Zoning Plan also regulates development within the marine park through a permit system.

Relevance to the project Figure 2.5 illustrates the location subject site and current zoning according to the Zoning Plan. As illustrated in Figure 2.5, the subject site is located within the ‘Conservation Zone’ of the Great Sandy Marine Park. As such, the proposed works require a development permit for ‘Entry or Use within a Marine Park’. An application for a marine park permit was submitted to the DNPRSaR on the 16 August 2013, and will be assessed concurrently with the current application for Prescribed Tidal Works.

4.3.4 Fisheries Act 1994 The Fisheries Act provides for the management, use, development and protection of fisheries resources and fish habitats, and the management of aquaculture activities. The Act holds provisions for the following: ° Waterway barrier works ° Works in a declared Fish Habitat Area (FHA) ° Removal, destruction and/or damage to marine plants, including mangroves and seagrass Schedule 3, Part 1, Table 4, Item 6-8 of the SP Reg specifies that Operational Work for the purposes of the above activities under the Fisheries Act is Assessable Development.

p 31

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Relevance to the project An ecological assessment undertaken for the project area identified four species recognised as marine plants under the provisions of the Fisheries Act as they are considered to provide potential habitat for fish (Refer Appendix I): ° New Zealand spinach (Tetragonia tetragonioides) ° Sea purslane (Sesuviam portulacastrum) ° Goats foot, Beach morning glory vine (Ipomoea pes-caprae subsp. Brasiliensis) ° Pigweed (Portulaca bicolor) As the project area will be cleared prior to construction, a development permit is required for the removal of these species under the Fisheries Act. Further information regarding potential impacts to marine plants is provided in Section 5.4.2. In addition, the project area is located adjacent to the landward boundary of the Beelbi FHA. Further information regarding the boundary of the FHA is provided within Section 1.1.2. As the works are located on land adjoining a FHA, DAFF has a concurrence agency jurisdiction to assess the potential impact of the works on the adjoining FHA.

4.3.5 Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) The Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) provides for the conservation and management of nature through two mechanisms: ° declaration and management of protected area ° the protection of native wildlife that is not found within a protected area The NC Act provides for orders to conserve, protect or manage wildlife, habitat or areas subject to a threatening process likely to have a significant detrimental effect. The Nature Conservation (Protected Plants) Conservation Plan 2000 and the Nature Conservation Regulation 1994 apply to the clearing of protected plants in the wild. All native plants in Queensland are protected plants.

Wildlife (animals and plants) can be declared under the Act within the following classes: ° Presumed extinct wildlife ° Endangered wildlife ° Vulnerable wildlife ° Rare wildlife ° Common wildlife ° International wildlife ° Prohibited wildlife

Approvals are required under the NC Act for the clearing of native vegetation (Clearing Permit), in addition to the tampering of an animal breeding place, interfering with a cultural or natural resource in a protected area or erecting a structure in a protected area.

Relevance to the project An ecological assessment undertaken within the project area (Appendix I) identified a total of 69 flora species within the project footprint. Of these species, 31 (45%) were native species and 38 (55 %) were non-native (ie exotic).

p 32

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

The clearing of native vegetation within the project area will require an application for a Clearing Permit to be obtained under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 . This permit will be sought concurrently with this application.

4.3.6 Vegetation Management Act 1999 The Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act) regulates the conservation and management of vegetation communities. Under the VM Act, a Regional Ecosystem (RE) is defined as a vegetation community in a bioregion that is consistently associated with a particular combination of geology, land form and soil.

Relevance to the project

Vegetation within the project site is mapped by the DNRM as a ‘least concern’ mixed regional ecosystem (RE 12.2.11). However, no clearing permit is required under the VM Act as the proposed works are designated as a road reserve and exemptions apply for the removal of vegetation within a road under Schedule 24 Item 5 of the SP Reg (outlined below). “5 Land that is a road under the Land Act 1994 For land that is a road under the Land Act 1994, clearing that is— (a) carried out by a local government, or by or for the chief executive of the department in which the Transport Infrastructure Act is administered, and is— (i) necessary to construct road infrastructure or to source construction material for roads; or (ii) in an urban area and the vegetation is a least concern regional ecosystem shown on the regional ecosystem map or remnant map as remnant vegetation; or (iii) in an urban area and the vegetation is shown on the regional ecosystem map or remnant map as other than remnant vegetation…” The application of this exemption to this particular project has been confirmed by the DNRM.

4.3.7 Land Act 1994 The Land Act 1994 (Land Act) regulates the management of land in Queensland for the benefit of the people by having regard to seven principles: sustainability, evaluation, development, community purpose, protection, consultation and administration. The Land Act sets out the framework for the management of State land, leasehold land, and freehold land.

Relevance to the project The proposed works will be located within the Toogoom ‘esplanade’. According to advice received from the DNRM, the ‘esplanade’ is State land which is designated as a road and administered by the FCRC under Section 93 of the Land Act.

4.3.8 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 (ACH Act) binds all persons, including the state, to provide recognition, protection and conservation of Aboriginal cultural heritage. Section 23 of the ACH Act states that ‘a person who carries out an activity must take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure the activity does not harm Aboriginal cultural heritage’ (the ‘cultural heritage duty of care’).

The ACH Act requires the development of a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) if:

• An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required; or

p 33

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

• An environmental authority is required under a different act. A CHMP may also be required where a development application is required under SPA, and the chief executive of the ACH Act is a concurrence agency for the application. However the need for a CHMP in this instance is requested through an ‘Information Request’ under SPA for works that have the potential to impact on aboriginal cultural heritage.

Relevance to the project An Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Search has been obtained for an area within 1 km of the project site and is included within Appendix G. Whilst no recorded sites have been identified within the immediate vicinity of the site, DATSIMA also advises that although the area does not contain recognised cultural heritage items, it is possible that due to insufficient cultural heritage surveys in the past the subject site may still contain remnants of cultural significance. DATSIMA has advised the Cultural Heritage Body for the area is: QC09/5 – QUD288/09 Butchulla Land & Sea Claim #2 Principal Legal Officer Queensland South Native Title Services Ltd. Level 4, 370 Queen Street (PO Box 10832, Adelaide St) Brisbane, QLD 4000 Ph: (07) 3224 1200 Fax: (07) 3229 9880 In complying with the Duty of Care requirement, appropriate procedures will be implemented during construction through the development of a CEMP to ensure any unexpected finds are managed appropriately. In addition, notification is intended to be provided to the applicable cultural heritage body prior to construction to advise them of the proposed works and invite their comments.

4.3.9 Environmental Protection Act 1994 The objective of the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act) is to protect Queensland’s environment and to promote ecologically sustainable development. The EP Act establishes the General Environmental Duty established under Section 36 of the Act, which requires that “a person must not carry out any activity that causes or is likely to cause environmental harm unless the person takes all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent or minimise the harm”. To act with due diligence, the parties must show that the environmental risk associated with the activity has been assessed and minimised where possible.

Relevance to the project The proposed development must have due regard to the need to minimise environmental impacts associated with construction activities. To meet the principles of the General Environmental Duty, it is proposed to develop a CEMP to be implemented prior to construction, detailing measures to prevent or minimise environmental impacts.

4.4 Local government regulatory framework

4.4.1 Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan 2011 The proposed development falls within the Wide Bay Burnett region and is regulated by the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan 2011 and the Wide Bay Burnett State Planning Regulatory Provisions 2011 .

p 34

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

The Wide Bay Burnett allocates all land into one of three land use categories; Regional Landscape and Rural Production Area, Urban Footprint and Rural Living Area. These categories provide the spatial context for the regulatory provisions of the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan. The subject site falls within the Urban Footprint and the proposal is consistent with the intention of the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan.

4.4.2 Hervey Bay Planning Scheme (2006) The subject site is located within the Fraser Coast Regional Council local government area. Planning and development within the locality of the subject site is regulated by the FCRC under the Hervey Bay Planning Scheme 2006 (the planning scheme).

Relevance to the project: Figure 4.2 below provides an illustration of the project site and current zoning according to the Planning Scheme.

Figure 4.2 Zoning – Hervey Bay Planning Scheme (Project site indicated by the blue star)

As illustrated above, the site of the proposed seawall at Toogoom is located within unzoned land designated as a road reserve under the Land Act (as detailed above). Adjoining private land, including those properties bordering the proposed seawall (i.e. 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade) is zoned as Low Density Residential under the planning scheme. Schedule 4 Table 4 of the SP Reg specifies that operational works being undertaken “by or on behalf of a public sector entity ” is exempt development under a planning scheme. Therefore, the proposed works are not assessable under the Planning Scheme. However, as the proposed works are located within a local government tidal area, the FCRC is identified as the assessment manager for the development application. Therefore an assessment of the IDAS Code for Prescribed Tidal Works

p 35

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Code under Schedule 4A of the Coastal Act has been undertaken and is included within Appendix F. This Code requires consideration to the zoning and planning objectives under the planning scheme.

p 36

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

5 Potential impacts and mitigation measures

5.1 Summary of potential impacts Potential environmental impacts as a result of the proposed works will comprise both short term impact associated with construction activities, and potential long term impacts to coastal geomorphology. As noted within Section 3, the proposed works are anticipated to be constructed over a period of three to five months. During this time, it will be essential that appropriate management controls are established to mitigate the short term impacts associated with the use of machinery in and around the coastal environment. It is also acknowledged that the proposed seawall will comprise the addition of a permanent physical structure into the coastal environment, and therefore potential impacts to coastal geomorphology and sediment transfer must also be considered. An assessment of the potential impacts associated with the works is provided below, including the identification of potential mitigation measures where appropriate.

5.2 Coastal geomorphology The proposed works are required to protect people and property from the impacts of on-going erosion and storm tide, as well as to provide a level of immunity from coastal hazards during extreme events. While it is recognised that the seawall presents the introduction of a physical structure in this locality, the seawall has been designed with consideration to local coastal processes and minimising effects on sediment transfer. As noted in Section 2, the predominant sediment transfer pattern in this location is east to west, and is significantly influenced by the drainage of Beelbi Creek. The subject site is particularly susceptible to erosion, whereas locations either side of the Beelbi Creek are experiencing sand accretion. Once constructed, the seawall will protect the properties at 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade from on-going beach erosion. However, the beach erosion is likely to continue at Toogoom Beach and as a result the ends of the seawall may require extension overtime to protect the neighbouring properties either side of the current seawall footprint. Typically erosion in these locations occurs at an average rate of 1.5 m per year. The remaining dune buffer at the eastern end is approximately 30m wide. This implies that additional erosion protection may be required in these locations within the next 20 years. However, it

p 37

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

is also noted that erosion is often episodic (resulting from storm events) and cannot be accurately predicted. The seawall will not significantly affect sediment transport patterns along the beach, with the exception of reducing the sand material available for transport immediately behind the wall. The effect of the seawall is that sand located behind the wall becomes unavailable for transport. However this effect is localised and does not mean that the magnitude of sediment transport is affected significantly along the beach. The seawall ends will also have some effect on littoral transport. The eastern end of the seawall may potentially interrupt the predominant westerly transport pattern and has less risk of undermining than the western end of the seawall (where the dune buffer is wider). However, it is also noted that storm events dominate sediment transport processes on the upper beach, and as such, the direction of littoral transport during storm can be in the eastern or western direction. The seawall has been designed to minimise the potential effects of scouring and resultant sediment transfer through the use of appropriate armour design, as well as additional toe and end protection. The proposed works have also been designed for a 50 yr ARI event and with allowance for sea level rise of 0.3 m (by 2063) to provide an appropriate level of protection to ensure the integrity of the structure, and minimise the need for additional works in future. The development of permanent works will also avoid the need for sand nourishment which has been previously occurring in this location as a temporary mitigation measure.

5.3 Heritage values

5.3.1 Non-Indigenous cultural heritage In determining potential impacts on matters of natural heritage, consideration must be given to the nature, magnitude and extent of potential impacts; as well as the sensitivity of the receiving environment. The site of the proposed works is in close proximity to Great Sandy Strait (a declared Ramsar wetland) and adjacent to Fraser Island (a registered World Heritage Area and National Heritage Area protected under the EPBC Act). It is considered that the proposed works, being for the purpose of protection and maintenance of an existing public facility, will not result in any significant impacts to the heritage features of the area. The works are located outside of the boundaries of the Great Sandy Strait, and comprise a scale which is unlikely to have significant impacts on the coastal environment in this location. In addition, given the developed nature of the area, there are no known sensitive marine species or features located within the immediate area of works. Therefore, the development is not considered to impact on the cultural heritage values of the locality.

5.3.2 Indigenous cultural heritage A cultural heritage search has been undertaken for an area within 1 km of the project site, and is included within Appendix G. No significant cultural heritage sites are known to be located within the area of works. Given the lack of recorded features and the long term occupation of the area for residential development, the proposed works are not considered to impact on aboriginal cultural heritage values. However, appropriate controls will be established through the CEMP to ensure that correct procedures are followed in the event of a significant find of either European or aboriginal cultural heritage significance. Such measures will include stop work orders and provisions for notification to an appropriate cultural heritage representative or agency.

p 38

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

In addition, notification is intended to be provided to the applicable cultural heritage body prior to construction to advise them of the proposed works and invite their comments.

5.4 Flora/fauna impacts

5.4.1 Terrestrial ecology The clearing of existing vegetation will be required within the project footprint to enable construction of the seawall. Accordingly, an ecological assessment was undertaken for the project area and confirmed the terrestrial ecology is consistent with a disturbed environment, containing a high proportion of non-native and weed species (refer section 2.3.4). Whilst the project site is characterised by a significant extent of non-native and weed species, the clearing of native species will require a permit under the NC Act. This permit would be sought prior to any clearing works commencing on the site. No clearing permit is required under the VM Act as the proposed works are designated as a road reserve and exemptions apply for the removal of vegetation within a road under Schedule 24 of the SPA. Given the disturbed nature of the environment, the clearing of vegetation in this locality is considered to have minor impacts on terrestrial ecology. As noted in Chapter 3, measures would be established through the CEMP to be implemented during the construction period to minimise the impacts of vegetation clearing activities. Such mitigation measures will include clear delineation of the clearing footprint ensuring clearing is limited to the minimum extent possible.

5.4.2 Marine plants The ecological assessment undertaken for the project area identified four species recognised as marine plants under the provisions of the Fisheries Act within the proposed clearing footprint (Refer Appendix I): ° New Zealand spinach (Tetragonia tetragonioides) ° Sea purslane (Sesuviam portulacastrum) ° Goats foot, Beach morning glory vine (Ipomoea pes-caprae subsp. Brasiliensis) ° Pigweed (Portulaca bicolor) The clearing of marine plants require a development approval under the Fisheries Act. During field investigations, marine plants subject to tidal influence (below HAT) were identified only in the area fronting numbers 60 to 66 Kingfisher Parade (Refer Figure 5.1 below). This is the area illustrated between ‘control line B’ and ‘control line C’ and west of the proposed stairs on the proposal drawings in Appendix C.

p 39

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Figure 5.1 Illustration of area of marine plant disturbance below HAT.

Marine plants located in the disturbance area illustrated in Figure 5.1 were observed to be in good health. The marine plants were approximately 1 cm to 10 cm in height with an average height of approximately 6 cm. The density of these marine plants was observed to be sparse and occurred sporadically within the disturbance area. Portulaca bicolor (Pigweed), Sesuviam portulacastrum (Sea purslane) and Ipomoea pes-caprae subsp. brasiliensis (Beach morning glory vine) each had approximately 0.5% vegetation cover; while Tetragonia tetragonioides (New Zealand spinach) had approximately 1% vegetation cover. Therefore, the total vegetation cover of marine plants within the disturbance area estimated to be approximately 2.5%. The proposed disturbance area located west of the proposed stairs and below HAT is approximately 370 m2. Based on an estimated 2.5 % coverage density, the area of marine plants required to be cleared within this area is approximately 9.25 m 2. Further assessment against the assessment criteria for the removal, destruction or damage of marine plants is provided in Appendix D.

5.4.3 Marine fauna The ecological assessment undertaken for the project area identified 15 native bird species, including the Eastern osprey (Pandion cristatus ) listed as a Migratory and Marine species under the provisions of the EPBC Act (refer search results in Appendix G). However due to the temporary nature of construction works, impacts to migratory bird species are unlikely. Nonetheless, as construction works will be undertaken within a marine environment, the following impacts may occur to marine fauna: ° Harassment of fauna during construction activities ° Displacement of marine fauna due to noise and vibration impacts during general construction works ° Unintended impacts to surrounding vegetation or habitat

p 40

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

These potential impacts are proposed to be managed through the CEMP to be developed prior to construction. The CEMP will include procedures for the following: ° Environmental awareness training for all workers and ongoing task/activity-specific training ° Protection of through the implementation of sediment and erosion control practices ° Monitoring of construction activities (where necessary) to protect marine fauna and shorebird habitat ° Scheduling of construction works during low tide to avoid impacts to marine fauna. Through the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to marine ecology are considered to be unlikely.

5.5 Marine water and sediment The following are identified as potential impacts on water quality associated with construction of the proposed seawall: ° Sediment disturbance from excavation and filling activities, resulting in the transfer of sediment and increased turbidity within the marine environment ° Possible disturbance to naturally occurring/pre-existing contaminants (including ASS/PASS) into the marine environment ° Contaminant releases from onsite plant during construction During the construction period, mitigation measures will be required to minimise impacts associated with the use of machinery and disturbance of sediment within a tidal environment. The following mitigation measures are proposed for construction works and will be included within the CEMP: ° Install and maintain erosion and sediment control measures during site works, including: − sediment fencing and/or bunding where appropriate; − use of water for dust suppression; ° Works requiring access to the tidal environment to be scheduled during low tide (where possible); ° Works to be undertaken in stages to ensure earthworks are limited to the daily extent of works, and the need for stockpiles of rock material is minimised; ° Implement a visual turbidity monitoring program throughout construction. Should visible turbid plumes occur as a result of construction works, construction works will decrease until the plume settles.

5.5.1 Acid sulphate soils As outlined in section 3.3.6, the project site is identified as at risk of Potential Acid Sulfate Soils (PASS), comprising coastal land located below 5m AHD. Hence, strict management measures will be required during construction works to minimise disturbance of PASS within the area. Should PASS or ASS be encountered during construction works, adequate control measures to prevent environmental harm, including monitoring and treatment, will be managed in accordance with mitigation measures and control strategies to be developed prior to construction as part of the ASSMP. However as excavation is not proposed below -1.5m AHD, the exposure of ASS is considered unlikely.

5.6 Noise Noise impacts may be experienced at adjoining properties during the construction phase primarily associated with the use of plant equipment and the movement of construction vehicles. However such impacts will be of a temporary nature and confined to daytime hours during the construction period,

p 41

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

which is anticipated to comprise approximately three to five months. Noise impacts will be managed by procedures to be developed through the CEMP once construction timeframes, scheduling and machinery details are understood.

5.7 Traffic impacts As the construction of the seawall would be undertaken over a period of three to five months, there is the potential for traffic impacts to the road network associated with the transport of rock material and removal of wastes from the site. Confirmation of the intended delivery schedule and transport routes to be utilised cannot be confirmed until a contractor has been engaged. However the transport of materials from the Dundowran Quarry is likely to be transported via - Road (a State Controlled Road). It is anticipated that a Traffic Management Plan would be developed by the contractor, prior to the commencement of construction works, detailing routes for the transport of materials to site and the intended arrangements for laydown and storage.

5.8 Public health and safety The proposed works have the potential to impact on public health and safety during the construction phase, as well as associated with the development of a physical structure within a publicly accessible coastal environment. During construction, it is intended that appropriate fencing and signage would be established at the site and access roads to prevent public access to and within the area of works. Following the completion of construction, permanent signage may be erected to warn the public of the location of the seawall and discourage access across the structure.

5.9 General environmental duty The residual environmental risk for this proposed project falls under the duty of care provision of the EP Act. To prevent environmental harm, the General Environmental Duty established under Section 36 of the Act must be observed and activities must be undertaken with due diligence. The General Environmental Duty states “ a person must not carry out any activity that causes or is likely to cause environmental harm unless the person takes all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent or minimise the harm”. To act with due diligence, the parties must show that the environmental risk associated with the activity has been assessed and minimised where possible. The CEMP, to be developed prior to construction, will include mitigation measures, including those identified above, to ensure compliance with the General Environmental Duty.

p 42

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

6 Conclusion

This report has been prepared on behalf of the FCRC to support the following development applications under SPA for the construction of a seawall located adjacent to 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade, Toogoom: ° Operational Works that are Tidal Works in a Coastal Management District (CMD) under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (Coastal Act) ° Operational Works for the removal, damage, or destruction to marine plants under SPA and the Fisheries Act 1994 The proposed works are necessary to protect people and property from the impacts of coastal hazards, and to ensure there is no damage to the marine environment as a result of continued erosion of the foreshore. The application has illustrated compliance with the Draft Coastal SPRP, the IDAS Code for the Assessment of Prescribed Tidal Works and the relevant SDAP provisions. It is considered that all potential impacts associated with construction of the seawall can be managed and/or mitigated through the implementation of appropriate measures outlined in Chapter 5, including the development of a CEMP. After consideration of the proposal, it is requested that the application be approved.

p 43

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

7 References

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC), 2013: Australian Heritage Database , http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/places/index.html Cardno, 2011: Fraser Coast Shoreline Erosion Management Plan – Gap Analysis Report, prepared for Fraser Coast Regional Council.

p 44

Project 237236 | File Planning Report SPA_FINAL.docx | 26 August 2013 | Revision 2

Appendices

Appendix A Application forms & owners consent

Appendix A - Application forms & owners consent

IDAS form 26 —Marine plants and declared fish habitat areas (Sustainable Planning Act 2009 version 3.0 effective 1 July 2013)

This form must be used for development applications for: • operational work that is the removal, destruction or damage of a marine plant • a material change of use of premises if the material change of use involves operational work that is the removal, destruction or damage of marine plants, and there is no development permit for the operational work • reconfiguring a lot if the reconfiguration involves operational work that is the removal, destruction or damage of marine plants, and there is no development permit for the operational work • building work in a declared fish habitat area • operational work completely or partly within a declared fish habitat area.

You MUST complete ALL questions that are stated to be a mandatory requirement unless otherwise identified on this form.

For all development applications you must: • complete IDAS form 1—Application details • complete any other forms relevant to your application • provide any mandatory supporting information identified on the forms as being required to accompany your application. Attach extra pages if there is insufficient space on this form.

All terms used on this form have the meaning given in the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) or the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 .

This form can also be completed online using MyDAS at www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/MyDAS

Mandatory requirements

1. What is the nature of the proposed work? (Tick all applicable boxes.)

Operational work that is the removal, destruction or damage of marine plants as defined in the Fisheries Act 1994 , section 8 Operational work that is completely or partly within a declared fish habitat area as defined in the Fisheries Regulation 2008, Schedule 3 Building work in a declared fish habitat area

Mandatory supporting information

2. Confirm that the following mandatory supporting information accompanies this application

Mandatory supporting information Confirmation of Method of lodgement lodgement A scaled site plan of the proposed work showing the location, areas of impact and adjacent area including or in relation to: • actual area of disturbance to marine plants and/or declared fish habitat Confirmed area in square metres. Identify proportion (m 2) of permanent and/or temporary disturbance

• dimensions and GPS coordinates and zone references (GDA94 Confirmed preferred) • easily identifiable site features (e.g. roads, road intersections, waterway Confirmed names, bends in the waterway, etc.) • real property boundaries adjacent to and in the vicinity of the proposed Confirmed work • boundary of the declared fish habitat area Confirmed Not applicable

• location, extent, nature and dimensions of the area for proposed work, Confirmed including access paths, construction areas, moorings and dredging required to undertake the work • location and extent of highest astronomical tide, mean high water Confirmed springs and mean low water springs levels, by reference to easily identifiable fixed points • location of all waterway features within the development area, including Confirmed creeks, drainage lines, lagoons and marshes • location and extent of all marine plants (e.g. saltmarsh, mangrove, Confirmed seagrass) within and adjacent to the proposed work Not applicable

• location and extent of all marine plants proposed to be removed, Confirmed destroyed or damaged Not applicable

• location and extent of any existing disturbances, structures, Confirmed improvements or fill within, adjacent to, or associated with the proposed Not applicable work. Written documentation Details of the purpose of the proposed work (e.g. public jetty, private jetty, Confirmed boat ramp, pontoon, revetment, board walk, etc.). A description of the habitats within the declared fish habitat area proposed Confirmed to be impacted (e.g. sand banks, mud banks, seagrass, mangroves, salt Not applicable couch, rocky shore, etc.) and the nature of the impact. A description of the marine plants proposed to be removed, destroyed or Confirmed 2 damaged (e.g. number, type, height, area in m , density, health, etc.) by the Not applicable work. A description of the method of works (e.g. equipment to be used). Confirmed

A description of the past uses and/or disturbances of the development area. Confirmed

A statement addressing the relevant part(s) of the State Development Confirmed Assessment Provisions (SDAP). Not applicable Justification A detailed description of the alternatives considered to reduce impacts on Confirmed marine plants or the declared fish habitat area, as applicable (e.g. alternative designs, locations, setbacks/buffer distances, etc.). Details of on-site mitigation actions proposed to prevent the proposed work Confirmed contributing to degradation of the declared fish habitat area, in and adjacent Not applicable to the development area, during and after the development. Details of on-site mitigation actions proposed to prevent the proposed work Confirmed contributing to degradation of the declared fish habitat area, in and adjacent Not applicable to the development area, during and after the development.

IDAS form 26 —Marine plants and declared fish habitat areas Version 3.0—1 July 2013

A description of off-site actions proposed to offset residual impacts from any Confirmed permanent loss of or damage to marine plants or the declared fish habitat area, as applicable (e.g. any proposed rehabilitation or restoration of marine plants, land exchange options, fish habitat research contribution, etc.). The extent of any future maintenance works required for the continued safe Confirmed operation of the proposed structure or facility (e.g. trimming of regrowth of Not applicable marine plants, maintenance dredging). For an application involving assessable development in a area Documentation that: Confirmed • describes how the development to which the application relates is not Not applicable prohibited development and • demonstrates how the proposed development will meet the requirements set out in the relevant wild river declaration and any applicable code mentioned in the relevant wild river declaration under the Wild Rivers Act 2005 .

A map showing the proposed location of the development in relation to any Confirmed nominated waterways under the Wild Rivers Act 2005 and wild river Not applicable management areas. (a map may be produced digitally at www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildrivers/wildrivers-map.php ). Wild river management area means any of the following areas under the Wild Rivers Act 2005 : • special floodplain management area • preservation area • high preservation area • floodplain management area • subartesian management area • designated urban area. Editor's note: A floodplain management area, subartesian management area or designated urban area may be over all or part of a high preservation area or preservation area. A subartesian management area or designated urban area may be over all or part of a special floodplain management area.

Privacy—Please refer to your assessment manager, referral agency and/or building certifier for further details on the use of information recorded in this form.

OFFICE USE ONLY

Date received Reference numbers

The Sustainable Planning Act 2009 is administered by the Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning. This form and all other required application materials should be sent to your assessment manager and any referral agency.

Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning PO Box 15009 City East Qld 4002 tel 13 QGOV (13 74 68) [email protected] IDAS form 26 —Marine plants and declared fish habitat areas Version 3.0—1 July 2013 www.dsdip.qld.gov.au

IDAS form 23 —Tidal works and development within coastal management districts (Sustainable Planning Act 2009 version 3.0 effective 1 July 2013)

This form must be used for development applications for: • operational work that is tidal works (including prescribed tidal works) or operational work within a coastal management district (mentioned in the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 , schedule 7, table 2, item 13) • material change of use that requires referral under the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009, schedule 7, table 3, item 5 because it involves: - operational work carried out completely or partly in a coastal management district; or - building work carried out completely or partly in a coastal management district that is the construction of a new premises with a gross floor area (GFA) of at least 1000m 2 or the enlargement of the GFA of an existing premises by more than 1000m 2 • reconfiguring a lot that requires referral under the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009, schedule 7, table 2, item 14 because the land is situated completely or partly in a coastal management district or the reconfiguration is in connection with the construction of a canal • building work that requires referral under the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009, schedule 7, table 1, item 11 because it is on land completely or partly seaward of a coastal building line.

You MUST complete ALL questions that are stated to be a mandatory requirement unless otherwise identified on this form.

Notes for completing this form For all development applications you must: • complete IDAS form 1—Application details • complete any other forms relevant to your application • provide any mandatory supporting information identified on the forms as being required to accompany your application. Attach extra pages if there is insufficient space on this form.

All terms used on this form have the meaning given in the Coastal Management and Protection Act 1995 , the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2003, the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) or the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009.

This form can also be completed online using MyDAS at www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/MyDAS

Mandatory requirements

1. Confirm the following mandatory requirements accompany Confirmation of Method of this application lodgement lodgement Written description of the proposal, including a report that addresses any Confirmed relevant policies.

2. What is the nature of the work or development proposed by the application? (Tick all applicable boxes.)

Operational work—complete table A Material Change of Use—complete table B Reconfiguring a Lot—complete table C Building Work—complete table D

Table A—Operational Work Does the operational work involve the following? (Tick all applicable boxes.) a) Tidal works as defined under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (e.g. basins, breakwater, bridges, boat ramps, decks and boardwalks, docks, dockyards, groynes, jetties, marinas, pipelines, pontoons, powerlines, seawalls, slips, training walls, wharves and the reclamation of land under tidal water)? No Yes If yes, what is the purpose?

Private purpose (e.g. private pontoon) Another purpose (e.g. commercial marina)

Does the tidal works also require resource allocation under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 ? No Yes If applicable what is the estimated value of the proposed works? b) Interfering with quarry material as defined under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (e.g. excavating or moving sand, gravel or any other earth material on state coastal land such as roads, esplanades, parks or unallocated state land) on state coastal land above high-water mark. No Yes If yes, which of the following? Works for coastal management purpose involving beach nourishment, dune fencing, revegetation of dunal areas with endemic native plants, or stinger net enclosures. For purposes directly related to the provision of lifesaving or rescue services by a volunteer community organisation. For other purposes (please state below).

If applicable what is the estimated value of the proposed works? c) Disposing of dredge spoil or other solid waste material in tidal water? No Yes If applicable what is the estimated value of the proposed works? d) Constructing an artificial waterway? No Yes If applicable what is the length of the waterway? e) Removing or interfering with coastal on land, other than state coastal land, that is in an erosion prone area as defined in the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 and above high water mark (e.g. lowering dune vegetation on freehold and leasehold land)? No Yes If applicable what is the estimated value of the proposed works?

IDAS form 23 —Tidal works and development within coastal management districts Version 3.0—1 July 2013

Table B—Material change of use a) Does the material change of use involve the following? (Tick all applicable boxes.) Operational work carried out completely or partly in a coastal management district b) Does the material change of use involve building work carried out completely or partly in a coastal management district that is: the construction of new premises with a gross floor area of at least 1000 m2 the enlargement of the gross floor area of existing premises by more than 1000 m2

Table C—Reconfiguring a lot a) Does the reconfiguring a lot involve the following? (Tick all applicable boxes.) Land situated completely or partly in a coastal management district The construction of a canal b) How many lots will be created?

Table D—Building work a) Is the building work on land completely or partly seaward of the coastal building line under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 ? No Yes

3. Is the tidal works located within a local government tidal area? (Tick all applicable boxes)

No Yes—provide details below

Local government:

Mandatory supporting information

4. Please provide the following information Confirmation of Method of lodgement lodgement For all applications A statement addressing the relevant part(s) of the State Development Confirmed Assessment Provisions (SDAP). Not applicable For applications involving operational work that is tidal works A copy of the certificate of title for the land (including tidal land) that Confirmed would abut or adjoin the proposed works. Not applicable

Plans showing: Confirmed • the real property description and boundaries of the land (including Not applicable tidal land) that would abut or adjoin the proposed works • the proposed works (including existing works to be removed) in relation to relevant tidal planes (e.g. mean high water springs) • the slope angles of the beds and banks of the tidal area and the finished levels of the proposed works. For tidal work that will occupy a navigable waterway provide a water Confirmed allocation area plan providing evidence that the proposed work will not Not applicable prejudice the access rights of adjoining property owners.

IDAS form 23 —Tidal works and development within coastal management districts Version 3.0—1 July 2013

Details of the largest vessel, if any, to be moored at the structure. Confirmed Not applicable

For prescribed tidal works, details of how the proposed work addresses Confirmed the IDAS code for prescribed tidal work in the Coastal Protection and Not applicable Management Regulation 2003, schedule 4A. If applicable, certification that the design of tidal works is suitable for Confirmed intended use, signed by a Registered Professional Engineer of Not applicable Queensland (or equivalent). For applications involving material change of use Plans certified by a registered professional engineer of Queensland Confirmed (RPEQ) or a registered surveyor showing: Not applicable • the real property description and boundaries of the land • the proposed works in relation to the location of the coastal management district and coastal hazards. For applications involving reconfiguring a lot Plans certified by a registered surveyor showing: Confirmed • the real property description and boundaries of the land Not applicable • The location of the coastal management district and coastal hazards in relation to the land being reconfigured • Any land being surrendered as a separate lot on the plan of subdivision. For applications involving building works seaward of a coastal building line Plans certified by a registered professional engineer of Queensland Confirmed (RPEQ): Not applicable • the real property description and boundaries of the land • the proposed works in relation to the location of the coastal building line.

Notes for completing this form • Please ensure all applicable fees are paid, noting that referral agency fees are to be paid to the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection. • For an application requiring referral to the Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR), it is recommended that the applicant contact DTMR to ensure that required information for assessment of the application is provided.

Privacy—Please refer to your assessment manager, referral agency and/or building certifier for further details on the use of information recorded in this form.

OFFICE USE ONLY

Date received Reference numbers

The Sustainable Planning Act 2009 is administered by the Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning. This form and all other required application materials should be sent to your assessment manager and any referral agency.

Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning PO Box 15009 City East Qld 4002 IDAS form 23 —Tidal works and development within tel 13 QGOV (13 74 68) coastal management districts [email protected] Version 3.0—1 July 2013 www.dsdip.qld.gov.au

Appendix B Smart Maps and Property Titles

Appendix B - Smart Maps and Property Titles

467 152°40'25".50215 20 152°40'29".230

25°14'42".167 25°14'42".167

85 85

9 RP127480 10 RP127480 FH

FH 1 2 RP196057

607m² ROAD 3 589m² RP177077 FH 4 RP177077 FH

1200m² FH 7207 80 0 m N 7207 80 KINGFISHER 600m² PARADE 19 600m² RP127480 20 RP127480 KINGFISHER FH 16 PARADE SP184925 FH 30 SP184925 607m² FH 29 1 RP841136 28 2 597m² FH SP172294 RP177077 1 FH 600m² FH SP172294 FH 25°14'46".168 17 25°14'46".168 FH SP172294 FH 609m² 709m² 600m² 600m² 701m² 649m²

152°40'25".502 152°40'29".230 467 15 0m E 467 20

STANDARD MAP NUMBER 0 15 30 45 60 75 m 9447-42322 HORIZONTAL DATUM:GDA94 ZONE:56 SCALE 1 : 750 SmartMap An External Product of MAP WINDOW POSITION & NEAREST LOCATION SmartMap Information Services SUBJECT PARCEL DESCRIPTION CLIENT SERVICE STANDARDS Based upon an extraction from the 152°40'27".366 Digital Cadastral Data Base 25°14'44".168 PRINTED (dd/mm/yyyy) 10/07/2013 TOOGOOM DCDB 0.26 KM Lot/Plan 1/RP196057 Area/Volume 1200m² DCDB 09/07/2013 Tenure FREEHOLD Local Government FRASER COAST REGIONAL Locality TOOGOOM Users of the information recorded in this document (the Information) accept all responsibility and risk associated with the use of the Information and should seek independent professional advice in Parish VERNON relation to dealings with property. County MARCH Segment/Parcel 34517/44 Despite Department of Natural Resources and Mines(DNRM)'s best efforts, DNRM makes no representations or warranties in relation to the Information, and, to the extent permitted by law, exclude or limit all warranties relating to correctness, accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency and all liability for any direct, indirect and consequential costs, losses, damages and expenses incurred in any way (including but not limited to that arising from negligence) in connection with any use of or reliance on the Information (c) The State of Queensland, (Department of Natural GDA For further information on SmartMap products visit http://nrw.qld.gov.au/property/mapping/blinmap Resources and Mines) 2013. 467 152°40'17".736 95 152°40'20" 00 152°40'21".463

25°14'41".701 25°14'41".701

ESPLANADE

ESPLANADE

85 3 1 85 2 RP127480 RP213308 RP127480 1 RP127480 FH FH FH

FH 607m² 1214m² 29 ROAD 2 28 RP101370 668m² RP101370

FH 597m² FH HER PARADE KINGFIS 529m² 546m²

7207 0 m 80 N 13 7207 80 11 RP127480 PARADE KINGFISHER RP857899 FH

FH 30 ROAD 607m² 31 RP101370 1 RP101370 FH 7 25°14'45".703 FH 25°14'45".703 1151m² 8 SP172294 SP172294 FH 546m² 536m² FH 691m² 696m²

152°40'17".736 152°40'20" 152°40'21".463 466 95 0m E 467 00

STANDARD MAP NUMBER 0 15 30 45 60 75 m 9447-42322 HORIZONTAL DATUM:GDA94 ZONE:56 SCALE 1 : 750 SmartMap An External Product of MAP WINDOW POSITION & NEAREST LOCATION SmartMap Information Services SUBJECT PARCEL DESCRIPTION CLIENT SERVICE STANDARDS Based upon an extraction from the 152°40'19".600 Digital Cadastral Data Base 25°14'43".702 PRINTED (dd/mm/yyyy) 16/08/2013 TOOGOOM DCDB 0.13 KM Lot/Plan 1/RP127480 Area/Volume 597m² DCDB 15/08/2013 Tenure FREEHOLD Local Government FRASER COAST REGIONAL Locality TOOGOOM Users of the information recorded in this document (the Information) accept all responsibility and risk associated with the use of the Information and should seek independent professional advice in Parish VERNON relation to dealings with property. County MARCH Segment/Parcel 34517/16 Despite Department of Natural Resources and Mines(DNRM)'s best efforts, DNRM makes no representations or warranties in relation to the Information, and, to the extent permitted by law, exclude or limit all warranties relating to correctness, accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency and all liability for any direct, indirect and consequential costs, losses, damages and expenses incurred in any way (including but not limited to that arising from negligence) in connection with any use of or reliance on the Information (c) The State of Queensland, (Department of Natural GDA For further information on SmartMap products visit http://nrw.qld.gov.au/property/mapping/blinmap Resources and Mines) 2013.

Appendix C Engineering drawings and RPEQ Certification

Appendix C - Engineering drawings and RPEQ Certification

NOTES:

NEW SEAWALL 1. POSITION & DIMENSIONS OF THE SEAWALL ARE INDICATIVE ONLY 2. DRAWINGS SHOULD BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITHKINGFISHER PARADE KINGFISHER PARADE, TOOGUM SEAWALL PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT 3. THE SEAWALL IS ONLY AN EROSION CONTROL STRUCTURE AND IS NOT DESIGNED FOR FLOOD CONTROL TIDAL LEVELS * 4. SETOUT INFORMATION IS APPROXIMATE ONLY. ACCURATE LOCATIONS TO BE SCHEDULE OF DRAWINGS CONFIRMED BY ENGINEER. NAMECHART DATUM (m) AHD 237236-DRG-S-0001 SCHEDULE OF DRAWINGS 237236-DRG-S-0002 SURVEY LAYOUT HAT 3.81 1.99 237236-DRG-S-0003 SITE LAYOUT - OPTION A MHWS 3.03 1.21 MLHW 2.38 0.56 237236-DRG-S-0004 SITE LAYOUT - OPTION B MSL 1.78 -0.04 237236-DRG-S-0005 SECTIONS AND DETAILS MHLW 1.14 -0.68 MLWS 0.49 -1.33 LAT 0.00 -1.82

* - TIDAL LEVELS ASSUMED TO BE SIMILAR TO BURRUM HEADS

STORM TIDE LEVELS **

AVERAGE RECURRENCE PRESENT SEA LEVEL 2100 SEA LEVEL INTERVAL (A.R.I. YEAR) (m AHD) (m AHD) 50 3.81 1.99 100 3.03 1.21 500 2.38 0.56 RL (AHD) (DEPTH) ** - BASED ON 2004 JCU STUDY 3.5 0

DESIGN PARAMETERS FINE TO MEDIUM GRAINED SAND D50=0.15mm AVERAGE RECURRENCE WATER LEVEL WIND SPEED SIGNIFICANT WAVE DESIGN WAVE PEAK INTERVAL (A.R.I. YEAR) (m AHD) (m/S) # HEIGHT Hs (m) PERIOD Tp (s) -1.5 -5m 50 2.85 29.4 2.5 8 to 10 CLAYEY SAND / SANDY CLAY # - WIND SPEED IS PER AUS STD AS1170.2 (HOURLY SPEED AT 10m/s) -3.5 -7m GREENHOUSE EFFECT SEA LEVEL RISE = 0.3m (2063) GEOTECHNICAL DATA TYPICAL SECTION ALONG THE SEAWALL, BASED ON LIMITED INFORMATION (3 BOREHOLES). STORM DURATION REFER CONNELL WAGNER (AURECON) GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT 2004 957702UG FOR DETAILS. AC10 SULFATE SOIL. MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLIES. DESIGN STORM DURATION = 2 HOURS (TIDAL CONSTRAINT)

SCOUR ALLOWANCE SEAWALL TOE IS BURIED TO -1.0m AHD SELF HEALING TOE ACCORDING TO DRAWING

SURVEY Filename: SURVEY PROVIDED BY GOODWIN MIDSON, JULY 2013 Brisbane 18/07/2013 11:01:00 AM Plot Date: Office: 94405763-5383-4cc6-953b-54d979bfb493 CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NEW SEAWALL A PRELIMINARY ISSUE NOT TO SCALE A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION KINGFISHER PARADE, TOOGOOM DRAWN APPROVED DRAWING SCHEDULE AND NOTES S.LEMON PROJECT LEADER DATE TITLE DESIGNED J.FARNES VERIFIED PROJECT No. WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV DRAWING No. G.COLLETER 237236 0000 DRG LA 0001 A 58 60 54 7 52 6 62 1 RP RP 50 3 8 RP 127480 127480 2 RP 213308 RP 64 48 RP 127480 127480 9 1 127480 RP RP 127480 66 127480 10 RP 127480 70 1 RP KINGFISHER PARADE 72 196057 3 74 RP 4 177077 RP 177077 76 5 RP 177077 78 6 RP 177077 80 7 RP 177077 82 8 RP 177077 84 Filename: 9 RP Brisbane 177077

86 10 PLAN RP

22/07/2013 04:13:00 PM 177077 Plot Date: Office: 72682e8d-49d8-4d16-8b74-929c3c625e4b

50 10 20m

SCALE 1:500

CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NEW SEAWALL A PRELIMINARY ISSUE 1:500 A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION KINGFISHER PARADE, TOOGOOM DRAWN APPROVED SURVEY LAYOUT S.LEMON PROJECT LEADER DATE TITLE DESIGNED J.FARNES VERIFIED PROJECT No. WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV DRAWING No. G.COLLETER 237236 0000 DRG LA 0002 A 2004 ESPLANADE 2013 A

A

B B

10m

5m 10m A

58 60 54 6 7 5m 52 1 RP 62 5m 50 3 RP 8 RP 127480 127480 2 RP 213308 RP 64 48 RP 127480 127480 9 1 127480 RP 10m RP 127480 66 127480 10 RP 127480 70 1 A RP KINGFISHER PARADE 72 196057 3 74 RP 4 177077 RP 177077 76 5 RP 10m 177077 78 6 RP 5m 177077 80 7 FRASER WATERS PARADE RP 177077 82 8 RP 177077 84 Filename: 9 RP Brisbane 177077

86 10 PLAN RP

22/07/2013 04:13:00 PM 177077 Plot Date: Office: acbf6987-2325-4a29-b7ed-bb4da21fe8fc

50 10 20m

SCALE 1:500

CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NEW SEAWALL A PRELIMINARY ISSUE 1:500 A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION KINGFISHER PARADE, TOOGOOM DRAWN APPROVED SITE LAYOUT S.LEMON PROJECT LEADER DATE TITLE DESIGNED OPTION A J.FARNES VERIFIED PROJECT No. WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV DRAWING No. G.COLLETER 237236 0000 DRG LA 0003 A 2004 ESPLANADE 2013 A

A

B B

10m A 5m 10m

60 C 58 5m 54 7 52 6 62 5m 1 RP RP 50 3 8 RP 127480 127480 2 RP 213308 RP 64 48 RP 127480 127480 9 1 127480 RP 10m RP 127480 66 127480 10

RP 5m 127480 70 1 A RP KINGFISHER PARADE 72 16m 196057 3 74 RP 4 177077 RP 5m 177077 10m 76 5 RP 10m 177077 78 6 RP 5m 177077 80 7 FRASER WATERS PARADE RP 177077 82 8 RP 177077 84 9 RP 177077

86 10 PLAN RP 177077 Filename: Brisbane

50 10 20m 22/07/2013 04:15:00 PM SCALE 1:500 Plot Date: Office: bd49cd98-ae72-4ecf-9543-e4f894136c74 CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NEW SEAWALL A PRELIMINARY ISSUE 1:1000 A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION KINGFISHER PARADE, TOOGOOM DRAWN APPROVED SITE LAYOUT S.LEMON PROJECT LEADER DATE TITLE DESIGNED OPTION B J.FARNES VERIFIED PROJECT No. WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV DRAWING No. 237236 0000 DRG LA 0004 A VARIES (5-10m) 6240 7020 10000 6240 7020 1550 4690 1550 4690

CREST ARMOUR, LINE B LINE C LINE B LINE C LINE A LINE A PROPERTY PROPERTY 1 LAYER M50=6t BOUNDARY BOUNDARY PRIMARY ARMOUR, PRIMARY ARMOUR, 2 LAYERS M50=6t RL 3.60 2 LAYERS M50=3t RL 3.60 EXISTING BEACH LEVEL (VARIES) SCOUR 500 PROTECTION, 500 2100 2600 SCOUR MIN 2 ROCKS M50=6t EXISTING MIN BEACH LEVEL PROTECTION, (VARIES) 2 ROCKS M50=6t 1 1 900R GEOTEXTILE 1000 900R GEOTEXTILE 1.5 1.5 1000

RL 0.00 1 1 1 1 SECONDARY ARMOUR, SECONDARY ARMOUR, 2 LAYERS M50=300kg RL -1.00 2 LAYERS M50=300kg RL -1.00 650 TEMPORARY 650 TEMPORARY CUT CUT

TYPICAL SEAWALL SECTION A TYPICAL SEAWALL SECTION B SCALE 1:50 SCALE 1:50

SECTION A SECTION B 0003 & 4 0004 SECTION C SIMILAR 0004

RL 3.33

RL 1.33

RL 0.00

RL -0.67 Filename:

Brisbane CONCRETE STAIR DETAILS SCALE 1:50

500 0 1000 2000mm 22/07/2013 04:05:00 PM SCALE 1:50 Plot Date: Office: 9f111a65-3ade-485a-87e9-873a3252b226 CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NEW SEAWALL A PRELIMINARY ISSUE AS SHOWN A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION KINGFISHER PARADE, TOOGOOM DRAWN APPROVED SECTIONS AND DETAILS S.LEMON PROJECT LEADER DATE TITLE DESIGNED J.FARNES VERIFIED PROJECT No. WBS TYPE DISC NUMBER REV DRAWING No. G.COLLETER 237236 0000 DRG LA 0005 A

Appendix D SDAP Assessment

Appendix D - SDAP Assessment

Response column key: X Achieved P/S Performance solution N/A Not applicable 10.1 Tidal works, or development in a coastal management district state code Table 10.1.1: All development Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment PO1 Development in a coastal hazard AO1.1 Development is located outside a high coastal P/S The proposed seawall will be located within an erosion area is compatible with the level of hazard area unless it is: prone coastal hazard area and has been designed to protect severity of the coastal hazard. 1) coastal-dependent development, or private properties from the prolonged erosion. The seawall 2) temporary, readily relocatable, or able to be will be compatible with the level of severity of the coastal abandoned, or hazard, ensuring coastal erosion risks are mitigated along 3) essential community service infrastructure, or the foreshore of the Esplanade. 4) small- to medium-scale tourist development, or 5) development that is compatible with temporary inundation due to its nature or function, or 6) within an existing built-up urban area, or 7) is redevelopment of built structures that cannot be relocated or abandoned. AND AO1.2 Development referred to in AO1.1(6) avoids being P/S The proposed seawall will be located within a coastal hazard located within a high coastal hazard area, or where this is area and will act as erosion protection along the foreshore of not practicable, minimises the exposure of people and the esplanade. The seawall is the most feasible option to permanent structures to coastal hazard impacts and provide a long term solution for protecting the residents of mitigates residual impacts where it is not practicable to 48 -80 Kingfisher Parade from the impacts of prolonged locate the development outside a high coastal hazard coastal erosion, resulting from storm tide and wave action. area. The proposed works will facilitate continued access to the foreshore over time, and will act to minimise the exposure of the public to coastal hazards. It is also noted that a consensus for a seawall in this location been agreed upon by the residents of Kingfisher Parade, and local and State government representatives. PO2 Development siting, layout and AO2.1 Development within a coastal hazard area is N/A The proposed seawall will be a coastal protection structure. access in a coastal hazard area located, designed, constructed and operated to maintain The works do not involve an increase to habitable responds to a potential coastal hazard or enhance the community’s resilience to defined storm development within the area or influence current emergency and minimises risk to personal safety and tide events and coastal erosion by limiting the exposure of access routes. property. people and structures to coastal hazard impacts and ensuring: (1) habitable rooms of built structures are located above the defined storm tide event level and any additional freeboard level that would ordinarily apply in a flood prone area under a relevant planning scheme Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment standard, or (2) a safe refuge is available for people within the premises during a defined storm tide event, or (3) at least one evacuation route remains passable for emergency evacuations during a defined storm tide event, including consideration of the capacity of the route to support the evacuation of the entire local population within a reasonably short time frame (for example, 12 hours). AND AO2.2 Development within a coastal hazard area is √ The seawall has been designed to protect private properties located, designed and constructed to ensure exposed from the prolonged erosion that has occurred along the structures can sustain flooding from a defined storm tide foreshore of the Esplanade, as a result of storm waves and event. tides. AND The seawall has been designed to mitigate the impact of coastal hazards for a 50 yr ARI, and with allowance for sea level rise of 0.3m (by 2063). The seawall is not intended to provide protection from the impacts of flooding. It is noted that in a 50 yr ARI the seawall will still experience some overtopping, however the design of the structure is such that it will be able to withstand the impact of the event with minimal damage. AO2.3 Essential community service infrastructure is: N/A The seawall is not essential community service (1) located so that it is not inundated by a recommended infrastructure. storm tide event specified for that infrastructure, or (2) located and designed to ensure any components of the infrastructure that are likely to fail to function or may result in contamination when inundated by a storm tide (for example, electrical switch gear and motors, water supply pipeline air valves) are: (1) located above the peak water level for a recommended storm tide event, or (2) designed and constructed to exclude storm tide intrusion or infiltration (including by being located in the ground), or (3) able to temporarily stop functioning during a recommended storm tide event without causing significant adverse impacts to the infrastructure or the community. Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment AND AO2.4 Emergency services infrastructure and emergency N/A The proposed works are not for emergency services shelters, police facilities, and hospitals and associated infrastructure. facilities have an emergency rescue area above the peak water level for a recommended storm tide event. AND AO2.5 Redevelopment of existing built structures avoids N/A No coastal protection structures currently exist along this increasing the exposure of people and permanent part of the foreshore. structures to adverse coastal hazard impacts (including impacts on the development’s ongoing operation). AO3.1 Development avoids increasing the number of PO3 Development directly, indirectly and √ The proposed seawall is necessary to protect people and cumulatively avoids an unacceptable premises from which people would need to be evacuated property, and mitigate ongoing erosion occurring to the increase in the severity of the coastal to prevent death or injury from a defined storm tide event. coastal environment during a storm tide event. hazard, and does not significantly increase the potential for damage on the premises or to other premises. PO4 Development avoids the release of AO4.1 Development that involves the manufacture or N/A The proposed works do not involve the manufacture or hazardous materials as a result of a storage of hazardous materials in bulk are designed to: storage of hazardous materials. natural hazard event. (1) prevent the intrusion of waters from a defined storm Editor’s note: Applications should: tide event into structures or facilities containing the hazardous materials, or assess the risk of storm tide inundation (2) ensure hazardous materials remain secured despite releasing or otherwise exposing hazardous inundation, including secure from the effects of materials, including appropriate emergency hydrodynamic forcing associated with wave action or planning and contingency measures. flowing water. applications are to be supported by a report certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ) that demonstrates this performance outcome will be achieved. PO5 Natural processes and the AO5.1 Development in an erosion prone area within the √ The proposed works are required to protect people and protective function of landforms and coastal management district: property from the impacts of on-going erosion and storm vegetation are maintained in coastal (1) maintains vegetation on coastal landforms where its tide, as well as to provide a level of immunity from coastal hazard areas. removal or damage may: hazards during extreme events. While it is recognised that Editor’s note: Applications should be (1) destabilise the area and increase the potential the seawall presents the introduction of a physical structure supported by a report certified by an RPEQ for erosion, or in this locality, the seawall has been designed with that demonstrates this performance outcome (2) interrupt natural sediment trapping processes or consideration to local coastal processes and minimising will be achieved. dune or land building processes effects on sediment transfer. (2) maintains sediment volumes of dunes and near-shore The clearing of existing vegetation will be required within the coastal landforms, or where a reduction in sediment project footprint to enable construction of the seawall. The Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment volumes cannot be avoided, increased risks to terrestrial ecology present within the construction footprint is development from coastal erosion are mitigated by consistent with a disturbed environment, containing a high location, design, construction and operating proportion of non-native and weed species. Given the standards disturbed nature of the environment, the clearing of (3) maintains physical coastal processes outside the vegetation in this locality is considered to have minor development footprint for the development, including impacts on terrestrial ecology and will not impact on coastal longshore transport of sediment along the coast landforms. Once constructed, the seawall will act to stabilise (4) reduces the risk of shoreline erosion for areas the previously vegetated area. In addition, the area will area adjacent to the development footprint unless the will be rehabilitated using dune stabilising species such as development is an erosion control structure salt couch (subject to confirmation by the FCRC). (5) reduces the risk of shoreline erosion for areas In regards to coastal impacts, the seawall will not adjacent to the development footprint to the significantly affect sediment transport patterns along the maximum extent feasible in the case of erosion beach, with the exception of reducing the sand material control structures. available for transport immediately behind the wall. This AND effect is localised and does not mean that the magnitude of sediment transport is affected significantly along the beach. The seawall ends will also have some effect on littoral transport whereby the eastern seawall end will interrupt the predominant westerly transport pattern. However, the seawall has been designed to minimise the potential effects of scouring and resultant sediment transfer through the use of appropriate armour design, as well as additional toe and end protection. The proposed works have also been designed for a 50 yr ARI event and with allowance for sea level rise of 0.3 m (by 2063) to provide an appropriate level of protection to ensure the integrity of the structure, and minimise the need for additional works in future. For these reasons the proposed seawall is considered to maintain physical coastal processes in this location. AO5.2 Development in a storm tide inundation area is √ In the absence of control measures, ongoing erosion at a located, designed, constructed and operated to: rate of between 1 m to 2m per year in this location has the (1) maintain dune crest heights, or where a reduction in potential to significantly reduce the dune buffer between crest heights cannot be avoided, mitigate risks to private property and tidal waters. development from wave overtopping and storm surge The design standard for the seawall is to provide protection inundation (with minimum damage) in a 50 year ARI event, including (2) maintain or enhance coastal ecosystems and natural allowance for a sea level rise of 0.3 m to 2063. With features, such as mangroves and coastal wetlands, recognition to the applicable storm tide levels, tidal between the development and tidal waters, where the boundaries, and wind and wave patterns for the locality, the coastal ecosystems and natural features protect or required height of the seawall has been determined to be Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment buffer communities and infrastructure from sea level +3.6m AHD to provide a standard 50 year design life for the rise and impacts from storm tide inundation. structure. AND Physical testing undertaken for the structure (outlined in the planning report) confirmed that the storm tide level, including wave set-up is slightly lower than the crest of the seawall. However, during the design conditions the overtopping is extreme and would cause significant coastal flooding inland. This effect cannot be mitigated without development of a significantly larger structure. However the armour design of the structure is such that it will be able to withstand the impact of the event with minimal damage. Therefore, it is considered that the seawall has been designed for an appropriate level of protection from coastal hazards. AO5.3 Redevelopment of built structures in the erosion N/A The proposed seawall will be a new structure. prone area within a coastal management district: (1) avoids intensifying the use of the premises, or (2) demonstrates that any intensification of use will not result in a significant increase in foreshore or bank hardening due to: (1) the presence of existing erosion control structures on or adjacent to the property, or (2) the existing necessity to install erosion control structures to defend built structures on the property from an imminent threat of coastal erosion. AND AO5.4 Development that is coastal protection work √ The seawall is proposed as part of FCRC’s coastal involves: protection works. The works specifically include construction (1) beach nourishment undertaken in accordance with a of a rock armour seawall, which will act as erosion program of beach nourishment works that source protection along the foreshore of the Esplanade, protecting sediment of a suitable quality and of a type and size the residents of 48 -80 Kingfisher Parade from prolonged which match that of the native sediment usually found coastal erosion. at the location, or It is noted that a seawall was initially proposed in this (2) the construction of an erosion control structure, location in 2005, and since this time a consensus for a rock where it is demonstrated that installing an erosion armour seawall to provide a permanent solution to the control structure is the only feasible option for erosion problem in this location has been agreed upon by protecting permanent structures from coastal erosion the residents of Kingfisher Parade, as well as local and at those structures cannot be abandoned or relocated State government representatives. in the event of coastal erosion occurring. Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment Editor’s note: Applications for coastal protection work should be supported by a report certified by an RPEQ that demonstrates how the engineering solution sought by the work will be achieved.

Editor’s note: Applications for erosion control structures should demonstrate the consideration of beach nourishment techniques, and include a statement of why nourishment (in whole or part) has not been adopted as the preferred means of controlling the erosion risk.

AND AO5.5 Development involving reclamation: N/A The proposed works do not involve reclamation works. (1) does not alter, or otherwise minimises impacts on, the physical characteristics of dune systems, including dune crest height and sand volume (2) does not alter, or otherwise minimises impacts on, the physical characteristics of a waterway or the seabed near the reclamation, including flow regimes, hydrodynamic forces, tidal water and riverbank stability (3) is located outside the active sediment transport area, or otherwise maintains sediment transport processes as close as possible to their natural state (4) ensures activities associated with the operation of the development maintain the structure and condition of vegetation communities and avoid wind and water run-off erosion. PO6 Erosion prone areas in a coastal AO6.1 Development locates built structures outside the √ The proposed seawall forms part of the FCRC coastal management district are maintained as part of the coastal management district that is the erosion protection works and is being proposed as an appropriate development free buffers, or where prone area unless the development: solution to mitigate the prolonged erosion that has occurred permanent buildings or structures exist, (1) is coastal-dependent development, or along the Esplanade. coastal erosion risks are avoided or (2) is temporary, readily relocatable, or able to be mitigated. abandoned, or (3) is essential community service infrastructure, or (4) is located landward of an applicable coastal building line, or (5) is located landward of the alignment of adjacent habitable buildings if there is no coastal building line, and on a lot that is less than 2000 square metres in size, or (6) is redevelopment of existing built structures, or Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment (7) is coastal protection work, or (8) locates built structures landward of other permanent built structures that are likely to be defended from coastal erosion, if it is demonstrated the development cannot reasonably be located outside the erosion prone area. AND AO6.2 Development referred to in AO6.1(4), (5) or (8) N/A The proposed seawall forms part of the FCRC coastal above ensures sufficient space is provided seaward of the protection works. development within the premises to allow for the construction of erosion control structures (such as a seawall). AND AO6.3 Coastal-dependent development: N/A The proposed seawall forms part of the FCRC coastal (1) locates, designs and constructs relevant buildings or protection works . structures to withstand coastal erosion impacts, including by use of appropriate foundations or installs and maintains coastal protection works to mitigate adverse impacts to people and permanent structures from coastal erosion at the location. AND AO6.4 Development that is temporary, readily relocatable, N/A The proposed seawall forms part of the FCRC coastal able to be abandoned, or essential community service protection works. infrastructure: (1) locates built structures landward of an applicable coastal building line (2) where there is no coastal building line, locates habitable built structures landward of the alignment of adjacent habitable buildings (3) locates lifesaver towers or beach access infrastructure to minimise its impacts on physical coastal processes or (4) where it is demonstrated that (1) or (2) is not reasonable and (3) does not apply: (1) locates built structures as far landward as practicable (2) uses layout design to minimise the footprint of Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment the development that remains within the erosion prone area. AND AO6.5 Redevelopment of existing built structures not N/A The proposed seawall forms part of the FCRC coastal referred to in AO6.4, and excluding marine development: protection works. (1) relocates built structures outside that part of the erosion prone area that is within the coastal management district, or (2) relocates built structures as far landward as practicable, and landward of an applicable coastal building line, or (3) where there is no coastal building line, relocates built structures landward of the alignment of adjacent habitable buildings, or (4) uses layout design to minimise the footprint of the development that remains within the erosion prone area, or (5) provides sufficient space seaward of the development within the premises to allow for the construction of erosion control structures. AND AO6.6 Redevelopment of built structures in the erosion N/A The proposed seawall will be a new structure. prone area within a coastal management district, which results in an intensification of use, mitigates the erosion threat to the development, having regard to: (1) use of appropriate foundations for the building or structure, given the practical design life of the development (2) installing and maintaining on-site erosion control structures if the development is not intended to be temporary. AND AO6.7 Development that is coastal protection work: P/S The proposed works are required to protect people and (1) is in the form of beach nourishment that maintains the property from the impacts of on-going erosion and storm natural characteristics and landform of the beach or tide, as well as to provide a level of immunity from coastal foreshore hazards during extreme events. or The development of permanent works will also avoid the is in the form of an erosion control structure where beach need for sand nourishment which is understood to have nourishment is not feasible for addressing the risk of been previously undertaken by the FCRC as a temporary Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment coastal erosion, and the erosion control structure is mitigation measure to replenish the beach. located on private land to the maximum extent The proposed seawall is located at the boundary of feasible. Unallocated State Land (land below HAT) and coastal reserve land designated as an ‘esplanade’ (or road reserve) which is owned by the State and administered by the FCRC. The location of the seawall alignment has been retained within the esplanade, rather than private land, to ensure public access to the beach is maintained. PO7 Development avoids or minimises AO7.1 Coastal protection work that is in the form of beach N/A Beach nourishment is not proposed as part of this adverse impacts on coastal resources nourishment uses methods of placement suitable for the application. and their values, to the maximum extent location that do not interfere with the long-term use of the reasonable. locality of, or natural values within or neighbouring, the proposed placement site. AND AO7.2 Marine development is located and designed to N/A Marine development is not proposed as part of this expand on or redevelop existing marine infrastructure application. unless it is demonstrated that it is not practicable to co-locate the development with existing marine infrastructure. AND AO7.3 Marine development: N/A Marine development is not proposed as part of this (1) relies on a natural channel of a depth adequate for application. the intended vessels, or (2) where there are no feasible alternative location for the facility in the local area that do not require dredging for navigation channel purposes: (1) involves capital dredging for new navigation channel purposes (2) is located, designed and operated to minimise the need for capital and subsequent maintenance dredging for navigation channel purposes. AND AO7.4 Development minimises capital dredging or the N/A No dredging is proposed as part of this application. disposal of material in coastal waters during key biological events (such as fish aggregations or spawning) for species found in the area. AND Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment AO7.5 Measures are to be incorporated as part of siting P/S The proposed works will require the removal of vegetation and design of the development to protect and retain within the project footprint, primarily located at the eastern identified ecological values and underlying ecosystem and western ends of the seawall. processes within or adjacent to the development site to A field survey identified that the terrestrial ecology is the greatest extent practicable. This includes: consistent with a disturbed environment, containing a high (1) maintaining or restoring vegetated buffers between proportion of non-native and weed species. Given the development and coastal waters to the extent disturbed nature of the environment, the clearing of practicable, unless the development is within ports or vegetation in this locality is considered to have minor airports, or is marine development impacts on terrestrial ecology. (2) maintaining or enhancing the connectivity of The ecology assessment undertaken for the project area ecosystems in consideration of the cumulative effect identified four species recognised as marine plants under of the development in addition to existing developed the provisions of the Fisheries Act within the proposed areas clearing footprint, and 15 native bird species, including the (3) retaining coastal wetlands, seagrass beds and other Eastern osprey ( Pandion cristatus ) listed as a Migratory and locally important feeding, nesting or breeding sites for Marine species under the provisions of the EPBC Act. native wildlife. Given the temporary nature of construction works, impacts AND to migratory bird species is considered unlikely, however given the seawall will be undertaken within a marine environment it is recognised that there may be potential impacts on marine species, associated with construction, such as harassment of fauna during construction activities, displacement of marine fauna due to noise and vibration impacts and Unintended impacts on surrounding vegetation or habitat. Any potential impacts on marine ecology are proposed to be managed through the CEMP, which will be implemented prior to construction, and will include monitoring of construction activities (where necessary) to protect marine fauna and shorebird habitat and scheduling of construction works during low tide to avoid impacts to marine fauna. Through the implementation of these mitigation measures, potential impacts on identified ecological values and underlying ecosystem processes within or adjacent to the development site are unlikely. AO7.6 Measures are incorporated as part of siting and √ The proposed seawall design has considered the design of the development to maintain or enhance water environmental values outlined in the Environmental quality to achieve the environmental values and water Protection (Water) Policy 2009 ‘ Great Sandy Strait and quality objectives outlined in the Environmental Protection coastal creeks environmental values and water quality (Water) Policy 2009. objectives (July 2010)’. Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment AND Construction works for the seawall are likely to be undertaken over a period of three to five months. As outlined within Chapter 4, appropriate mitigation measures are intended to be employed during construction to mitigate potential environmental impacts. Such measures include the monitoring of construction activities (where necessary) to protect marine fauna and shorebird habitat, visual turbidity monitoring and the use of sediment and erosion control, dust suppression, machinery management, and appropriate on-site awareness training. Through the development of the CEMP it is considered that appropriate methods for monitoring, managing and mitigating potential impacts will be implemented and will not impact on the environmental values and water quality objectives of the Great Sandy Strait. AO7.7 Development avoids the disturbance of acid √ The works will be located on land below 5 m AHD. sulphate soils, or where it is demonstrated that this is not An ASS investigation was undertaken for the project area in possible, the disturbance of acid sulphate soils is carefully 2004. The investigation did not identify the presence of ASS managed to minimise and mitigate the adverse effects of above the water table, which at the time was -1.5m AHD. the disturbance on coastal resources. However, given the works will involve excavation activities below 5m AHD there is the potential that ASS may be encountered. It is intended that the existing ASSMP (also prepared in 2004) would be updated and implemented for this project. The ASSMP will include methods to mitigate potential environmental impacts through the implementation of appropriate controls for handling, managing and treating ASS material, should these soils be encountered during excavation works. If material requires treatment the ASSMP covers a number of possible alternative options for treatment (such as liming). In addition, temporary bunding would be established around the construction area to allow the treatment of ASS if required. PO8 Coastal protection work is AO8.1 Coastal protection work is only undertaken to √ The proposed seawall will act as erosion protection along undertaken only as a last resort where protect existing permanent structures from imminent the foreshore of the Esplanade. The seawall is the most erosion presents an imminent threat to adverse coastal erosion impacts, and the structures feasible option for protecting the residents of 48 -80 public safety or permanent structures. cannot reasonably be relocated or abandoned. Kingfisher Parade from prolonged coastal erosion. Editor’s note: Applications for coastal AND protection work must be supported by a AO8.2 Coastal protection work is undertaken on private P/S The proposed seawall is located at the boundary of Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment report certified by an RPEQ that land to the maximum extent reasonable. Unallocated State Land (land below HAT) and coastal demonstrates how the engineering AND reserve land designated as an ‘esplanade’ (or road reserve) solution sought by the work will be which is owned by the State and administered by the FCRC. achieved. The proposed seawall is required to be constructed in this location to provide erosion protection works alongside the Esplanade. The location of the seawall alignment has been retained within the esplanade, rather than private land, to ensure public access to the beach is maintained. AO8.3 Coastal protection work does not increase the √ The proposed seawall has been designed to protect coastal hazard risk for adjacent areas or properties. residents from prolonged erosion and will not increase the potential coastal hazard risks on adjacent areas. However it is acknowledged that the seawall protects only those properties located at 48 to 80 Kingfisher Parade, and there is the potential that additional erosion protection may be required for properties either side of the seawall ends in future. However, the eastern seawall end will act to interrupt the predominant westerly sediment transport and has less risk of undermining than the western end of the seawall (where the dune buffer is wider). The seawall ends have been designed with additional scour protection to minimise effects to adjacent areas. PO9 Development avoids adverse AO9.1 Development: P/S A portion of the seawall (approximately 200m 2) is located impacts on matters of national (1) is set back from matters of national environmental within the boundaries of the Great Sandy (State) Marine environmental significance and matters significance or matters of state environmental Park, protected under the Marine Parks Act 1994 , and of state environmental significance, or significance therefore identified as a matter of state environmental where this is not reasonably possible, (2) avoids interrupting, interfering or otherwise adversely significance under the State Development Assessment impacts are minimised and residual impacting underlying natural ecosystem components Provisions. impacts are offset. or processes and interactions that affect or maintain The proposed works will ensure continued access to the the matters of national environmental significance or marine park and enjoyment of its significant ecological matters of state environmental significance, such as values by the community. A permit will be required under the water quality, hydrology, geomorphology and Marine Parks Act 1994 to authorise development within the biological processes, or marine park, and is being sought from the DNPRSaR (3) incorporates measures as part of its location and concurrently with this application. design to protect and retain matters of national environmental significance or matters of state environmental significance and underlying ecosystem processes within and adjacent to the development site to the greatest extent practicable. Editor’s note: Applications for development should identify any Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment threatened species or their habitats, or threatened ecosystems, that may be affected by the proposal. In particular, applications should identify and describe how the development avoids adverse impacts on any critical life stage ecological processes within or adjacent to the development area. AND AO9.2 An environmental offset is provided for any N/A The proposed works will require the removal of marine unavoidable significant residual impact on matters of state plants to enable construction of the seawall. However, the environmental significance caused by the development. extent of marine plant clearing will be less than 25m 2 and as Editor’s note: Applications for development should identify the development is for public works, no offsets are required anticipated losses, and outline what actions are proposed to be as per the Marine Fish Habitat Offset Policy undertaken to offset the loss in accordance with the relevant (FHMOP.005.2). Environmental Offset Policy available from the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection library catalogue .

PO10 Development maintains or AO10.1 Development adjacent to state coastal land or √ The proposed seawall is necessary to protect people and enhances general public access to or tidal water: property, and mitigate ongoing erosion occurring to the along the foreshore, unless this is (1) demonstrates that restrictions to public access are coastal environment. In the absence of control measures, contrary to the protection of coastal necessary for: ongoing erosion at a rate of between 1 m to 2m per year in resources or public safety. (1) the safe or secure operation of development, or this location has the potential to impact on the ability to (2) the maintenance of coastal landforms and safely access the beach in this location. coastal habitat The seawall has been specifically designed with appropriate (2) separates residential, tourist and retail development provision to maintain public access, and facilitate continued from tidal water with public areas or public access use and enjoyment of the coastal environment. facilities, or (3) maintains existing public access (including public access infrastructure that has been approved by the local government or relevant authority) through the site to the foreshore for: (1) pedestrians, via access points including approved walking tracks, boardwalks and viewing platforms, or (2) vehicles, via access points including approved roads or tracks. AND AO10.2 Development adjacent to state coastal land, √ A formal access to the beach is currently provided from including land under tidal water: surrounding residential areas along Kingfisher Parade. (1) is located and designed to: However the 2m high erosion scarp which has formed as a (1) allow safe and unimpeded access to, over, under result of ongoing erosion currently hinders safe access to Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment or around built structures located on, over or the beach and is threatening essential public infrastructure. along the foreshore Therefore, through stabilising this environment it is (2) ensure emergency vehicles can access the area considered that the proposed works will have a positive near the development, or effect on the use and enjoyment of the marine park and (2) minimises and offsets any loss of access to and surrounding areas. along the foreshore within two kilometres of the Provision has been made within the design for a for a 5 m existing access points, and the access is located and wide timber staircase to connect with the existing public designed to be consistent with (1)(a) and (b). thoroughfare from Kingfisher Parade, and maintain public AND access across the structure. Additionally, the use of a rock armour design provides a variable surface which can allow passage across the face of the seawall. AO10.3 Any parts of private marine development that N/A No private marine development is proposed as part of this extend over tidal water are to be designed, constructed application. and used for marine access purposes only.

PO11 Development avoids structures AO11.1 Private marine development and other structures N/A No private marine development is proposed as part of this attaching to, or extending across, non- such as decks or boardwalks for private use do not attach application. tidal state coastal land abutting tidal to, or extend across state coastal land that is situated waters. above the high water mark. Editor’s note: For occupation permits or allocations of State land, refer to the Land Act 1994.

PO12 Further development of canals, dry AO12.1 The design, construction and operation of artificial N/A No artificial waterways are proposed as part of this land marinas and artificial waterways tidal waterways maintains the tidal prism volume of the application. avoids or minimises adverse impacts on natural waterway to which it is connected. coastal resources and their values, and AND does not contribute to: (1) degradation of water quality AO12.2 The design, construction and operation of artificial N/A No artificial waterways are proposed as part of this tidal waterways does not increase the number of premises application. (2) an increase in the risk of flooding vulnerable to flooding from a defined storm tide event. (3) degradation and loss of matters of national environmental significance AND and matters of state environmental AO12.3 The location of artificial waterways avoids matters N/A No artificial waterways are proposed as part of this significance (including, but not of national environmental significance and matters of state application. limited to, coastal wetlands, fish environmental significance, or does not result in any habitat areas and migratory species significant adverse effect on a matter of national habitat). environmental significance or matter of state environmental significance.

PO13 Development does not involve No acceptable outcome is prescribed. N/A Reclamation works are not proposed as part of this reclamation of land below the highest application. Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment astronomical tide, other than for the purposes of: (1) coastal-dependent development, public marine development or community infrastructure (2) strategic ports, boat harbours or strategic airports and aviation facilities, in accordance with a statutory land use plan, where there is a demonstrated net benefit for the state or region and no feasible alternative exists (3) coastal protection work or work necessary to protect coastal resources or physical coastal processes.

Table 10.1.2: Operational work Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment PO1 Tidal works that is private marine AO1.1 The location and design of tidal works that is N/A No private marine development is proposed as part of this development does not result in adverse private marine development: application. impacts to tidal land. (1) is on private land abutting state tidal land and used Editor’s note: In addressing this performance for property access purposes outcome, the applicant should also have (2) occupies the minimum area reasonably required for regard to requirements for private marine its designed purpose development in the prescribed tidal works code in the Coastal Protection and (3) is not to be roofed or otherwise covered Management Regulation 2003 . (4) does not require the construction of coastal protection works, riverbank hardening or dredging for marine Editor’s note; Applications should be access supported by a report certified by an RPEQ to (5) does not adversely impact on public safety or public demonstrate compliance with this performance outcome. access and use of the foreshore. PO2 Development does not result in the No acceptable outcome prescribed. N/A Disposal of material dredged from an artificial waterway into disposal of material dredged from an coastal waters is not proposed as part of this application. artificial waterway into coastal waters, with the exception of: (1) reclamation works, or (2) coastal protection works, or (3) the maintenance of an existing Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment artificial waterway and the at-sea disposal of material that has previously been approved for the waterway. PO3 Development includes and complies AO3.1 A dredge management plan for the development: N/A No dredging is proposed as part of this application. with a dredge management plan that (1) directs the operation of the development demonstrates how environmental (2) identifies disposal methods and disposal sites for the impacts will be managed and mitigated, removed material for the construction and operational and how the requirements of the National phases of the development Assessment Guidelines for Dredging, (3) outlines how any adverse effects from extraction Australia Government Department of the activities on sediment transport processes and/or Environment, Water, Heritage and the adjacent coastal landforms will be mitigated or Arts, 2009 will be met. otherwise remediated by suitably planned and implemented beach nourishment and rehabilitation works. Editor’s note: The development must comply with the National assessment guidelines for dredging , Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2009 AND AO3.2 For land based disposal of dredged material, any N/A No dredging is proposed as part of this application. area used for storing, dewatering, drying or rehandling dredge material as outlined in the dredge management plan is: (1) of sufficient size for the projected volume of dredged material from relevant capital or maintenance dredging (2) protected from future development that would compromise the use of the area for its intended purpose of spoil dewatering. AND AO3.3 For at-sea disposal of suitable dredged material, N/A No dredging is proposed as part of this application. the dredge management plan specifies that material is placed at a dredged material disposal site only if it is demonstrated that it is not feasible to: (1) dispose of the material above the high water mark, if the material is from maintenance works for an existing artificial waterway for which at-sea disposal was previously approved, or (2) keep the dredged material within the active sediment Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment transport system for the locality, or (3) use the material for beach nourishment or another beneficial purpose. AND AO3.4 For at-sea disposal of dredged material where the N/A No dredging is proposed as part of this application. marine spoil disposal site is a retentive (i.e. non- dispersive) site, the disposal site identified in the dredge management plan has the capacity to hold and retain the material within its boundaries during construction and operation of the development. Editor’s note: The use of dredged material for a beneficial purpose uses of dredged material could include development of port or other marine facilities, use for construction or industrial purposes, or use to create or modify land or waters for an approved environmental outcome (such as creation of a bird roosting site). Further information about beneficial uses is contained in the National assessment guidelines for dredging , Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2009.

Within a wild river area: riparian and wildlife corridor functions PO4 The clearing of native marine plants AO4.1 Clearing of marine plants within a wild river area N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. within a wild river area is minimised. can only occur to the extent of the works, plus the prescribed area around the development to allow for maintenance.

PO5 Development within a wild river area No acceptable outcome is prescribed. N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. does not impact fish passage. PO6 There is no net loss in marine plants AO6.1 Any marine plant damaged during construction in a N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. beyond the extent of the works in a wild wild river area is replaced at the completion of the river area. development with the same species of plant in the disturbed area outside the footprint of the development.

PO7 Works within a wild river area does AO7.1 Works located in tidal waters within a wild river N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. not impact on fish habitat values. area are designed and constructed using materials, and located to ensure that the activities do not impact on fish habitat values and function.

Within a wild river area: hydrological processes Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment PO8 Development within a wild river area No acceptable outcome is prescribed. N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. does not impound natural drainage lines or flow paths, during both construction and operation. Within a wild river area: geomorphic processes PO9 Excavation and filling for prescribed No acceptable outcome is prescribed. N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. tidal work within a wild river area is carried out only to the extent necessary for the development. PO10 Works in a tidal area within a wild AO10.1 Where it is necessary to remove a marine plant, N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. river area are designed and constructed the root system must be left in the substrate to minimise in a way to ensure they do not adversely disturbance to bed and banks. affect the stability of the bed and banks AND of any waterway. AO10.2 When the works are completed, any tidal lands N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. disturbed by activities beyond the footprint of the works are restored to pre-disturbance condition to promote natural restoration of marine plants and fish habitats.

Within a wild river area: water quality PO11 No pollutants are released from No acceptable outcome is prescribed. N/A The proposed seawall is not within a wild river area. the activity.

Table 10.1.3: Reconfiguring a lot Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment PO1 Erosion prone areas in a coastal AO1.1 Where reconfiguring a lot is proposed within the N/A Reconfiguring a lot is not proposed as part of this management district are maintained as coastal management district, the erosion prone area application. development free buffers, or where within the lot, or land within 40 metres of the foreshore permanent buildings or structures exist, (whichever is greater), is surrendered to the State for coastal erosion risks are avoided or public use unless: mitigated. (1) the development is in a port or is for coastal- dependent development or (2) the surrender of the land will not enhance coastal management outcomes, for example, because there is already substantial development seaward of the lot. Editor’s note: Land surrendered to the State for public use under Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment AO1.1 is to be:

(1) placed in a State land reserve for beach protection and coastal management purposes under the Land Act 1994, with local government as trustee, or (2) managed for beach protection and coastal management purposes under another management regime to the satisfaction of the chief executive administering the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 and Land Act 1994 , if it is demonstrated that AO1.2(1) cannot be reasonably achieved. PO2 Development maintains or AO2.1 Reconfiguring a lot that abuts the foreshore or tidal N/A Reconfiguring a lot is not proposed as part of this enhances general public access to or waters involves the creation of 10 or more lots or the application. along the foreshore, unless this is opening of a new road, unless it is for coastal-dependent contrary to the protection of coastal development. resources or public safety.

5.3 Removal, destruction or damage of marine plants state code Table 5.3.1: Operational work (including operational work as part of a material change of use or reconfiguring a lot) Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment

PO1 Development avoids and protects AO1.1 A buffer surrounding fish habitats is provided and P/S The proposed seawall will be constructed adjacent to a fish habitats and fisheries resources. has a minimum width of: mapped Fish Habitat Area, and requires the removal of (1) For tidal fish habitats— approximately 9.42m 2 of species considered to be marine 100 metres above highest astronomical tide outside plants (below HAT). Marine plant species and required to be an urban area, or cleared to enable the works include: (a) 50 metres above highest astronomical tide within ° New Zealand spinach ( Tetragonia tetragonioides ) an urban area Sea purslane (Sesuviam portulacastrum) (2) non-tidal fish habitats— ° (a) 50 metres above bankful width outside ° Goats foot, Beach morning glory vine ( Ipomoea pes- an urban area or caprae subsp. Brasiliensis ) (b) 25 metres above bankful width within an urban area. ° Pigweed ( Portulaca bicolor ) Editor’s note: Guidelines to assist with determining the There were minor occurrences of these marine plants appropriate buffer widths: located below HAT and therefore within an area of tidal influence. These plants were very sparse with approximately (1) Fisheries guidelines for fish habitat buffer zones (FHG 003) , Department of Primary Industries, 2000 2.5% vegetation cover where identified below HAT, and (2) Queensland wetland buffer planning guideline , Department therefore are unlikely to provide any significant habitat for of Natural Resources and Mines, 2011. fish species. It is anticipated that any impact to fisheries resources as a result of the removal of these marine plants will be minor. These species were also observed to occur sporadically above the current erosion scarp and therefore outside of the area of tidal influence. Marine species located above HAT are not considered to meet the definition of a marine plant under the Fisheries Act, and are not considered to provide habitat for fish species. Therefore no impacts to fisheries resources are anticipated as a result of their removal. Given the seawall will be undertaken within a marine environment it is recognised that there may be potential impacts on marine species associated with construction, such as disturbance to fauna during construction activities, displacement of marine fauna due to noise and vibration impacts and unintended impacts on surrounding vegetation or habitat. Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment Any potential impacts on marine ecology are proposed to be managed through the CEMP, which will be implemented prior to construction, and will include monitoring of construction activities (where necessary) to protect marine fauna and shorebird habitat. Through the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to fish habitats and marine ecology are considered to be unlikely. PO2 There is a demonstrated right to AO2.1 The development is supported by a statutory √ Discussion around the development of erosion control propose development within or adjacent instrument (for example, regional plans made under the measures in this location has been ongoing since 2005. to the public fish habitats and fisheries Act, Shoreline Erosion Management Plan (SEMP), Since this time, a consensus for a seawall to be developed resources. coordinated project approval under the State along the esplanade has been discussed through inter- Editor’s note: Further guidance on rights in Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 ), ministerial and governmental collaboration and is supported context of fisheries resources and fish habitats and the impact on fish habitats have been properly in principle, subject to appropriate design investigations is provided in the policy provisions of considered. being undertaken. Preliminary investigations identified that a Management of declared fish habitat areas rock armour seawall of approximately 370 m in length (FHMOP 002) , Department of Primary OR between properties 48 to 82 Kingfisher Parade, Toogoom, Industries and Fisheries, 2008 . provided the most effective solution in terms of capital costs, constructability, and importantly, protection from coastal hazards. The Fraser Coast Regional Council (FCRC) Policy for Shoreline Erosion Protection Structures (Policy Number #2260297v2) specifies that the council will take the lead agency role for the initial capital cost of shoreline protection works, to be recovered through a special rate charged on benefited properties. As such, the project is being initially funded and managed by the FCRC, with capital costs recovered from the residents through a special levy. Following construction, the seawall asset will be transferred to FCRC for ongoing management. The design of the seawall has considered any potential impacts on fish habitats and any potential impacts are considered to be unlikely. AO2.2 Development is for public infrastructure. √ The proposed seawall development is public infrastructure OR to be maintained by the FCRC. AO2.3 Development is for public infrastructure for which √ The proposed seawall development is for public there is no alternative viable route that does not require infrastructure to be maintained by the FCRC and is for an works on tidal land or fish habitats. erosion protection structure which is required to be located OR on tidal land. Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment AO2.4 Development is for a legitimate public health or √ FCRC are a public sector entity and are funding and safety issue, and the applicant is an entity or acting on managing the Project. The proposed seawall is necessary behalf of an entity. to protect people and property and therefore addressing a OR legitimate public health and safety issue. AO2.5 The following can be demonstrated: √ The proposed seawall is located at the boundary of (1) tenure is held for the land directly abutting the tidal Unallocated State Land (tidal land below HAT) and coastal land and has full riparian access rights, or land designated as an ‘esplanade’. (2) tenure has been granted over the area of work, or The tenure of the ‘esplanade’, on which the proposed (3) resource entitlement or resource allocation has been seawall will be located, is a road reserve designated under granted for the resource being developed, or Section 93 of the Land Act. The ‘esplanade’ is therefore (4) for private development work that is a jetty, pontoon or State owned land which is administered by the FCRC for the boat ramp, no other maritime access structure adjoins benefit of the public. the property. Owner’s consent has been obtained from DNRM for works on State land. PO3 There is an overriding functional AO3.1 Development is for maritime infrastructure (for N/A The proposed seawall is not maritime infrastructure. requirement for the development or part example, jetty, boat ramp, moorings). of the development to be located on tidal OR lands. AO3.2 Development is lineal or nodal infrastructure N/A The proposed seawall is not linear or nodal infrastructure. Editor’s note: Development components that required to cross or be located within a waterway or tidal have a functional requirement to be located over fish habitats are acceptable. For example area (for example, bridge, culvert crossing, stormwater car park areas (including for boat ramps), outlet, pipeline). parklands, marina offices, spoil disposal or OR amenity facilities do not depend on their location to be on or over tidal lands to function, AO3.3 The access is required for the construction of the N/A The proposed seawall is not marine or linear or nodal where alternatives of lesser impact exist. marine or lineal infrastructure. infrastructure.

PO4 Development maintains or AO4.1 The development does not impact on existing √ The proposed seawall will increase the ability of the public to enhances community access to fisheries infrastructure or access required by fishing sectors. access and use the land within the esplanade. resources and fish habitats, such as Impacts on the existing infrastructure and access required through fishing access and linkages by the fishing sector will be minor. between the commercial fishery and infrastructure, services and facilities. PO5 Development that has the potential AO5.1 Affected fisheries, and the impacts on those √ The proposed seawall will not impact on Queensland to impact on the operations and fisheries, are identified. commercial or recreational fisheries operations. productivity of Queensland commercial AND or recreational fisheries mitigates any adverse impacts due to adjustment of AO5.2 Fair and reasonable compensation to commercial N/A The proposed seawall will not impact on Queensland fisheries. fishers is determined. commercial or recreational fisheries operations. AND Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment AO5.3 The impact of the development on commercial N/A The proposed seawall will not impact on Queensland fisheries and recreational fishers is offset in accordance commercial or recreational fisheries operations. with the Guideline on fisheries adjustment , Department of Fisheries and Forestry . Editor’s note: The Guideline on fisheries adjustment provides advice for proponents on relevant fisheries adjustment processes and is available by request from the Department of Fisheries and Forestry. u AO6.1 Fish will not become trapped or stranded as a √ The proposed seawall will not result in fish being trapped or result of development. stranded. AND AO6.2 Risks of fish stranding occurring have been √ The proposed seawall will not result in fish being trapped or identified, and are demonstrably manageable. stranded. AND AO6.3 Suitable habitat conditions, such as water and √ The proposed seawall has been designed with sediment quality, will be maintained to sustain the health consideration to local coastal processes and minimising and condition of fisheries resources within all fish habitats. effects on sediment transfer. AND The seawall has been designed to minimise the potential effects of scouring and resultant sediment transfer through the use of appropriate armour design, as well as additional toe and end protection. The proposed works have also been designed for a 50 yr ARI event and with allowance for sea level rise of 0.3 m (by 2063) to provide an appropriate level of protection to ensure the integrity of the structure, and minimise the need for additional works in future. A visual turbidity monitoring program will be implemented throughout construction. Should visible turbid plumes occur as a result of construction works, construction works will decrease until the plume settles. AO6.4 Herbicides are not used on, and will not drift onto, N/A No herbicides will be used on the Project. tidal land or wetlands, or within waterways. Editor’s note: Refer to the Fish salvage guidelines , Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, 2004 for guidance on how to comply with the acceptable outcomes. PO7 Development resulting in drainage AO7.1 Run-off and leachate from disturbed or oxidised √ The proposed works will require excavation below 5 m AHD, or disturbance of acid sulfate soil is acid sulfate soils is contained and treated, and not therefore there is the potential that ASS will be encountered managed to prevent impacts on fisheries released to a waterway or other fish habitat. during construction. Procedures for the management and resources and fish habitats. Editor’s note: Management of acid sulfate soil is consistent with treatment of ASS are intended to be developed through an ASS Management Plan. Performance outcomes Acceptable outcomes Response Comment the current Queensland acid sulfate soil technical manual: Soil The ASS Management Plan will include methods to mitigate management guidelines , Department of Natural Resources and Mines, 2002. potential environmental impacts through the implementation of appropriate controls for handling, managing and treating ASS material. A temporary bund is proposed to be established around the construction trench to allow remedial action to be taken if ASS are encountered. PO8 Development of, or adjacent to, fish AO8.1 The development does not directly impact fish √ Construction of the seawall will be undertaken from within habitats avoids the unnecessary loss, habitats and is located: the tidal environment. The works will be undertaken in degradation or fragmentation of fish (1) above the highest astronomical tide for tidal fish stages to minimise impacts to the marine environment. habitats and their values and the loss of habitat, or In addition, appropriate mitigation measures are intended to fish movement. (2) above bankful width for non-tidal fish habitats be established through the CEMP to mitigate potential Editor’s note: For more information, refer to (freshwater). environmental impacts including the monitoring of relevant fish habitat management operational OR construction activities (where necessary) to protect marine policies and fish habitat guidelines: fauna and shorebird habitat, visual turbidity monitoring and (1) Management and protection of marine the use of sediment and erosion control, dust suppression, plants and other tidal fish habitats (FHMOP 001), Department of Primary machinery management, and appropriate on-site awareness Industries and Fisheries, 2007 training. Tidal fish habitats, erosion control and beach AO8.2 Where impacts on fish habitats cannot be avoided, √ The proposed development will require minor clearing of replenishment (FHMOP 010) , 2 Department of Primary Industries and development meets the following criteria: marine plants (9.42 m ). However, due to the very sparse Fisheries, 2007 (1) the location, design and work methods will result in coverage of these species below HAT, the removal of these Dredging, extraction and spoil disposal the smallest impact possible to fish habitats plants is considered to have little impact on fish habitat. activities (FHMOP 004) , Department of (2) development does not increase the risk of transfer of, Given the seawall will be undertaken within a marine Primary Industries, 1998 or impacts from, pest fish and other relevant pest environment it is recognised that there may be potential Departmental procedures for permit species applications assessment and approvals impacts on marine species, associated with construction, for insect pest control in wetlands (3) tidal and freshwater inundation and drainage such as disturbance to fauna during construction activities, (FHMOP 003) , Department of Primary patterns, extent and timing are maintained such that displacement of marine fauna due to noise and vibration Industries, 1996 ecological processes continue impacts and unintended impacts on surrounding vegetation Fisheries guidelines for fish-friendly structures (4) works or development will not restrict fish access to or habitat. (FHG 006 ), Department of Primary fish habitats or fisheries resources Industries and Fisheries, 2006 Any potential impacts on marine ecology are proposed to be (5) tidal or freshwater fish habitats will not be substituted managed through the CEMP, which will be implemented for another type of habitat, for example, creation of prior to construction, and will include monitoring of mangrove communities from other tidal fish habitats construction activities (where necessary) to protect marine (6) works are undertaken to avoid both seagrass fauna and shorebird habitat and scheduling of construction flowering periods and fish spawning and migration works during low tide to avoid impacts to marine fauna. periods Through the implementation of these mitigation measures, (7) impacts are mitigated where possible. impacts to fish habitats and marine ecology are considered to be unlikely. Public infrastructure to facilitate fishing