Mid-1120-0458

Know How

Environmental Assessment Report Ministerial Infrastructure Designation (MID) for the Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Prepared for Lendlease Communities (Shoreline) Pty Ltd Our Reference: 8868 12 November 2020

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Saunders Havill Group Pty Ltd (SHG) has prepared this document for the sole use of its client and for a specific purpose, as expressly stated in the document. No other party should rely on this document without the prior consent of SHG. SHG undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any third party who may rely on upon or use the document. This document has been prepared based on SHG’s client’s description of their requirements and SHG’s experience, having regard to assumptions that SHG can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional principles. SHG may have also relied upon information provided by its client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which may not have been verified. Subject to the above conditions, this document may be transmitted, reproduced or disseminated only in its entirety.

Document Issue

Issue Date Prepared By Checked By

Draft 30 September 2020 Laura Urbina Nick Christofis

Final 11 November 2020 Nick Christofis Ashley Lovell

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Abbreviations and Glossary ACHA Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 ARI Average Recurrence Interval ASS Acid Sulfate Soils AHD Australian Height Datum ADWF Average Dry Weather Flow BPZ Bushfire Protection Zone City Plan 2018 Redland City Plan 2018 – version 4 CLR Contaminated Land Register DAF Department of Agriculture and Fisheries DAMS Development Assessment Mapping System DATSIP Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships DES Department of Environment and Science DFES Department of Fire and Emergency Services DNRME Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy DPC Department of Premier and Cabinet DSDMIP Department of State Development, Tourism and Innovation DTMR Department of Transport and Main Roads EAR Environmental Assessment Report EMR Environmental Management Register EP Equivalent Persons EPA Environmental Protection Act 1994 EPBC Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) EP (Noise) Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2019 ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development ERA Environmentally Relevant Activity FTE Full Time Equivalent IA Infrastructure Agreement MID Ministerial Infrastructure Designation ID Team Queensland Treasury – Planning Group Infrastructure Designation Team LGA Local Government Area LGIP Local Government Infrastructure Plan LRV Log Reduction Values MCA Multi Criteria Assessment MBR Membrane Bioreactor MFW Mangrove Filtration Wetlands MGR Minister’s Guidelines and Rules MID Ministerial Infrastructure Designation MLES Matters of Local Environmental Significance MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance MSES Mattes of State Environmental Significance NCA Nature Conservation Act 1992 PA Planning Act 2016 PIA Priority Infrastructure Area POD Plan of Development PR Planning Regulation 2017

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

QTPG Queensland Treasury – Planning Group RCC Redland City Council SAO’s State Assessment Outcomes SARA State Assessment Referral Agency SEQ South East Queensland ShapingSEQ ShapingSEQ, South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 SPP State Planning Policy SRBEA Southern Redland Bay Expansion Area STP Sewer Treatment Plant VMA Vegetation Management Act 1999 WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant

iii

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Executive Summary This Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) is written on behalf of Lendlease Communities (Shoreline) (the Infrastructure Entity and proponent ) who seek a Ministerial Infrastructure Designation (MID) over the premises at 38 Longland Road, Redland Bay for the proposed Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and wetlands project (the project), pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 5, section 36 of the Planning Act 2016 (PA). Saunders Havill Group have prepared this EAR to support the request in accordance with the MID process overview (version 1.3 – 17 June 2019, D18/227762) from Queensland Treasury – Planning Group (QTPG) and the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (MGR), Chapter 7 – Guidelines for the process for environmental assessment and consolation for making or amending a Ministerial designation .

The proposed MID is needed under this framework to facilitate the efficient and timely supply of infrastructure to service land within the Urban Footprint in Southern Redland Bay, being the key greenfield dwelling supply area for the Redlands Local Government Area (LGA), identified in ShapingSEQ - South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (ShapingSEQ ). The project aligns with the following two (2) infrastructure categories under Schedule 5, Part 2 of the Planning Regulation 2017 (PR):

. Category 17 - water cycle management infrastructure; and . Category 19 - any other facility not stated in this part that is intended mainly to accommodate government functions.

The project is to be delivered as a collaborative partnership between Lendlease, Redland City Council (RCC) and Redland Water (RW) with whom extensive pre-consultation has occurred; and represents a best practice recycle water management system to treat wastewater from the Southern Redland Bay catchment, which includes the Lendlease development of Shoreline, currently under construction. The Shoreline development will be home to approximately 10,000 Equivalent Persons (EP) (up to 3,500 dwellings) and is intended to include a town centre, school, regionally significant foreshore parklands, regional sport facilities, district centre as well as new and restored ecological corridors. An additional 3,500 new residents are anticipated to be accommodated within the balance of the Southern Redland Bay catchment that is within the Urban Footprint. Upon completion, the new sub-regional WWTP infrastructure is anticipated to service a total population of approximately 13,500 EP or up to 5,000 dwellings, gradually reaching capacity over a period of twenty (20) years. In 2019, RCC resolved to support a sub-regional solution to provide wastewater treatment for the Southern Redland Bay catchment, for land within the Urban Footprint.

Whilst Lendlease is the infrastructure entity for the MID, it is agreed that following construction and an initial maintenance period, RW and RCC will take over the maintenance and management of the infrastructure.

This project adopts a sustainable and innovative methodology to wastewater management, setting a new benchmark for the delivery of community infrastructure for wastewater management. The proposal involves the construction of an advanced Membrane Bioreactor (MBR ) WWTP to treat recycled water to an extremely high standard; as well as a secondary natural filtration system (wetlands), being the creation of a 9.854ha mangrove forest and salt-marsh habitat. The wetland system is intended to ‘polish’ the recycled water from the WWTP and offset the nutrient load through nitrogen retention/de-nitrification (with the added benefit of offsetting carbon as a carbon sink). Additional environmental benefits include further nutrient offset through sediment accretion, mitigating effects of sea level rise, mitigating the effects of flooding, erosion protection and significant additional estuarine habitat creation.

The WWTP and mangrove offset proposal is an exemplar project that provides significant environmental, social and cost advantages over traditional wastewater solutions, which would typically involve treatment and direct disposal to the ocean or river system.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

RPS Economics, within a report commissioned by Lendlease, found that development of the Southern Redland Bay catchment must commence in the short term if Redland City is to reach the planned population of 188,000 people by 2041 (Table 13, Shaping SEQ ). More importantly, Redland City must continue to develop and evolve all employment opportunities if the LGA is to host the planned 69,200 employees by 2041.

Key project benefits for the proposed essential community infrastructure include –

Innovation and Ecological Sustainability –

Meeting Community Expectations –

. Efficient and timely supply of catalyst sub-regional infrastructure necessary to ‘unlock’ land for the establishment of a new urban community within Shoreline (Approved 2015) and the greater Southern Redland Bay catchment and meet Shaping SEQ dwelling targets for the Redland LGA, achieving Goal 1: Grow of ShapingSEQ ; . The Infrastructure Entity has undertaken a lengthy informal pre-engagement consultation process with Council and key stakeholders, exceeding MGR consultation requirements; and . The infrastructure will satisfy servicing requirements of RCC and RW, whom have already resolved to support the project.

Economic Enabling Infrastructure – According to an RPS Economics report dated August 2020:

. Servicing the Southern Redland Bay catchment with wastewater infrastructure is an essential first step in delivering 5,000 new homes, 13,250 full time equivalent (FTE) direct and supply chain construction jobs and 1,260 ongoing jobs to Redland City when complete; . This total employment equates to 662 FTE direct and supply chain construction jobs per annum if the area is developed over 20 years; . The construction industry represents 13.9% of the workforce and 24.1% of the businesses in the Redland LGA. The ongoing development of Shoreline and the Southern Redland Bay catchment is essential to support the construction industry (workers and supply chains) based in the Redlands; . Most of the local workforce in the Redland LGA will work from, or at, home with an estimated 15% of dwellings hosting one (1) FTE. This 750-person workforce will activate the local community and economy; and . A new urban community within Shoreline and the greater Southern Redland Bay catchment will assist in attracting private sector investment to RCC.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

This EAR has considered the following key environmental impacts and has demonstrated that with mitigation measures or otherwise, impacts can be appropriately controlled or avoided:

. Operational risks – Operational risks were assessed as part of an Operational Environmental Management Plan, which found that with the mitigation measures proposed, operational risks can be appropriately avoided or minimised. . Water quality (nutrients) – The proposed MBR WWTP treats water to an extremely high standard. Results from water quality assessments undertaken by Water Technology indicate that the project will result in either a net improvement or non-worsening of water quality of the Logan River. . Water quality (pathogens) – The proposed MBR WWTP treats water to an extremely high standard and results from water quality assessments undertaken by Water Technology found the WWTP will adequately protect Logan River water users from enteric bacteria and Cryptosporidium. Water Technology recommended that additional disinfection (either UV or chlorination) be provided to protect Logan River water users from human enteric viruses (including in wet weather events). Additional disinfection (UV) has been incorporated into the design. . Water quality (other compounds) – The proposed MBR WWTP treats water to an extremely high standard and results from water quality assessments undertaken by Water Technology found the WWTP would produce, in most instances, water that is the same or better quality than existing conditions in the Logan River. . Odour impacts – The dispersion modelling by Stantec indicates that odour emissions from the proposed Southern Redland Bay WWTP site do not exceed the DES ‘no nuisance’ criterion of 5 odour units (ou) at any of the thirteen identified sensitive receptors. The report provided several recommendations in relation to covering, extracting and treating various components of the WWTP to control odours. The WWTP will be designed to comply with the odour control recommendations. . Noise impacts – The results of the noise impact assessment indicate that with the noise control measures recommended in the acoustic report from ATP Consulting (measures that are commonly used in WWTP’s), noise impacts can be satisfactorily reduced and there would be no further acoustic constraint on the establishment of the WWTP. . Marine Plants and Wetlands – The project involves the removal of some existing marine plants (mangroves and salt marsh habitat) to establish the wetlands, however will result in a net ecological benefit through the creation of a 9.854ha wetland system comprising new mangrove forest, salt-marsh habitat, new Casuarina glauca ecosystem. . Fisheries and Waterways – The proposal involves the creation of a new access road across a mapped waterway parallel to Longland Road; and some bank stability works within Serpentine Creek. Impacts are appropriately managed through design of the access road culvert, which will connect the waterway with the wetland; and rehabilitation works to establish a 9.854ha wetland including new waterway (central drain) and fish habitat. . Terrestrial Vegetation – The proposal involves impact to some existing terrestrial vegetation, including removal of 21 non-juvenile Koala habitat trees and removal of vegetation within mapped constraints. This impact is offset by the rehabilitation of 2.84ha of koala habitat and planting of 100 juvenile Koala habitat trees. . Coastal Processes and Hazards – The proposal will not have any significant impact on coastal processes provided that the mitigation and management measures outlined within this EAR are adopted. The WWTP itself is not subject to any coastal hazards. . Cultural Heritage – The impact assessment determined that impacts associated with potential Aboriginal cultural heritage disturbance can be appropriately managed through compliance with the existing Cultural Heritage Management Plan. . Natural Hazards – Impacts from natural hazards (i.e. bushfire hazard, flooding impacts, biting insects) can be appropriately managed in accordance with the management plans that accompany this EAR.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Visual Impact – An assessment of 8 nearby sensitive receptors (existing dwellings) found that the proposed WWTP would be partially visible from only two of these receptors. With mitigation measures from proposed screening vegetation (rehabilitation planting), visual amenity impacts can be avoided. . Traffic Impacts – Access to the WWTP site will be achieved by construction of a new all-movement access intersection on Longland Road and the Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by SLR Consulting recommended that the Longland Road access intersection was designed in accordance with KN Group plan 19-189-32 to ensure that impacts on the safety and efficiency of the State-controlled road network is not compromised.

This EAR has been prepared to provide information to the Minister and stakeholders in accordance with the MGR. The report includes a detailed description of the proposal with supporting plans and technical reports as well as an assessment of the natural, social and economic impacts. Also addressed is the MID process, legislative framework, consultation strategy and other relevant information.

We believe that the proposal appropriately manages or mitigates potential on-site and off-site impacts or the WWTP and mangrove offset proposal during both the construction and operational phases. The proposed designation aligns with the guiding principles, policies and assessment benchmarks for the key State interests under the State Planning Framework. The project has undergone a comprehensive environmental assessment (including extensive pre- consultation) that is of a standard to satisfy the Minister to make a Designation under s36 of the PA.

vii

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 Details Summary 3 2.1 Proposed Premises Summary 3 2.2 Proposed Infrastructure Summary 4 2.3 Proposed Infrastructure Entity Summary 5 2.4 Project Team 6 2.5 Supporting Investigations or Assessments 6

3 MID Process 9 3.1 Designation Planning Framework 9 3.2 Designation Intent 10 3.2.1 Proposed Premises 10 3.2.2 Proposed Infrastructure 11 3.2.3 Proposed Infrastructure Entity 11 3.2.4 ID Criteria 11 3.3 Effect of Designation 11 3.4 MID Process 12 3.5 Part 1 – Pre-lodgement, Pre-consultation and Endorsement 13 3.6 Part 2 - Lodgement of EAR and Consultation Strategy 14

4 Site Analysis 20 4.1 Site Description 20 4.2 Regional Context 20 4.3 Southern Redland Bay 21 4.3.1 Shoreline Master Planned Development 22 4.3.2 Morris Site 25 4.3.3 Southern Redland Bay Expansion Area 26 4.3.4 Other Sites 27 4.3.5 Surrounding Conservation and Other Areas 28 4.4 Local Context 28 4.5 Subject Site 30 4.6 Logan-Albert Catchment 31 4.7 Development Approval History 32 4.7.1 Subject Site 32 4.7.2 Adjoining Sites 32 4.8 Existing Site Characteristics 32 4.8.1 Easement and Encumbrances 33 4.8.2 Unallocated State land 33

viii

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

4.8.3 Environmental Characteristics 33 4.8.4 Infrastructure Networks 34 4.9 Site Photos 35

5 Project Background 42 5.1 Project History 42 5.1.1 Initial WWTP Studies 42 5.2 WWTP Options Assessment and Selection 43 5.2.1 Catchment Area and Population 43 5.2.2 Forecast Growth 45 5.2.3 Longlisted WWTP (Site) Options 45 5.2.4 Shortlisted WWTP (Site) Options 46 5.2.5 Longlisted Recycled Water Disposal Options 47 5.2.6 Shortlisted Recycled Water Disposal Options 48 5.2.7 Selection of Shortlisted WWTP Site and Discharge Options 49 5.2.8 Assessment of Shortlisted Options 50 5.3 Preferred Option 50 5.4 Proof of Concept 51 5.5 Mangrove Rehabilitation/Restoration Protocol 51

6 Proposed Infrastructure 53 6.1 Proposal Intent 53 6.2 Proposal summary 53 6.3 Wastewater Treatment Plant Concept Design 58 6.3.1 WWTP Staging 59 6.3.2 Treated Water Quality 60 6.3.3 Noise and Odour Control 61 6.3.4 WWTP Process Components 61 6.3.5 Disinfection 63 6.3.6 Wet Weather Bypass 63 6.3.7 Recycled Water Storage and Pump Station 64 6.3.8 WWTP Discharge Point 64 6.4 WWTP Operational Servicing Requirements (non-process related) 65 6.5 WWTP Services and Infrastructure Provisions 65 6.5.1 Potable Water Connections 65 6.5.2 Wastewater Connections 66 6.5.3 Recycled Water 67 6.5.4 Electricity Supply 68 6.5.5 Communications 69 6.6 Pipelines 69 6.7 Freshwater Storage Lagoon 70 6.8 Wetland System 70 6.8.1 Hydrology 72 6.8.2 Earthworks 72

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

6.8.3 Central Channel 73 6.8.4 Inlet and Outlet Works 73 6.8.5 Wetland Establishment/Rehabilitation 75 6.9 Ancillary Structures 77 6.10 Recycled Water Management 77 6.10.1 Recycled Water Use and Quality 77 6.10.2 Temporary Irrigation Area 78 6.10.3 Recycled Water Strategy 79 6.11 Reconfiguration of a Lot 80 6.12 Environmental Best Practice 81 6.13 Delivery and Ownership 82

7 Environmental Assessment 83 7.1 Environmental Assessment Impacts Summary 83 7.2 Key Benefits Summary 93 7.3 Water Quality Assessment 94 7.3.1 Estuarine Impact Assessments 94 7.3.2 Groundwater Impact Assessment 98 7.3.3 Recycled Water Impact Assessment 100 7.4 Natural Hazards Assessment 101 7.4.1 Bushfire Hazard Assessment and Management 101 7.4.2 Flooding Hazard Assessment and Management 103 7.5 Biodiversity Impacts Assessment 105 7.6 Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment 109 7.7 Amenity Impacts 115 7.7.1 Built Form and Visual Amenity Impacts 115 7.7.2 Biting Insects Assessment 124 7.7.3 Noise Impact Assessment 127 7.7.4 Odour Assessment 130 7.8 Cultural Heritage Assessment 132 7.9 Soils and Geology 134 7.9.1 Acid Sulfate Soils 134 7.10 Coastal Environment and Processes 136 7.11 Economic Impacts 139 7.12 Other Social Impacts 141

8 Risk Management and Ongoing Monitoring 142 8.1 Risk Management 142 8.2 Construction Risk Management 147 8.3 Management Plans 147 8.4 Ongoing Monitoring 147

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

9 Commonwealth Planning Framework 149 9.1 Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 149

10 State Planning Framework 150 10.1 State Planning Instruments 150 10.2 Planning Act 2016 151 10.3 Planning Regulation 2017 153 10.4 State Planning Policy 154 10.4.1 Part C – Purpose and Guiding Principles Assessment 155 10.4.2 Part D - State Interest Statements Assessment 158 10.4.3 Part E – State Interest Policies and Assessment Benchmarks 163 10.5 State Development Assessment Provisions 170 10.6 ShapingSEQ 173 10.7 Goal 1: Grow 173 10.8 Goal 4: Sustain 178 10.9 Other State Legislation/Requirements 179

11 Local Planning Framework 180 11.1 Local Government Planning Assessment 180 11.2 Local Framework Overview 180 11.2.1 Use Definition 180 11.2.2 Zone 181 11.2.3 Neighbourhood Plan 181 11.2.4 Overlays 181 11.3 Temporary Local Planning Instruments 187 11.4 Local Government Infrastructure Plan 187

12 Approvals Matrix 188

13 Consultation and Tranche Submissions 190 13.1 Identification of Stakeholders 190 13.2 Informal Pre-Consultation 193 13.2.1 State Government Pre-Consultation 193 13.2.2 Local Government Pre-Consultation 193 13.2.3 Workshops 194 13.2.4 Elected Representatives 194 13.2.5 Native Title Partners 194 13.2.6 Special Interest, Business and Industry Groups 194 13.3 Formal Pre-Consultation 194 13.4 Changes in Response to Formal Pre-consultation 208 13.5 Tranche Submissions 209 13.5.1 Tranche 1 210

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

13.5.2 Tranche 2 210 13.5.3 Tranche 3 213 13.5.4 Tranche 4 216 13.5.5 Tranches 5 & 6 223 13.6 Summary of Pre-consultation 234 13.7 Formal Consultation 234 13.7.1 Minimum Consultation Requirements 234 13.8 Ongoing Consultation 235

14 Conclusion and Recommendations 236 14.1 Recommended Conditions 236

15 Appendices 238

xii

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 1 Introduction Saunders Havill Group, in conjunction with Lendlease Communities (Shoreline), the Infrastructure Entity, have prepared this EAR for the Minister (the Designator) seeking a MID over premises at 38 Longland Road, Redland Bay for the propose of the Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and Wetlands Project.

Specifically, the project involves the construction of a new WWTP, new wetlands including mangrove forest and saltmarsh habitat and ancillary infrastructure to support the WWTP. The WWTP will treat incoming wastewater from the Southern Redland Bay catchment and produce recycled water for reuse or disposal. Importantly, the proposal will provide essential community infrastructure required to service land identified within the Urban Footprint and the Southern Redland Bay major expansion area, identified within the South East Queensland Regional Plan (ShapingSEQ).

As part of an extensive scoping, pre-lodgement and pre-consultation phases, options for location of the WWTP site and recycled water discharge were investigated by the technical consultant team, which eventually resulted in the proposed infrastructure solution that comprises a standalone, new WWTP and a land-based recycled water discharge (to wetlands).

The environmental impacts of the proposed infrastructure have been assessed and appropriate response measures recommended by the team of technical consultants to avoid, mitigate or offset (where applicable) throughout the life of the development (including construction). The project will be an exemplar of best-practice in wastewater management and will have ancillary benefits such as carbon sequestration, the provision of new or additional marine and terrestrial fauna habitat and will result in either a net improvement or neutral impact on water quality in the Logan River. Importantly, it has been demonstrated that project impacts can be satisfactorily avoided, mitigated or managed; and net environmental, social and economic benefits resulting from the delivery of this community infrastructure.

This EAR has been prepared to support the MID request under s36 of the PA and provide information for the Minister and stakeholders. This document has been prepared in accordance with the MID process overview and Chapter 7 of the MGR.

The EAR provides the following information for the Minister and stakeholders –

Table 1: EAR Sections

EAR Report Section Purpose of Section

Section 1 An introduction to this EAR and summary of where to find certain information within Introduction the report.

Section 2 A broad summary of the infrastructure proposal, state interests and infrastructure Details Summary entity details. Additionally, listed is the location of supporting technical information and reports.

Section 3 A summary of the MID planning framework and more specifically the MID process. MID Process Also included is a summary of how the infrastructure entity and how the requirements of the process have been addressed.

Section 4 An analysis of the site’s context, characteristics, existing uses, surrounding uses and Site Analysis site photographs.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 1: EAR Sections

Section 5 A summary into the project history and options assessment process leading to the Project Background ultimate selection of the WWTP site and disposal option.

Section 6 A description of the proposed WWTP and Wetlands project and associated works. Proposed Infrastructure The proposed infrastructure briefly outlines the recommendations of the environmental assessment.

Section 7 A comprehensive assessment of the environmental, social and economic impacts of Environmental Assessment the proposal and how it is proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate these impacts (if applicable).

Section 8 This section provides details of the risk management approaches adopted by the Risk Management (including proponent and outlines the ongoing monitoring that is intended to be undertaken emergency situations) and during the construction and operational phases. Monitoring

Section 9 An outline of the Commonwealth legislative framework that applies to the site and Commonwealth Legislative proposed MID. Framework

Section 10 An outline of the State planning framework that applies to the site and proposed State Planning Framework MID.

Section 11 An outline of the Local Government planning framework that applies to the site for Local Government Planning the proposed MID. Framework

Section 12 A summary of the other additional approvals, permits and licences required Approvals Matrix subsequent to the MID to enable for development to occur.

Section 13 A summary of the pre-lodgement, pre-consultation and formal consultation strategy, Consultation and Tranche including the identification of relevant stakeholders, details of informal pre- Submissions consultation, formal pre-consultation (already undertaken) and a response to comments and advice received during the pre-consultation phase.

Section 14 A summary of the EAR conclusions. Conclusion

Section 15 Supporting appendices including property information, context plans and Appendices supporting technical investigations.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 2 Details Summary 2.1 Proposed Premises Summary

Table 2: Proposed Premises Summary

Premise 38 Longland Road, Redland Bay 4165

Real property description . Lot 2 on RP223470 . Lot 3 on RP223470 . Lot 1 on SL3427 . Lot 254 on S31102 . Part of unallocated State land (Serpentine Creek) for outlet works

Registered Owner . John Ronald McDonald - Lot 2 on RP223470, Lot 3 on RP223470, Lot 1 on SL3427, Lot 254 on S31102 . Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy (Part of Serpentine Creek)

Area Approximately 74.8ha

Frontage Approximately 1km frontage to Longland Road Approximately 470m frontage to Rocky Passage Road

Registered Easements Nil

Contaminated Land Not listed on the Contaminated Land Register (CLR) or Environmental Management Register (EMR).

Local Government Area Redland City Council

Planning Scheme Redland City Plan 2018 – Version 4

Planning Scheme Zone Rural Zone

Planning Scheme Overlays . Bushfire Hazard Overlay . Coastal Protection (Erosion Prone Areas) Overlay . Environmental Significance Overlay . Flood and Storm Tide Hazard Overlay . Landslide Hazard Overlay . Transport Noise Corridor Overlay . Waterway Corridors and Wetlands Overlay

Regional Plan ShapingSEQ , South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 - Regional Landscape and Rural Production Area

State Planning Policy Biodiversity . MSES - Wildlife habitat (endangered or vulnerable) . MSES - Wildlife habitat (special least concern animal) . MSES - Wildlife habitat (koala habitat areas - core) . MSES - Regulated vegetation (category B) . MSES - Regulated vegetation (category C)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 2: Proposed Premises Summary

. MSES - Regulated vegetation (essential habitat) . MSES - Regulated vegetation (wetland) . MSES - Regulated vegetation (intersecting a watercourse) . MSES - High ecological significance wetlands Coastal Environment . Coastal management district Natural Hazards Risk and Resilience . Bushfire prone area . Erosion prone area . Medium storm tide inundation area . High storm tide inundation area Transport Infrastructure . State-controlled road

Development Assessment SEQ Regional Plan Mapping (DAMS) . SEQ Regional Plan land use categories Coastal Protection . Coastal management district . Coastal area – erosion prone area . Coastal area – medium storm tide inundation area . Coastal area – high storm tide inundation area Fish Habitat Areas . Queensland waterways for waterway barrier works Water Resources . Water resource planning area boundaries Native Vegetation Clearing . Regulated vegetation management map (Category A and B extract) Koala Priority Area . Koala Priority Area Koala Habitat Area . Core Koala Habitat Area State Transport Corridor . State-controlled road Areas within 25m of a State Transport Corridor . Area within 25m of a State-controlled road

2.2 Proposed Infrastructure Summary

Table 3: Proposed Infrastructure Summary

Designator QTPG (Minister)

Category of Infrastructure Planning Regulation 2017 , Schedule 5, Part 2:

. Category 17 - water cycle management infrastructure . Category 19 - any other facility not stated in this part that is intended mainly to accommodate government functions.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 3: Proposed Infrastructure Summary

Description of Infrastructure . New WWTP . New 9.854ha wetland including mangrove forest and salt-marsh habitat . Freshwater storage lagoon . Ancillary infrastructure to support the WWTP (including access roads, inlet/outlet works, sediment basin and reticulated mains)

Relevant State Departments . Queensland Treasury – Planning Group (QTPG) . Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF) . Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships (DATSMIP) . Department of Environment and Science (DES) . Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy (DNRME) . Department of State Development, Tourism and Infrastructure (DSDTI) . Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR)

Pre-Consultation . Redland City Council (RCC) . Redland Water (RW) . Department of Agriculture and Fisheries . Department of Environment and Science . Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy . Department of Transport and Main Roads . Adjoining Landowners (as advised by QTPG) . Directly Affected Landowners (as advised by QTPG) . Elected Representatives . Gold Coast City Council (GCCC) . Logan City Council (LCC) . Federal Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) . Business Advocacy Groups (including Australian Prawn Farmers Association) . GHD (peer review) . Academic Assessment (peer review) o University of Queensland – Alistair Grinham o University of Queensland – Kath Lovelock o Griffith University – Dr Maria Fernanda Adame . Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)

2.3 Proposed Infrastructure Entity Summary

Table 4: Proposed Infrastructure Entity Summary

Infrastructure Entity Lendlease Communities (Shoreline) Pty Ltd c/- Saunders Havill Group

Type of Entity Non-public sector entity

Contact Nick Christofis

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 4: Proposed Infrastructure Entity Summary

Saunders Havill Group Suite 1B, 6 Yoga Way Springfield Central QLD 4300 Telephone: (07) 3539 6700 Email: [email protected]

2.4 Project Team

Table 5: Project Team

Project Engineer (WWTP) Stantec

Civil Engineer KN Group

Hydraulic Engineer Water Technology

Water, Coastal and Water Technology Environmental Consultant

Planning Saunders Havill Group

Terrestrial Ecology Saunders Havill Group

Aquatic Ecology frc environmental and Saunders Havill Group

Bushfire Management LEC Land and Environment Consultants

Surveyor Saunders Havill Group

Environmental Management Saunders Havill Group (Rehabilitation)

Acoustic ATP Consulting Engineers

Traffic Consultant SLR Consulting

Stakeholder Engagement and Threeplus Community Consultation

Mapping Saunders Havill Group

Landscape Architect Saunders Havill Group

2.5 Supporting Investigations or Assessments

Table 6: Supporting Investigations or Assessments

Investigation or Assessments Prepared by Appendix

MID Process Overview and MID Process Flow Chart QTPG Appendix A

Southern Redland Bay WWTP Project – Proposal Plans Saunders Havill Group Appendix B (Site Plans)

Southern Redland Bay WWTP Project – Proposal Plans Saunders Havill Group Appendix C (Reconfiguration of a Lot Proposal Plan)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 6: Supporting Investigations or Assessments

Southern Redland Bay WWTP Project – Proposal Plans KN Group Appendix D (Engineering Plans)

Existing Site Plan Saunders Havill Group Appendix E

Southern Redland Bay WWTP Options Assessment Stantec Appendix F Report

Southern Redland Bay WWTP - Concept Design Report, Stantec Appendix G including –

. Appendix A - Process Flow Diagram . Appendix B - WWTP Concept Site Layout . Appendix C - Odour Impact Assessment . Appendix D - Noise Impact Assessment

Engineering Services Report Stantec Appendix H

Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Recycled Water Stantec Appendix I Management Plan, including –

. Appendix A - Risks and Mitigations . Appendix B - Likelihood and Consequence Rating

WWTP Process Flowchart Stantec Appendix J

Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design Water Technology Appendix K and Receiving Environmental Assessments, including –

. Estuarine Impact Assessments . Groundwater Assessment . Flooding and Stormwater Assessment . Coastal Processes Assessment . Water Quality Monitoring and Management Plan . Response to State Planning Policy (Water Quality) . Appendix A - Response to State Code 8

Hydrodynamic Modelling for Culvert Sizing Water Technology Appendix L

Ecological Assessment Report, including – Saunders Havill Group Appendix M

. Aquatic and terrestrial flora and flora surveys and impact assessment . Appendix F - Property Map of Assessable Vegetation Report . Appendix L - Response to State Code 11 . Appendix M - Response to State Code 18 . Appendix K - Response to State Code 25

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 6: Supporting Investigations or Assessments

. Appendix N - EPBC Act Significant Impact Guideline Assessment

Preliminary Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Saunders Havill Group Appendix N Plan

Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan Saunders Havill Group Appendix O

Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan Saunders Havill Group Appendix P

Cultural Heritage Management Plan Lendlease Communities Appendix Q (Shoreline) Pty Ltd & Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People

Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation Douglas Partners Appendix R

Bushfire Management Plan LEC Land and Environment Appendix S Consultants

Biting Insect Management Plan frc environmental Appendix T

Traffic and Transport Assessment, including – SLR Consulting Appendix U

. Appendix A - Access Concept and Site Distance Assessment (Longland Road) prepared by KN Group

Visual Impact Assessment Mapping Saunders Havill Group Appendix V

Construction Environmental Management Plan Stantec Appendix W

Operational Environmental Management Plan (WWTP) Stantec Appendix X

Preliminary Site Based Management Plan (Wetlands) Water Technology Appendix Y

Pre-Consultation Report Threeplus Appendix Z

Formal Consultation Strategy Threeplus Appendix AA

Survey Sketch Plan Saunders Havill Group Appendix BB

Perspective Images (Lumion Renders) Saunders Havill Group Appendix CC

Matters of State Environmental Significance Mapping Saunders Havill Group and Appendix DD QTPG

RCC PD-online Property Summary Redland City Council Appendix EE

Adjoining Landowners and Directly Affected Landowners QTPG Appendix FF

Property Searches Saunders Havill Group Appendix GG

Development Assessment Mapping (State) QTPG Appendix HH

Koala Management Plan Saunders Havill Group Appendix II

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 3 MID Process On 23 December 2019, the Southern Redland Bay WWTP and Wetlands project was endorsed by the Minister (via the ID Team) for the MID assessment process, which included an invitation to submit an EAR for the project. It was advised by the ID Team that the EAR should include (but not necessarily be limited to):

. A summary of: pre-engagement consultation actions and stakeholders notified; matters/issues raised; and, how these matters/issues have been directly addressed (for example, design changes or mitigation measures); . The matters identified chapter 7, part 3, section 4 of the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (in relation to content of the EAR); . The matters raised and discussed in the pre-lodgement meetings; . The approval/s history for the site, to ensure that the designation does not conflict with any ongoing obligations from previous development approvals over the site. This must include: o a summary of the approvals history for the site (all approvals/judgements/orders) o the status of the above (which have been carried out, which have not, which have lapsed, etc) o an analysis of the ongoing obligations of those approvals (for example, conditions that are not ‘discharged’ – ‘operational’ or ‘maintain’ conditions) o commentary as to how the designation proposes to deal with any ongoing obligations or former operational conditions to avoid any conflict. . The proposed consultation strategy, including: o draft sign on land (template attached) o draft newspaper advert (template attached) o list of stakeholders, including: . directly affected non-local government utility providers . elected representatives (local, state and federal) . all adjoining landowners . directly affected surrounding landowners . other interested groups/parties/organisations o The Native Title party or Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander party for the area (for purpose of the assessment and management of cultural heritage). Note that native title party includes all current or previous native title holders/claimants o Draft letter to stakeholders

This section provides a summary of the key intent, legislative framework and process for the proposed MID in accordance with the MID process overview and Chapter 7 of the MGR.

3.1 Designation Planning Framework The following three (3) statutory planning instruments provide the framework for an ID –

. Planning Act 2016 – includes provisions for making, amending, extending or repealing designations; . Planning Regulation 2017 – identifies types of infrastructure that may be designated; . Minister’s Guidelines & Rules (MGR) under the Planning Act 2016 (July 2017) – includes processes for making or amending designations, including: .  Chapter 7 – includes processes specific to a Ministerial designation ; . Chapter 8 – includes processes specific to a Local Government designation.

Additional guidance is received from the following supporting publications –

. Guidance for the MGR (July 2017) – provides guidelines to accompany the processes in the MGR; and

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. QTPG MID Process Overview (Operational Guidance) and the QTPG MID process flowchart (Appendix A).

3.2 Designation Intent Infrastructure Designations (ID) play a critical role in Queensland’s new planning system by designating premises for infrastructure. The key purpose of an ID is to facilitate the efficient and cost-effective provision of the community infrastructure. Queensland’s planning legislation under the PA, allows for a request for an ID to be made by either a public sector entity or non-public sector entity (an Infrastructure Entity). A Designation can be made by the Minister (a Ministerial designation) or by a Local Government (a Local Government designation). 3.2.1 Proposed Premises The proposed premise for the MID is land located at 38 Longland Road, Redland Bay, formally described as Lot 2 on RP223470, Lot 3 on RP223470, Lot 1 on SL3427, Lot 254 on S31102 and Part of unallocated State land (Serpentine Creek) for creek stabilisation works.

Figure 1 below shows in purple the proposed ID boundary, the above listed existing parcels of land which make up the designation area and location of proposed infrastructure components. The Proposal Plans (Site Plans) are contained in Appendix B. A survey sketch of the part of Serpentine Creek required for creek stabilisation works is included in Appendix BB.

Figure 1: Extract from Proposal Plan (Source: Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Project 8868 P 02 Rev P – SK 01)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

3.2.2 Proposed Infrastructure We have carried out an assessment of the infrastructure categories under Part 2, Schedule 5 of the PR in accordance with section 2.2(d), Part 1, Chapter 7 of the MGR. The proposed infrastructure aligns with the following categories –

. Category 17 – water cycle management infrastructure; and . Category 19 – any other facility not stated in this part that is intended mainly to accommodate government functions. 3.2.3 Proposed Infrastructure Entity The proposed Infrastructure Entity is Lendlease Communities (Shoreline), whom are requesting the Queensland Treasury – Planning and Infrastructure Minister, as the designator (a Ministerial Designation), make a MID that identifies the premise for the development of infrastructure prescribed under the PR (categories 17 and 19 as above). Lendlease Communities (Shoreline) are a non-public sector entity and are required to notify relevant State departments for the type of infrastructure proposed.

Whilst Lendlease is the Infrastructure Entity for the MID, the proposed MID is a sub-regional wastewater treatment solution servicing the Southern Redland Bay catchment, within the RCC Local Government Area (LGA). As such, it is agreed that following construction and an initial maintenance period, RCC and RW will take over the maintenance and management of the infrastructure; therefore, the proposal is undertaken ‘on behalf of’ a public sector entity.

Lendlease Communities (Shoreline) has an interest in the majority of the land within the ShapingSEQ Urban Footprint of the Southern Redland Bay catchment area, including the Shoreline master planned community and other land holdings within the balance area of Southern Redland Bay; however, upon Council resolution are proposing a sub-regional solution to service land within the Southern Redland Bay catchment and Urban Footprint. 3.2.4 ID Criteria We have carried out an assessment of the criteria for making an ID under section 36(1) of the PA in accordance with section 2.2(j), Part 1, Chapter 7 of the MGR. Refer to Section 10.2 – Planning Act 2016.

A preliminary assessment of the ID criteria was undertaken as part of the Request for Endorsement in December 2019 and endorsed by the Minister (via the ID Team), which culminated in an invitation to lodge this EAR.

3.3 Effect of Designation Development of infrastructure on a premise that is subject to a Designation is Accepted Development under section 44(6)(b) of the PA, provided it complies with any requirements for the Designation under section 35(2) of the PA.

An ID is exempt from the assessment processes normally conducted against State and local planning instruments (e.g. under the Development Assessment Rules and as per the PA), as a Designation includes consideration of the proposal against relevant planning instruments leading to its approval. The effect of the Designation, if made, is that the use and development of the site for the designated infrastructure is ‘accepted development’ and therefore is exempt from assessment against the local government planning scheme and does not require a development permit to proceed.

The Designation does not exempt aspects of building work that is building work under the Building Act 1975 . Building works under the Building Act 1975 is assessable development other than accepted development under Schedule 7 of the PR.

The Designation does not prevent other development from taking place on the designated premises. However, any development proposed that departs from the Designation (by use or scale) and would be classed as assessable

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project development (under the relevant local planning instrument, the regulation, or other land-use plans) will require a development permit under the local government’s categorising instrument.

In addition to obtaining the Minister’s approval for a Designation of the premises for a community infrastructure, other approvals are required to permit the development of the infrastructure. It is the responsibility of the infrastructure entity to identify if any other such approvals are required before commencing works related to the development. Other approval requirements are summarised in Section 12 – Approvals Matrix .

3.4 MID Process A MID is to be undertaken in accordance with Chapter 2, Part 5, s35-38 of the PA. Chapter 7 of the MGR, which outlines five (5) part process for carrying out a MID. Prior to making a MID, the Minister must be satisfied that adequate environmental assessment and consultation on the environmental assessment has occurred.

The process under Chapter 7 of the MGR includes the following parts –

. Part 1 – Planning and preparation; . Part 2 – Minister’s acknowledgement; . Part 3 – Draft environmental assessment report; . Part 4 – Consultation and state interest review; and . Part 5 – Finalise environmental assessment report.

The MGR provide a process for satisfying a Minister to designate a premise, ‘ however, the Minister may be satisfied of the matters in another way ’ in accordance with Chapter 2, Part 5, s36 (5) of the PA.

In accordance with the MID Process Overview document (Appendix A ), the process includes the following five (5) parts:

.  Part 1 – Pre-lodgement, pre-consultation and endorsement ; .  Part 2 – Entity lodges EAR and consultation strategy [current stage] ; . Part 3 – QTPG Preliminary Assessment; . Part 4 – Consultation and Assessment; and . Part 5 – Final Assessment.

Part 1 of the MID process has been completed. A Request for Endorsement seeking the Minister’s endorsement of the proposed MID and to proceed to the ‘Lodgement of EAR’ was submitted by the infrastructure entity on 17 December 2019. Endorsement to prepare and submit an EAR was received from QTPG on 23 December 2019. The lodgement of the EAR represents the commencement of Part 2.

The QTPG MID Process is additionally summarised in the flowchart shown in Figure 2 and contained in Appendix A.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 2: Extract of the MID Process (Source: QTPG)

3.5 Part 1 – Pre-lodgement, Pre-consultation and Endorsement Part 1 of the MID process is ‘Pre-lodgement, Pre-consultation and Endorsement’. The intent of Part 1 is to confirm –

. Proposal Details; . State Interests; . Consultation Strategy; . Key Issues; and . Endorsement to proceed to lodgement of an EAR.

Initial contact was made with the ID Team in September 2018, and an extended pre-lodgement process was commenced involving meetings with Local Government (RCC and RW), relevant State agencies and other key stakeholders over an 18-month period. The ID Team advised the project team could commence formal pre- consultation on 30 October 2019. Formal pre-consultation commenced on 20 November 2019 and concluded on 11 December 2019.

Pre-consultation was undertaken in three (3) stages, as follows –

. Stage 1 – Informal pre-consultation, including: o Extensive informal consultation with both State and local governments (RCC and RW), elected representatives and the native title partners. . Stage 2 – Formal pre-consultation, including: o Formal consultation with adjoining and directly affected landowners, other community members, elected representatives and other key stakeholders. . Stage 3 – Continuing Information Pre-Consultation, including: o Consultation with the Australian Prawn Farmers Association; and o Submission of draft technical reporting and plans to State agencies for preliminary assessment.

A summary of the actions undertaken, and outcomes of the informal and formal pre-consultation is provided in Section 13.

As noted above, a Request for Endorsement for acceptance of the MID was lodged by the infrastructure entity on 17 December 2019. Endorsement to prepare and submit an EAR was received from QTPG on 23 December 2019.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

3.6 Part 2 - Lodgement of EAR and Consultation Strategy Part 2 of the Streamlined MID process is ‘Entity lodges EAR and consultation stategy’. The following tables provide an assessment against the relevant requirements and inents of an EAR in Part 2 -

. Table 6 – requirements set out for an EAR under Part 2 of the MID proccess; . Table 7 – requirements under Chapter 7, part 1, section 2 – Infrastructure Proposal of the MGR; and . Table 8 – requirements under Chapter 7, part 3, section 4 - Environmental assessment report of the MGR.

Table 7: Assessment against Part 2 - MID process

Requirement Proposal

The entity is to lodge the EAR (via the online portal), prepared Compliance with Chapter 7, Part 3, Section 4 of the MGR in accordance with chapter 7, part 3, section 4 of the MGR, has been met. Please refer to the assessment undertaken and addressing all matters discussed in the pre-lodgement in Table 8. meeting. The EAR must address outcomes of pre-engagement Refer to Section 13 of this EAR. This section of the report consultation with the council and key stakeholders (as details the pre-consultation (informal and formal) that has determined by QTPG), including: occurred with all stakeholders over an 18-month period . actions and stakeholders notified and outlines the issues and/or concerns raised and how . matters/issues raised these have been addressed in the EAR. . how these matters/issues have been directly addressed (for example, design changes or mitigation measures)

The EAR must address the approval/s history for the site, to Refer to Section 4 – Site Analysis of the EAR providing: ensure that the designation does not conflict with any . ongoing obligations from previous development approvals Site summary and confirmation that there are no over the site. This includes: existing uses or approvals for development over . a summary of the approval’s history for the site (all the proposed premise. Additionally refer to the approvals/judgements/orders) RCC PD online property summary provided in . the status of the above (which have been carried Appendix EE; out, which have not, which have lapsed, etc) . A summary of the Shoreline preliminary . an analysis of the ongoing obligations of those approval history outlining the infrastructure approvals (for example, conditions that are not ‘discharged’ – ‘operational’ or ‘maintain’ entity obligations to provide a sub-regional conditions) waste water solution for the Southern Redland . commentary as to how the designation proposes to bay catchment. deal with any ongoing obligations or former operational conditions to avoid any conflict. Refer to Section 6 - Proposal, outlining the intended delivery and ulimate ownership of the proposed infrastructure.

The EAR must be accompanied by the following material as Refer to Section 13 of the EAR detailing the proposed outlined in the consultation strategy: consulation strategy (including informal and formal . Draft sign on land (template attached) preconsultation and formal consultation strategy from . Draft newspaper advert (template attached) Threeplus). The formal consultation strategy includes all . List of stakeholders, including: stakeholders and draft material to be circulated during o directly affected non-local government utility formal consultation. providers o elected representatives (local, state and federal) The formal consultation straetgy from Threeplus is o all adjoining landowners/residents attached ( Appendix AA).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 7: Assessment against Part 2 - MID process

o directly affected surrounding landowners o interested groups/parties/organisations o the Native Title party or Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander party for the area (for purpose of the assessment and management of cultural heritage). Note that native title party includes all current or previous native title holders/claimants

Draft letters to stakeholders Refer to the Formal Consultation Strategy (Appendix AA ), prepared by Threeplus containing the relevant material.

Table 8: Assessment against MGR, Chapter 7, Part 1, s2.1 & 2.2

Requirement Proposal

2.1 An infrastructure entity may request the Minister to designate premises or to amend an existing Ministerial designation for the development of infrastructure of a type prescribed by regulation by giving an infrastructure proposal to the Minister.

2.2. The infrastructure proposal must include the following matters - a) the site description including the location of the premises The MID is proposed over the premise at 38 Longland proposed to be designated Road, Redland Bay 4165. Site details are further explained in Section 2 -Details Summary and Section 4 – Site Analysis. Please also refer to the proposed site plans (Appendix B ) and Survey Sketch Plan ( Appendix BB ) which clearly show the land to be designated. Please also refer to the existing site plan ( Appendix E ). b) any existing uses on the premises proposed to be There are no existing uses proposed to be designated. designated; The Designation is for the Southern Redland Bay WWTP and Wetlands Project as detailed in Section 6 – Proposed Infrastructure. c) existing uses on adjoining sites; Refer to Section 4 – Site Analysis providing a summary of the premise, surrounding land uses and greater context. Please also refer to the existing site plan ( Appendix E ). d) the type of infrastructure; The proposed WWTP and wetlands proposal aligns with the following community infrastructure categories under the PR:

. Category 17 - water cycle management infrastructure; and . Category 19 - any other facility not stated in this part that is intended mainly to accommodate government functions.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 8: Assessment against MGR, Chapter 7, Part 1, s2.1 & 2.2 e) information about the nature, scale and intensity of the Refer to Section 6 – Proposed Infrastructure detailing all infrastructure and each use proposed; aspects of the proposal. Additionally, refer to the supporting technical reports and plans contained within the appendices of this EAR, which include detailed description of the proposal components and their nature, scale and intensity. f) the intended outcomes of the proposed uses on the site; Refer to Section 6 – Proposed Infrastructure detailing the intended outcomes, being for a new sub-regional WWTP and ancillary mechanisms for the provision of wastewater infrastructure to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment. g) any anticipated impacts on the surrounding infrastructure Refer to Section 7 – Environmental Assessment network (both state and local); detailing the impacts of the proposed ID and how these impacts are to be avoided, mitigated or offset. Section 7 provides a distilled summary of all the technical assessments contained within the appendices of this EAR. h) a list of the applicable state interests as identified by the Refer to Section 8 – State Planning Framework infrastructure entity and a statement about how they relate providing an assessment of all the relevant state interest to the infrastructure proposal; as we believe they apply to the proposed MID. Notwithstanding, it is within the ambit of QTPG to determine the applicable State interests. i) a statement about any relevant regional plans and state Refer to Section 10 – State Planning Framework development areas that are applicable to the site and how providing an assessment of the proposed MID against they are relevant to the infrastructure proposal; ShapingSEQ. There are no relevant State Development Areas applicable to the site. j) sufficient information to address the requirements of Refer to Section 10 – State Planning Framework and section 36(1) of the Act; more specifically Section 10.2 providing an assessment against s36 of the PA. k) a proposed consultation strategy for the proposed Refer to Section 13 – Consultation . Additionally, refer to designation that has taken into account the level of impact Appendix AA being the proposed Formal Consultation of the infrastructure proposal and that includes a method for Strategy prepared by Threeplus. consultation with directly affected landowners, adjoining landowners, and identified Native Title parties, differentiated from general public consultation; l) any other matter the infrastructure entity considers All matters considered relevant to the proposed ID have relevant to the request. been addressed in the EAR.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 9: Assessment against MGR, Chapter 7, Part 3, s4

Requirement Proposal

4.1. The infrastructure entity must prepare an environmental assessment report that includes— a) further detail around the matters outlined in section 2.2, Agreement from the Minister (via the ID Team) to allow including appropriately detailed site plans and descriptions the proponent to submit an EAR has been received. Refer of individual site uses; to Section 6 – Proposed Infrastructure containing all relevant information regarding the proposed ID for the Southern Redland Bay WWTP and wetlands.

Proposal plans and supporting technical reports are provided within the appendices of the EAR. Specifically, reference should be made to:

. Appendix B – Proposal Plans (Site Plans); . Appendix C – Proposal Plans (Reconfiguration of a Lot); . Appendix D – Engineering Plans; and . Appendix F – Concept Design Report. b) a comprehensive assessment of all environmental, social Refer to Section 7 – Environmental Assessment which and economic impacts (both positive and negative); includes a comprehensive assessment of the various types of impacts (positive and negative) of the proposed ID. c) how any negative impacts can be avoided, mitigated or Refer to Section 7 – Environmental Assessment. offset; Thorough technical investigations and assessments by technical consultants and experts have identified impacts of the proposed MID and an appropriate response measure (where necessary) to avoid, mitigate or offset any negative impact is recommended. Technical investigations are provided within the appendices of the EAR; however, Section 7 provides a distilled summary. d) whole-of-life impacts (i.e. construction, operation, and Refer to Section 7 – Environmental Assessment . decommission as relevant); Anticipated timing of an impact and/ or timing for actioning the recommended response measure is detailed in each of the relevant technical investigations by the project team, comprised of various technical consultants and experts. This EAR also contains the following management plans:

. Construction Environmental Management Plan; . Operational Environmental Management Plan (WWTP); . Operational Environmental Management Plan (Mangroves); . Recycled Water Management Plan;

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan; . Biting Insects Management Plan; . Bushire Management Plan; . Cultural Heritage Management Plan; and . Rehabilitation Management Plans. e) off-site impacts from the construction, operation and Refer to Section 7 – Environmental Assessment. Refer decommission (if relevant); and to response above. The technical assessments and management plans consider relevant off-site impacts. f) any further information the Minister has requested under Refer to Section 13 – Consultation , which details the pre- section 3.1(e). lodgement and pre-consultation (informal and formal) undertaken with the Minister (represented by the ID Team), directly affected and adjoining landowners and all key stakeholders; and any relevant issues raised / further information requested by the Minister (on behalf of relevant State agencies).

4.2. The infrastructure entity must identify all affected parties and stakeholders in the environmental assessment report including— a) any local government in which the proposed designation Refer to Section 13 – Consultation , which identifies all is located or that would be affected by the infrastructure relevant stakeholders. The proposed premise is located proposal; within the Redlands LGA and the infrastructure entity has undertaken extensive pre-consultation engagement with RCC and RW. Pre-consultation has also occurred with Logan City Council and Gold Coast City Council as these LGA’s directly adjoin or are in close proximity to the subject site. b) any directly affected, non-local government utility Refer to Section 13 – Consultation , identifying all providers; relevant stakeholders. c) for site-based infrastructure—all adjoining landowners; Refer to Section 13 – Consultation , identifying all relevant stakeholders including directly affected and adjoining landowners. The proposal involves site-based infrastructure and the infrastructure entity has undertaken extensive pre-consultation with all relevant stakeholders. d) for linear infrastructure—any directly affected landowners The proposed MID only applies over the proposed and adjoining landowners to the corridor; and premise. However, the infrastructure will require the provision of linear infrastructure (pipeline) external to the site to connect the sewer network to the catchment area, which is not part of the Designation. e) any identified native title parties. Refer to Section 7.8 – Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The proposed premise is encompassed by a Cultural Heritage Management Plan, an agreement under the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 between the infrastructure entity and the Native Title Claim Group (Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People). A copy of the Management Plan is provided in Appendix Q .

4.3. The infrastructure entity may identify additional Refer to Section 13 – Consultation , identifying all stakeholders for consultation in the environmental relevant stakeholders. During pre-consultation both the assessment report. Minister (represented by the ID Team) and the infrastructure entity did identify additional stakeholders for consultation.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 4 Site Analysis This section provides a comprehensive analysis of the proposed premise (site) including description, context, history, uses, characteristics and surrounding uses.

4.1 Site Description Table 10 below provides a summary of the site description –

Table 10: Site Description

Premises 38 Longland Road, Redland Bay

Real Property Description . Lot 1 on SL3427 . Lot 254 on S31102 . Lot 3 on RP223470 . Lot 2 on RP223470 . Part of unallocated State land (Serpentine Creek) for outlet works

Registered Owner . John Ronald McDonald - Lot 2 on RP223470, Lot 3 on RP223470, Lot 1 on SL3427, Lot 254 on S31102 . DNRME (Part of Serpentine Creek required for stabilisation works)

Registered Easements Nil

Area Approximately 74.8ha

Frontage Approximately 1km frontage to Longland Road Approximately 470m frontage to Rocky Passage Road

Existing Use Areas of cleared grazing land and areas of existing vegetation Detached dwelling and ancillary structures

4.2 Regional Context The site is located on the southern extremity of the Redlands LGA, approximately 35 km south-east of Brisbane City and 12 km south of Victoria Point, as the crow flies.

The Redland Bay suburb of the Redlands LGA forms part of the larger Redlands Coast which extends from Wellington Point to southern Redland Bay. Redland Bay is a launch point for the Southern Redland Bay Islands (Russell, Macleay, Lam and Karragarra). It is a coastal semi-rural locality, with a farming history but suitable urban land is being increasingly populated and re-developed for urban purposes.

Figure 3 below shows the location of Redland Bay in the context of the Redland City LGA.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 3: Regional Context Plan (source: Queensland Government - DSDMIP) showing the location of Redland Bay in the context of the Redland LGA 4.3 Southern Redland Bay Southern Redland Bay generally refers to the land within the southern portion of the Redland Bay suburb, part of the Redland LGA. It is not exclusively defined under the local government planning scheme or LGA suburb boundary, however, in context of the MID is land south of the intersection of Cleveland Redland Bay Road and Serpentine Creek Road to the Logan River. In the context of ShapingSEQ , Southern Redland Bay refers to land within the expansion area that is contained within the Urban Footprint.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The western portion of Southern Redland Bay is largely identified as ‘conservation’, this includes the Kidd Street Conservation Area, Carbrook Wetlands, Serpentine Creek Conservation Area and Native Dog Road Conservation Area. Significant land holdings within the Urban Footprint include the Shoreline master planned development, Morris Site (Lot 2 on RP212251) and the Southern Redland Bay Expansion Area (SRBEA). These areas and the surrounding rural and conservation zoned land within Southern Redland Bay are described in greater detail below ( Sections 4.3.1 to 4.3.5 ). The context of the site within Southern Redland Bay is shown below in Figure 4 below.

Kidd Street and Days Road Shaping SEQ Urban Conservation Areas Footprint including the Shoreline development (pink)

Carbrook Wetlands and Conservation park

Serpentine Creek and Native Dog Road Conservations Areas

Existing Rural and R ural Residential Uses (brown)

Existing Agricultural and Aquaculture Uses (yellow) Subject Site

Figure 4: Southern Redland Bay Context (source: Google Maps) showing the location of the subject site, surrounding land uses and conservation areas in the context of Southern Redland Bay

4.3.1 Shoreline Master Planned Development The Shoreline master planned community is located approximately 1.5km north of the proposed WWTP and Wetlands on Serpentine Creek Road. Shoreline constitutes the largest development within the Southern Redland Bay catchment area (land within the Urban Footprint). Figure 5 below shows the location of Shoreline in the context of the Southern Redland Bay catchment (land within the Urban footprint).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 5: The Shoreline development in the context of the Southern Redland Bay catchment (land within the urban footprint)

The original preliminary approval overriding the Redlands Planning Scheme v6.2 (RPSv6.2) for the Shoreline master planned community was received from RCC 25 November 2015 (Council Ref: MCU013287) and was subsequently amended via a Change Application, which was granted on 4 October January 2018 (Council Ref: MCU18/0220). The preliminary approval remains in force, having a prescribed period of fifteen (15) years from the date the approval takes effect.

Pursuant to a development application made under s242 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, the Shoreline Plan of Development (POD) is a comprehensive planning instrument for the 279-hectare Shoreline site, which contains an approved Master Plan and Precinct Plan (refer to Figures 6 and 7 below).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 6: On the left - Master Plan. Shoreline (source: Lat 27, 20 October 2016, 14009_SK013 (24)) and Figure 7: on the right - Precinct Plan. Shoreline (source: Lat 27, 20 October 2016, 14009_SK015 (21))

The Shoreline POD is the enabling statutory tool for the future and on-going development of Shoreline as envisaged by the approved Shoreline Master Plan and Precinct Plan. The Master Plan shows the conceptual road layout, location of the town centre and tourism/recreation activity areas, residential areas and open space/foreshore open space corridors. Specifically, Shoreline will be home to approximately 10,000 residents and include a town centre, regionally significant foreshore parklands, regional sport facilities, new and restored bushland corridors and hike and bike trails. The development will additionally recreate and revegetate bushland wildlife corridors across what has for many years been cleared land and provide a new primary school by the 1000 th lot to service the Southern Redland Bay community.

In 2016, Southern Redland Bay was added to the Urban Footprint as part of ShapingSEQ . As part of the Minor and Administrative Planning Scheme Amendment Package 07/19, Adopted in June 2019, Redland City Council amended the zoning of the approved Shoreline development from Rural to Emerging Community.

The Shoreline site also includes the temporary irrigation area for recycled water discharge in the initial phases of the project (as detailed in Sections 6.2 and 6.10 below). The temporary irrigation area is shown in Figure 5 above (green hatch) and shown in more detail within Figure 8 below. The temporary irrigation area does not form part of the Designation.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 8: Temporary irrigation area within the Shoreline development (source: Queensland Globe)

4.3.2 Morris Site The ‘Morris Site’ as referred to herein is additionally identified as 48-66 Scenic Road, Redland Bay (Lot 2 on RP212251) and has an area of 17.4ha, as identified in Figure 9 below. The subject parcel is located on the Redland Bay foreshore and is surrounded by the Shoreline development on all other boundaries but is not included within the preliminary approval for the master planned community.

This parcel represents a ‘missing piece of the puzzle’ needed to link up the coastline and two ends of the foreshore within Shoreline for the provision of a single continuous regionally significant open space corridor along the water’s edge.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 9: Location of the Morris site (Source: Qld Globe 2019)

4.3.3 Southern Redland Bay Expansion Area SRBEA refers to a land holding consisting of seven (7) allotments within the Urban Footprint of Southern Redland Bay, comprising a site area of approximately 82.91 hectares. SRBEA is located on the western side of Serpentine Creek Road between Kidd Street and Shoreline to the west and south, as identified in Figure 10 below.

The SRBEA has scatted vegetation but has been largely cleared from previous agricultural uses and is generally free from environmental constraints. However, SRBEA is in the Rural Zone of the RCC planning scheme which effectively prohibits further clearing of Koala Habitat Area to occur. It is understood that a number of entities with invested interest over the site have gained RCC support to commence a consultative developer-led structure planning process over the land.

The developer led structure plan process is to be undertaken in accordance with Planning Scheme Policy (PSP) 5 – Structure Planning of City Plan 2018. It is envisioned that the outcomes of the SRBEA structure plan may be supported by RCC and endorsed via a planning scheme amendment. Regardless, development application/s may be made, which would generally be consistent with the proposed structure plan.

The purpose of the structure plan is to demonstrate how the proposed land use pattern for the SRBEA will integrate with adjoining Shoreline development and transition into urban purposes in an orderly fashion, that is serviceable by all five (5) infrastructure networks. In this regard, the much of the Shoreline infrastructure is common to the SRBEA and is expected to cater for its future urban development.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 10: Location of the SRBEA (Source: Qld Globe 2019)

4.3.4 Other Sites Other sites of note outside of the abovementioned is the pocket land located south of Scenic Road and east of Serpentine Creek Road, as identified in Figure 11 below. Whilst only partially included in the Urban Footprint of ShapingSEQ , it contains existing rural residential and park residential sized allotments and is wholly contained within the Southern Redland Bay catchment area. The majority of developed lots East of Vine Street adjoining open wetlands are additionally contained in the low-density residential zone but are not currently connected to reticulated sewer.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 11: Location of ‘other sites’ (Source: Qld Globe 2019)

4.3.5 Surrounding Conservation and Other Areas Southern Redland Bay comprises significant conservation areas, generally on the western side of Serpentine Creek Road and northern side of Beenleigh Redland Bay Road. As shown in Figure 4 above, these conservation areas include Kidd Street Conservation Area, Serpentine Creek Conservation Area, Bayview Conservation Park, Days Road Conservation Area, Carbrook Wetlands Conservation Park and Native Dog Road Conservation Area. Within and surrounding these conservation areas are rural, rural residential and other conservation uses.

Land to the east and west of the subject site generally comprises rural and rural residential uses, including the large area of Southern Redland Bay bounded by Lagoon View Road, Moreton Bay (Redland Bay passage) and the Logan River. Land to the south of the Logan River generally comprises agricultural uses and several aquaculture uses directly adjoining the Logan River as shown in Figure 4 above and Figure 12 below.

4.4 Local Context The subject site is located to the south of Longland Road at Redland Bay, on an outer bend of the Logan River, about 7.5 km upstream from the mouth of the river. The site is partly bounded by Rocky Passage Road with residential property located beyond to the east. Rural and rural residential properties are located to the west of the subject site accessed via Fischer Road (Fischer Road does not extend into the site) and to the south-east. The Logan River forms part of the southern boundary of the site and on the southern side of the Logan River land use is generally agricultural, including several aquaculture uses directly adjoining the Logan River (refer to Figure 4 above).

The site extends over four (4) lots within RCC administrative area. Serpentine Creek is located adjacent to the site to the west and this forms the boundary between the administrative areas of Redland City and Logan City Council areas.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

We have carried out an assessment of the adjoining/surrounding uses and have found that – . To the north on the opposite side of Longland Road are rural and rural residential uses (Lots 10 and 11 on SP295473), Carbrook Wetlands and Native Dog Road Conservation Area; . To the east on the opposite side of Rocky Passage Road are rural residential and rural uses including several plant nurseries (Speedon Spray Cycles, an industrial land use, is also located on Rocky Passage Road); . Adjoining the site to the east (Lot 1 RP223470) is a single residential property (approximately 280m from the proposed WWTP); . Adjoining the site to the south-east is Lot 1 on RP886435, which is land owned by Redland City Council which appears to be used as a depot (or utility); . Larger rural residential lots are located to the south and south-east along Rocky Passage Road; . Logan River is located on the southern boundary; . On the southern bank of the Logan River directly opposite the subject site is an aquaculture use (Lot 4 on SP148708) with access gained via Faciles Road; and . To the west are rural residential and rural properties.

The following aerial photos show the location of the subject site and immediate surrounds –

Native Dog Road Conservation Area Rural Residential Uses (part of Carbrook Wetlands )

Rural Residential Uses

Rural and Rural Residential Uses Existing Aquaculture Use

Figure 12: Local Context (Source: Qld Globe 2019)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Rocky Passage Road

Longland Road (Beenleigh Lot 1 on RP223470 (Rural Redland Bay Road) Residential Use)

Lot 1 on RP886435 (owned by Redland City Council)

Fisher Road Logan River

Figure 13: Site Aerial (Source: Qld Globe 2019) 4.5 Subject Site We have carried out an assessment of the existing uses on the site and found that the majority of Lot 1 SL3427 is cleared land for grazing with retained areas of vegetation located centrally on the lot. As such, the site has been subject to historical broad scale clearing to support rural uses.

Serpentine Creek, a tributary of the Logan River, bounds the site to the west. Longland Road bounds the site to the north. Rocky Passage Road and Lot 1 on RP223470 bound the site to the east, whilst existing rural residential properties and the Logan River bound the site to the south.

An existing dam is located across Lot 1 on SL3427, Lot 254 on S31102 and Lot 3 on RP223470 and runs north to south. An area of land is cleared of vegetation adjacent to the dam on Lot 3 RP223470, the balance of land retains vegetation cover. A dwelling is sited at the northern part of Lot 3 on RP223470 with an existing access driveway from Longland Road. This dwelling is sited on an elevated part of the site that drops away towards the west.

Property Searches including smart map, title search and contaminated land searches for the subject land are included at Appendix GG.

Figure 14 below contains an extract of the Existing Site Plan showing the abovementioned topographical and site features. The Existing Site Plan has been prepared by Saunders Havill Group (Appendix E ).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 14: Existing Site Plan (Source: 8868 P 08 Rev A – SK01, Saunders Havill Group, 23/06/2020) 4.6 Logan-Albert Catchment The SRBWWTP is located within the Logan-Albert drainage basin which covers a total area of 4,150 km², wherein the Logan catchment alone covers approximately 2,000 km². The main waterway is the Logan River, with numerous smaller waterways flowing into it. The Logan River is joined by the Albert River near Eagleby (11 kilometres upstream of its mouth) and then flows into Southern Moreton Bay. The site is located within the Lower Logan sub catchment area, which is well within the tidal reaches of the Logan River Estuary.

Water Technology advises that although there is vegetation cover at the headwaters of the catchment, the lower catchment has been substantially cleared for a range of rural/rural residential land uses (including agriculture) and for urban development.

Figure 15 below shows the location of the Logan-Albert catchment.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 15: Logan-Albert catchment (source: Department of Environment and Science and Queensland Globe

4.7 Development Approval History 4.7.1 Subject Site There are limited development approvals over the subject land and relate only to a boat hire business in 1984 (C989) on Lot 1 on SL3427 (refer to Appendix EE ). There is no evidence that the boat hire business continues to operate from the site, as evidenced during site visits over a period of over 12 months, therefore it is our opinion that this use has ceased. 4.7.2 Adjoining Sites There has been limited development activity within the vicinity of the subject site with surrounding development applications limited to domestic developments (i.e. swimming pools, boundary realignment and extensions).

4.8 Existing Site Characteristics We have carried out an assessment of the existing characteristics of the site below.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

4.8.1 Easement and Encumbrances There are no easements or encumbrances burdening the site. A copy of the property searches including Smart Map, current Registered Plans and Certificate of Title is provided in Appendix GG. The searches confirm the site is not included on the on the CLR or the EMR. 4.8.2 Unallocated State land Part of the MID (designation area) will fall within boundaries of the Serpentine Creek, being unallocated State land, which is intended to be used for the purposes of waterway stabilisation works at the outlet structure. Owners consent from DNRME will be obtained separately and prior to any Designation. Land owner consent is not required for the EAR submission. The location of the encroachment into the creek is detailed in the Engineering Plans contained in Appendix D and on the Survey Sketch Plan ( Appendix BB ). 4.8.3 Environmental Characteristics Table 11 below describes the existing environmental characteristics of the premise –

Table 11: Existing Environmental Characteristics

Characteristics Description

Topography The north-eastern portion of the site is elevated, while much of the western portion of the site is low lying land and supports some estuarine wetlands (including saltmarsh / samphire) with weed dominated areas. There are some steeper areas of the site, generally to the east of the existing driveway from Longland Road. LiDAR mapping (as shown on the Existing Site Plan) indicates there are some drainage features in the eastern part of the site (in Lot 3 on RP223470) and parallel to Longland Road. There is an existing freshwater dam located to the west of the driveway from Longland Road and several other depressions, including what appear to be some tidally influenced depressions in the southern part of Lot 3.

Flooding and Overland Flow The site is identified within the high and medium hazard area of the storm tide inundation overlay of Redland City Plan 2018 and part of the site is within an Erosion Prone Area and medium/high storm tide inundation areas on the Matters of State Environmental Significance Mapping ( Appendix DD ). Refer to Section 7 – Environmental Assessment , and Section 10 – State Planning Framework and the Coastal Processes Assessment contained within the Water Technology Report entitled Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments (Appendix K).

Soils The subsurface conditions encountered generally comprised upper clayey sand topsoil to depths of between 0.1 m and 0.3 m underlain by alluvial soils. The alluvial soils generally comprised high plasticity, estimated soft to firm sandy clay to depths between 0.7 m and 1.2 m and then estimated loose clayey sand to the termination depth of 2 m.

Free groundwater was observed during hand augering in all bores between 0.2 m and 1 m depth. It should be noted that groundwater depths at this site are affected by climatic conditions and soil permeability, and tidal conditions at this site, and will therefore vary with time.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Refer to Section 7.9 – Soils and Geology and the Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation from Douglas Partners (Appendix R).

Acid Sulfate Soils The western portion of the site is mapped as potentially having acid sulphate soils below 5m AHG and between 5-20m AHD. This mapping is only sourced from the superseded Redland Planning Scheme v7.2.

Section 3.0, the ASS map for Tweed Heads to Redcliffe indicates the site is “land where ASS occurs within 5 m of the surface. Virtually all land in this category has at least one 'potential acid sulfate soil' layer and some of this land will have an 'actual acid sulfate soil' layer” which is in agreeance with the laboratory results. Furthermore, no visual evidence of jarosite or other ASS indicators were identified during the investigation, thus the soils were considered to be non-acid sulfate forming.

Refer Section 7.9 – Soils and Geology and the Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation rom Douglas Partners ( Appendix R).

Terrestrial Vegetation The site contains existing vegetation, most of it previously cleared of canopy vegetation because of historical rural land use for agriculture dating back to 1982. For a detailed description of the existing vegetation, refer to the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ) and, Section 5.4 of this report.

Marine Plants and Wetlands The site contains some marine plants in the western part of the site comprising mainly salt-couch, isolated areas of mangroves adjoining Logan River, Serpentine Creek and within tidally influenced areas of the site; although significant parts of the salt-couch areas are weed-dominated. The site is mapped as containing some areas of High Ecological Significance Wetlands on the State Planning Policy mapping ( Appendix DD ) and as noted above, the site is located south-east of Native Dog Road Conservation Area (part of Carbrook Wetlands). Patches of Casuarina glauca, mangroves and other marine plants are located along the banks of Logan River and Serpentine Creek.

For more detail, refer to the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M), and, Sections 5.2 and 5.3 of this report.

Terrestrial and Aquatic Fauna For a description of observed terrestrial and aquatic fauna, please refer to the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ), and, in Section 5.5 of this report.

Bushfire Hazard The site contains open grassland, bushland vegetation and estuarine vegetation. It is identified within the medium, high and very high potential bushfire intensity areas as shown on the State Planning Policy mapping ( Appendix DD ). Refer to Section 7.4.1 – Bushfire Management and the Bushfire Management Plan prepared by LEC (Appendix S).

4.8.4 Infrastructure Networks Table 12 describes the existing infrastructure and transport networks servicing the premises -

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 5: Existing infrastructure networks

Infrastructure Network Description

Water Infrastructure The site is not currently serviced by reticulated water.

Sewer Infrastructure The site is not currently serviced by reticulated sewer.

Stormwater Infrastructure The site is not currently serviced by stormwater infrastructure.

Electricity and An existing power supply exists from Longland Road through the proposed site to Telecommunications service a residential house on Lot 1 on RP223470. It is not clear if this service also Infrastructure extends to the existing dwelling on Lot 3 (subject site). There is an existing clearing along the electricity corridor.

Reticulated Gas There is no existing reticulated gas supply to the property.

Transport Network

Road Access to the site is gained from Longland Road (a State-controlled Road under the jurisdiction of DTMR) along the north boundary, via a driveway intersecting with Longland Road (informal intersection and gravel driveway).

The driveway access on Lot 3 on RP223470 runs generally west of the existing dam and then diverts north to the existing house. Whilst there is a cleared stretch of vegetation along the property boundary from Longland Road between Lot 2 on RP223470 and Lot 3 on RP223440, which appears as though it could be utilised for access purposes, it does not provide for vehicular access.

There is no current vehicular access to the site from Rocky Passage Road which runs along the eastern boundary.

On-street Parking There is limited shouldering for on street parking on Longland Road and Rocky Passage Road and due to the posted speed limit, it is likely not safe for on-street parking to occur on Longland Road.

Bus There are no nearby public transport bus services to the premise.

Ferry There are no nearby public transport ferry services to the premise.

Rail There are no nearby public transport rail services to the premise.

Cycle There are no dedicated bikeways to the premise.

Pedestrian There are no dedicated pedestrian walkways to the premise.

4.9 Site Photos The following photos are of the subject site and surrounds.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

fi Photo 1: Existing cleared area on Lot 3 RP223470 (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

Photo 2: Rundown boat shed in proximity to existing dwelling on Lot 3 RP2223470 and on the site of the proposed WWTP (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Photo 3: Existing linear dam on Lot 3 RP223470 (proposed freshwater storage lagoon) and elevated woodlands on horizon (view towards WWTP site) (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

Photo 4: Existing linear dam on Lot 3 RP223470 (proposed freshwater storage lagoon) (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Photo 5: Elevated woodlands on Lot 3 RP223470 (view to proposed WWTP site from proposed freshwater storage lagoon) (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

Photo 6: Minor drainage channels on Lot 1 SL3427 (proposed wetland area) (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Photo 7: Open grasslands on Lot 1 SL3427 within the proposed wetland area viewing towards Longland Road (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

Photo 8: Loan River from the banks of Lot 1 SL3427 within the proposed wetlands area (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Photo 9: Logan River bank viewing south-east from the site (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

Photo 10: Logan River bank viewing south to adjacent aquaculture use (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Photo 11: Open grasslands within the proposed wetland area (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

Photo 12: Serpentine Creek view from the subject site (wetlands) to adjoining dwellings on Fisher Road (Source: SHG Site Visit 29/10/2019)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 5 Project Background 5.1 Project History The Shoreline preliminary approval (inclusive of the Shoreline IA) does not provide an ultimate wastewater infrastructure solution to effectively service either Shoreline or the greater Southern Redland Bay catchment. The original developer (Shoreline Redlands Pty Ltd), whom obtained the preliminary approval for the master-planned community, proposed to construct a private wastewater treatment plant in a small lot in the centre of the development. The WWTP was to produce recycled water to a Class A+ quality suitable for reuse in homes and businesses as well as irrigation of open space. However, analysis from Stantec found that the that the development could not support the proposed ‘closed system’ solution and that the proposed wastewater disposal strategy would require an environmental licence. Furthermore, the new WWTP, if appropriately sized to cater for the population catchment had an insufficient buffer distance and would have unacceptable odour and noise impacts.

Lendlease Communities (Shoreline) Pty Ltd subsequently gained control over the Shoreline development and agreed with RCC to undertake a review of alternative WWTP sites and wastewater servicing options, including options that provided a solution for the whole of the Southern Redland Bay catchment . In 2019, RCC resolved to support a sub- regional solution to provide wastewater treatment for the Southern Redland Bay catchment, for land within the Urban Footprint.

It is important to note that collaborative engagement with RCC and RW has been maintained throughout the initial project scoping, options analysis, technical investigations and assessment phases. 5.1.1 Initial WWTP Studies Initial studies undertaken on behalf of Lendlease by Stantec advised that there was no current feasible wastewater infrastructure solution for RCC to effectively service the master planned community and the wider Southern Redland Bay catchment; nor was it feasible to upgrade the existing WWTP’s at Victoria Point or Mt Cotton due to receiving water quality assimilative capacity limitations.

The initial assessment determined that a new sub-regional infrastructure solution is required to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment for an estimated total population of approximately 13,500 EP or up to 5,000 dwellings. This includes approximately 10,000 EP or 3,500 dwellings for Shoreline and 3,500 EP for the balance of the Southern Redland Bay catchment in the Urban Footprint, consisting of the Morris Land, SRBEA and approximately 88 un-serviced residential/rural residential lots.

Stantec and Water Technology were commissioned to undertake initial investigations to identify the most appropriate options for establishing a WWTP and disposal system to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment. Stantec prepared an initial Sewerage Treatment Plan Site Options Report , which included an assessment of five (5) different WWTP and effluent disposal options. Water Technology’s advice was that the most appropriate disposal option for the excess recycled water was an ocean outfall, as there was only limited opportunity for long term reuse in the Redland Bay region.

Subsequent to the completion of the initial options analysis, land at 38 Longland Road, Redland Bay became available for purchase. This land has extensive frontage to the Logan River and would enable a gravity discharge solution to the Logan River (compared with a pumped discharge solution to an ocean outfall) or the opportunity for creation of a wetland for a land-based disposal.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

As part of the evolving scoping phase, Water Technology prepared the Southern Redland Bay WWTP and Mangrove Offset Program Due Diligence Report dated 16 December 2019, which included a number of preliminary technical assessments relating to water quality, acid sulfate soils, coastal processes, hydraulics, terrestrial flora and fauna, aquatic flora and fauna and mangrove establishment. These initial investigations concluded that 38 Longland Road provided an opportunity to deliver an innovative and environmentally sustainable approach to wastewater management through the establishment of a new mangrove forest and wetlands to ‘polish’ recycled water before discharge into the Logan River. This alternative option, it was found, could achieve a neutral or positive effect on Logan River water quality and could implement best-practice in recycled water management with ancillary benefits such as carbon sequestration and the provision of additional marine and terrestrial flora and fauna habitats.

The Water Technology report also included advice from noted academic experts in the field of wetlands ecosystems and greenhouse gas dynamics. Both assessments considered the basis for the project was sound; that the latest scientific research shows that wetlands can improve water quality while providing a range of added benefits; and that the project represents an existing opportunity to minimise development impacts on receiving water environments.

The Water Technology report, together with pre-lodgement discussions and pre-consultation with the ID Team and relevant State agencies, and advice from RCC and RW informed the basis for the final option selection. The report verified the concept of a mangrove wetland system to offset wastewater discharges from the proposed Southern Redland Bay WWTP and was subsequently superseded by the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K), however includes a summary of the previous reporting.

5.2 WWTP Options Assessment and Selection The Southern Redland Bay WWTP and Wetlands will treat incoming wastewater and produce recycled water for reuse or disposal. There are therefore two separate but intrinsically linked components being the WWTP and the discharge (land/water). The options assessment considered both.

Documenting the options selection process is the Southern Redland Bay WWTP Options Assessment, undertaken by Stantec (Appendix F). This report provides a review of the various options assessed for the provision of wastewater infrastructure. The objectives of this report are to:

. Define the catchment and population to be served by the proposed WWTP; . Define the water quality to be delivered by the proposed WWTP (refer to Section 6); . Assess the options for a regional WWTP (site); and . Assess the options for the re-use or disposal of the recycled water (discharge).

In choosing the final preferred option, numerous potential strategies were considered using a triple bottom line methodology that is based on a Multi Criteria Assessment (MCA). Initial assessments included a ‘long listing’ (consideration of all options) and ‘shortlisting’ approach (narrow down of options). 5.2.1 Catchment Area and Population The extent of the stormwater catchment is defined by the Southern Redland Bay catchment (land within the Urban Footprint under ShapingSEQ ) with the exception of Area 4, as shown in Figure 16 below.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 16: Extract of Figure 1: Southern Redland Bay Catchment Boundary (source: WWTP Options Assessment Report, May 2020, Stantec, p3)

To calculate the estimated population, development densities were then applied over this area. The following assumptions were adopted -

. EP is calculated in accordance with the SEQ Water Supply and Sewerage Design & Construction Code 2012 (SEQ Code) at a residential occupancy rate of 2.7 EP / per lot as per Appendix 2.7 of the SEQ Code; . Land use is dominated by low density residential development with an estimated average lot size of 450m²; and . Does not account for further development outside of the proposed Southern Redland Bay ‘catchment area’.

Actual EP’s will be subject to the densities achieved under development approvals. However, it is noted that Shoreline is generally consistent with the approved capacity of the preliminary approval which has theoretically determined values for the various land uses.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 17 below extracted from the WWTP Options Assessment provides a breakdown of the estimated 13,500 EP, translating into approximately 5,000 new dwellings. Note that the ‘area number’ corresponds with the areas shown in Figure 16 above.

Figure 17: Extract of Table 2-1: Shoreline Regional Approximate Contributing Population (source: WWTP Options Assessment Report, August 2020, Stantec, p2)

5.2.2 Forecast Growth The forecast growth of the development area is estimated to be around 200 lots/year, resulting in a time ending on the supply and demand of dwellings. Therefore, it is assumed that development within the catchment will be completed by 2045 but may be completed as early as 2040. 5.2.3 Longlisted WWTP (Site) Options A range of WWTP options were considered, as identified in Figure 18 below.

Figure 18: Extract of Table 6-1: WWTP Sites Considered (source: WWTP Options Assessment Report, May 2020, Stantec, p10)

A summary of the outcomes of the initial ‘long listing’ review indicated that:

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Sites 1 and 2 - upgrading of existing sewer treatment plants at Victoria Point and Mt Cotton, were found to have no additional capacity and difficulties related to disposal of excess water. In addition, these options had higher capital and operational costs; . Site 3 - was discounted by RCC due to the site being required for a future waste transfer facility; . Sites 4 and 5 - at Longland Road were new private sites. Benefits of these sites include their close proximity to the catchment and the minimal environmental and social impacts of these options; and . Site 6 - was discussed with RCC and Logan Water and it was difficult to identify any benefits due to distance from the catchment and the total costs of transfer and treatment. 5.2.4 Shortlisted WWTP (Site) Options The following issues/assessment criteria was considered to assist in the ‘shortlisting’ of potential WWTP sites:

. Land use/zoning/ownership; . Availability of land; . Topography of site and route of connecting mains; . Available buffer distance; . Vegetation, ecology and environmental protection issues; . Flooding issues; . Traffic access; and . Cost of option, including operating costs.

The screening of options was discussed and submitted to RCC and RW for consideration by full Council. Shortlisting involved a comparison of the WWTP options against the issues/assessment criteria. Figure 19 below extracts the key findings of the comparison for determining the shortlisted options.

Figure 19: Extract of Table 7-1: Comparison of WWTP Site Options (source: WWTP Options Assessment Report, May 2020, Stantec, p21)

Based on the abovementioned assessment, two (2) site options as identified below and in Figure 20 , were found to provide significant potential to become the WWTP site for the Southern Redland Bay catchment:

. Site 4: New WWTP at Longland Road North (Lots 1- & 11 on SP295473); and . Site 5 : New WWTP at Longland Road South (subject site).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 20: Extract of Figure 7: Location of sites 4 and 5 (QLD Globe) (source: WWTP Options Assessment Report, May 2020, Stantec, p14) 5.2.5 Longlisted Recycled Water Disposal Options A range of disposal options for discharge of excess recycled water were considered, as identified in Figure 21 below.

Figure 21: Extract of Table 6-2: Excess Recycled Water Disposal Options Considered (source: WWTP Options Assessment Report, May 2020, Stantec, p10)

A summary of the outcomes of the initial ‘long listing’ review indicated that:

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Option 1 - to discharge to Eprapah Creek would require a new licence and would likely have significant issues relating to water quality impact on both the creek and downstream High Environmental Value (HEV) areas; . Option 2 - includes various sub-options for discharge to Moreton Bay. It was found that Option 2B Discharge from Redland Bay at Sel Outridge Park was found to be a potential option, however there could be an unacceptable risk to HEV areas within Moreton Bay; . Option 3 - involves sub-options for discharge to the Logan River. Option 3C was found to provide potential opportunity in relation to gravity discharge to wetlands providing direct nutrient offsets. Direct discharge to the Logan River was identified to increase nutrients in the lower Logan River and would not likely be approved even with upstream offsets (in LCC or CoGC); . Option 4 - involves discharge to Stradbroke Island and was found to have excessive capital cost and likely approval issues; . Option 5 - involves the discharge to local aquifers and was found not to be feasible due to lack of suitable aquifers in the area; and . Option 6 - involves extensive long-term reuse on agriculture was found to require up to 160 ha of suitable land to be sustainable. The availability of this large area of land is highly unlikely due to land banking by developers. 5.2.6 Shortlisted Recycled Water Disposal Options The ‘shortlisting’ of disposal options involved a pros and cons assessment, as shown in Figure 22 below.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 22: Extract of Figure 7.2: Summary of Outfall Site Suitability (source: WWTP Options Assessment Report, May 2020, Stantec, p23)

Based on the assessment and RCC and RW feedback, the following options were shortlisted -

. Option 2B : Ocean Outfall 2b from Redland Bay (Sel Outridge Park) approximately 1km offshore; and . Option 3C : Logan River gravity discharge to wetlands before discharge to Logan River.

5.2.7 Selection of Shortlisted WWTP Site and Discharge Options It is important to note that WWTP site selection options and discharge options are not interchangeable. For instance, selection of WWTP Site Option 4 (Longland Road North) is not compatible with Discharge Option 3C (gravity discharge to Logan River). The Longland Road North discharge option cannot discharge to the Logan River (either gravity or otherwise), therefore this combination of options is not possible. Discharge Option 3C is only compatible with WWTP Site Option 5. Discharge Option 2B would, however be possible with WWTP Site Option 4.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

5.2.8 Assessment of Shortlisted Options Based on the initial assessment and RCC feedback, the following two (2) site and disposal options were further shortlisted for a more detailed assessment:

. WWTP Site 4 (Longland Road North) with Discharge 2B (to Moreton Bay outfall from Sel Outridge Park); and . WWTP Site 5 (Longland Road South) with Discharge 3C (to Logan River via Wetlands).

These options were compared through an MCA using the following the evaluation criteria categories –

. Technical (performance, construction risks, operational risks); . Resilience & longevity (risk of outage and damage from extreme weather or natural event); . Operations & maintenance (difficulty maintaining assets); . Environmental (risk of damage to the environment during construction, impact on environment); . Community (construction impacts to the community, operational impacts and operational public health impacts); and . Financial (capital and operations costs).

5.3 Preferred Option Based on the outcomes of the MCA, it was evident that the combined option of WWTP Site 5 (Longland Road South) with Discharge 3C (to Logan River via Wetlands) with a total weighted score of 900 (beating the alternative score of 715) is the superior option and should be adopted as the preferred solution.

The preferred option is for the Southern Redland Bay WWTP to be constructed on Site 5 (the subject site). The point of licencing for the WWTP should be at the discharge point from the treatment plant to the freshwater storage lagoon. Excess recycled water should be discharged to the freshwater lagoon and then to a mangrove wetland prior to any release to the Logan River. The primary function of the wetlands is to offset or ‘polish’ the nutrient discharges to the Logan River.

The key reasons for the selection of this option are summarised as follows:

. The site will accommodate both the WWTP with a sufficient buffer to surrounding properties (minimum 200m) as well as the offsets required for the Environmental Authority (DES) in the form of the freshwater and mangrove wetlands; . Capital and operational cost of this option are substantially lower than for Site 4 due to the removal of the requirement to discharge to Moreton Bay offshore from Redland Bay and operate the associated pumped main; . The community impacts will be substantially lower for Site 5 as there is no need to build the outfall main through residential areas of southern Redland Bay; . Construction risk of the Site 5 option is lower than the risk of the underwater main to the discharge point in Moreton Bay; . The mangrove wetland has the potential to both improve the water quality in the lower Logan River and to remove carbon from the atmosphere through sequestration; and . As noted above, WWTP Site Option 4 (Longland Road North) is not compatible with Discharge Option 3C (gravity discharge to Logan River).

Refer to Section 7 which includes a summary of environmental impacts of the preferred option (the proposed Southern Redland Bay WWTP and Wetlands Project).

It is additionally noted that the selection of the preferred option was influenced by the following –

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. The Southern Redland Bay WWTP and Mangrove Offset Program Due Diligence Report dated 16 December 2019, prepared by Water Technology, submitted to the Minister with the Request for Endorsement of the ID in December 2019. The report verifies the concept of a wetland system to offset impacts from wastewater discharges from the WWTP and included a range of preliminary technical assessments; . Reporting from Water Technology detailing a range of case studies of mangrove restorations and mangroves in wastewater receiving environments, including Brisbane Airport, Bulimba Creek Mount St John (Townsville) and international examples (see Section 5.4 below); . Water Technology report also included advice from noted academic experts in the field of wetlands ecosystems and greenhouse gas dynamics. Both assessments considered the basis for the project was sound; that the latest scientific research shows that wetlands can improve water quality while providing a range of added benefits; and that the project represents an existing opportunity to minimise development impacts on receiving water environments; . Advice from RCC and RW; and . Pre-lodgement meetings and pre-consolation with the ID Team and relevant State agencies.

5.4 Proof of Concept As noted above, as part of the initial reporting, Water Technology undertook detailed investigations into local and international mangrove restoration projects and the use of mangroves in WWTP wastewater receiving environments. A summary of those initial investigations is included below:

. At Brisbane Airport, Brisbane a project involving the relocation of a waterway through excavation of a new drainage line and stabilisation with mangroves showed successful mangrove recolonization and natural recruitment within 4-5 years into a self-maintaining wetland system; . At Bulimba Creek (Oxbow at Port of Brisbane Motorway) involved hydraulic rehabilitation and mangrove establishment of tidal wetlands following construction of the Port of Brisbane motorway construction. The Bulimba Creek Catchment Coordinating Committee (B4C) was involved in this project, which now features established wetlands within and surrounding the oxbow; . In West Lake, Florida a project involving the restoration of 500ha of mangroves showed successful mangrove restoration within 6.5 years of earthworks without any other active intervention (planting); and . In Mount St John (Townsville), the Mt St John WWTP which has a capacity of approximately 106,000EP. Treated wastewater from the WWTP is used for irrigation and remaining treated wastewater is discharged to Snaggy Creek. There was a noticeable decrease in concentration of nutrients between the WWTP discharge and the closest monitoring station from the outfall; and then noticeably lower nutrient concentrations at further downstream monitoring stations.

For further information and more detailed analysis of case studies and literature review, please refer to Section 3 of the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ).

5.5 Mangrove Rehabilitation/Restoration Protocol In preparing the conceptual design during the initial due diligence phase and moving into the detailed design, emphasis was placed on planning and designing the wetlands based on the six steps of the rehabilitation/restoration protocol, to ensure that the procedures and methodologies adopted were technically sound and tailored to the needs of this project. The protocol and relevant actions taken during the design development are outlined below:

. Step 1 - Understand the autecology (individual species ecology) of the mangrove species at the site. This step involved obtaining site specific ecological advice from frc environmental and Saunders Havill Group (ecological surveys) along with field experts from B4C.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Step 2 - Understand the normal hydrologic patterns that control the distribution and successful establishment and growth of targeted mangrove species. This step involved hydraulic modelling by Water Technology to estimate the elevation levels required to maintain suitable hydrologic patterns within the wetlands in relation to the Logan estuary and its natural tidal patterns. The modelling also supported culvert sizing works for the tidal inlet and outlet of the wetlands. Water Technology also undertook water quality assessments to understand nutrient behaviour (existing Logan River baseline and discharge from the WWTP) and salinity levels and sediment inflow patterns. . Step 3 - Assess the modifications of the previous mangrove environment that currently prevent natural. In this instance, the project involves habitat creation (new wetlands) which involves modifying the hydrology of the site to create suitable hydraulic conditions. Appropriate site hydrology was recommended as part of the hydrodynamic modelling in Step 2 and geotechnical assessment by Douglas Partners and coastal processes investigations by Water Technology were undertaken to further identify any factors that may affect the stability and suitability of the site for wetland creation. In addition, Water Technology engaged CSIRO to perform site-specific virus risk assessment and Saunders Havill Group undertook site ecological assessments to determine the existing site ecology (including presence of marine plants) and any potential impacts on local flora and fauna. . Step 4 - Select appropriate mangrove restoration sites through application of Steps 1–3. In this instance, the ecological field investigations found that the site is in close proximity to existing mangrove/wetland environments, including the banks of the Logan River and Serpentine Creek. . Step 5 - Design the restoration program at appropriate sites selected in Step 4 to initially restore the appropriate hydrology and utilize natural mangrove propagule recruitment for plant establishment. In this instance it was found that creating the appropriate site hydrology will enable natural establishment of wetlands including mangrove species, however planting of propagules was recommended to speed up the natural establishment. . Step 6 - Only utilize actual planting of propagules, collected seedlings, or cultivated seedlings after determining through steps 1–5 that natural recruitment will not provide the appropriate quantum or promptness of successful wetland establishment. In this instance, it was recommended that planting of propagules occur to speed up natural establishment.

For further details on the mangrove rehabilitation/restoration protocol, please refer to Section 3 of the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ); the Ecological Assessment Report prepared by Saunders Havill Group ( Appendix M ); and the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan prepared by Saunders Havill Group ( Appendix O).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 6 Proposed Infrastructure 6.1 Proposal Intent The intent of the proposal is to provide critical community infrastructure (the Southern Redland Bay WWTP and Wetlands Project) to provide wastewater treatment for the Southern Redland Bay catchment, to enable development of the Southern Redland Bay expansion area (land within the Urban Footprint) to be developed in accordance with Goal 1 of ShapingSEQ .

More specifically, the intent of the project is to:

. Achieve environmental sustainability and best-practice wastewater management through treatment of wastewater to a high standard via an MBR treatment plant and offset remaining nutrient loads in recycled water via the construction of a suitably sized configured wetland ecosystem; . Construct a new wetland system as an alternative to a conventional wastewater treatment system (with ocean or river discharge), which is intended to offset nutrients loads from the proposed WWTP and the Logan River by way of nitrogen retention/de-nitrification and phosphorous capture and storage; . Deliver an environmentally sustainable wastewater treatment solution resulting in a net improvement or at worst a neutral impact to the water quality of the Logan River; . Appropriately implement whole of design life measures to avoid, mitigate or offset any natural, social and economic or environmental impacts; . Provide a substantial net increase in marine plants and biodiversity generally on the site, in turn creating additional habitat for terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna; . Provide efficient and timely supply of sub-regional infrastructure necessary to service land for the development of the Redland City major expansion area (Southern Redland Bay catchment) to meet dwelling targets for the Redland LGA in accordance with Goal 1 of ShapingSEQ ; . Provide necessary economic enabling infrastructure that will generate jobs and additional employment and support the ongoing construction & development of the Southern Redland Bay catchment; . Construct a wastewater treatment solution to the satisfaction of RCC and RW and hand over the asset to RCC and RW upon construction completion and a maintenance period (if applicable); and . Satisfy statutory requirements and a budgetary commitment from Redlands City Council (RCC), whom have resolved to support the WWTP and Wetlands project to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment. An existing Infrastructure Agreement (IA) between RCC and Lendlease will be amended and will set out the budgetary commitments to bring forward the delivery of this essential community infrastructure.

6.2 Proposal summary The Southern Redland Bay WWTP will treat incoming wastewater from the Southern Redland Bay catchment and produce high quality recycled water from a proposed MBR treatment plant, which will either be re-used or discharged to a freshwater storage lagoon and then to a constructed wetland including new mangrove and salt-marsh habitat.

Wastewater will be conveyed to the WWTP via pressure mains in Serpentine Creek Road and Longland Road, which will enter the site at the boundary of Lots 2 and 3 on RP223470, where there is an existing clearing for an electricity supply through the site. Water then travels to the WWTP (proposed MBR treatment plant) for treatment before being pumped via recycled water mains along the same services corridor to Longland Road/Serpentine Creek Road and further north, where some recycled water will be used on parks within Shoreline and potentially other developments in the catchment. Recycled water will either be available for construction or commercial operations, however any excess

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project recycled water will be gravity discharged to a freshwater lagoon (storage) and then gravity discharged through a field inlet to the constructed mangrove wetlands.

Whilst the constructed mangrove wetland matures over an estimated establishment period of five (5) years, recycled water will be re-used on parks, for construction water and will be available to commercial operators. During these initial phases, excess recycled water that cannot be re-used will be discharged to a temporary irrigation area within the Shoreline development (noting that the temporary irrigation area is outside of and separate to the Designation).

The WWTP will be an advanced MBR system, a proven treatment process that will remove nutrients and pathogens to a level that is as low, or lower than, most existing plants in South East Queensland. The MBR will remove at least 99.9% of pathogens prior to discharge to the freshwater lagoon and wetlands. Upon entry to the wetlands, the recycled water nutrients load from the proposed WWTP will be offset by way of nitrogen retention/de-nitrification and phosphorous capture and storage. This treatment of nutrient loads also applies to Logan River water that enters and exits the site during each tidal cycle.

To establish the mangrove wetlands, the site needs to be excavated to the appropriate level to allow tidal influence from the Logan River via inlet works at the south-eastern corner of the wetlands. The inlet works are intended to allow tidal water to flow into the site from a small tidal tributary of the Logan River through the gated inlet culvert and will gradually fill the wetlands on an incoming tide. At the change of tide, it is intended that hydrostatic pressure will close the inlet gate and the wetlands will drain via the outlet culvert to Serpentine Creek. The wetlands have been designed and shaped to provide the longest residence time for recycled water entering the wetlands from the freshwater lagoon. The wetlands include a central channel, which is always intended to contain a level of standing water, suitable for fish passage.

Proposal plans (site plans) showing the various components of the WWTP and Wetlands Project as detailed in Table 13 – Proposal Summary and extracted in Figures 23 and 24 below. Please refer to the Proposal Plans ( Appendix B ), Engineering plans (Appendix D ) and the Concept Design Report ( Appendix G ) providing detailed plans and a description of the project components and proposed and engineering works (including earthworks, roadworks, stormwater drainage and services).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 23: WWTP and wetlands project overview and catchment area (source: Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Project, 26/10/2020, 8868 P 02 Rev P, SK01, Saunders Havill Group – Appendix B of this EAR)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Recycled Water Return to Southern Redland Wastewater from Bay Southern Redland Bay

Freshwa ter Storage Lagoon

WWTP

WWTP Discharge to Freshwater Storage Lagoon

Wetland

Figure 24: Overview of WWTP Site and Discharge Arragement (source: Southern Redlland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec)

Table 13 below provides a summary of the various components of the WWTP and Wetlands Project –

Table 6: Proposal Summary

Component General Description Investigation or Assessment

Waste Water A new Membrane Bioreactor (MBR) WWTP on Lot 3 on RP223470. Refer to Section 6.3 and the Treatment Plant WWTP to be constructed over two (2) key stages & one sub-stage, Southern Redland Bay WWTP (WWTP) each stage providing additional capacity for additional Concept Design Report populations over time. Access into the proposed WWTP and contained in Appendix G. overall designation area will be gained from Longland Road on the northern boundary of Lot 1 on SL3427. The MBR WWTP contains the following components:

. Inlet works (receiving wastewater from gravity mains); . Balance tank; . RCC tankering receival facility; . Bioreactor; . Recycled water tanks (including UV treatment); . Blowers (enclosed in blower building); . Emergency generator;

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 6: Proposal Summary

. Transformer; . Sludge treatment facility and loading area; . Chemical storage facility; . Neutralisation system; . First Flush Tank; . Odour Control Facility and Stack; . Administration building; . Driveways, manoeuvring and car parking areas.

The WWTP will be sized to treat up to 5x ADWF in the initial phases and then up to 3x ADWF in the ultimate; which is industry standard for WWTP’s.

Pipelines New pipelines would be required to connect the WWTP to the Refer to Section 6.6 below. reticulated wastewater network to be constructed in Serpentine Creek Road and Longland Road. A recycled water main will be Refer to the Engineering Plans constructed for transfer of water back to the Southern Redland (Appendix D ) for further Bay area for re-use. Pipelines external to the site (i.e. within details. Longland Road and Serpentine Creek Road) do not form part of the Designation. A potable water main will also be provided from the north along Serpentine Creek Road to service the WWTP.

Freshwater A new freshwater storage lagoon is proposed approximately at Refer to Section 6.7 Storage Lagoon the location of an existing freshwater dam straddling Lot 3 on RP223470, Lot 254 on S31102 and Lot 1 on SL3427. Earthworks Refer to the Proposal Plans are required to the existing dam to ensure it is of sufficient size (Appendix B ) and Engineering and volume to cater for emergency flows. Plans ( Appendix D ) for further details.

Wetlands A new [constructed] mangrove forest and salt-marsh habitat Refer to Section 6.8 would be established in approximately 9.854ha of land to the west of the freshwater storage lagoon and WWTP. This would be Please also refer to the facilitated by earthworks to lower the level of the land Engineering Plans ( Appendix approximately 1m to allow for tidal inundation from the Logan D) and Concept Mangrove River. An existing tidal inlet (tributary) from the Logan River will Rehabilitation Plans be connected to the newly created mangrove wetlands. An (Appendix O). outlet would be facilitated via a connection to Serpentine Creek at the western end of the site.

The mangrove wetlands comprise the following:

. 8.6854ha of mangrove forest including central channel; . 1.08ha of salt-marsh habitat; and . Casuarina glauca (swamp she-oak) planting and natural regeneration.

Inlet and outlet structures to allow tidal water to inundate and drain from the wetlands. The structures would comprise box culverts with operable gates. A sediment forebay on the inlet

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 6: Proposal Summary

structure is provided along with a maintenance access track to access both the inlet and outlet structures.

Ancillary A new intersection and driveway access will be required to Refer to Section 6.9 structures Longland Road to provide access to the WWTP. Access tracks are required for maintenance, linking the main access road with the Please also refer to the inlet and outlet structures (described above). A stormwater drain Engineering Plans ( Appendix is required underneath the access road from Longland Road, D), which includes detailed connecting with the wetlands. designs for ancillary structures and a concept intersection design for Longland Road.

Temporary It is proposed that during the early stages of the project when Refer to Section 6.10 Irrigation Area the mangrove forest is being established, discharge from the WWTP will occur to a temporary irrigation area north of the Refer to the Southern Redland WWTP site and inside the current Shoreline preliminary approval Bay WWTP - Recycled Water area. The temporary irrigation area will not form part of the Management Plan contained Designation. in Appendix I.

Reconfiguration It is proposed to reconfigure the existing cadastral boundaries to Refer to Section 6.11 of a Lot create suitable base parcels for the WWTP and wetlands components (4 into 4 lot reconfiguration). Refer to the Reconfiguration of a Lot Proposal Plan ( Appendix C).

To be clear, it is not proposed to designate land to facilitate construction of the pipeline from the WWTP to the temporary disposal area nor it is proposed that the temporary disposal area would form part of the Designation. The temporary disposal area would be used only for a limited timeframe; does not compromise the existing use of the land for agricultural purposes (it is zoned rural); and conveyance via pipeline and discharge of effluent can be facilitated by operational works applications.

6.3 Wastewater Treatment Plant Concept Design The Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report prepared by Stantec and contained in Appendix G, has been prepared and is intended to be an evolving document to be updated at each stage of the project’s development and as detailed design development progresses in conjunction with RW. To be clear, WWTP design is only conceptual until a contractor is appointed in a ‘design and construct’ capacity and the contractor undertakes detailed design.

Stages of design for the WWTP include:

.  Basis of design (completed) ; .  Concept design (current stage); o A concept design report is developed into initial design deliverables for discussion of the proposed design with the environmental regulator (the Department of Environment and Science (DES)) and the Council, the utility which will ultimately operate the treatment facility (RCC). . TBC - Detailed design and construct phase (future design stage) .

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The concept layout for the WWTP, prepared by Stantec, is shown below in Figure 25. This layout has been adopted for the purposes of preparing the Proposal Plans ( Appendix B ), Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ), Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M) and Preliminary Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan ( Appendix N).

The plans estimate earthworks required to accommodate a sufficient pad for the WWTP (buildings and access roads). Precise batter extents can only be estimated at this stage given that detailed design will be subject to a ‘design and construct’ process with the construction contractor (in future).

Figure 25: Extract of Site Layout - Concept Plan (Source: Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec, 31/08/2020)

6.3.1 WWTP Staging In line with the growth and demand for infrastructure, the WWTP construction and operation is planned to take place over two (2) stages and one sub-stage, each stage providing additional capacity for an increase in population over time, as summarised in Figures 26 and 27 below.

Figure 26: Extract of Table 4.1: Summary of staging and proposed works (Source: Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec, p 4)

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 27: Extract of Table 2.1: Staging of the WWTP (Source: Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec (p4)

The main impact of this staging approach is the capacity upgrade for the secondary stage of the treatment process, which removes key nutrients from the wastewater to meet discharge requirements. The concept design considers the influent wastewater flows including:

. the average dry weather flow values and the peak wet weather flow values (being 5 times the average dry weather flow values); . influent wastewater characteristics based in typical values for sewerage in SEQ; . basis for process sizing; and . key peaking factors based on typical values for wastewater design in SEQ. 6.3.2 Treated Water Quality The Southern Redland Bay WWTP will treat incoming wastewater and produce recycled water for reuse or disposal. The intent for the WWTP is to maximise the re-use of recycled water, as much as possibly feasible and/or acceptable to RCC.

Recycled water is expected to be directed to various uses as detailed in Section 6.5.3 - Recycled Water Strategy and Section 6.10. Recycled water will not be provided as a third-pipe system to homes at any stage of the development.

Recycled water is to meet the following requirements:

. Queensland Class A Recycled Water requirements; . E. coli < 1 cfu per 100 mL in line with the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling (2006); and . A chlorine residual of 1.0 mg/L at the plant discharge.

Land disposal water quality requirements are applicable to Stage 1A of the WWTP construction phase for the discharge of recycled water into the temporary irrigation area and for re-use by nurseries and construction/landscape/park uses. It is understood that requirements may be subject to a separate licence from DES, however it is yet to be confirmed if this is necessary.

Wetland discharge disposal water quality requirements will be subject to a licence from DES, the licence point being the discharge from the WWTP to the freshwater storage lagoon . Water quality requirements are to be confirmed

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project and for guidance purposes have, at this point of time, been assumed based on typical standards set by other SEQ waterway discharge licences. The concept design has been developed to meet the waterway disposal quality criteria outlined in Figure 28 below –

Figure 28: Extract of Table 2.7: Summary of proposed WWTP discharge quality requirements for treated recycled water for waterway discharge (Source: Southern Redlland Bay WWTP Cocnept Design Report, Stantec (p9).

6.3.3 Noise and Odour Control Odours produced by the Southern Redland Bay WWTP will be managed by odour extraction and treatment systems to be incorporated in the design of the WWTP. Noise emissions are proposed to be treated by a range of measures, which include the use of specific types of equipment and plant equipment enclosures. Noise and odour assessments have been undertaken to assess the impact and mitigation measures. Refer to Section 7.7.3 and Section 7.7.4 of the environmental assessment for further information on the measures to be used to reduce noise and odour impacts. 6.3.4 WWTP Process Components The recycled water treatment process is demonstrated in Figure 29 – Process Flow Diagram . The size and capacity of works associated with the process vary and increase with sub-stages of construction, as demand grows. This diagram is provided (with greater clarity) as a separate attachment ( Appendix J ).

Figure 29: Extract of Process Flow Diagram, Concept Design Issue (Source: Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec, 23/03/2020 (Appendix A))

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The process diagram and works includes the following processes –

Initial Treatment, Inlet Works –

. The inlet works are to be constructed to the full Stage 2 capacity in Stage 1A in order to minimise cost, disruptions and the need for temporary systems which may increase the risk to the functionality of the MBR plant.; . Screening channels to be constructed at Stage 1A for the full Stage 2 capacities with mechanical equipment staged to suit actual anticipated flows; . Grit removal to be constructed as a single full-capacity grit chamber to be installed in Stage 1A for a whole-of- life basis. The single vortex grit chamber will be capable of treating maximum pumped flows at Stage 2 (180 L/s) provided as part of the Stage 1A works. The grit removal approach is expected to be a concrete structure, forming part of the overall inlet works; . Standalone screening and grit handling facility provided for ultimate Stage 2 flows as part of Stage 1A works; . Screening and grit bin storage which is contracted to JJ Richards (RCC Contractor). Screenings and grit storage will be kept between approximately five (5) and seven (7) days and it is expected that a single 660 L bin will be required for Stage 1A and 1B, and two (2), 1,100 L bins at Stage 2. At each stage, an additional bin will be provided as a standby; . Wet weather bypass, storage & flow balancing designed to provide full treatment to 5 x ADWF flows in Stages 1A and 1B. Stage 2 onwards involves – o Up to 3 x ADWF flows will undergo full treatment including through the bioreactors; o Flows in excess of 3 x ADWF (maximum of 2x ADWF) will be treated by the inlet works, including fine screens, and directed to the balance tank(s). If the balance tank storage volume is used (filled), flows to the plant in excess of 3 x ADWF will then pass through the inlet works and bypass the remainder of the treatment plant and be directed to the plant discharge (to the freshwater storage lagoon). . Subject to discussions with DES and Council, Stantec advise that the position regarding fate of the bypass flows that occur at Stage 2, as of August 2020 is: o The concept design and subsequent preliminary design will include disinfection of the Stage 2 bypass flows. Bypass disinfection will either be by a dedicated UV system designed for the bypass flows, or chlorination/de-chlorination of the bypass flows. o Sampling and further risk assessment will be conducted during Stage 1 operation of the WWTP (e.g. sampling of actual wet weather flows in the Logan River) to determine if pathogen removal is required for bypass flows, and if so what LRVs are required.

Secondary Treatment, Bioreactor –

. The concept design process explored three (3) options for the bioreactor. Subject to this assessment, a 20-day sludge age, with no aerobic digester, was adopted for the concept design for all stages. This is an extended aeration option under the updated End of Waste Code for biosolids. The sludge treatment will include the following and is to achieve Grade B biosolids – o Thickening within the membrane bioreactor to 1.0% solids; o Waste-activated sludge (WAS) pumps to deliver WAS to a rotary drum thickener – it is likely this will not be required until Stage 1B; o Feed-averaging tank to balance flows and ensure smooth dewatering operation; o Sludge dewatering screw press to dewater biosolids to >16% dry solids including feed pump; and o Sludge out-loading initially via sealed bin or truck. . The bioreactor to be provided is a 4-stage Bardenpho reactor followed by membrane tanks. Stage 2 capacity represents 100% of bioreactor capacity. This is broken down to 25% capacity installed at Stage 1A, 25% capacity installed at Stage 1B and 50% is installed at Stage 2. Stages 1A and 1B will be installed as independent

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

bioreactors within the same structure. Stage 2, a bioreactor at 50% capacity will be installed as this reduces number of assets (recycle pumps and instruments) for operation and maintenance. Each bioreactor will be a continuous compartmentalised system with continuous aeration. Figure 30 provides a summary of key bioreactor volumes at each stage.

Figure 30: Extract of Figure 3-5 Summary of key bioreactor volumes (Source: Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec (p16))

Figure 27 above shows bioreactor staged construction (refer to item 4), within the red dash line.

The proposed Concept Plan is provided within Appendix B of the Stantec Concept Design Report ( Appendix G). 6.3.5 Disinfection The WWTP is required to achieve removal of pathogens to protect public health, both for recycled water uses (land disposal) and for environmental discharge into the wetlands. To achieve the required log reduction values (LRV) for each pathogen and each water type disinfection, the following three (3) key processes are to be used –

. The bioreactor and membrane filtration; . UV disinfection; o UV equipment will likely to be pressurised system utilising low pressure high output lamps. . Sodium hypochlorite dosing – on recycled water for reuse only. o Digital dosing pumps will be selected for chlorine (sodium hypochlorite) dosing for the recycled water flows.

Figure 31 provides a summary of the proposed Southern Redland Bay WWTP disinfection process, achieving the LRV standards for viruses’ protozoa and bacteria.

6.3.6 Wet Weather Bypass The WWTP will be subject to intermittent bypass under heavy rainfall conditions. Stage 1 (1A and 1B) will include the capacity to treat a peak wet weather flow of 5 x Average Dry Weather Flow (5 x ADWF) and Stage 2 will treat up to 3 x ADWF and will allow for a bypass after the inlet works of up to 2 x ADWF during wet weather conditions, which is industry standard for WWTP’s. Bypass flows can be regulated in the balance tank and any excess would be discharged to the storage lagoon for appropriate risk management (refer to Section 8 and the Operational Environmental Management Plan – Appendix X ). Other risk management measures to prevent un-planned discharges to the storage lagoon are outlined in Section 8 .

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 31: Extract of Figure 3-8 LRVs for Disinfection Processes (Source: Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec (p18))

6.3.7 Recycled Water Storage and Pump Station Recycled water storage is to be designed to hold a maximum of 1ML (1,000m³) at Stage 2. Figure32 outlines the proposed WWTP storage tank sizing strategy at each stage of construction.

Figure 32: Extract of Figure 3-9 Summary of recycled water tank sizing (Source: Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report, Stantec (p18))

A dedicated recycled water pump station will be provided, to supply recycled water to licenced users. On low recycled water demand days, excess treated plant water may be directed to the freshwater lagoon (also referred to as the ‘freshwater wetland’ ) for temporary storage. Stored recycle water in the freshwater lagoon could be returned to the head of works for re-treatment and distributed to recycled water users on higher demand days. A pump station and rising main to return flow back to the inlet works will be required.

As shown in the Concept Layout Plan, a general-purpose pumping station (GPPS) will be provided to receive site flows and return these to the inlet works. A single GPPS will be provided to return the following key site flows:

. Filtrate/centrate from the dewatering process; . Drainage from the inlet works, including screenings and grit handling processes and slab drainage; . Discharges from the MBR processes, including off-spec water and neutralised chemical cleaning streams; . Odour control drainage/blowdown streams; and . Additional other drainage/discharge to be developed in preliminary design - this may include directing waste flows from the site office/laboratory. 6.3.8 WWTP Discharge Point The concept design is based on the licence discharge point being the discharge pipe to the freshwater storage lagoon at the WWTP boundary fence.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

6.4 WWTP Operational Servicing Requirements (non-process related) Section 3.2 of the Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report prepared by Stantec, contained in Appendix G, provides a summary of the non-process related infrastructure servicing requirements, including –

. Onsite control systems; . Instrumentation; . Civil Requirements (including security re, fencing and gates, buildings, stormwater management, retaining walls, sediment and erosion control); . Mechanical equipment requirements; and . Structure requirements.

At the current ‘ Concept Design’ stage of the WWTP, site servicing and site requirements are conceptual with many specific details not yet confirmed. Detailed operational design considerations are to be determined as part of the ‘Preliminary design’ and ‘ Detailed design and construct’ future design stages of the WWTP to be undertaken by Stantec and the construction entity, in consultation with RCC and RW. Other standards, specifications and code requirements relating to construction, operation and decommissioning are to be resolved as part of these future WWTP design stages.

Additionally, refer to Appendix E - Concept Design Process Equipment Schedule and Appendix F – loads list of the Stantec Concept Design Report in Appendix G of this EAR.

6.5 WWTP Services and Infrastructure Provisions A WWTP Engineering Services Report has been prepared by Stantec for the proposed MID and is contained in Appendix H. This report overviews the services requirements and proposed connections that will be made to the WWTP site and should be read in conjunction with the Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report (Appendix G). Site service connections and infrastructure provisions applicable to the site are summarised in the sections below – 6.5.1 Potable Water Connections Potable water is provided to the WWTP for both domestic & process uses as well as for fire services. Water supply requirements for the site are as follows –

. Domestic and process use – estimated to be a peak demand of 5 L/s at 22 m residual pressure and under peak hour demand conditions; and . Fire flow – 15 L/s at 12 m residual pressure (as confirmed by RCC) during 2/3 peak hour demands in the Shoreline network.

The connection point for supply to the WWTP site will be the proposed mains for the Shoreline Stage 1 development, which is the corner of Serpentine Road and Scenic Road. Based on the strategy from the approved master planned development, water will be supplied from a Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) at the North Stradbroke Island trunk main which connects to the reservoirs at Heinemann Road, Mt Cotton.

Network analysis of the supply to the WWTP indicates that a 150 mm diameter main (shown in blue) will be required to service the WWTP. The proposed 150 mm diameter main will connect to the WWTP with no planned connections between the southernmost point of the catchment and the mains corridor into the WWTP site, i.e. no supply to existing rural properties has been allowed for in the capacity of the system. The proposed layout of the water supply to the site is shown in Figure 33.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 33: Extract of Figure 2.1 Proposed Water Supply Connection WWTP (Source: SRB WWTP Engineering Services Report, Stantec (p3))

6.5.2 Wastewater Connections Wastewater from the Southern Redland Bay catchment will be connected via two (2) rising (pressure), mains to be constructed along the Serpentine Road / Longland Road corridor. The following mains, as shown in Figure 34, are proposed to service the WWTP and the greater Southern Redland Bay (Urban Footprint area) -

. Stage 1 – a DN280 HDPE main will be constructed in 2021 to service the south western stages of the catchment. Two pumping stations will be connected to the main and transfer flows to the WWTP. The maximum operating pressure will be approximately 40 m head; and . Stage 2 - a DN400 HDPE main will be constructed in future (around 2030) to service the eastern, south eastern and northern stages of the catchment. Two pumping stations will be connected to the main and transfer flows to the WWTP. The maximum operating pressure will be approximately 40 m head.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 34: Extract of Figure 3.1 Proposed Sewer Connections to the WWTP (Source: SRB WWTP Engineering Services Report, Stantec (p5)

6.5.3 Recycled Water A 250 mm diameter HDPE recycled water main is to be constructed from the WWTP and along Longland Road/Serpentine Road in the same corridor as the incoming sewerage rising mains and water main. The main will operate at around 60m to 70m head. The recycled water mains will service sites identified in the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Recycled Water Strategy, prepared by Stantec and contained in Appendix I. The proposed recycled water connections from the WWTP to areas within the Southern Redland Bay Urban Footprint area, are shown in Figure 35.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 35: Extract of Figure 4.1 Proposed Recycled Water Layout (Source: SRB WWTP Engineering Services Report, Stantec (p7)

6.5.4 Electricity Supply Electricity supply to the WWTP will be provided to power the buildings and operational components including pumps, blowers, valves and other equipment related to the processing of the wastewater.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The overall load at ultimate catchment has been estimated at around 675 kW assuming a safety factor of 30% and including all loads with a Diversity Factor> 0). This estimated load will be staged as follows:

. Stage 1A – 2021 – Load of 510 kW; . Stage 1A + Stage 1B – 2026 – Load of 665 kW; . Stage 1A + Stage 1B + Stage 2 – 2031 – Load of 875 kW or a maximum of 1,475 A per phase.

To supply this load, it is expected that Energex will require a Ring Main Unit (RMU) and a Padmount Transformer. The transformer will be located within the site or close to the entrance road to the site at Longland Road. Energex may also require upgrade to the supply mains (11 kV mains on Longland Drive) however, this will not be known until the WWTP design is further progressed. For power outages, it is proposed to install a permanent generator at the site to ensure that power supply is maintained through local outages. This generator will supply at a minimum, systems required to ensure the hydraulic capacity of the plant is maintained in a power failure scenario for a minimum of up to 4 hours. 6.5.5 Communications There is no centralised communication facility for the WWTP currently in place, however, a plant wide control approach will be developed. The preferred strategy is to minimise site attendance at the WWTP and will for the most part be monitored and operated through the control room located at the Victoria Point WWTP.

The primary communications for the monitoring and alarm system will use the RCC dedicated channel radio system connected to the SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) system. RCC also run a secondary system, in case of loss of radio communications, with critical alarms transmitted via the mobile network. Testing near the entrance to the WWTP compound area indicated that the signal strength could meet the requirements of RCC, i.e. the signal at the ground level of the WWTP was of sufficient quality to transmit the amount of data required to operate a WWTP. In addition to these two communications systems, an NBN connection may be provided, if deemed necessary for data transmission, to connect the proposed WWTP to the RCC systems.

6.6 Pipelines New pipelines within the site (designation area) would be required to connect the WWTP to the reticulated wastewater network to be constructed in Serpentine Creek Road and Longland Road (as described above). A recycled water main will be constructed for transfer of water back to the Southern Redland Bay area for re-use, also as described above.

It is proposed that pipelines will enter the site at the existing boundary of Lots 2 & 3 on RP223470, where there is an existing clearing for an electricity supply through the site. Figure 36 below is an extract from the proposed engineering plans showing a cross section of pipelines to be constructed beside the existing overhead powerlines.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 36: Extract of Engineering Plans (Appendix D) showing a cross-section of proposed pipelines within the site (Source: KN Group) 6.7 Freshwater Storage Lagoon There is an existing freshwater dam located on the western side of the driveway from Longland Road. It is proposed to undertake earthworks to this existing dam in accordance with the proposed Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ), including significant earthworks on the eastern side of the lagoon. The earthworks are required in order to ensure the capacity of the freshwater storage lagoon is sufficient for emergency events and to accommodate stormwater flows from the WWTP and other hardstand areas. Whilst also ensuring there is sufficient capacity in the lagoon, the lagoon was also designed to allow vegetation screening to the eastern side of the lagoon.

The freshwater storage lagoon includes a field inlet, which will be the primary discharge to the wetlands. An overflow weir is also included on the western side of the lagoon.

Vegetation rehabilitation works within and surrounding the freshwater storage lagoon are detailed on the Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix P ).

6.8 Wetland System A new [constructed] wetland system is proposed that will be a total of 9.854ha in size, located immediately west of the freshwater storage lagoon and adjoining the Logan River bank.

The wetlands would be facilitated by earthworks to lower the level of the land approximately 1m to allow for tidal inundation from the Logan River. An existing tidal inlet (tributary) from the Logan River will be connected to the newly created mangrove wetlands. An outlet would be facilitated via a connection to Serpentine Creek at the western end of the site.

A wetland system will comprise:

. A mangrove wetland comprising a total area of 8.6854ha of mangroves including central channel; . A salt-marsh habitat comprising a total area of 1.08ha;

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Casuarina glauca (swamp she-oak) planting (1835m²) and natural regeneration, including retention of existing Casuarina glauca communities; and . Green couch grasslands adjoining access tracks.

The wetland system for offsetting nutrient loads and ‘polishing’ recycled water from a WWTP is a leading-edge, environmentally sustainable process for treatment of wastewater. The treated water will be flushed from the mangrove and salt marsh habitat and into the Logan River through a one-way water flow system with the wetland designed to provide the longest residence time for recycled water entering the wetlands.

According to a report prepared by the CSIRO for the project (as contained in the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments Report), the combined system of the wastewater treatment plant and natural wetland process will reduce pathogens to significantly greater levels than conventional treatment plants in South East Queensland.

Figure 37 below shows the proposed wetland components.

Figure 37: Extract of Proposal Plans (Appendix B) showing proposed wetlands, including proposed mangrove forest and saltmarsh habitat and existing Casuarina glauca communities to be retained

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

6.8.1 Hydrology As noted above, for wetlands establishment it is critical for the hydrology to be correct to enable tides to inundate the area and create the appropriate tidal conditions for marine plants. Water Technology undertook a hydrodynamic modelling for the wetlands. The report contains a summary of the works required to size the culverts which pass water between the proposed wetlands and the surrounding tidal waterways. In addition, the tidal regime within the wetland is discussed in the context of establishing intertidal vegetation.

Water Technology recommended culvert sizing for inlet/outlet works and levels for the design of the wetlands and central channel. It was advised that ideal mangrove conditions would exist between 0.5m and 1m AHD but that mangroves may occur above this range. It was expected that mangroves would help stabilise the central channel between the elevations of 0.5 to 0.6m AHD. The mean water level was anticipated to be 0.45m AHD.

KN Group utilised the findings from the Water Technology report to design the earthworks and inlet/outlet structures (refer to Sections 6.8.2 and 6.8.4 below). KN Group also calculated inlet and outlet velocity assessments based on the Water Technology modelling and the selected inlet/outlet works design. The velocities are typically extremely low and suitable for fish passage.

For further information, please refer to the Hydrodynamic Modelling for Culvert Sizing ( Appendix L), which includes the KN Group velocity assessment. 6.8.2 Earthworks Significant earthworks are required to establish the wetlands, including excavation of the site in order that it can be tidally influenced by the Logan River. The design is cognisant of existing Casuarina glauca communities, which the earthworks design avoids. Earthworks to establish the wetlands occurs predominantly in areas of the site that contain low existing environmental values.

An extract from the Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ), showing the earthworks required to establish the wetlands and central channel is included below in Figure 38.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 38: Extract of Engineering Plans (Appendix D) showing earthworks design for part of the proposed wetlands

6.8.3 Central Channel The wetlands include a central channel that is typically approximately 15m in width, ranging in depth from approximately RL-0.5m to RL0.6m. It is intended that this central channel will have a standing water level of RL0.0m (a depth of approximately 0.5m). Please refer to the Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ) for detailed engineering drawings of the proposed central channel (including cross-sections). 6.8.4 Inlet and Outlet Works Based on the Hydrodynamic Modelling undertaken by Water Technology, KN Group developed detailed designs for the inlet/outlet works. The inlet works connect with an existing tidally influenced waterway in the south-eastern part of the site and comprise four (4) 1200mm by 1200mm diameter box culverts approximately 11m long. The culverts connect with aprons and scour protection at either end and contain operable flood gates on the northern (wetland) side of the inlet. The northern side of the inlet also contains a sediment forebay to a depth of -1.4m, which is intended to trap incoming sediment from the Logan River. As noted above in Section 6.8.3 , there is a standing (minimum) water level of RL0.0m.

Please refer below to Figures 39 and 40 which include extracts from the Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ) showing details of the inlet works structure (plan and section).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 39: Extract of Engineering Plans (Appendix D) showing the proposed inlet structure

Figure 40: Extract of Engineering Plans (Appendix D) showing a section of the proposed inlet structure

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The outlet works discharge water via culverts to Serpentine Creek at the western end of the site. The outlet works comprise four (4) 1200mm by 1200mm diameter box culverts approximately 5m long. The culverts connect with aprons and scour protection at either end (including stabilisation works to be undertaken within Serpentine Creek; and include operable flood gates on the western (Serpentine Creek) side of the outlet.

Please refer below to Figure 41 , which includes an extract from the Engineering Plans ( Appendix D) showing details of the outlet structure.

Figure 41: Extract of Engineering Plans (Appendix D) showing proposed outlet structure at Serpentine Creek

On top of both the inlet and outlet structures, an access (maintenance) track is to be constructed.

6.8.5 Wetland Establishment/Rehabilitation In order to undertake concept design of the wetland system (including establishment and maintenance methodologies), Water Technology undertook a significant amount of investigation into applicable case studies and sought advice from academic experts. Water Technology and Saunders Havill Group also consulted with the Bulimba Creek Catchment Coordinating Committee (B4C), who have experience in wetland rehabilitation through their Landcare Services team.

With mangrove establishment, the most critical factor is establishing the correct hydrology. With the correct hydrology and a nearby mangrove seed bank (which there is in this instance) it was found that mangroves would naturally

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project populate a rehabilitation area. It is proposed in this instance that natural generation alone, whilst part of the solution, should not be relied upon to establish the wetlands.

Saunders Havill Group then developed the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix O), an extract of which is included below in Figure 42. The CMRP contains detailed information about the project background, existing soils and vegetation analysis, rehabilitation framework and guidelines, rehabilitation methodology, management zones, species selection, planting densities, construction management, pest/weed control and ongoing monitoring.

Figure 42: Extract of Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan (Appendix O) showing proposed wetlands rehabilitation works and different management zones

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

6.9 Ancillary Structures A new intersection and driveway access will be required to Longland Road to provide access to the WWTP. Access tracks are required for maintenance, linking the main access road with the inlet and outlet structures (described above). A stormwater drain is required underneath the access road from Longland Road, connecting with the wetlands.

Figure 43 below includes an extract from the Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ), showing the proposed concept design for the intersection with Longland Road as recommended by SLR Consulting.

Figure 43: Extract of Engineering Plans (Appendix D) showing concept design of the proposed intersection with Longland Road 6.10 Recycled Water Management 6.10.1 Recycled Water Use and Quality Across the life of the proposed infrastructure, recycled water is expected to be directed to the following uses:

. Council parks and gardens, and other similar Council facilities as appropriate; . Local nurseries; . Construction use; . A tanker filling point at the WWTP for access by other licensed water users;

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Please refer to Figure 44 below, which shows the location of local nurseries and parks that are anticipated to use the recycled water.

Recycled water will be required to meet the following requirements;

. Queensland Class A Recycled Water requirements . E. coli < 1 cfu per 100 mL in line with the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling (2006) . A chlorine residual of 0.7 mg/L at the plant discharge .

The criteria above are primarily based on Queensland Class A recycled water requirements for “Irrigation for uses other than minimally processed food crops” which includes provision of recycled water for “irrigation of public open spaces such as, but not limited to, the irrigation of municipal parks and gardens, recreational sporting fields, racecourses, botanical gardens, school ovals and golf courses”.

The Queensland guidelines call for compliance with other guidelines where appropriate, including the Public Health Regulation 2005. On this basis, recycled water is to be produced by Southern Redland Bay WWTP to a standard that is more stringent than the Queensland Class A standard but less stringent than Class A+. 6.10.2 Temporary Irrigation Area While the wetlands are being established, recycled water from the plant will be used to irrigate an [initial] 10.3ha site with the option for additional areas up to 40ha in total on the eastern side of Serpentine Creek Road immediately south of Scenic Road – refer to Figure 8 above. Studies of soils and groundwater at the site indicate that the land is suitable for irrigation with recycled water and it is intended the land will be used for pasture production.

Given the temporary irrigation area is temporary and may only be required for a very short period, the temporary irrigation area does not form part of the proposed designation. Pre-consultation on the proposal has, however, extended to land owners and occupiers around the temporary irrigation area given that it will be used temporarily for disposal of recycled water from the proposed infrastructure.

The temporary irrigation area is not part of the Designation but impacts associated with this are assessed in this EAR and will be subject to formal consultation.

Please refer to Figure 44 below which shows the location of the temporary irrigation area in the context of the proposed MID and parks/ovals and nurseries.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 44: Extract of Stantec Report (Recycled Water Management Plan) showing recycled water disposal locations

6.10.3 Recycled Water Strategy With the expected rate of development and population growth in southern Redland Bay, treated water will start flowing into the wetland system once the inflows exceed re-use capacity (or the capacity of the temporary irrigation area), which is anticipated to be by approximately year 4 following construction of the WWTP and wetlands. This delay enables sufficient time for the wetlands to establish and start improving Logan River water in the absence of any recycled water discharge.

Phasing of the re-use and disposal of recycled water is summarised below:

. Phase 1: Tankering and Construction o Year 1 – Wetland construction and planting occurs to assist establishment. Wastewater from the catchment’s initial 200 lots is transported via mobile tankers to the existing RCC owned wastewater treatment facility at Victoria Point. . Phase 2: No Discharge to Wetland o Year 2 – Wastewater tankering ceases and Stage 1A of the Southern Redland Bay WWTP produces recycled water which is used to supply water for construction, landscaping and use at local nurseries. There is no excess recycled water and therefore no discharge is required to the wetland. . Phase 3: Increasing Discharge to Wetland o Years 3 & 4 – The recycled water storage (freshwater storage lagoon) is established. Recycled water is used to supply the temporary irrigation of pasture at Lot 83 S312432 (within Shoreline). A small discharge volume is proposed through the freshwater wetland to the mangrove wetland in year 4 only under wet weather conditions. o Years 5 & 6 – Additional temporary irrigation for pasture in Lot 256 S312432 (within Shoreline) may be established with increasing discharge through the freshwater storage lagoon wetland. It is noted that

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

by the end of years 5 or 6, depending on the success of the mangrove forest establishment, the Shoreline temporary irrigation may be ceased. Stage 1B of the Southern Redland Bay WWTP will be delivered around this time. . Phase 4: Ultimate Scheme o Year 7 onwards – The temporary irrigation of Lots 83 and 256 S312432 (within Shoreline) is ceased. The excess recycled water will then be discharged to the established wetland. Recycled water will continue to be used for construction, landscape establishment, sporting ovals and parks in the catchment. o After Year 25 - Following the completion of Shoreline (approximately year 25) the on-going recycled water use will be approximately 18% of total water, with the remainder being discharged to the wetland.

The discharge quantum is dependent upon how much land is used for temporary irrigation, however there is no anticipated recycled water discharge to the wetlands in years 1-3. From year 4, small discharges are anticipated which will increase to a total of 824.5 megalitres per year at year 25. During years 1-25 it is anticipated that water will be re- used for construction, landscape establishment, nurseries and parks. After 25 years, it is anticipated that construction and landscape establishment re-use will cease; however, construction water may still be used for other ongoing projects within the catchment (other than Shoreline), so the estimate is conservative.

For the full recycled water strategy and water balance calculations, please refer to the Recycled Water Management Plan prepared by Stantec ( Appendix I ).

6.11 Reconfiguration of a Lot As part of the proposed Designation, the infrastructure entity is seeking to reconfigure the existing lots in order that the WWTP can be appropriately managed by different parts of RCC. During pre-consultation, RCC and RW outlined that it was likely RCC Parks Department would take on the maintenance of the wetland, whilst RW would take on the maintenance and operation of the WWTP. As such, the infrastructure entity has decided to propose reconfiguring the site (i.e. a boundary realignment) in order that the proposed WWTP is located on a single lot (Proposed Lot 1); and the wetlands are located on a separate lot (Proposed Lot 4). Balance lots would be created (Proposed Lots 2 & 3) – Lot 2 is generally as per existing; however, Lot 3 is a balance created by the formation of Proposed Lots 1 & 4. With this configuration, RW can take over the ownership and maintenance of the WWTP, whilst RCC can take over the ownership and maintenance of the wetlands.

The configuration of Lot 1 is such that the impacts associated with the WWTP can still be managed within the boundary of Lot 1 (i.e. an approximately 200m buffer from the WWTP). It is likely that Lendlease would retain ownership of Proposed Lots 2 and 3; or they would be transferred to RCC. Please note that Proposed Lots 2 & 3 remain within the designation area. Figure 45 below shows the proposed reconfiguration of the site.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 45: Extract of Reconfiguration of a Lot Proposal Plan (Saunders Havill Group) 6.12 Environmental Best Practice The proposed mangrove forest treatment solution has significant social, environmental and cost advantages over other options, first and foremost by allowing a gravity discharge to the proposed wetland.

The new wetland will also provide a net environmental benefit to the Logan River by:

. providing for a neutral or net improvement in the water quality within the Logan River estuary; . creating a significant net increase in marine plants; . creating a fish breeding habitat and habitat other marine species such as prawns; . supporting and foraging habitat for wading birds and sea birds (and other terrestrial fauna); . stabilising the shoreline against climate change, wind and water erosion; . removal of sediment and nutrients from the Logan River on every tide; and . carbon sequestration.

A major advantage is the creation of a wetland that will remove nutrients from both the recycled wastewater and from the Logan River on every tide cycle.

The project is considered to be environmental best-practice and Water Technology are currently seeking to partner with Griffith University regarding the possibility of a long term (5 year) Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project research-based monitoring program. If the ARC submission is unsuccessful, a comparable though smaller scientific research and validation program will still take place.

6.13 Delivery and Ownership With regard to the delivery and ownership of the infrastructure, it is confirmed that RCC and RW will be the ultimate owner and operator of the infrastructure assets (land and works). RCC and RW therefore also have a significant interest in the cost-effective delivery/operation and value capture opportunity (i.e. for the servicing of the entire Southern Redland Bay catchment).

Lendlease intend to fully fund the project, however, under an IA to be negotiated with RCC, will seek to obtain infrastructure offsets against relevant Local Government infrastructure contributions through provision of these works in lieu of payment, as is the case for any trunk infrastructure servicing a catchment larger than a development itself. It is anticipated that delivery of the infrastructure will be required by December 2021, allowing for current/projected rates of development.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 7 Environmental Assessment Prior to making a ministerial designation, the Minister must be satisfied that adequate environmental assessment has occurred. Chapter 7 of the MGR outlines the process for environmental assessment.

A comprehensive environmental assessment of the following has been carried out –

. all environmental, social and economic impacts (both positive and negative); . how any negative impacts can be avoided, mitigated or offset; . whole-of-life impacts from construction, operation, and decommission (as relevant); and . off-site impacts from the construction, operation and decommission (if relevant).

7.1 Environmental Assessment Impacts Summary Table 14 below provides a summary of the impacts identified from the environmental assessment:

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

Type of impact Impact Assessment

Risk Management and Refer to Section 8 Refer to Section 8 Emergency Situations

Water Quality Impacts Estuarine Impacts – Please refer to Table 16 including estuarine impact The proposal has potential water quality impacts below and the Southern assessments and groundwater through the discharge of recycled water into the Redland Bay WWTP – impacts freshwater storage lagoon and wetlands prior to Mangrove Design discharge into the Logan River. and Receiving Environmental Assessments Water Technology have undertaken comprehensive (Appendix K). estuarine impact assessments and have found that water quality impacts can be avoided or appropriately mitigated in order that water quality at the reference point in the Logan River is the same or better than the current conditions.

Groundwater Impacts – Please refer to Table 17 In respect to groundwater impacts, it was found that below and the Southern there are no known groundwater users within 1km of Redland Bay WWTP – the site; and groundwater salinity of the alluvial aquifer Mangrove Design and is expected to be reflective of that in the Logan River, Receiving Environmental which is equivalent to seawater in this location. Assessments ( Appendix K ).

Recycled Water Impacts – Please refer to Table 18 Other considerations in respect of water quality include below and the Recycled impacts associated with the quality of recycled water Water Management Plan for re-use for construction water, landscape (Appendix I ) establishment, by local nurseries and within the temporary irrigation area.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

Natural Hazards Bushfire Hazard Assessment and Management – Refer to Table 19 below including bushfire, flooding The site is in an area mapped as containing medium, along with the Bushfire and landslide. high and very high bushfire hazard. Impacts associated Management Plan with the establishment of community infrastructure (Appendix P ) and the within bushfire hazard areas have been considered and Concept WWTP mitigation measures recommended within the Bushfire Rehabilitation Plan Management Plan ( Appendix P ). As a result of the (Appendix P ) recommended mitigation measures, the proposal will have an ecological impact through vegetation clearing for the creation of a 38.1m wide Bushfire Protection Zone (BPZ) around the WWTP.

The impact of vegetation clearing to establish the BPZ is to be minimised through clearing only tree species which are non-endemic, trees which are dead/diseased or dangerous or with a diameter of <10cm. Vegetation clearing within the BPZ will also be mitigated by the rehabilitation of the BPZ through planting of less flammable plants as recommended in the Bushfire Management Plan.

The BPZ seeks to avoid and minimise an increased risk to people and property for ‘essential service infrastructure’ consistent with Bushfire Resilient Communities (2019).

Migration measures aim to protect and at avoid and environmental, social and economic impact in the event of a bushfire. These are to be complied with prior to construction and whilst operational in accordance with the Bushfire Management Plan.

Flooding Hazard Assessment and Management - Refer to Table 20 below and The proposal will have a potential impact on flooding the Southern Redland Bay resulting from earthworks to be undertaken within WWTP – Mangrove Design existing mapped flood areas (overland flow and and Receiving medium/high storm tide inundation areas). Impacts Environmental Assessments associated with coastal processes are addressed in the (Appendix K ). Coastal Processes section (Table ***). Impacts associated with on-site and localised flooding are either entirely avoided or mitigated through design measures.

Landslide/Steep Land – The proposal will have a potential impact on landslide hazards. Impacts associated with landslide hazards can

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

be appropriately mitigated or avoided through engineering design by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ) and complying with the relevant standards. As such, any impacts associated with landslide hazard have not been considered any further in this EAR.

Biodiversity Impacts The proposal will have an ecological impact through: Refer to Table 21 below and Flora and fauna, including the Ecological Assessment . Vegetation clearing (including marine and Commonwealth, State and Report ( Appendix M) terrestrial plants); Local Government legislation . Potential impacts to fauna during construction; and obligations . Water quality impacts from recycled wastewater.

The Ecological Assessment Report prepared by Saunders Havill Group (Appendix M) contains a comprehensive assessment of biodiversity impacts (including measures to avoid, mitigate or offset impacts). Impacts and net ecological benefits are summarised below:

Impact to MSES (mapped constraints) –

. 0.15ha of Wildlife Habitat (Koala Habitat (Core); Essential Habitat; Endangered and Vulnerable) for the mains infrastructure (located on an existing powerline path that will be marginally widened to accommodate this new and unavoidable linear infrastructure, then rehabilitated post-construction; 21 Non-juvenile Koala Habitat Tree (NJKHT) removed). . Up to 0.89ha of Wildlife Habitat (Koala Habitat (Core) - 0.79ha; Essential Habitat – 0.79ha; Endangered and Vulnerable – 0.00ha; Special Least Concern – 0.89ha) for the proposed WWTP bushfire buffer (non- native vegetation clearing only; all NJKHT retained). . 0.53ha least concern RE12.1.2 (HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) (ground- truthed as 1.44ha) for the mangrove wetland. . 0.03ha least concern RE12.1.3 (HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) (ground- truthed as 0.03ha) for the mangrove wetland.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

Impact to MSES (ecological values) –

. 1.44ha salt couch dominated or the mangrove wetland and access road. . 0.42ha of salt couch along drainage lines in weed dominated area for the mangrove wetland. . 20 Grey Mangrove for the mangrove wetland and ancillary infrastructure. . 21 NJKHT of the mains infrastructure to connect to Longland Road.

Biodiversity impacts can be appropriately avoided, minimised, mitigated or offset in order that there is a net environmental benefit, through the creation of:

. 9.854ha mangrove forest and saltmarsh wetland comprised of: o 8.6854ha of mangrove (least concern RE12.1.3; HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) o 1.08ha of saltmarsh (least concern RE12.1.2; HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) o Casuarina glauca (swamp she-oak) planting (1835m²) and natural regeneration o Green couch grasslands adjoining access tracks. . 2.26ha of Koala habitat (RE12.3.5/12.3.6) . 0.58ha of Koala habitat (RE12.11.27/12.11.23/12.11.26) . Planting of 100 juvenile Koala habitat trees along the outer margins of the linear infrastructure path between the WWTP and Longland Road.

Transport and Traffic The proposal will have an environmental impact during Refer to Table 22 below Impacts construction and operation by way of increased traffic along with the Traffic and including access, parking, generation and impacts on the safety and efficiency of Transport Assessment servicing and traffic impacts. the State-controlled road network. Traffic generation (Appendix U ), the impacts are to be mitigated through safe intersection Engineering Plans and access design to reduce the increased risk of (Appendix D ) and the incidents on Longland Road at the proposed site access . Construction Environmental An intersection design that complies with the Management Plan appropriate DTMR standards and minimum safe sight (Appendix W). distance is provided in the Engineering Plans (Appendix D ).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

Mitigation measures should be conditioned and complied with prior to construction, during construction and whilst operational in accordance with the recommendations of the Traffic and Transport Assessment.

Amenity Impacts Built Form and Visual Amenity Impacts – Refer to Table 23 below and including, built form, bulk and Built form and visual amenity impacts can be the Concept Mangrove scale, biting insects, noise, air appropriately mitigated (where necessary) through Rehabilitation Plan quality, light and odour. vegetation planting (rehabilitation site works) in (Appendix O ) and Concept accordance with the Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan WWTP Rehabilitation Plan and Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan. Visual (Appendix P ). Please also impact from nearby sensitive receptors was analysed in refer to the visual impact Globalmapper using a base case (worst case) and found analysis (mapping) from that the WWTP will not be visible from 6 of the 8 sensitive receptors analysed sensitive receptors. The analysis found that (Appendix V). the WWTP would be partially visible from 190 Fisher Road and 213 Fisher Road; however, screening vegetation is proposed on the eastern side of the mangrove wetlands and the eastern side of the freshwater storage lagoon to screen the WWTP from view. The WWTP will also be visible from Longland Road (Beenleigh- Redland Bay Road) when originally established, however the screening vegetation referenced above will appropriate mitigate visual amenity impacts from Longland Road. There was not considered to be any visual amenity impacts from the wetlands as the establishment of the wetlands are considered to enhance visual amenity.

Biting Insects – Refer to Table 24 below and The proposal can avoid or minimise impacts associated the Biting Insects with biting insects, provided that the mitigation Management Plan measures for managing an increased risk of (Appendix T). environmental and social impacts from the potential creation of new or additional breeding habitat are adhered to. The mitigation measures are to be conditioned and complied with prior to construction, during construction and whilst operational in accordance with the Biting Insect Management Plan.

Noise Impacts – Refer to Table 25 below and The noise emissions generated by the proposal can be to the Noise Impact appropriately mitigated to an acceptable level, Assessment as part of the provided the mitigation recommendations in the Noise

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

Impact Assessment are conditioned and complied with Concept Design Report prior to construction and whilst operational. (Appendix G ).

Odour Impacts – Refer to Table 26 below and The proposal has the potential to cause odour impacts to the Odour Impact on nearby ‘sensitive receptors’ (dwellings). Odour Assessment as part of the emissions generated by the proposal can be Concept Design Report appropriately mitigated to an acceptable level, (Appendix G ). provided the mitigation recommendations in the Odour Impact Assessment are conditioned and complied with prior to construction and whilst operational.

Other Air Quality Impacts – Other air quality impacts may include dust emissions during construction (or from vehicles during operation) or dust emissions from wastewater treatment operations (including pumps, blowers, vents). Dust emissions during construction are dealt with in the Construction Impacts section and within the Construction Environmental Management Plan. Stantec concluded within the Operational Environmental Management Plan that the operation of the proposed WWTP would not increase emissions of air pollutants and would therefore not expose sensitive receptors to an increase in air emissions.

Lighting Impacts - Light impacts can be appropriately mitigated by ensuring the lighting design complies with AS4282 - 1997 ( Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting ). No specific lighting design has been completed and is not intended to be completed prior to development of the detailed WWTP design. Compliance with AS4282- 1997 should be conditioned to mitigate lighting impacts. Lighting impacts are not considered any further in this EAR.

Vibration Impacts - Vibration impacts were considered within the Noise Impact Assessment and the Operational Environmental Management Plan prepared by Stantec. Stantec concluded that the WWTP does not involve any operations that would result in significant levels of ground vibration, therefore vibration impacts are not considered any further in this EAR.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

Cultural Heritage Impacts Aboriginal Cultural Heritage – Refer to Table 27 below and including Aboriginal Cultural The proposal should not have impacts on Aboriginal the Cultural Heritage Heritage and Native Title cultural heritage values provided that the mitigation Management Plan and management measures outlined within the Cultural (Appendix Q ) and Property Heritage Management Plan for managing the increased Searches ( Appendix GG ) risk of a ‘high impact activity’ is conditioned and complied with prior to construction in accordance with the Cultural Heritage Management Plan. Management measures aim to avoid impacts and protect cultural heritage or minimise social impacts if there is damage or destruction to Aboriginal cultural heritage values.

Heritage Places – The site is not listed on the Queensland Heritage Register nor is it listed as a Local Heritage Place under Redland City Plan 2018; therefore, there are no impacts to places of State or local heritage significance and this has not been considered any further in this EAR.

Infrastructure Infrastructure is required to be supplied to the Refer to Section 6.5 of this including water, sewer, proposed WWTP and to provide continuing connection EAR and the Engineering stormwater, to adjoining properties. Infrastructure required is Services Report ( Appendix electricity/telecommunications described in Section 6 of this EAR. Impacts associated H). and gas networks with this infrastructure provision are dealt with as part of the other impact assessments outlined within Section 7 .

Soils and Geology Acid Sulfate Soils – Refer to Table 28 below and including contamination land, The proposal will have no impact on Acid Sulfate Soils to the Acid Sulfate Soils acid sulfate soils, earthworks (ASS), provided that the activity is managed in Investigation ( Appendix R ) and erosion and sediment accordance with the recommendations of the Acid and Construction control; Sulfate Soils Investigation. The investigation does not Environmental Management recommend that an Acid Sulfate Management Plan be Plan ( Appendix W ). prepared, however, does identify mitigation measures to neutralise soils during construction and achieve desired pH levels. Mitigation measures are to be conditioned and complied with prior to construction (incorporated into a site management plan) and during construction.

The management plan seeks to avoid environmental impacts that could be experienced during construction when undertaking site works resulting in the disturbance of the sediments.

Contaminated Land-

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

None of the lots comprising the Designation are listed on the Contaminated Land Register or Environmental Management Register (refer to Appendix GG). On-site geotechnical testing did not identify any contaminants therefore there are no impacts associated with contaminated land and this EAR does not consider this matter any further.

Earthworks Substantial earthworks are required to establish the wetlands and base pad for the WWTP. There is high potential for impacts associated with erosion and sedimentation during construction. This is addressed under Construction Management. Earthworks are only conceptual at this stage given that detailed design of the WWTP will be undertaken via a ‘design and construct’ process with the construction contractor. Stantec has rationalised the WWTP layout and allowed for stepping of buildings with the slope (as best as can be accommodated in the circumstance) to minimise batter extents.

Coastal Environment and The proposal has the potential to cause impacts to Please refer to Table 29 Processes coastal processes, as it is partly located within an below and the Southern including coastal erosion, erosion prone area and medium/high storm tide hazard Redland Bay WWTP – storm tide inundation and area. Climate change is anticipated to exacerbate Mangrove Design climate change impacts relating to coastal erosion and storm tide and Receiving inundation. Environmental Assessments (Appendix K ). Specifically The impacts associated with coastal processes have refer to Appendix K – Coastal been considered by Water Technology in a Coastal Processes of the Water Processes memorandum. Water Technology found Technology Report. that:

. The site currently inundates under larger tides and after development of the wetlands, this inundation will be more frequent (every tide) and will be carefully controlled by dedicated inlet and outlet structures; . The WWTP is located outside an erosion prone area; . The WWTP will not be affected by storm tide inundation even when considering future 0.8m sea level rise; . Erosion/migration of the riverbank is best protected by maintaining and rehabilitating the currently stable and well vegetated

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

riverbanks along the Logan River and Serpentine Creek; . Measures to mitigate the impacts of erosion around ancillary structures (inlet/outlet structures and access paths) be incorporated into the engineering design; . The development will cause no detrimental impacts on adjacent properties or other areas within the coastal zone; and . The development will not adversely impact coastal resources and public amenity of foreshore areas, either at the development site or in adjacent areas.

The proposal will not have any significant impact on coastal processes provided that the mitigation and management measures outlined in the Water Technology report are adopted. The WWTP is not subject to any coastal hazard.

Hydrological Impacts Water Technology considered hydrological impacts Please refer to the Southern including impacts associated associated with the construction of the WWTP and Redland Bay WWTP – with changed hydraulic wetlands and found that there were no impacts Mangrove Design and conditions within the site associated with fluvial flooding from Serpentine Creek. Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ). Other localised hydrological impacts are appropriately avoided or mitigated by:

. Locating the proposed WWTP (and batter extents) outside of existing drainage paths or waterways; . Ensuring stormwater discharge from the WWTP are directed to the freshwater storage lagoon, avoiding potential overland flow issues external to the WWTP; . Ensuring the drainage feature/waterway at the northern part of the site (parallel to Longland Road) is connected to the wetlands.

Construction Impacts Construction impacts can be appropriately avoided or Refer to the Construction including management of mitigated through compliance with a Construction Environmental Management construction impacts such as Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), which has Plan prepared by Stantec noise, traffic, light and waste. been prepared in accordance with the (Appendix W ) recommendations of technical studies. The CEMP provides a summary of approval requirements, an environmental risk assessment (including management measures), roles and responsibilities, emergency management and incident reporting. Construction

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 74: Environmental Assessment Impact Summary

impacts can also be mitigated or avoided through compliance with the management plans that are submitted as part of this EAR (and referenced in the CEMP).

By implementing the management measures outlined in the CEMP, impacts associated with construction can be appropriately avoided or mitigated.

Economic Impacts The proposal has the potential to cause economic Refer to Table 30 below and impacts, most of which are dealt with as part of other the Southern Redland Bay impact assessments (i.e. economic impacts resulting WWTP – Mangrove Design from water quality impacts, construction management, and Receiving hydrological impacts, traffic impacts etc); and impacts Environmental Assessments are appropriately avoided, mitigated, minimised or (Appendix K ). Please also offset. Other potential economic impacts have also refer to the Options been considered in more detail, including: Assessment prepared by . Economic impacts associated with the impact Stantec ( Appendix F ). on nearby aquaculture uses along the Logan River; and . Economic impacts associated with the project not proceeding.

Economic impacts associated with any perceived impact on property values is not considered to be a valid planning consideration and has not been considered in this EAR.

Social Impacts Social impacts are consequences experienced by Refer to Table 31 below and people due to changes in the environment associated the Southern Redland Bay with a proposed development. The proposal has the WWTP – Mangrove Design potential to cause social impacts, primarily through and Receiving amenity impacts, most of which are dealt with as part of Environmental Assessments other impact assessments (i.e. social impacts resulting (Appendix K ). from water quality impacts, construction management, hydrological impacts, traffic impacts etc); and impacts are appropriately avoided, mitigated, minimised or offset. Other potential social impacts are also considered in more detail, including:

. Social impacts associated with the impact on recreational fishing within the Logan River; . Social impacts associated with the project not proceeding.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

7.2 Key Benefits Summary An assessment of the anticipated key benefits for the proposal has been carried out. Table 15 below identifies the anticipated key benefits of the proposed ID –

Table 8: Key Benefits Summary

Benefit Type Anticipated Key Benefits

Social/Cultural . Efficient and timely supply of sub-regional infrastructure necessary to service land Project need , meeting within the Southern Redland Bay catchment for the establishment of a new urban community expectations community in accordance with Goal 1: Grow of Shaping SEQ ; and ShapingSEQ targets . Efficient and timely supply of sub-regional infrastructure to service new community facilities including new parklands, community uses, district centre (shopping) and school to service Southern Redland Bay; . The infrastructure entity has undertaken a lengthy informal pre-engagement consultation process with RCC, RW, directly affected landowners, adjoining landowners and other stakeholders, for an inclusive and wholistic pre- consultation process; and . The project will satisfy RCC and RW desire for a sub-regional infrastructure solution for servicing the Southern Redland Bay catchment

Environmental . Achieve environmental sustainability and best-practice wastewater management Innovation, environmental through treatment of wastewater to a high standard via an MBR treatment plant excellence and ecological and offset any remaining nutrient loads in recycled water via the construction of a sustainability suitably sized configured wetland ecosystem; and

. Provide a substantial net increase in marine plants and biodiversity generally on the site, in turn creating additional habitat for terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna.

Economic . Efficient and timely supply of sub-regional infrastructure necessary to service land Economic Enabling within the Southern Redland Bay catchment for the establishment of a new urban Infrastructure community in accordance with Goal 1: Grow of Shaping SEQ , supporting 5,000 new homes, 13,250 full time equivalent (FTE) direct and supply chain construction jobs and 1,260 ongoing jobs within the Redland City LGA ; . Development of the Southern Redland Bay catchment would support 662 FTE direct and supply chain construction jobs per annum if the area is developed over 20 years (more if the area is developed over a longer timeframe); . A new urban community within the Southern Redland Bay catchment will assist in attracting private sector investment to RCC. . Most of the local workforce in the Redland LGA will work from, or at, home with an estimated 15% of dwellings hosting one (1) FTE. This 750-person workforce will activate the local community and economy. Development of the Southern Redland Bay catchment will support the growth of small and micro businesses by providing an urban setting that is attractive to families wanting to invest in their houses and businesses (including houses specifically designed to cater for work from home arrangements).

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

7.3 Water Quality Assessment The following sections deal with water quality impacts, which were assessed by Water Technology in their report Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ). The following sections include a distilled summary of the water quality impacts and mitigation measures addressed within that report. 7.3.1 Estuarine Impact Assessments

Table 96: Estuarine Impact Assessments

Site Context As outlined above in the Section 4 - Site Analysis, the site is in the Logan-Albert catchment, which covers a total area of 4,150km² of which the Logan catchment covers approximately 2,000km². Within the lower Logan sub-catchment, existing water quality is heavily influenced by land use (urban development and agricultural uses), including several WWTP’s that discharge directly or indirectly into the Logan River. Of these WWTP’s, the Lower Logan sub-catchment treatment plants at Loganholme (forecast to be 335,000EP capacity) and Mount Cotton (10,000 – 50,000 EP capacity) are nearest to the site.

In addition, and as also noted in Section 4, the site is in close proximity to existing aquaculture uses on the opposite bank of the Logan River, including an aquaculture facility directly opposite the subject site (on Lot 4 on SP148708). Due to the existing WWTP discharges and other influences (e.g. urban stormwater runoff), the estuarine reaches of the Logan-Albert sub-catchment can experience poor water quality conditions, including high turbidity, high nutrient concentrations and low dissolved oxygen.

Proposed MID Due to the nature of the infrastructure proposed, there is potential for water quality impacts within and nearby to the site, including the Logan River. Water Technology have undertaken comprehensive estuarine impact assessments and found that water quality impacts can be avoided or appropriately mitigated in order that water quality at the modelled reference point in the Logan River is the same or better than the current conditions.

The Water Technology report found that water quality impacts can be avoided, mitigated or offset by:

. Treatment of wastewater to a high standard by an MBR WWTP, as proposed, which generates high quality recycled water which is of a quality better than A-class but marginally below A+ class; . Construction of a new wetland (mangrove forest and salt-marsh habitat) as part of a land-based discharge to reduce nutrient loads from the WWTP through nitrogen retention/de-nitrification and phosphorus capture and storage; . Designing a wetland that allowed for maximum possible residence time of recycled water within the wetlands; . Allowance of sufficient time (up to at least 4 years) for wetland establishment prior to the wetlands receiving the first recycled water discharges; . Providing additional disinfection (UV) prior to discharge of waters to the wetlands, including treatment of wet weather flows; . Significant dilution effect within the Logan River; and

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Implementation of a comprehensive monitoring program, reporting on a range of water quality (and other) parameters.

Impact Assessment Due to the proximity of aquaculture uses and recreational use of the Logan River, it was considered extremely important to undertake a comprehensive impact assessment of any water quality impacts on the Logan River (estuarine assessments).

The estuarine impact assessments in the Water Technology report Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments (Appendix K ) are based on data collected by the following:

. Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program (EHMP) by Healthy Land and Water (HLW), which is used by Healthy Land and Water to quantify annual waterway health using state-of-the art receiving water quality models; and . Water quality monitoring that was specifically implemented for this project to verify existing water quality in the Logan River in the vicinity of the Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Monitoring Project Site, and against available EHMP data and corresponding water quality guidelines.

Using the EHMP data, catchment pollutant models and 3D hydrodynamic and water quality models have been developed which are used to calculate the HLW report cards each year. This data was enhanced with additional water quality monitoring, including 2 rounds of in- situ measurements at 3 analysis sites to create a ‘bespoke’ baseline conditions model. The additional testing for baseline conditions also involved testing for heavy metals, pharmaceuticals and personal care products, endocrine disrupting compounds and herbicides/pesticides and other constituents.

In terms of baseline conditions, it was found that water quality was poor in terms of nutrient levels at all sample locations. Regarding other tested parameters, existing baseline conditions in the Logan River are described below:

. Heavy metals concentrations were below guideline levels; . For all existing and tested pharmaceuticals and personal care products, concentrations in the Logan River were significantly below guideline levels; . For all existing and tested endocrine disrupting compounds, concentrations in the Logan River were significantly below guideline levels; . Levels of herbicides and pesticides were considerably lower than guideline values; and . All tested Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and ‘other’ compounds were found to be below their respective reporting limits.

The model developed by Water Technology accurately represents water quality, current speeds, direction, fluxes and water level in the Logan River, which forms a good basis for the impact assessments contained within Section 9 of the Water Technology Report.

To provide insights into the expected changes in water quality within the Logan River Estuary attributable to the SRBWWTP, comparisons between the following three scenarios were made:

. An existing (undeveloped) case ;

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. A base case , with fully constructed wetlands and no recycled water discharge; and . A developed case , with fully constructed wetlands and recycled water discharge from the proposed WWTP.

The comparisons for water quality between existing, base and developed cases were made using ‘box and whisker’ plots generated from results extracted mid-channel in the Logan River adjacent to the mouth of Serpentine Creek. It was considered important to ‘test’ the proposal against the existing conditions and a baseline whereby a wetland is established but was not receiving recycled water discharges, which will be the case in the initial establishment years (years 1-4).

A summary of the water quality assessments for the range of parameters tested is included below:

. Salinity - Results from the modelling showed minimal impacts from the proposed recycled water discharge into the wetlands. The median salinity within the wetland (~ 25 g/L) showed a slight decrease in the areas immediately surrounding the point of entry of recycled water, however the slight decrease will not affect the establishment of mangroves or salt-marsh. The developed case had negligible impacts on salinity levels in the Logan River, which were shown to remain at ~ 30 g/L . Total Nitrogen - The levels of total nitrogen within the wetlands were influenced by the recycled water discharge. An apparent increase in the median total nitrogen concentration within the wetlands at the recycled water discharge point north-east of the proposed mangrove site was modelled; however, impacts in the Logan River from total nitrogen in the recycled water discharge is negligible and of no concern. . Total Phosphorus - It was evident from the modelling that the median total phosphorous decreases slightly from the existing case to the base case; however, once discharges from the wastewater treatment plant are included the concentrations are again equivalent to those of the existing case. . Dissolved Oxygen - It was evident from the modelling that the median dissolved oxygen increases slightly from the existing case to the base case; however, once the discharges from the wastewater treatment plant are included the dissolved oxygen concentrations are again equivalent to those of the existing case. . Other nutrients – the modelling showed that the concentrations of other nutrients (e.g. ammonia, nitrous oxide, organic nitrogen) remain similar to or less than those of the base and existing cases. . Waterborne Pathogens – The modelling found that current levels of treatment/controls are adequate to protect Logan River water users from enteric bacteria and Cryptosporidium; however, additional treatment was recommended to protect Logan River water users from human enteric viruses. It was recommended that additional disinfection (UV or chlorination) would provide a further 3 Log10 barrier for viruses and provide a much greater margin of safety. As a result of this recommendation, UV treatment is proposed to be included as part of the WWTP for all events including wet weather events.

Emerging Contaminants and Other Constituents of Concern Following pre-consultation with the ID Team, DES, DAF and the Australian Prawn Farmers Association, additional water quality parameters were tested (for over 400 different

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

contaminants). Given that it is not possible to test the same parameters for recycled water from the proposed WWTP, Stantec provided estimates of water quality for recycled water from a reference WWTP in South East Queensland. It is, however noted that the reference parameters are to be used as a guide only as the catchment for the reference WWTP included industrial waste contributions .

A summary of results from the modelling of emerging contaminants and other constituents of concern are presented below:

Inorganic Toxicants (heavy metals and others) – The modelling indicates that for most tested inorganic toxicants, average measured values for the reference WWTP were considerably below prescribed guidelines and no impacts were expected. The results indicated that for aluminium and iron, the water quality samples from the Logan River indicate that the levels already exceed the prescribed guideline values and that the results from the reference WWTP was slightly above the prescribed guideline values (although better than the existing Logan River results). If the recycled water from the proposed WWTP matches the quality of the reference WWTP, discharges will be of a concentration that is less than ambient levels in the Logan River, and should contribute to an (albeit small) reduction in these levels. Hence, no detectable or adverse impact on aquaculture production is expected from the proposed WWTP. For zinc, the levels in the Logan River were below the prescribed guideline values but the measured value for zinc at the reference WWTP exceeded the prescribed guideline value. Water Technology anticipates that the level of zinc in the proposed recycled water discharge will likely be of a better quality than the reference WWTP (as there are no industrial uses). They consider that given the slight degree of exceedance of the guideline value in recycled water discharge from the reference WWTP and the significant dilution of effluent in the wetlands and once it reaches the Logan River, that there would be no impact on aquaculture species.

Organic Toxicants – Water Technology found that for all existing and tested pharmaceuticals and personal care products, concentrations in the Logan River Estuary were significantly below guideline levels. Low concentrations were recorded, despite considerable effluent loads from upstream WWTPs into the Logan River. For the reference WWTP, concentrations of pharmaceuticals and personal care products were significantly lower than the guideline values but were in some cases higher than ambient levels in the Logan River. Water Technology considered this not to be of concern, because:

. A substantial contribution to pharmaceuticals and personal care products come from hospitals and industries, however the Southern Redland Bay catchment does not contain any hospitals or industrial uses; . The proposed WWTP is significantly smaller than the reference WWTP and will treat only domestic wastewater; and . There is significant dilution of recycled water in the wetlands and Logan River.

Endocrine Disrupting Compounds - For existing and tested endocrine disrupting compounds, concentrations in the Logan River Estuary were significantly below guideline levels. Low concentrations of EDCs were recorded, despite considerable effluent loads from upstream WWTPs into the Logan River. For the reference WWTP, endocrine disrupting compound concentrations were significantly lower than the guideline values but, in some

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

cases, they were higher than ambient levels in the Logan River. Water Technology considered this not to be of concern, because:

. A substantial contribution of these compounds come from hospitals and industries, however the Southern Redland Bay catchment does not contain any hospitals or industrial uses; . The proposed WWTP is significantly smaller than the reference WWTP and will treat only domestic wastewater; and . There is significant dilution of recycled water in the wetlands and Logan River.

Herbicides and Pesticides - For herbicides and pesticides, tested levels were considerably lower than guideline values. For the reference WWTP, the levels of pesticides and herbicides were significantly lower than the guideline values but in some cases were greater than the ambient levels in the Logan River. Water Technology considered this not to be of concern, because:

. The proposed WWTP will treat domestic wastewater only, compared with the reference WWTP which also treats industrial wastewater; . The proposed WWTP is significantly smaller than the reference WWTP; and . There is significant dilution of recycled water in the wetlands and Logan River.

All tested Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) were found to be below respective reporting limits in the Logan River. No reference data were available for comparison with other existing WWTPs. Water Technology considered the risk from PCBs was expected to be negligible.

Summary The Water Technology estuarine impact assessment found that recycled water discharge into the wetlands will not have adverse impacts on the Logan River; however, did recommend additional disinfection (UV or chlorination) would mitigate potential impacts for human enteric viruses and provide a further 3 Log10 barrier, in turn providing a much greater margin of safety. As a result of this recommendation, UV treatment is proposed to be included as part of the WWTP for all events including wet weather events.

Monitoring Water Technology recommended a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation program be undertaken, including a long term researched based monitoring. Details of proposed monitoring measures are outlined in Section 8 .

7.3.2 Groundwater Impact Assessment

Table 10: Groundwater Impact Assessment

Site Context The proposed WWTP and wetland is located within the Logan-Albert Basin. There is no known groundwater management area listed for this area. The nearest recorded groundwater wells are more than 1 km away and are reported to intersect the Bunya Phyllite/Neranleigh-Fernvale beds.

Aquatic and terrestrial Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDEs) are identified (with moderate confidence) near the proposed wetlands, in part of Serpentine Creek and Carbrook Wetlands and in a part of the site that is not to be disturbed.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Geotechnical investigations by Douglas Partners ( Appendix R ) found that the site is characterised by an upper clayey sand topsoil layer to depths of between 0.1 m and 0.3 m. The topsoil was underlain by alluvial soils comprising high plasticity, soft to firm sandy clay to depths of 0.7 m and 1.2 m and then loose clayey sand to depths of 2 metres. Free groundwater was observed in all 30 geotechnical test bores between 0.2 m and 1 m depth. It was reported that groundwater depths within the proposed wetlands are affected by climatic conditions, soil permeability and tidal conditions and levels are therefore expected to vary with time.

Proposed MID Works to be undertaken for this project are in areas which have been previously cleared or have historically contained no vegetation.

Most vegetation around the WWTP and wetlands will be retained, although some clearing of vegetation is required as part of this project. The Proposal Plans ( Appendix B ) and Preliminary Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan prepared by Saunders Havill Group (Appendix N ) should be referred to for further details.

The potential impact on the local groundwater system of two activities planned in the area were considered as follows:

. Activity A – Wetland establishment involving construction of a 15 m wide central channel with a depth profile ranging from 0.5 m AHD at the edges to -0.5 m AHD in the central channel and modifications of the surrounding levels to achieve elevations of between 0.5 m AHD and 1 m AHD (generally); and . Activity B – Recycled water disposal involving disposal of recycled water to the wetlands once established.

Impact Assessment The Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments (Appendix K ) considers groundwater impacts in Section 10. The impact assessment concluded that:

. There is potential that the shallow alluvial aquifer will be intersected during construction of the central flow channel based on observed groundwater levels which are expected to occur from 0.2 m and 1 m below the natural surface elevation; . The flow regime of the central flow channel is expected to be dominated by the tidal inflow and outflow from unidirectional inlet and outlet structures. It is expected that levels within the wetland will be maintained within those of natural tidal variations in the Logan River; . There are no known groundwater users within 1 km of the wetlands and without further information, any impacts to the shallow alluvial aquifer are expected to be localised and low; and . Some infiltration of the recycled water to the shallow alluvial aquifer is expected, however, as there are no nearby groundwater users and groundwater in the shallow alluvial aquifer is expected to naturally discharge back towards the Logan River, the risks of such are low.

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

7.3.3 Recycled Water Impact Assessment

Table 118: Recycled Water Use Impacts

Site Context As outlined in Section 6.10 above, some recycled water from the WWTP is proposed to be re- used for the following purposes: . Council parks and gardens, and other similar Council facilities as appropriate; . Local nurseries; . Construction use (including landscape establishment); and . A tanker filling point at the WWTP for access by other licensed water users.

Proposed MID The Recycled Water Management Plan ( Appendix I ) anticipates the following estimated average recycled water volumes will be re-used (from years 3 to ultimate development):

. 22.9ML per year for construction (earthworks); . 19.8ML per year for landscape establishment; . 71.3ML per year for local nurseries;

In addition, upon establishment of regional parks/open space as part of the Shoreline development, average annual recycled water re-use on open space is forecast:

. 76.3ML per year (year 7) increasing to 79.7ML per year (ongoing) for sports fields; and . 28.4ML per year (year 7) increasing to 34.8ML per year (ongoing) for parks.

Impact Assessment Impacts associated with the re-use of recycled water have been considered in the Recycled Water Strategy ( Appendix I ) and summarised below:

. Re-use for construction purposes presents risks to human exposure to pathogens (upon contact or ingestion). Measures to mitigate the risk of exposure include chlorination of recycled water at the WWTP, prominent warning signs indicating the water is not suitable for drinking or human exposure, ensuring water does not pond and appropriate staff training; . Re-use for landscape establishment presents a potential risk for nutrient transport and human exposure, although the risk of nutrient transport is low. Measures to mitigate the risk of exposure include chlorination of recycled water at the WWTP, prominent warning signs indicating the water is not suitable for drinking or human exposure, monitoring and verification of treated wastewater quality against target pathogen and nutrient levels (and licence requirements), staff training and pop-up sprinklers that have a low trajectory; . Re-use for within nurseries presents a potential risk for nutrient run-off and human exposure. Measures to mitigate the risk of exposure include chlorination of recycled water at the WWTP, addition of sodium hypochlorite to boost chlorine levels in the recycled water prior to irrigation, prominent warning signs indicating the water is not suitable for drinking or human exposure, monitoring and verification of treated wastewater quality against target pathogen and nutrient levels (and licence requirements), staff training restricted access to irrigation areas whilst irrigation is taking place; and

100

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Re-use for parks and sporting fields presents a potential risk for nutrient transport and human exposure, although the risk of nutrient transport is low. Measures to mitigate the risk of exposure include chlorination of recycled water at the WWTP, prominent warning signs indicating the water is not suitable for drinking or human exposure, monitoring and verification of treated wastewater quality against target pathogen and nutrient levels (and licence requirements), staff training and pop-up sprinklers that have a low trajectory.

The Recycled Water Management Plan ( Appendix I ) recommends that the mitigation measures identified above for each re-use (disposal) option be implemented; and that if implemented, the impacts associated with re-use of recycled water can be appropriately mitigated.

7.4 Natural Hazards Assessment The following sections include an assessment of impacts associated with natural hazards, including bushfire and flooding. 7.4.1 Bushfire Hazard Assessment and Management

Table 129: Bushfire Assessment

Site Context The proposed premise is identified as containing areas of medium, high and very high potential bushfire risk as per the State Planning Policy mapping ( Appendix DD ). The WWTP is subject to assessment and compliance with the outcomes of the SPP Bushfire prone area code in the Natural Hazards, Risk and Resilience of the SPP.

Proposed ID A Bushfire Management Plan has been prepared by Land and Environment Consultants for the project and is provided within Appendix S. In addition to a desktop assessment, a walk over of the site within 100m of the WWTP was undertaken to verify vegetation characteristics, slope and evidence of previous fires. Five (5) reference points and their features within the 100m buffer were recorded.

The reference points were used to determine the bushfire hazard using the PSBA Potential Bushfire Intensity Calculator (version November 2014). Results of the potential bushfire intensity calculations determined that medium potential bushfire intensity areas occur in bushland vegetation adjoining the north, south and east elevations of the WWTP. The project is therefore subject to compliance with outcomes of the SPP bushfire prone area code.

Results of the potential bushfire intensity calculations also determined that the freshwater storage lagoon, mangroves and saltmarsh to the west of the WWTP are a non-bushfire hazard class (i.e. this area will not support a bushfire or grassfire). Fire history data additionally indicated that no fires have occurred within 1 kilometre (km) of the site during the past 10 years.

It was additionally noted that:

. The WWTP will not materially increase the exposure of people to bushfire hazard given the adjacent population is very limited being of a rural residential nature (i.e.

101

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Rural zone of City Plan 2018 and within the Regional landscape and Rural Production Area of ShapingSEQ ); . The ongoing operation of the WWTP will not involve significant staffing levels as most processes can be run remotely from other WWTP’s; . Most activities at the WWTP will be confined to buildings and hardstand areas; . Access to the site will be from Longland Road via a new road connection in the same location as the existing driveway; and . Longland Road can accommodate emergency vehicles travelling from the north and the west.

Impact Assessment The Bushfire Management Plan identifies mitigation measures to comply the SPP bushfire prone area code which seeks to protect and reduce the risk of harm and destruction to life and property in the event of a bushfire.

The recommendations mitigate the risk of social, environmental and economic impacts, and are to be conditioned for compliance prior to conduction (design), operational phase and post decommission in accordance with the management plan.

Mitigation measures and recommendations of the assessment include:

Bushfire Protection zone –

. Establishment of a 10 kW/m (38.1-metre-wide) Bushfire Protection Zone (BPZ) around the north, south and east elevations of the WWTP compound. . The BPZ is to be surveyed and pegged and shown on site plans and maintained as a low fuel hazard area in perpetuity; . The BPZ is to remove tree species which are non-endemic, trees which are dead, diseased or dangerous and trees with a diameter <10cm at breast height. Shrub and grass vegetation will be slashed down to <10cm in height; and . The BPZ requires ongoing maintenance and slashing of shrub and grass vegetation to <10cm in height and treatment/removal of woody regrowth and weeds.

Landscape Species Control –

. Landscaping will utilise the plant species schedule that reduce the likelihood of ignition; . Landscaping is not overhang buildings or structures when they reach a mature state; . Only groundcover species will be planted adjacent fire-fighter water supplies, pathways, driveways; . Landscaping is to use non-flammable mulch; and . Regular maintenance of landscaped areas to remove plants that may become diseased, stressed or die and become more flammable as moisture content decreases.

Vehicular Access –

. Vehicular driveway will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Fire Hydrant and Vehicle Access Guidelines for Residential, Commercial and Industrial Lots 2015 (QFES 2015) (i.e. designed to provide efficient access for emergency

102

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

vehicles with regards to access to firefighting systems, vegetation clearance, surface load rating, passing areas, turnaround areas and turning radii).

Fire Fighting Water Supply –

. WWTP to provide a dedicated static water supply that is available solely for firefighting purposes and can be access by fire-fighting appliances; and . A water supply tank will be provided within the WWTP. If mains water is provided, a reticulated hydrant system will be provided which is designed and constructed in accordance with Fire Hydrant and Vehicle Access Guidelines for Residential, Commercial and Industrial Lots 2015 (QFES 2015).

Service installation –

. Services, i.e. water, electricity and gas, will be installed underground.

Emergency response planning –

. The operator of the proposed development will prepare, maintain and implement an emergency plan which meets requirements of the Queensland Work, Health and Safety Regulation 2011.

In accordance with the Queensland Work, Health and Safety Regulation 2011 , the operator of the wastewater treatment plant is obliged to prepare, maintain and implement an emergency plan which includes (amongst other things) emergency procedures, evacuation procedures and emergency service notification procedures.

Provided that the recommendations of the Bushfire Management Plan are appropriately implemented, bushfire hazard can be appropriately mitigated. The Preliminary Vegetation Management Plan ( Appendix N ), Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix P ) and Operational Environmental Management Plan ( Appendix X ) all incorporate the recommendations of the Bushfire Management Plan.

7.4.2 Flooding Hazard Assessment and Management

Table 20: Flood Hazard Assessment

Site Context According to Redland City Plan 2018, the site is within a flood prone area (localised drainage features and/or waterways). The entire wetland area is within the flood prone area and drainage features exist to the east of the flood prone area including drainage features at the northern part of the site parallel to Longland Road and at the south eastern corner of the WWTP.

This is verified by topographical mapping showing the eastern areas of the site are relatively steep and high whilst the central and western areas are relatively flat and low lying. Drainage features can be clearly seen within the topographical mapping ( Appendix E ).

Proposed ID The proposed WWTP is located above RL10m AHD to avoid the medium/high storm tide hazard areas and erosion prone area (refer to Section 7.10 ). The proposed WWTP is located outside of mapped flood prone areas (localised drainage features and/or waterways), although the entry road from Longland Road traverses a drainage feature/waterway.

103

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The design intent of the wetland is principally to maximise the area suitable for future mangrove colonisation within the constraints of the existing native vegetation and surface elevations – therefore, it is intended that the wetland area be regularly inundated.

Impact Assessment Water Technology addressed potential flood impacts in the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ). The WWTP has been designed to avoid impacts on existing waterways and drainage features (where possible), noting that impacts on the northern waterway cannot be avoided due to site access.

The results of the Water Technology assessment are included below:

WWTP and Freshwater Storage Lagoon Impacts could result from sustained and heavy rainfall increases both the natural flows into the freshwater storage lagoon and the risk of erosion over the relatively steep topography on which the WWTP is to be constructed. Mitigation measures to avoid impacts associated with flooding and erosion impacts are contained in the Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan (Appendix P ), including:

. Management Zone 1: Drainage Swale – A drainage feature designed to collect stormwater from the catchment and convey it into the wetlands; . Management Zone 2: Downstream Stormwater Outlet – An outlet is included to convey stormwater from the eastern catchment (WWTP) into the freshwater storage lagoon; . Management Zone 2 and 4: Weir / Overflow – A weir feature to manage recycled water levels in the freshwater storage lagoon; and . Management Zone 5 – Drainage feature/watercourse is included around the WWTP.

Wetlands There is a potential impact associated with mangrove die-offs following rainfall related flooding, which are almost always related to damage sustained from elevated flood currents and associated debris and/or the smothering of roots and leaves with sediment deposits. These die-offs are largely natural processes which occur following large and infrequent (extreme) events, such as the 2011 Brisbane River flood. Apart from extreme events, mangroves are largely unaffected by the temporary inundation resulting from rainfall or storm tide related flooding.

As the wetland does not constrict the existing natural waterways, the downstream flow of rainfall related flood waters from the catchment will not be hindered. The same applies for the upstream flow of storm tide related flood waters.

Proposed infrastructure within the wetlands, such as the site access footpath and sediment basin can be flooded without significant damage or inconvenience.

Climate Change and Sea Level Rise – Refer to Section 7.10 below.

104

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

7.5 Biodiversity Impacts Assessment

Table 21: Biodiversity Impacts Assessment

Site Context Contextually, the site is in southern Redland Bay and is located approximately 5.7km upstream of Moreton Bay Ramsar Wetland. Surrounding land uses comprise of a mix of rural and aquaculture industries. The development footprint is located on land which has been subject to broadscale clearing and predominately comprises open paddock or non-native vegetation.

Ecological values and on background land parcels are associated with regrowth and remnant bushland to the east which provides suitable habitat for terrestrial fauna species. Patches of Casuarina glauca were recorded along the banks of the Logan River and Serpentine Creek which can provide diverse habitat for a wide range of wetland, grassland and woodland fauna species. Mangroves and saltmarsh dominate tidally influenced areas in the west and along the banks of Logan River and Serpentine Creek, and these areas can provide habitat for aquatic species and suitable foraging habitat for migratory birds.

Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) regulated under the Environment and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act that occur at or near the site include:

. Coastal Swamp Oak ( Casuarina glauca ) forest of New South Wales and South East Queensland threatened ecological community (Endangered) o A 1.8ha patch of the ecological community is located adjacent to Serpentine Creek. Under the Approved Conservation Advice this patch is rated at as ‘Category C’ and requires referral under the EPBC Act if there is potential for a significant impact.

MNES with the potential to occur on or near the site, or are known to occur in the broader area include:

. Moreton Bay (Wetland of International Importance, Ramsar wetland) – the main Moreton Bay site is located 5.7km downstream and Carbrook Wetlands (Park 2) is located 2km (upstream) to the north. o The site is of national and international significance as one of the largest estuarine bays in Australia and provides important habitat for a number of protected shorebirds. While no direct impacts will occur to Ramsar wetlands, a referral under the EPBC Act is required if there is potential for a significant impact on the ecological character of the Ramsar wetland. . Phascolarctos cinereus (Koala) (Vulnerable) o Koalas are known to occur in the broader Redland Bay locality although no evidence of their presence was recorded on or near the site within the last 2 years. Remnant and regrowth vegetation within the balance land, to be retained by the development, may provide habitat for transient visitors. An assessment of the site under the Koala Habitat Assessment Tool identified that site does not contain ‘critical habitat to the survival to the species’ (score of 3/10). Consideration for providing safe movement opportunities for transient individuals should be made. . Shorebirds, Wetland Birds and Migratory Birds

105

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

o Moreton Bay provides habitat for internationally and nationally protect wetland birds and shorebirds. Calidris ferruginea (Curlew Sandpiper), Limosa lapponica baueri (Bar-tailed Godwit), Numenius madagascariensis (Eastern Curlew) are known to utilise foraging habitat downstream in Moreton Bay. No evidence of these species nor suitable foraging habitat was recorded on-site. o Rhipidura rufifrons (Rufous Fantail) was recorded as a fly-over species. Although no roosts were recorded on-site, suitable habitat is located within mangroves along the banks of the Logan River both downstream and upstream. o Mangroves and saltmarsh on-site provide suitable foraging habitat for a number of wetland bird species which are known to occur in the broader area.

The following Matters of State Environmental Significance occur at or near the site:

. Remnant vegetation along the banks of Serpentine Creek which is mapped as: o Category B least concern regional ecosystem (RE) 12.1.2/12.1.3 under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VMA); o Essential Habitat for threatened wildlife under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NCA) including Koala, Powerful Owl and Tusked Frog; o Wildlife Habitat for threatened wildlife under the NCA; and o High Ecological Significance (HES) wetlands on the Map of Referrable Wetlands. . Remnant vegetation within retained bushland to the east mapped as Category B endangered RE12.11.27. . Regrowth vegetation within retained bushland to the east mapped as a Koala Habitat Area (Core). . Waterways that provide fish passage (i.e. waterway for waterway barrier works, including tidal), protected under the Fisheries Act 1994 . . Marine plants including mangroves and saltmarsh at tidally influenced areas, protected under the Fisheries Act 1994 .

A Property Map of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) was certified across the land in 2020 which changed the regulated vegetation in the WWTP location to Category X as it comprised non- native vegetation. A map amendment request to correct the Koala Habitat Area (KHA) State overlay in this same area is underway.

Proposed ID Prior to the commencement of field surveys, a desktop analysis was conducted of Commonwealth, State and Local environmental databases and overlay mapping including the following: . Commonwealth Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) protected under Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) on and around the site using the Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST) and the Natural Conservation Values Atlas (NCVA); . Queensland Government Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NCA) listed threatened species on and around the site using the Wildlife Online (WildNet) database; . Public environmental databases including Atlas of Living Australia (ALA); . Queensland Government environmental overlay mapping and databases including:

106

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

o Regulated vegetation band essential habitat maps under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 o Flora survey trigger areas under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 o Fish habitat under the Fisheries Act 1994 o Watercourses under the Water Act 2000 o Weeds under the Biosecurity Act 2014 o Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES) under the State Planning Policy 2017 and Environmental Offsets Regulation 2014 (i.e. protected areas, wetlands, wildlife habitat, coastal management districts) o Priority Koala Areas and Koala Habitat Areas under the Planning Regulation 2017 . o Biodiversity Planning Assessment (South East Queensland)

Review of Federal and State guidelines and policies was also undertaken to inform this assessment.

Extensive terrestrial and aquatic field surveys were undertaken by Saunders Havill Group and frc environmental as per the methodology described in Sections 3.2 and 3.3 of the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ). The results of the field surveys as outlined in Section 5 of this report; and Sections 6 & 7 discuss the field survey findings as they relate to MNES and MSES impacts (and relevant legislation).

Impact Assessment Potential impacts and measures to avoid, minimise, mitigate or offset biodiversity impacts are discussed within Section 8 of the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ). Section 9 of this report outlines the management plans that have been prepared to avoid, mitigate, minimise or offset impacts associated with the infrastructure.

After avoiding and minimising the proposed WWTP (and ancillary works) footprint to the greatest extent practicable, the biodiversity impacts are summarised as follows:

Impact to MSES (mapped constraints) –

. 0.15ha of Wildlife Habitat (Koala Habitat (Core); Essential Habitat; Endangered and Vulnerable) for the mains infrastructure (located on an existing powerline path that will be marginally widened to accommodate this new and unavoidable linear infrastructure, then rehabilitated post-construction; 21 Non-juvenile Koala Habitat Tree (NJKHT) removed). . Up to 0.89ha of Wildlife Habitat (Koala Habitat (Core) - 0.79ha; Essential Habitat – 0.79ha; Endangered and Vulnerable – 0.00ha; Special Least Concern – 0.89ha) for the proposed WWTP bushfire buffer (non-native vegetation clearing only; all NJKHT retained). . 0.53ha least concern RE12.1.2 (HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) (ground-truthed as 1.44ha) for the mangrove wetland. . 0.03ha least concern RE12.1.3 (HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) (ground-truthed as 0.03ha) for the mangrove wetland.

Impact to MSES (ecological values) –

. 1.44ha salt couch dominated area for the wetland and access road.

107

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. 0.42ha of salt couch along drainage lines in weed dominated area for the mangrove wetland. . 20 Grey Mangrove for the mangrove wetland and ancillary infrastructure. . 21 NJKHT of the mains infrastructure to connect to Longland Road.

Several standard and project specific management measures will be adopted to avoid, minimise and mitigate impacts, including:

. Designing the project to minimise the construction and final development footprints: o Locating development (WWTP, wetland and ancillary infrastructure) within existing cleared or disturbed areas of the site to the greatest extent practicable; o Restricting impacts to Koala habitat to only those that are unavoidable to minimise clearing of Koala feed trees; o Retaining, rehabilitating and protecting the 1.8ha threatened ecological community (TEC) Casuarina glauca Coastal Swamp Oak from impacts of clearing and coastal process; o Minimising the removal of marine plants; o Minimising the volume of sediment and soils disturbed; o Avoiding direct impacts to the bank of the Logan River by locating in inlet and outlet within at disturbed areas along Serpentine Creek and a tidally influenced drain. . Translocating 1.44ha of marine plants (salt couch) within the site and creating a 9.85ha mangrove wetland to deliver a net gain in marine plants and create habitat for a variety of local and migratory fauna species. . Reducing the amount of recycled water entering the storage lagoon by re-use of recycled water in parks and gardens, construction uses, local nurseries and by other water users. . Designing the wetland to alter hydrodynamics at the site that reduce the risk of erosion and storm tide. . Allowing the mangroves to establish (Year 4) prior to the release of recycled water (with significant inflows only anticipated in Year 5+). . Including sympathetic lighting strategies, vegetation screening and sound attenuation to minimise potential impacts on localised fauna and migratory birds. . Treating recycled water to Class A quality under the Australian and Queensland Recycled Water Quality Guidelines and including contingency measures (wet- weather bypass, balance tank and storage lagoon) prior to release into the wetland. . Installing fauna exclusion fencing around the WWTP to deter fauna from entering dangerous areas and roads. . Installing inlet and outlet flood gates to maintain fish passage. . Implementing a raft of environmental management plans prepared in accordance with best-practice standards and guidelines, including: o Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan (Appendix N ) including provisions for a fauna spotter catcher and Koala Spotter holding DES and DAF permits to oversee the works. o Rehabilitation Plans - Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan (Appendix O), and WWTP Rehabilitation Plan (Appendix P ) prepared in accordance

108

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

with the South East Queensland Ecological Restoration Frameworks and Ecological Mangrove Protocol. o Bushfire Management Plan (Appendix S ). o Biting Insect Management Plan (Appendix T ). o Construction Environment Management Plan (Appendix W ). o Operational Environment Management Plan (Appendix X ). o Koala Management Plan (Appendix II ).

Net Ecological Benefit Through management and rehabilitation measures outlined above (including the construction of the proposed wetlands) there is a net ecological benefit through the creation of: . A 9.85ha mangrove forest and saltmarsh wetland comprised of: o 8.69ha of mangrove (least concern RE12.1.3; HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) o 1.08ha of saltmarsh (least concern RE12.1.2; HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) o Casuarina glauca (swamp she-oak) planting (1,835m²) and natural regeneration o Green couch grasslands adjoining access tracks . 2.26ha of Koala habitat (RE12.3.5/12.3.6) . 0.58ha of Koala habitat (RE12.11.27/12.11.23/12.11.26) . Planting of 100 juvenile Koala habitat trees along the outer margins of the linear infrastructure path between the WWTP and Longland Road.

Summary The project has been designed to avoid impacts to MNES and MSES to the greatest practicable extent. Assessments against the Commonwealth’s Significant Impact Guidelines and State Planning Policy were completed and found that with the implementation of mitigation and management measures, potential impacts to flora and fauna habitats are considered to be low, and the project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on MNES or MSES. Overall, the project is anticipated to deliver ecosystem benefits primarily through the creation of the 9.85ha mangrove wetland on rural land. This wetland will increase the occurrence of marine plants on-site and habitat for potentially threatened and migratory species. Furthermore, rehabilitation of the storage lagoon and surrounds will reduce the incidence of weed species on-site and increase native vegetation cover. Together these ecosystem improvements will provide habitat and resources for a variety of species whilst aiding the management of storm tide inundation and erosion at the site.

7.6 Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment

Table 22: Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment

Site Context The proposed premise has direct access to Longland Road which is designated as an Arterial Road under the RCC planning scheme and is a State-controlled road under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR). The state-controlled road transitions from Serpentine Creek Road (north) into Longland Road and becomes Beenleigh

109

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Redland Bay Road where it connects the southern suburbs of the Redlands to Logan and the Pacific Motorway, located to the west.

Along the site frontage, the subject road currently has a posted speed limited of 80km/hr and is a constrained road geometry compromising numerous vertical and horizontal curves. The road formation is two-lane, bi-directional, has a rural cross section and is not median separated. The site is surrounded by rural land uses which typically have direct access to the state-controlled road. Review of State mapping indicates that Serpentine Creek Road does not have any access restrictions in place for this section of the State-controlled road network.

A review of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) approved routes has been undertaken and confirmed that Longland Road and Serpentine Creek Road are not approved heavy vehicle routes which are permitted to accommodate the passage of B- double vehicles or larger. However, passage of vehicles up to and including 19m Articulated Vehicles would be typical and is unrestricted within a rural area.

Planned Upgrades RCC Local Government Infrastructure Plan (LGIP) as well as DTMR’s latest Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program (QTRIP) have no road upgrades planned for Longland Road (referred as Beenleigh-Redland Bay Road in this context) in proximity to the site.

Existing Speed Restrictions DTMR have indicated several minor speed limit reductions on sections of the State Controlled Road. These changes have been implemented because of the recent urbanisation and population increases and reflect a speed environment more suitable for a semi-urban context. The nearest urban residential development (Shoreline) is located within 1.5km of the proposed ID, these speed limit reductions are not anticipated to be of relevance to the proposed WWTP.

Crash History A history of traffic crashes recorded in proximity to the site between 2009 and 2019 was sourced from the Queensland Government’s Data portal. The historical crash data does not indicate that there are any road network deficiencies immediately relevant to the proposed premise which have resulted in crashes over the past 10 years. The data suggests that crashes along this section of State-controlled road are more common at the intersections with lower order roads or accesses to rural residential properties.

Proposed ID A Traffic and Transport Assessment has been prepared by SLR Consulting Pty Ltd for the proposed project and is provided within Appendix U. The report investigates the proposed design arrangements for the WWTP (i.e. vehicular access, car parking, servicing) as well as the potential impacts on the external road network based on the proposed staff capacity and forecast operating capacity.

The WWTP is anticipated to employ between 6-8 full time equivalent (FTE) staff during its operation, serviced by the ancillary administration building and vehicle loading areas.

110

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Access and Internal Circulation Site access is to be gained from Longland Road via a new driveway road that is offset approximately 40m south from the existing residential driveway, where minimum site distances can be achieved. It is noted that vegetation clearing, within the site and/or road reserve may be required to achieve these safe sight lines from the new access location. The existing internal access road is to be utilised as shown in Figure 46. The internal road will connect with the new site access and other internal areas requiring vehicular access through-out the site to service both light vehicles (i.e. employee vehicles) and heavy vehicles (i.e. wastewater trucks).

Figure 46: Extract of Figure 4 Proposed Development (Source: Traffic Assessment, SLR, dated May 2020, p11)

Car Parking The car parking provision proposed for the WWTP comprises of seven (7) light vehicle car spaces for the use of employees or visitors, located adjacent to the administration building. There also to be one (1) service bay provided for the occasional waste truck, located on the sludge driveway. Given the proposed use of the site and the low number of employees expected, the provision of 7 spaces is considered to be sufficient.

Traffic Generation The background traffic demands forecasted for the 2031 design horizon used the Transport Modelling and Traffic Forecasts Report used for the Shoreline development application at the full approved yield of the residential development (10,000 EP).

The potential traffic demand to be generated by the proposed ID, were additionally informed by traffic surveys undertaken at comparable facility, being the Cleveland Wastewater Treatment Plant located on Weippin Street, Cleveland. In this regard, it is noted that this existing facility has a treatment capacity of in the order of 41,000EP, which is significantly higher than that of the proposed Southern Redland Bay WWTP (13,500 EP). Nevertheless, the surveyed traffic volumes at the Cleveland WWTP have been adopted.

111

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Therefore, figures are considered to represent a highly conservative assessment scenario for the purposes of the intersection design.

The results of the surveys conservative rounded up traffic volumes to 10vph and 15vph for AM and PM peak period respectively, with the same in and out split as surveyed at the Cleveland facility. The traffic distribution adopted the following arrivals and departures from the proposed all-movements access configuration –

. 50% entering from the east / 50% entering from the west . 50% exiting to the east / 50% existing to the west

Network Assessment A sight distance assessment was undertaken in accordance with Part 4A: Unsignalised and Signalised Intersection of the Austroads Guide to Road Design . Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD ) is the minimum sight distance which should be provided on the major road at any intersection.

Figure 47 below details the minimum available and required sight distance at the proposed WWTP site access and confirms that the location can meet and exceed minimum SISD requirements based on review of the existing road topography.

Figure 47: Extract of Table 4 Summary of Sight Distance Assessment – LonglandRoad / Site Access Road (Source: Traffic Assessment, SLR, dated May 2020, p16)

Safety Assessment A turn lane warrants assessment has been undertaken to establish the desirable form of the site access in accordance with Part 4A: Austroads Guide to Road Design. It is noted that warrants are intended to determine appropriate turn treatments at the intersection of public roads and are not strictly intended to be used for private access locations. The application of this method to a private access location is conservative and achieves the same standard of safety as that of a public road intersection.

The turn warrant standards for a brownfield site was adopted at a design speed between 70km/h and 100km/h at the 2031 design horizon year for background plus development traffic. Results of the turn lane warrants assessment determined that a BAL (basic left turn) and BAR (basic right turn) was required for the proposed WWTP. However, a more conservative turn treatment type is to be adopted with an AUL(S) (auxiliary left turn – short) and CHR(S) (channelised right turn) to be constructed based on the assessment of other safety issues such as road environment, speed and scale of traffic volumes.

Figure 48 shows the abovementioned turn treatment types and Figure 49 shown the proposed concept design sketch for the proposed WWTP intersection prepared by KN Group. The proposed access configurating includes a 55m deceleration lanes (including the taper) plus 20m storage for the largest potential design vehicle (19m AV) for the protected

112

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

right-turn pocket. This is consistent with the minimum lengths outlined within Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 4A.

Figure 48: Extract of Figure 8 Turn Treatment Types (Source: Traffic Assessment, SLR, dated May 2020, p16)

Figure 49: Extract of the Intersection Concept Design Sketch (Source: Roadworks Sign and linemarking plan, dwg19-189-32, Rev A, KN Group, dated May 2020, Sheet 32 )

Capacity Assessment The proposed access intersection was analysed for the 2031 design horizon using SIDRA Intersection 8.0 (SIDRA ). The assessment determined that the proposed layout of the Serpentine Creek Road / Site Access intersection is a priority-controlled intersection as shown in Figure 49 (above) and Figure 50 .

113

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 50: Extract of Figure 11 Serpentine Creek Road / Site Access – Intersection Form (Source: Traffic Assessment, SLR, dated May 2020, p21) Impact Assessment The proposal will have an environmental impact during construction and operation by way of increased traffic generation and impacts on the safety and efficiency of the State- controlled road network. Traffic generation impacts are to be mitigated through safe intersection and access design to reduce the increased risk of incidents on Longland Road at the proposed site access. An intersection design that complies with the appropriate DTMR standards and minimum safe sight distance is provided in the Engineering Plans ( Appendix D).

Other mitigation measures and recommendations of the technical assessment include:

. Adoption of a conservative turn warrant assessment including a dedicated short auxiliary left turn lane (AUL(S)) and a short channelised right turn lane (CHR(S), ensuring that impact on the safety and efficiency of the State-controlled network is not compromised as a result of the proposed WWTP; . Sealed access tracks throughout the site to facilitate internal vehicle movements from the primary site access road; . On-site car parking provided for seven (7) vehicles and a single heavy vehicle to cater for an estimated maximum workforce of 6-8 full time equivalent (FTE) staff during the projects operational phase; and . Preparation of a separate Traffic Management Plan (TMP) prior to the commencement of any site works detailing the signage and traffic control strategy during to the construction of the site access intersection.

Please refer to the Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ), Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment ( Appendix U ) and Construction Environmental Management Plan ( Appendix W).

114

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

7.7 Amenity Impacts The following sections consider a range of potential amenity impacts arising from the proposed development and measures that have been made to avoid, minimise or mitigate any impacts. 7.7.1 Built Form and Visual Amenity Impacts

Table 23: Visual Impact Assessment

Site Context The proposed WWTP will require the construction of structures (buildings and plant equipment/machinery) and ancillary infrastructure as identified in the WWTP Concept Design Site Layout Plan, prepared by Stantec ( Appendix G). As the facility will be accommodated on the south-western side of the hill on Lot 3 on RP223470, the sloping site requires considerable earthworks and battering to create the necessary building pad for the facility and to provide access. The building pad is therefore elevated from the natural ground level, which also assists in ensuring the facility can withstand significant flood events. Earthworks for the proposed freshwater storage lagoon (eastern side) will also remove existing vegetation and notwithstanding the vegetation does not contain significant ecological value, it provides some existing amenity value.

Proposed ID Visual impact mapping of the proposed WWTP has been prepared by Saunders Havill Group and is provided in Appendix V. The visual impact assessment involved the creation of a digital elevation model of the WWTP (in Globalmapper) using lidar point cloud (existing levels), engineering base levels (post construction levels and batters), and top of building RL levels on the Concept Design Site Layout Plan.

The model was then used to generate views of the proposed WWTP from Longland Road and from eight (8) nearby sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors were partially identified and selected from Figure 5.2 - 3D Operational Noise Model of the Noise Impact Assessment prepared by ATP (Appendix G ), representing the eight (8) residential dwellings (or sensitive receptors) with a potential view of the proposed WWTP. These receptors range in distance from approximately 200m to 920m from the proposed WWTP (buildings) as shown in Figure 51 below.

115

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 51: Location of the selected Sensitive Receptors (Source: Figure 5.3 Operational noise model – SoundPLAN excerpt (Source: Noise Impact Assessment, prepared by ATP, dated May 2020, p5)

Please note that due to topography, 91-101 Rocky Passage Road was not considered in the assessment as there is a hill between this dwelling and the WWTP. Instead, 91-141 Rocky Passage Road was considered.

The digital model and looked at the view from the ‘best view line potential’ that were identified in the Stantec reporting. This is either the highest point and or best view line potential from each property next to the dwelling looking at WWTP centre from a 1.6m height above natural ground level, being a nominal eye level height of an adult standing. The WWTP is clearly identified on the generated views in red (for clarity) and as noted above is based on removal of vegetation as per the Preliminary Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan ( Appendix N ). The view lines do not consider any screening vegetation, so is a worst- case scenario.

Impact Assessment 213 Fischer Road, Carbrook – Located to the south-west, this property views the proposed WWTP in a north-easterly direction across Serpentine Creek, the proposed wetlands and the southern edge of the storage lagoon. Figure 52 below indicates that there may be an extremely obscured view of the WWTP buildings behind existing vegetation in the worst case. However, is noted that the model does not consider the additional rehabilitation works which would further screen the view to the proposed buildings. Therefore, it can be reasonably assumed that visibility will

116

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

decrease over time as the rehabilitation planting matures, and the WWTP will likely not be visible at all once the rehabilitation planting is established.

Figure 52: View to WWTP from 213 Fischer Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

Renders of the proposed WWTP and wetlands were prepared by Saunders Havill Group in Lumion (3D rendering software) based on information supplied within the Engineering Design ( Appendix D ), Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix O ) and Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix P ). Following completion of the 3D model, views were generated from as close to the sensitive receptor as possible. Figure 53 below shows the potential view from 213 Fisher Road following completion of the project and upon establishment of the rehabilitation planting.

Figure 53: Conceptual (3D modelled) view to WWTP from 213 Fischer Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

190 Fischer Road, Carbrook – Located to the west, comments and observation are as per 213 Fischer Road.

117

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 54: View to WWTP from 190 Fischer Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

Figure 55 below shows the potential view from 213 Fisher Road following completion of the project and upon establishment of the rehabilitation planting.

Figure 55: Conceptual (3D modelled) view to WWTP from 190 Fischer Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

1117 - 1157 Beenleigh Redland Bay Road, Carbrook – Located to the west, this property views the proposed WWTP in an easterly direction across Serpentine Creek and the northern end of the proposed wetlands and storage lagoon. Figure 56 below indicates that the WWTP is not visible from this location.

118

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 56: View to WWTP from 1117 - 1157 Beenleigh Redland Bay Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

195 Longland Road, Redland Bay – Located to the north, this property views the proposed WWTP in a southern direction across Longland Road. Figure 57 indicates that the WWTP is not visible from this location.

Figure 57: View to WWTP from 195 Longland Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

39 - 45 Rocky Passage Road, Redland Bay – Located to the north-east, this property views the proposed WWTP in a south-westerly direction. Figure 58 below indicates that the WWTP is not visible from this location.

119

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 58: View to WWTP from 39 - 45 Rocky Passage Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

48 - 78 Rocky Passage Road, Redland Bay – Located to the north-east, this property views the proposed WWTP in a south-westerly direction. Figure 59 below indicates that the WWTP is not visible from this location.

Figure 59: View to WWTP from 48 & 78 Rocky Passage Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

91 -141 Rocky Passage Road, Redland Bay – Located to the south- east, this property views the proposed WWTP in a north-westerly direction, however, is situated on the southern slope of ridge on the lot. Figure 60 indicates that the WWTP is not visible from this location.

120

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 60: View to WWTP from 91 & 101 Rocky Passage Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

115 Rocky Passage Road, Redland Bay – Located to the south-east, this property views the proposed WWTP in a north-westerly direction from the top of the ridge on the lot. Figure 61 below indicates that the very top of the OCF stack WWTP is partially visible from this location but is barely perceptible.

Figure 61: View to WWTP from 145 Rocky Passage Road (source: Saunders Havill Group)

Longland Road – Eastern Approach The proposed WWTP (and earthworks) are visible from Longland Road (western approach to Redland Bay) as shown in Figures 62 and 63 below. The WWTP is not visible from the eastern approach (westbound on Longland Road).

The most visible part of the development is the batters associated with establishing the WWTP pad levels and earthworks on the eastern side of the freshwater storage lagoon.

121

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 62: View to WWTP from Longland Road (western approach to Redland Bay)

Figure 63: View to WWTP from Longland Road (western approach to Redland Bay)

Once screening vegetation as per the Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan has been established, the visual impact of the WWTP and ancillary infrastructure is sufficiently screened as per the below Lumion rendered images (Figures 64 and 65 below).

122

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 64: Rendered image (Lumion) of ultimate view from Longland Road with screening vegetation and established wetland

Figure 65: Rendered image (Lumion) of ultimate view from Longland Road with screening vegetation and established wetland

Summary The generated model views demonstrate that there are very marginal visual impacts at 2 of the 8 analysed sensitive receptors (213 & 190 Fisher Road). There are no visual impacts at the other 6 sensitive receptors. There are visual impacts on the western approach along Longland Road.

Visual impacts for 190 & 213 Fisher Road can be appropriately mitigated (or eliminated) through revegetation of the site in accordance with the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix O ) and Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix P ).

Conceptual renders of the project were generated in Lumion (architectural visualisation software) based on the latest engineering and rehabilitation plans. The renders confirm that

123

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

visual impacts can be appropriately mitigated or eliminated by revegetation, including from Longland Road.

7.7.2 Biting Insects Assessment

Table24: Biting Insects Assessment

Site Context Within the Redlands, a variety of species of mosquito and biting midge occur in association with marine, brackish and fresh waters.

The existing premise currently supports extensive estuarine wetlands including saltmarsh / samphire with mangroves along the banks of the Logan River, Serpentine Creek and minor drainage channels. Additionally, onsite is a long, narrow brackish water dam and another smaller brackish water dam located on the eastern extent of the wetlands. As such, the extensive saltmarsh with numerous isolated pools provide a suitable breeding habitat for brackish and marine species.

Within the greater site context, there are several major salt marsh breeding sites within relatively close proximity to the site. In relation the species of mosquito and biting midge occurring within the region, it is noted that:

. adult mosquito abundance varies significantly between years; . the Redlands provides over 800 ha of salt marsh mosquito breeding habitat; . At least five species of biting midge are considered common within the region and are likely to occur in proximity to the site; . mosquitos may breed within nearby estuarine wetlands and can be carried to the site by prevailing winds; . No species of biting midge is currently considered a vector of human disease in Australia; and . two arboviral infections are commonly contracted within the Redlands: Barmah Forest virus and Ross River virus.

Redland City Council’s Pest Management Unit monitors the abundance of both larvae and adult mosquitoes throughout the city. Council’s Mosquito Management Policy POL - 2710 commits to the delivery of year-round mosquito management services to support strong, healthy communities, whilst its Mosquito Management Operational Plan 2017 – 2022 seeks to balance the cost of mosquito management against public health benefits and potential environmental harm. Redland City Council does not control biting midge.

As the proposed premise is located on the southern fridge of the Redland Bay LGA, the site likely benefits substantially from the ‘Contiguous Local Authorities Group’ made up of number LGA’s (of which both Redland City Council and Gold Coast City Council are members) current mosquito control program.

Proposed ID A Biting Insect Management Plan has been prepared by frc environmental for the proposed WWTP and wetlands and is provided within Appendix T. The impact of mosquitoes and biting midge on staff and visitors is nuisance and presents a potential risk of arbovirus infection. Bites can irritate the skin and in abundance can significantly reduce the amenity of outdoor areas.

124

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The proposed development will alter the landscape of the site and consequently the presence and relative proximities of existing on-site breeding and roosting habitat. The following potential impacts of development are identified:

. ‘hard’ infrastructure will have essentially no impact on breeding habitat; . ‘open’ water areas may provide breeding habitat; . stormwater drains and rainwater collected in man-made containers may provide breeding sites; . during construction, residual pools (vehicle ruts, etc.) may provide breeding habitat; and . modification and extension of existing estuarine wetlands may impact the extent of mosquito breeding habitat.

The proposed WWTP ‘hard’ infrastructure is to be accommodated within a cleared footprint surrounded by woodland. Whilst the woodland provides roosting habitat, it also serves as a buffer, ‘capturing’ mosquitoes and midges as they are carried by prevailing winds from breeding sites. Notwithstanding, the entire site is likely to be subject to a noticeable presence of mosquitoes over the warmer months of the year.

Impact Assessment There should not be any significant impacts arising from biting insects, provided that the activity is managed in accordance with the Biting Insect Management Plan (Appendix T ). The management plan identifies mitigation measures to protect workers, visitors and persons within the Southern Redland Bay LGA and neighbouring Logan LGA from the potential creation of new or additional breeding habitat.

The recommendations seek to avoid and mitigate potential social and environmental impacts that would be experienced to public health from insect-borne arboviruses and nuisance caused by biting insects.

Compliance with the management plan is to be met prior to construction (to be incorporated in the planning and design of the proposed WWTP and Wetlands), during construction and in the operational phase in order to comply with relevant legislative and regulatory requirements for and of biting insect management in Queensland.

It is important to note that whilst Lendlease are the developers of the site, ultimately Council will operate the wastewater treatment plant, facilitating ready integration of site-based biting insect management with Council’s broader biting insect management strategies.

Mitigation measures and recommendations of the technical assessment include –

Buffers –

. ‘Developed areas’ clear of vegetation include the WWTP, ‘hard’ infrastructure and the 38.1m wide BPZ located on the north, south and east elevations of the WWTP compound in accordance with the Bushfire Management Plan. This will result in the retention of dense vegetation between the WWTP and the wetlands to the west which will act as barrier and buffer that is likely to significantly mitigate the incidence of biting insects within the wastewater treatment plant.

Engineering and Landscape Design –

125

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. WWTP Poorly draining pools within the existing wetland will be filled and drainage of the existing wetland will be enhanced (whilst preserving the essential ecosystem functioning of the wetlands), as part of the site works. Constructed wetlands will be free-draining. . Stormwater infrastructure design to including sedimentation basins, bio-retention and detention basins, will be designed to be free draining in accordance with the guidelines provided by Water by Design (2010). Where practical, drains will discharge into a flowing waterway. . Vehicle access will be provided to potential on-site breeding sites (e.g. stormwater infrastructure). . to ensure that landscape planting will minimise the use of groundcovers, shrubs and small trees that may serve as roosting areas. Through careful selection of planting palettes, the use of organic mulch combined with the need for heavy watering will also be minimised to reduce breeding of biting midge.

Building Design –

. Careful attention to elements of both conceptual and detailed design can significantly lessen the potential for mosquitoes (and biting midges) to enter buildings. . Outdoor work areas are encouraged to be equipped with insect screens with a mesh aperture of not more than 1mm to minimise mosquito entry to the area. . Insect screens specifically designed to prevent the entry of smaller insects such as biting midge are recommended to be incorporated to minimise biting midge entry to the building. . Locate the majority of windows on the windward side of the building to pressurise the building and reduce opportunities for biting insects to enter the preferred leeward side of the building. . Ceiling fans and other air circulation devices are encouraged to increase airflow indoors and outdoors to minimise the ability for mosquitoes to travel inside the building. . Outdoor lighting is encouraged to be directed towards the ground to minimise the attraction of biting insects. Mosquitoes will travel significant distance towards lit up areas.

On-site Works

. Access roads will be fitted with culverts to prevent pooling of water. . Excavation, vehicle ruts, and temporary sediment control basins will be monitored. Prompt corrective action (filling ruts and draining or treating sediment control basins, etc) will be undertaken as required. Application of larvicides will be undertaken only by a licenced pest controller.

Design and Use of Wetlands and Waterways –

. Development of the site will partially retain existing wetlands, whilst also augmenting them. Wetlands will be designed / modified such that poorly draining pools within the existing wetland will be filled and drainage of the existing wetland will be enhanced (whilst preserving the essential ecosystem functioning of the wetlands). Constructed wetlands will be free-draining.

126

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Using Native Fish as Control Agents –

. Following an assessment of the existing fish fauna of the freshwater wetland, if appropriate, stocking with endemic, larvivorous fishes will be undertaken in accordance with QDPI&F guidelines.

7.7.3 Noise Impact Assessment Table 25 below provides a summary of the noise impact assessment and recommendations/measures to eliminate and/or mitigate noise impacts from the proposed development.

Table 25: Noise Impact Assessment

Site Context The proposal has the potential to cause odour impacts on nearby ‘sensitive receptors’ (dwellings). The WWTP and wetlands is to meet the requirements of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2019 (EP Noise) which identifies environmental values for the acoustic environment and sets acoustic quality objectives for sensitive receptors. Acoustic quality objectives under the EP Noise policy set out the standards for noise criteria that are intended to protect the acoustic amenity of the environment. ‘Sensitive receptor’ types are defined under Schedule 1 of the EP Noise policy and in this instance includes numerous rural residential dwellings, however, does not include the Logan River.

The proposed WWTP will additionally operate under an Environmentally Relevant Activity (ERA) licence for an ERA 63 ( operating Sewage treatment works, other than no-release works, with a total daily peak design capacity of more than 10,000 but more than 50,000EP ) to be issued by DES. Accordingly, the ERA will impose conditions relating to noise in accordance with DES Guideline: Environmental Protection Act 1994, Application requirements for activities with noise impacts , dated 11 June 2018.

The proposed MID is not assessable against RCC’s City Plan 2018 and applicable noise provisions under the planning scheme.

Proposed ID A Noise Impact Assessment has been prepared by ATP Engineers for the proposed WWTP and wetlands and is provided within the Concept Design Report (Appendix G). The assessment evaluates the impact of noise on sensitive receptors from existing background noise and the proposed WWTP in accordance with the relevant Queensland legislation for regulating noise.

To obtain information about the existing background noise levels (during day, evening and night) noise monitoring was undertaken at two (2) locations over a seven-day period, undertaken from 23 to 30 November 2019, at nearby sites. Figure 66 identifies the monitoring locations. The results of the background noise monitoring indicated that the existing noise amenity in the surrounding area is relatively quiet, which is typical of rural areas.

127

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 66: Extract of Figure 2.1 Background noise monitoring locations (Source: Noise Impact Assessment, prepared by ATP, dated May 2020, p5)

Potential noise emissions from the WWTP were determined by assigning representative sound levels to each plant area and to all site operations from the WWTP Site Layout – Stage 2, Concept Plan prepared by Stantec and Concept Design Loads Lists (refer to Appendix B of the Noise impact assessment). Under the concept design loads list, some of the plant areas at the proposed WWTP will operate 24 hours a day.

A 3D model of the development and surroundings was created using SoundPLAN noise propagation software considering the location and of the dominant noise sources at the WWTP. The calculations were carried out assuming a worst-case scenario with no noise mitigation measures, with all noise sources located outdoor and zero screening by buildings. Assumptions on operational noise were also made based on the information currently available at concept design stage. Figure 67 identifies the SoundPLAN model extent area assessing the impact to sensitive receptors located within a 2km radius from the WWTP.

128

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 67: Extract of Figure 5.3 Operational noise model – SoundPLAN excerpt (Source: Noise Impact Assessment, prepared by ATP, dated May 2020, p5)

The results of the noise assessment indicate that at night time, without mitigation measures, noise from the WWTP could result in exceedance of the acoustic quality objectives of the EP Noise Policy and background creep criteria at the nearest noise sensitive places. Potential noise impacts are associated with the operation of noisy plant such as blowers and pumps, which will operate continuously day and night.

Impact Potential impacts from noise emissions generated by the operation of the WWTP (and Assessment construction noise) can be appropriately mitigated, provided that noise mitigation recommendations within the Noise Impact Assessment are adopted. The impact assessment identifies several mitigation measures to ensure noise levels are reduced to an acceptable level and protect nearby sensitive receptors from environmental nuisance.

The recommendations seek to avoid or minimise impacts that could otherwise be experienced if the WWTP had no acoustic treatments. Mitigation measures are to be conditioned for compliance prior to construction (to be incorporated in the concept design) and whilst operational in order to comply with ERA and EP Noise policy requirements.

Noise mitigation measures and recommendations of the technical assessment include -

. Locate plant inside acoustically designed buildings or acoustic enclosures. Plant attenuation includes – o Blower fans (aeration and membrane blowers) and generator, requires a minimum 20 dB noise reduction and will typically require silencers; o External sound power level of each plant item must not exceed 80 dB(A) ref 102 W (assuming point source emanating noise outdoors); o The foul air fans and largest pumps (membrane filtrate pumps, tertiary treatment filtrate pumps and recycled water;

129

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

o Mobile plant to be fitted with broadband reversing beeper. This should be implemented for plant operating during night-time hours where reasonable and practicable; and o Use mufflers and engine covers/screens where appropriate for the generator and mobile plant. . Buildings and enclosures must be acoustically designed; . Construction components (external walls, roof/ceiling and doors) of the building or enclosure must achieve an appropriate weighted sound reduction index (Rw). The inside of the buildings and enclosures should be fitted with a sound absorbing lining; . Install acoustic doors with full perimeter acoustic seals where required; . Install silencers to fans; . Install acoustic louvres to any openings where required; and . Consider the layout and orientation of individual items of plant to ensure that, where practicable, intake and exhaust vents from fans, blowers and other items of powered mechanical plant are orientated away from noise sensitive sites.

For further analysis and assessment of impacts, please refer to the Noise Impact Assessment as part of the Concept Design Report ( Appendix G ).

7.7.4 Odour Assessment

Table26: Odour Impact Assessment

Site Context The proposal has the potential to cause odour impacts on nearby ‘sensitive receptors’ (dwellings). The WWTP and wetlands is to meet the requirements of the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (general provisions) and Environmental Protection Air Policy 2008 which identifies environmental values, sets out air quality objectives and an air quality management hierarchy. There is also an Odour Impact Assessment from Developments Guideline (DES) which has specific impact assessment criterion measured in odour units (ou).

The proposed WWTP will additionally operate under an Environmentally Relevant Activity (ERA) permit (licence) for an ERA 63 ( operating Sewage treatment works, other than no-release works, with a total daily peak design capacity of more than 10,000 but more than 50,000EP ) to be issued by DES. Accordingly, it is anticipated the ERA will impose conditions relating to air quality in accordance with the Environmental Protection Act 1994 and DES Odour Guideline referenced above.

The proposed ID to the Minister is not assessable against RCC’s City Plan 2018 and any applicable noise provisions under the planning scheme.

Proposed ID Stantec prepared an Odour Impact Assessment, which is contained in the Concept Design Report (Appendix G ). The principal odour emissions sources for the WWTP included in the odour impact assessment were:

. Odour Control Facility (OCF) stack (point emission source); . Inlet Works Area (area emission source); . Screening and Grit Bins (area emission source); . Sludge Handling Building (volume emission source); . Bioreactor (area emission sources); . Sludge Feed Averaging Tank (area emission source); and . Inlet Sewage Manhole (area emission source).

130

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The assessment considers the odour impact of the WWTP at its final stage (Stage 2) based on available Concept Design information, noting that detailed design of the WWTP will be undertaken in future by a contractor (design and construct). Figure 68 below shows the location of potential emissions sources at the WWTP.

Figure 68: Extract of Figure 2.1 Background noise monitoring locations (Source: Noise Impact Assessment, prepared by ATP, dated May 2020, p5)

Impact The odour impact of the WWTP to its surrounding is assessed on a quantitative basis using Assessment CALPUFF atmospheric dispersion model (using the latest version of this model). The potential odour nuisance effects are influenced by a range of factors, including frequency, intensity, duration, offensiveness and location/context. Dispersion modelling can assess the frequency, intensity and duration of an odour at a receptor but cannot assess offensiveness. In this context, however, it is uncontroversial that odours from a WWTP would be considered offensive.

The sensitivity of the receiving environment was assessed and a total of 24 discrete sensitive receptors were identified in the dispersion model, all of which were residential dwellings. Sensitive receptors are located from 200m to 1km away from the WWTP.

The predicted odour concentrations were compared against the odour impact assessment criteria (DES Odour Guideline) based on a conservative set of assumptions. The DES Odour Guideline adopts an assessment criterion range of 5-10 ou as the level at which an odour is perceived to be a nuisance. A level of 5 ou was adopted as part of the assessment as being the ‘no-nuisance’ criteria. For context, 1 ou is taken to be the lowest odour strength that 50% of the average population can detect in the most stringent of laboratory conditions. 2 ou up to 10 ou is the level at which an odour may be recognisable (although differs amongst individuals).

The assessment considered scenarios around whether the Odour Control Facility (OCF) stack, which is the largest odour emission source at the proposed WWTP, is wake-affected (Scenario 1) or wake-free (Scenario 2). Whether the OCF stack is wake-affected or wake-free has a bearing on the recommendations for odour control.

131

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The odour assessment found that if appropriate odour control measures are in place, the 5 ou criterion is not present in either scenario (wake-affected or wake-free) outside of the WWTP compound, meaning that the odour concentration contour generated by the proposed WWTP is predicted to be below the annoyance threshold across the site and surrounding areas. There is no instance where the 5 ou assessment criterion is exceeded at any sensitive receptor.

The assessment also found that the 2 ou contour is mainly contained within the WWTP boundary or immediate surrounds. Only one sensitive receptor is within the 1 ou contour. At 23 of the 24 sensitive receptors, modelled odour levels were less than 1 ou (not detectable) with the odour control treatments proposed.

Stantec’s recommended odour mitigation measures include:

. Covering, extracting and treating the following areas: o Inlet Sewer Manhole (rising main discharge point); o Inlet Work Structure; o Screenings and Grit Bins; o Bioreactor Anaerobic Zone (4 No. for 4 Bioreactors in Stage 2); and o Feed Averaging Tank. . If the OCF stack is wake-affected, a bio-trickling filter treatment is required (2,000 ou discharge); and . If the OCF stack is wake-free, an additional carbon treatment is required following the biotrickling filter (500 ou discharge).

For further details of the odour impact assessments (including methodology) please refer to the Concept Design Report ( Appendix G ). With the mitigation measures identified above, odour impacts can be appropriately mitigated.

7.8 Cultural Heritage Assessment

Table 27: Cultural Heritage Assessment

Site Context The proposed premise for the ID is identified within the native claim area described under the native title claimant application (QUD331/20017; QC2017/007) by the Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People.

The Cultural Heritage Management Plan contained in Appendix Q is an agreement between Lendlease Communities (Shoreline) Pty Ltd (the Company ) and the Native Title Claim Group (the Aboriginal Party ) over the ‘Agreement Area’ that encompasses land within the Shoreline development and the proposed WWT and wetlands (designation area). This agreement is an approved management plan under Part 7 of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 (ACHA) and is current as of 18 th February 2020.

The roles and responsibility of the Company is to take all reasonable and practical measures to avoid harm to Aboriginal Heritage Values as a result of the project where reasonable and practice to allow Aboriginal Heritage Values to remain and be managed in situ.

Proposed ID The proposed MID constitutes a ‘High Impact Activity’ as defined under Section 1.1 Definitions of the management plan on land subject to the native title claim by the

132

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People. The proposed high impact activity will have onsite impacts associated with land disturbing works for the clearing of vegetation, earthworks and construction of the WWTP (associated structures and access ways) and wetlands. As a consequence of these activities, there is an increased risk of damage and destruction to cultural heritage.

Impact Assessment Impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage can be appropriately managed or mitigated provided that the increased risk of damage and destruction to cultural heritage from site disturbance is managed in accordance with the Cultural Heritage Management Plan.

The recommendations mitigate the risk of potential social impacts and are to be conditioned for compliance prior to construction in accordance with the management plan. No offsite impacts are identified.

Item 4, Schedule 3 of the management plan identifies ‘Sensitive Areas’ within the Agreement Area which are either known to contain or are likely to contain Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Values. Item 4 (b), extracted below in Figure 69 , identifies a Sensitive Area within the proposed premise, contained within the boundaries of Lot 3 on RP223470, Lot 1 on SL3427 and Lot 254 on S31102. The sensitive area is proposed to accommodate the proposed mangroves and salt marsh, freshwater wetlands and the WWTP compound.

Figure 69: Sensitive Area extract (Source: Schedule 3, Item 4 (b) Cultural Heritage Management Plan, dated 06 Jane 2020)

133

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Item 2, Schedule 3 of the management plan identifies mitigation measures and states that:

(a) ‘High Impact Activities may proceed in the areas identified in Item 1, subject to:

i clause 10 (Discovery of a Find); and ii in relation to the Sensitive Areas, monitoring by Field Officers as agreed between the Parties.

(b) Low Impact Activities may proceed in areas set out in Item 1 above subject to clause 10 (Discovery of a Find)’.

It is additionally noted that Item 3, Schedule 3 of the management plan sets out rehabilitation activities that the company agrees to undertake within the Agreement Area.

7.9 Soils and Geology The following section deals with soils and geology, including impacts associated with potential acid sulfate soils (on land below 5m AHD and between 5m AHD and 20m AHD). 7.9.1 Acid Sulfate Soils

Table 28: Acid Sulfate Soils Assessment

Site Context The Department of Natural Resources and Mines 1:100,000 series ASS map for Tweed Heads to Redcliffe indicat es that the subject site is “land where ASS occurs within 5 m of the surface”. Virtually all land in this category has at least one 'potential acid sulfate soil' layer and some of this land will have an 'actual acid sulfate soil' layer”.

Geological Survey of Queensland’s 1:100,000 series Brisbane Sheet indicates that the site is located in an area which is underlain with -

. predominately by Alluvium typically comprising “second river terrace; sand, silt clay and gravel” of the Tertiary to Quaternary geological period; and . along the eastern boundary of the site by Miscellaneous Unconsolidated Sediments comprising “estuarine channels and banks; sandy mud, muddy sand, minor gravel” of the Tertiary to Quaternary geological period.

Proposed ID An Acid Sulfate Investigation has been prepared by Douglas and Partners for the proposed WWTP and wetlands and is provided within Appendix R. The investigation comprised 30 ‘shallow’ boreholes, followed by laboratory testing, engineering analysis and reporting.

Field Work Results – The subsurface conditions encountered from the field work generally comprised upper clayey sand topsoil to depths of between 0.1 m and 0.3 m underlain by alluvial soils. The alluvial soils generally comprised high plasticity, estimated soft to firm sandy clay to depths between 0.7 m and 1.2 m and then estimated loose clayey sand to the termination depth of 2 m.

134

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Laboratory Testing – Screening and analytical testing for the presence of oxidisable sulfur arising from actual acid sulfate soils (AASS) and potential acid sulfate soils (PASS) were carried out with reference to the QASSIT Guidelines (1998), the Soil Management Guidelines (2014) and the Laboratory Methods Guidelines (2004).

Selected samples from the bores were screened by measurement of pH after the addition of distilled water (pHF) and peroxide (pHFOX). The pHF tests indicate past oxidation of sulfides resulting in the presence of AASS. The pHFOX tests indicate the presence of unoxidised sulfides and therefore PASS.

ASS Assessment – The criteria used to assess the results of the screening tests (pHF and pHFOX) as possibly indicating actual acid sulfate soils (AASS) or potential acid sulfate soils (PASS) were based on the QASSIT Guidelines (1998).

The criteria results split the site into three (3) areas as shown in Figure 70. In summary there was no visual evidence of jarosite or other ASS indicators were identified during the investigation, thus the soils are considered to be non-acid sulfate forming. Based on the above, an Acid Sulfate Soils Management Plan (ASSMP) is not required for the site, however the Soil Management Guidelines (2014) suggests an Acidic Soil Management Plan incorporating the use of a neutralising agent (such as ag-lime) should be applied during site works is necessitated and appropriate management of this process will be required.

Impact Assessment There should be no impact from ASS from the proposed MID, provided that the activity is managed in accordance with the recommendations of the Provisional Acidic Soil Management Plan within the Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation (Appendix R ). The management plan identifies mitigation measures to be complied with during construction to neutralise soils during construction and achieve desired pH levels.

In accordance with the Provisional Acidic Soil Management Plan, a neutralising agent (such as ag-lime) should be applied during site works and appropriate management of this process will be required. The neutralising agent may be:

. spread in key areas as part of the fill operations to intercept any acidic leachate flow; . added to truckloads of disturbed material while being moved, thus achieving a degree of mixing during transport and placement; . spread as a guard layer under any temporary or permanent stockpiles or treatment areas; . incorporated as lime-enriched perimeters around temporary or permanent stockpiles or treatment areas; and

135

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. positioned in drains and areas most likely to experience flow.

Using the laboratory test results in Areas 1 to 3 (refer to Figure 70) below, a preliminary neutralisation rates of:

. Area 1: 15 kg of lime per tonne of soil is required which equates to 27 kg/m3 (assuming a bulk density of 1.8 tonnes/m3) should be used; . Area 2: 10 kg of lime per tonne of soil is required which equates to 18 kg/m3 (assuming a bulk density of 1.8 tonnes/m3) should be used; and . Area 3: 5 kg of lime per tonne of soil is required which equates to 9 kg/m3 (assuming a bulk density of 1.8 tonnes/m3) should be used.

Figure 70: Sensitive Area extract (Source: extract of Figure 2: Aerial view of the site – Areas 1 – 3, Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation, prepared by Douglas Partners and dated August 2019)

7.10 Coastal Environment and Processes

Table 2913: Coastal Environment and Processes Assessment

Site Context As identified in the Queensland Government’s Development Assessment Mapping ( Appendix HH ) and State Planning Policy mapping ( Appendix DD ) an assessment of coastal processes impacts associated with the development is required due to the site being located within the following areas:

. Coastal Management District; . Partly within the Medium and High Storm Tide Inundation Area; and . Partly within the Erosion Prone Area.

136

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Currently the site is intermittently inundated by tides of the order of Mean High Water Springs via Serpentine Creek and other small waterways. Once developed, incoming tides will inundate the wetlands via a unidirectional inlet to the east of the site and then drain out through a unidirectional outlet to Serpentine Creek to the west of the site.

Proposed MID Water Technology have prepared a coastal processes assessment, which is contained within their Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments (Appendix K ), specifically at Appendix K – Coastal Processes . The assessment addresses the influences of storm tide and climate change to indicate potential impacts on the proposed site, including an assessment of astronomical tides, storm tides, climate change and the erosion prone area.

Impact Astronomical Tides – Assessment Tides are intended enter the proposed wetlands via a unidirectional inlet connected to a small waterway to the east of the site and pass through a designated sediment basin before inundating the remainder of the wetland. The level of water in the wetland varies and will be inundated to varying degrees during all tidal cycles. The salt-marsh area surrounding the mangroves is located above MHWS. At the downstream end of the project area, water discharges through another unidirectional outlet to Serpentine Creek from which it flows back into the Logan river. In essence, the wetland is designed to be inundated by astronomical tides.

The proposed WWTP will be located at a minimum level of 10m AHD and approximately 320 m from the Logan River shoreline. The location of the WWTP is not influenced by tides. The WWTP is located well above 1.53m AHD, which is the highest astronomical tide (HAT) level. Sea level rise is expected to be 0.8m by 2100. Assuming that the tidal range will remain the same with sea level rise, the future level of MWHS and HAT would be 1.79m AHD and 2.33m AHD, respectively. This means that the WWTP infrastructure site will still not be inundated in the future once the full sea level rise of 0.8m has occurred.

Storm Tides – State Code 8 states that for a development site, the Defined Storm Tide Event (DSTE) should be equivalent to a 1% AEP storm tide event, incorporating sea level rise and the increased cyclone intensity expected under a changing climate. The whole of the proposed wetlands is located within the high to medium hazard area, however the wetlands are designed to be inundated including in storm tide events. It is expected that increased inundation of the site during a storm tide event can be accommodated. Most importantly, Water Technology advised that as mangroves are adaptable to temporarily increased inundation (storm tide event) and long-term changes in water levels such as sea level rise due to climate change, the wetland will, in fact, help mitigate the effects of potential flooding of the shoreline. Vegetation can accommodate the increased levels over a short period of time and infrastructure such as the site access footpath and sediment basin can be flooded without major damage. However, some repair work may be required after an inundation event.

Storm tide inundation may render the freshwater storage lagoon brackish. However, the effects of storm tide events are only expected to be temporary.

Inflowing waters may have higher sediment concentrations during a storm tide event. Therefore, the whole site may experience some short-term sediment deposition. However, mangroves

137

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

thrive in environments that experience modest amounts of sediment accumulation and therefore infrequent storm tide inundation is not expected to be detrimental to the wetlands.

Due to the location of the Site being approximately 7.5km upstream from Moreton Bay, waves are not expected to impact on the site during a storm surge event.

The location of the proposed MBR WWTP is not within the medium or high inundation hazard area mapping and is therefore exempt from assessment under State Code 8. The location of the proposed WWTP will not be affected by storm tide inundation.

Erosion Prone Area – The proposed wetlands and freshwater storage lagoon area are located within the erosion prone area. The HAT + 0.8 m sea level rise component is the governing component in these areas. Due to the wetlands being tidally dependent and replicating estuarine habitat, the location of these components in the erosion prone area is not a matter of concern. Erosion around the periphery of the site and in proximity to the proposed locations of the hard infrastructure could occur. Water Technology recommended that measures to limit erosion around the tidal inlet and outlet structures and measures to mitigate erosion around access paths were incorporated into the engienering design. These measures have been incorproated into the engineering design – refer to Engineering Plans ( Appendix D ), including stabilisation works; and revegetation works are outlined as part of the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix O ). The location of the proposed WWTP infrastructure is not within the extent of the erosion prone area and in any case is classified as ‘essential community infrastructure’.

Other Factors – Water Technology advised that vegetation is an important factor when considering the erosion potential of creeks and river banks. Heavily vegetated banks/areas tend to experience limited erosion and can withstand higher flow velocities. Preliminary findings suggest that natural vegetation and restored wetlands can protect shorelines effectively. Therefore, maintaining and protecting existing vegetation buffers is a highly efficient foreshore protection approach and an approach that is likely to result in a positive environmental benefit arising from the propsoed development, provided the impacts at the inlet/outlet structures can be appropriately managed.

An investigation of historical imagery indicates that the river bank has not moved appreciably in some 62 years. As such, it is apparent that the banks of the river are well established and not subject to long term erosion.

Tidal Prism and Shoreline Erosion – Tidal prism is defined as the volume of water that flows through a channel cross-section during the flood tide. The establishment of the wetland will change the tidal prism of the Logan River. At the full operational capacity of the WWTP and upon complete establishment of the wetland, the change in tidal prism of the Logan estuary was estimated to be between 0.6% (during neap tides) and 1.5% (during spring tides). Water Technology advise that these changes are small and will have no impact on bed and bank stability or coastal processes within adjacent sections of the Logan River. In this regard, Water Technology recommended that vegetation along the Logan River and Serpentine Creek be maintaned in order that the banks are stable and well-vegetated;

138

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

that rehabilitation occur to these areas; and that spraying of mangroves in Serpentine Creek cease.

Please refer to the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan prepared by Saundres Havill Group (Appendix O ) that demonstrates rehabilitation for the banks of the Logan River, the whole of the wetland area and includes recommendations for the ongoing management and maintenance of the wetland (recommending against spraying).

Summary – Water Technology found, as part of their coastal assessment that:

. The site currently inundates under larger tides and after development of the wetlands, this inundation will be more frequent (every tide) and will be carefully controlled by dedicated inlet and outlet structures; . Erosion/migration of the riverbank is best protected by maintaining and rehabilitating the currently stable and well vegetated riverbanks along the Logan River and Serpentine Creek; . The development will cause no detrimental impacts on adjacent properties or other areas within the coastal zone; and . The development will not adversely impact coastal resources and public amenity of foreshore areas, either at the development site or in adjacent areas.

A response to State Code 8 - Coastal Development and Tidal Works is provided within the Water Technology report ( Appendix K ).

7.11 Economic Impacts

Table 30: Economic Impacts

Site Context As noted in Section 5 – Project Background, there are limited suitable options for locating a new wastewater treatment plant to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment. The infrastructure is critical to enable the creation of a new community within Southern Redland Bay in accordance with Goal 1 of ShapingSEQ.

As noted in Section 4, the site is located on the Logan River directly adjacent to an aquaculture use on Lot 4 on SP148708. There are several other aquaculture uses along the southern side of the Logan River within approximately 3km of the subject site.

Proposed ID Stantec have prepared and Options Assessment for the location of the Southern Redland Bay WWTP and shortlisted two potential options to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment. They included a new WWTP on Lots 10 & 11 on RP295473 and an ocean outfall to Southern Moreton Bay at Weinam Creek; or the proposed MID involving a land-based discharge to wetlands. RCC and RW have been consulted on the proposed infrastructure solution and are supportive, as the solution results in significant potential capital and operational expenses compared with the alternative solution.

139

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Water Technology have also undertaken a comprehensive assessment of water quality impacts as part of their Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ).

Impact In respect to the impact on nearby aquaculture uses, Water Technology undertook a Assessment comprehensive water quality assessment, including analysis of toxicant guidelines for the protection of aquaculture species. They recommended that additional disinfection be included in the design, including treatment of wet weathers events. UV disinfection was incorporated into the design as per this recommendation and therefore mitigate the impacts associated with human enteric viruses. Other mitigation measures include re-use of recycled water (where possible), establishment of new wetlands (a land-based discharge) and an initial establishment period for the wetlands. With these mitigation measures, Water Technology found that recycled water discharge into the wetlands will not have adverse impacts on the Logan River estuary.

With respect to economic impacts stemming from the project not proceeding, these impacts include:

. Efficient and timely supply of catalyst sub-regional infrastructure necessary to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment cannot be provided and therefore cannot meet ShapingSEQ dwelling targets for the Redland LGA; . Economic impact resulting from the inability to service 5,000 new homes, 13,250 full time equivalent (FTE) direct and supply chain construction jobs and 1,260 ongoing jobs to Redland City; . Economic impacts to the construction industry, which represents 13.9% of the workforce and 24.1% of the businesses in the Redland LGA; . Economic impacts for the Redland LGA, which will be unable to provide for a new urban community and assist in attracting private sector investment to RCC; . Flow-on economic impacts associated with the inability to provide additional community facilities (parks, commercial uses and a new school to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment).

Economic impacts associated with the cost of the wastewater treatment solutions should also be considered. The proposed infrastructure is trunk infrastructure to service a sub-region (or catchment) and as noted in this EAR would be subject to an Infrastructure Agreement with RCC. Trunk infrastructure is funded through development charges (contributions) payable as development progresses, which is budgeted by an LGA within a LGIP. It is essentially then an LGA that ‘pays’ for trunk infrastructure including ongoing maintenance and operation, therefore the operational and capital costs of trunk infrastructure is an important consideration. Compared with the alternative shortlisted option (described above), the proposed MID has substantial operational and capital cost savings resulting from:

. Not having to construct 13km of pipeline (from the catchment to the WWTP and then ocean outfall); . Not having to construct an ocean outfall 1km off the Southern Redland Bay coast; . Not having to pump wastewater from the catchment to the WWTP and then to the ocean outfall.

There are costs for the proposed infrastructure that are not attributable to the alternative (i.e. the substantial cost of rehabilitation/earthworks and maintenance of the wetland), however overall Stantec found there were substantial cost savings as part of the proposed solution.

140

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

7.12 Other Social Impacts

Table 31: Other Social Impacts

Site Context The site is not publicly accessible and does not provide a service to the local community. Notwithstanding, the site adjoins the Logan River, which provides recreational opportunities for water users including recreational fishing.

As noted in Section 5 – Project Background, there are limited suitable options for locating a new wastewater treatment plant to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment. The infrastructure is critical to enable the creation of a new community within Southern Redland Bay in accordance with Goal 1 of ShapingSEQ. Establishment of a new community in Southern Redland Bay enables the creation of community infrastructure including parks, district centre, community uses/facilities and a new school to service the Southern Redland Bay area.

Proposed ID As noted in Section 7.11 above, there are limited options for servicing the Southern Redland Bay catchment. The proposed infrastructure solution is a superior environmental outcome and demonstrates best-practice in wastewater management.

Impact In respect to the impact on recreational fishing in the Logan River, Water Technology undertook a Assessment comprehensive water quality assessment, including analysis of baseline and resultant water quality in the Logan River. They recommended that additional disinfection be included in the design, including treatment of wet weathers events. UV disinfection was incorporated into the design as per this recommendation and therefore mitigate the impacts associated with human enteric viruses. Other mitigation measures include re-use of recycled water (where possible), establishment of new wetlands (a land-based discharge) and an initial establishment period for the wetlands. With these mitigation measures, Water Technology found that recycled water discharge into the wetlands will not have adverse impacts on the Logan River estuary, and thus no adverse impacts on recreational fishing in the Logan River.

With respect to social impacts stemming from the project not proceeding, these impacts include:

. Efficient and timely supply of catalyst sub-regional infrastructure necessary to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment cannot be provided and therefore cannot meet ShapingSEQ dwelling targets for the Redland LGA; . Impacts created by a decrease in available housing in the Redland LGA; and . Impacts created by an inability to accommodate a new community, including community facilities (parks, community services, commercial activities or a new school to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment.

Please refer to the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ) and the Concept Design Report ( Appendix G ).

141

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 8 Risk Management and Ongoing Monitoring The following sections deal with risk management, outlining the measures that have been put in place to mitigate environmental risks in a range of different scenarios; the management plans that assist in risk mitigation and will ensure proper functioning of the proposed infrastructure; and the ongoing monitoring that will be required to ensure the project is functioning in accordance with the management plans.

8.1 Risk Management With any type of emissions generating infrastructure, there are potential environmental risks. The assessment of impacts in Section 7 above, project impacts are addressed assuming that the proposed infrastructure is functioning as anticipated (i.e. normal operating conditions). However, situations can arise where normal operation is not possible, including scenarios that may be within or outside the control of the operator/operation.

Risk estimation requires determining its measure (based on available data, reliability and expected results), which can be measured either quantitatively or qualitatively (or a mixture of the two). The result of a mixed method is usually a risk map or matrix. The Operational Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) prepared by Stantec ( Appendix X ) includes a risk assessment and management matrix at Appendix A.

During pre-consultation, the ID Team requested that the infrastructure entity undertake a comprehensive assessment of risks associated with the project. At the time of pre-consultation, this information was not available, however it was always the intention of the proponent to undertake a detailed assessment of project risks.

Drawing from the Stantec OEMP, there are five different types of risks associated with the proposed MID, as outlined below:

. The WWTP does not meet licence conditions during dry weather (normal operation); . The WWTP does not meet licence conditions during wet weather (wet weather operation); . Risks associated with mangrove establishment; . Risks associated with external impacts (odour, noise, vibration); and . Risks associated with re-used or irrigated recycled water not meeting licence conditions.

To summarise the different risks and mitigation measures, a range of scenarios is ‘tested’ in Table 32 below.

Table 32: Risk Scenarios and Mitigation Measures

Scenario Type Risk and Management Mitigated Risk Rating

1 Power Failure at the WWTP With upstream pump stations still operational, power Low failure at the WWTP has the potential to cause un- managed discharge. Risks are mitigated by:

. Ensuring the WWTP has a back-up generator capable of supplying all processes for up to 4 hours; . Flow balance tank included in the WWTP;

142

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Available emergency storage time within the collection system of 4 hours at ADWF; . Communications alarms (and battery back-up for communications systems); . Tankers on-call to take wastewater from upstream pump stations or the WWTP; . Discharge is initially to the freshwater storage lagoon, which has a significant capacity and can ability to capture discharge (for re-treatment) prior to release into the wetlands; and . Location of WWTP >200m from nearby sensitive receptors (to reduce odour concerns from discharge into storage lagoon).

2 Power Failure at the WWTP With upstream pump stations not operational, no No Risk and at upstream pump wastewater would enter the WWTP. stations

3 Mechanical or electrical With upstream pump stations still operational, equipment Low Risk equipment failure at the or electrical failure at the WWTP has the potential to cause WWTP un-managed discharge. Risks are mitigated by: . Available emergency storage time within the collection system of 4 hours at ADWF; . Flow balance tank included in the WWTP; . Communications alarms; . Tankers on-call to take wastewater from upstream pump stations or the WWTP; . Discharge is initially to the freshwater storage lagoon, which has a significant capacity and can capture discharge (for re-treatment) prior to release into the wetlands; and . Location of WWTP >200m from nearby sensitive receptors (to reduce odour concerns from discharge into storage lagoon).

4 Control or communications With upstream pump stations still operational, Low systems failure communications failure at the WWTP has the potential to cause un-managed discharge. Risks are mitigated by:

. Available emergency storage time within the collection system of 4 hours at ADWF; . Flow balance tank included in the WWTP; . Communications alarm if base receives no signal; . Communications alarm results in escalated notifications within RW Operations Group; . Tankers on-call to take wastewater from upstream pump stations or the WWTP;

143

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Discharge is initially to the freshwater storage lagoon, which has a significant capacity and can capture discharge (for re-treatment) prior to release into the wetlands; and . Location of WWTP >200m from nearby sensitive receptors (to reduce odour concerns from discharge into storage lagoon).

5 Pipeline blockage or failure Risks associated with a pipeline blockage or failure could Low (either within the site or in result in un-managed discharges or spillage events upstream mains) internal or external to the site. It is noted that risk of pipe blockage or failure is extremely low (i.e. occurs less than once every 10 years). Risks are mitigated by:

. WWTP automation able to identify loss of inflows by comparing with previous or default day pattern; . The WWTP site (compound area) includes stormwater management measures to direct flows to the freshwater storage lagoon (where possible); . Pipe failure in road reserve would be captured in road reserve drainage which would flow to the wetlands prior to the Logan River.

6 Poorly performing equipment Risks associated with recycled water discharge not Low meeting licence requirements are related to water quality and impacts on the wetlands/Logan River. It is noted that RW are extremely experienced in the operation of WWTP (including MBR treatment plants). They currently manage 1200km of wastewater pipe and 7 WWTP’s across the city. Risks are mitigated by:

. Regular monitoring of the performance of the plant discharge; and . Process monitoring.

7 Wet weather events exceed 5 Risks associated with flows higher than the inlet works Low x ADWF (exceed treatment capacity at the WWTP include the water quality (impact capacity) on wetlands and Logan River), public health or odour nuisance. Risks are mitigated by:

. Limiting upstream pumping station discharge to ensure that flows do not exceed inlet works capacity; . RW Overflow Abatement Plan, with reporting on poorly performing pump station catchments; . Flowmeter installation at pump stations;

144

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Use of Reduced Infiltration Gravity Sewers (RIGS) within the catchment to reduce wet weather ingress; . Dilution effect during high wet weather flows; . Discharge is initially to the freshwater storage lagoon, which has a significant capacity and can capture discharge (for re-treatment) prior to release into the wetlands; and . Location of WWTP >200m from nearby sensitive receptors (to reduce odour concerns from discharge into storage lagoon).

8 Mangrove establishment Risks associated with mangrove establishment taking Medium takes longer than 5 years more than 5 years and therefore an inability to discharge an increased amount of recycled water into the wetlands at year 5. Risks are mitigated by:

. Undertaking wetland rehabilitation in accordance with the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan (Appendix O); . Consultation with experts on mangrove establishment during the design phases (already undertaken); . Appointing a contractor experienced in mangrove restoration projects (i.e. B4C); . Enhance natural generation by planting; . Regularly monitor growth and undertake additional management or planting measures as needed; . Ability to expand the temporary irrigation area to provide a longer time for mangrove establishment.

9 Mangroves die during future Risks associated with mangrove die-off during the Medium use operational phase (in the future) include the inability of the wetlands to uptake nutrients. Risks are mitigated by:

. Regular monitoring and reporting of mangrove health as outlined in the Preliminary Site Based Management Plan for Wetlands (Appendix Y ); . Academic research to be undertaken in first 5 to10 years to document ecosystem growth, performance and tree health; . Substantial nutrient up-take in the marine muds, therefore any degradation in growth can be addressed in reasonable period prior to permanent reduction in performance.

145

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

10 Wetlands accumulate large Risks associated with increased sedimentation may Low silt deposits from the Logan include reduced performance of the wetland. Risk River mitigation measures include: . Annual field inspections and measurements of siltation in accordance with the Preliminary Site Based Management Plan for Wetlands (Appendix Y ); . Regular mangrove health measurements; . Sedimentation basin at the inlet structure is regularly cleaned and maintained; and . Limited dredging may be possible in extreme circumstances.

It should be noted that Water Technology found that mangroves do thrive in a climate where there is some sedimentation, provided that sedimentation is not so extreme as to place mangroves outside their ideal hydrology.

11 Odour/Noise nuisance caused There are risks that odour/noise amenity issues could be Medium by the plant at a sensitive caused by failure of the odour control unit or that noise receptor exceeds environmental requirements. Risk mitigation measures include:

. Regular monitoring of odour control units; . Ensure the recommendations of the Noise Impact Assessment ( Appendix G) are adhered to including a noise attenuation strategy for all equipment; and . Regular maintenance of the WWTP.

12 Recycled water does not meet Risk associated with recycled water not meeting the Low targeted quality targeted quality for re-use or temporary disposal include increased risk to public health, users at nurseries or construction sites; and pathogen risk for any crops grown within the temporary irrigation area. Risks are mitigated by:

. MBR plant produces high quality recycled water with low pathogen level, through use of membranes; . Routine monitoring of the chlorine levels in the recycled water at the WWTP; . Additional monitoring/disinfection by nurseries under their adopted industry code of practice.

As is demonstrated in the above scenarios, the lower risk aspects of the proposal are risks associated with the proper functioning of the WWTP. Medium risk aspects of the proposal are the establishment of the wetlands and risk of odour

146

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project nuisance. It is normal for the process related risks to be low given that the equipment used and the processes themselves are extremely well-established and reliable; and include redundancy measures in case of failures.

The medium risk aspects associated with the wetland are a result of the innovative nature of the project. Notwithstanding, the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix O ) has been prepared based on Saunders Havill Group’s technical knowledge of previous mangrove restoration projects; technical advice from Water Technology; advice from leading academics; and advice from B4C, who are experienced construction contractors in wetland restoration. Risks associated with wetland establishment and maintenance can be appropriately mitigated by ensuring the project is undertaken in accordance with the Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix O ) and maintained in accordance with the Site Based Management Plan – Wetlands ( Appendix Y ).

Potential ecological risks are outlined within Section 10 of the Ecological Assessment Report (Appendix M ) and are assessed in Section 7 of this report.

8.2 Construction Risk Management Construction risk management is outlined within the Construction Environmental Management Plan ( Appendix W ).

8.3 Management Plans Several management plans have been prepared which are intended to mitigate impacts and project risks during construction and operation. Management plans prepared as part of this EAR include:

. Operational Environmental Management Plan . Site Based Management Plan – Wetlands . Construction Environmental Management Plan . Preliminary Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan . Recycled Water Management Plan . Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan . Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan . Cultural Heritage Management Plan . Bushfire Management Plan . Biting Insects Management Plan . Koala Management Plan

8.4 Ongoing Monitoring Ongoing monitoring of the performance of the WWTP and the wetland system will be critical in ensuring that the environmental impacts identified in Section 7 can be appropriately managed. Along with adoption of the various management plans outlined in Section 8.3 above, ongoing monitoring is proposed as per the Operational Environmental Management Plan ( Appendix X ) and Site Based Management Plan – Wetlands ( Appendix Y ).

Ongoing monitoring to ensure proper functioning of the WWTP will be a condition of any Environmental Authority (licence) issued by DES and will include conditions requiring monitoring and satisfaction of conditions relating to water quality at the licence point, recycled water quality, air quality and noise. In addition, monitoring of storage lagoon and wetland performance is recommended by Water Technology within the Site Based Management Plan – Wetlands, including recommendation of a long-term research based monitoring (Australian Research Council Linkage Program). This project, as a best-practice environmental solution to wastewater management, has significant potential for

147

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project ongoing research projects and advancement of knowledge in order that it could be applied to other wastewater management projects within Queensland or nationally.

Monitoring of water quality (including ecosystem condition and water quality parameters), sludge/sediment and the sediment basin is included within Appendices A to C of the Site Based Management Plan – Wetlands.

In addition to monitoring wetlands and storage lagoon, Water Technology recommended within their Receiving Water Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ), that water quality data from the Healthy Land and Water (HLW) Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program (EHMP) be used to assess any changes in ambient water quality in the Logan Estuary. They recommended that existing water quality data from the HLW EHMP be used to assess any changes in ambient water quality in the Logan Estuary during the construction and establishment phases of the development.

148

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 9 Commonwealth Planning Framework This section provides a summary of the Commonwealth planning framework applying to the site and proposed designation. We have reviewed the applicability of Commonwealth Government legislation/matters to the site and proposed development. The key legislation/matters are discussed below.

9.1 Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act Whilst there is no specific Commonwealth planning legislation regulating WWTP’s, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) regulates impacts on matters of national environmental significance. The EPBC Act provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places defined in the EPBC Act as matters of national environmental significance.

Saunders Havill Group has carried out an assessment of the proposal against matters of national environmental significance under the EPBC Act as part of the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ) and intends to refer the proposed MID (the ‘action’) to the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE). DAWE will assess the referral and whether it considers the action will have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance. DAWE will either consider that the action is not a controlled action (no further assessment required); or may consider the action is a controlled action in which further assessment by DAWE will be required (and also determine the assessment process). If further assessment is required, this process is separate to the MID process.

149

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 10 State Planning Framework This section provides a summary of the State Legislative planning framework applying to the site and proposed designation. We have reviewed the applicability of State planning legislative/matters to the site and proposed development. The key legislation/matters are discussed below.

10.1 State Planning Instruments The Queensland Planning System operates within the Queensland Government's state-wide legislative framework for land-use planning. ID’s play a critical role in Queensland’s planning system by identifying land for community infrastructure. The key purpose of an ID is to facilitate the efficient and cost-effective provision of the community infrastructure.

Table 33 provides a summary of all the instruments in the Queensland Planning System and how they relate to the proposed ID.

Table 33: Queensland Planning Instruments Summary

Element Applicability Report Section

Planning Legislation

Planning Act 2016  Applicable Refer to Section 10.2 Includes provisions for making, amending, or extending designations.

Planning Regulation 2017  Applicable Refer to Section 10.3 Identifies the type of infrastructure that may be designated.

State Planning Instruments

State Planning Policy  Applicable Refer to Section 10.4 Identifies State interest over the Site

Regional Plans  Applicable Refer to Section 10.6 Identifies the regional intent for growth within the Redlands LGA over the next 25 years

Local Government Planning Instruments

Planning Scheme (including overlays, Not Applicable Notwithstanding that local TLPI’s & LGIP) Local government planning government planning instruments are instruments do not apply to a MID. not applicable to a MID, an assessment has been provided as part of this EAR. Refer to Section 11 – Local Planning Framework

Supporting Statutory Instruments

Minister’s Guidelines & Rules  Applicable Refer to Section 3.6 – Lodgement of EAR and consultation strategy

150

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Identifies guidelines for the process for an EAR and consultation for making or amended a MID

Development Assessment Rules Not Applicable The development assessment rules Identifies the process development are not applicable to a MID. for applications under the Planning Act that are assessable under a categorising instrument.

State Development Assessment Not Applicable The State Development Assessment Provisions Identifies benchmarks or matters that Provisions (including State Codes) are the State Assessment Referral Agency not applicable to a MID, however a will assess a development application response to the State Codes is (under the Planning Act ). included in this EAR to enable streamlined assessment of State interests. Refer to Section 10.5.

The applicable elements of the framework are addressed in the sections below.

10.2 Planning Act 2016 Chapter 2, Part 5, s35 (1) of the PA, states that a designation is a decision of the Minister (Ministerial Designation) or a local government (Local Government Infrastructure Designation) that identifies a premise for development of one or more types of infrastructure that are prescribed under the regulation. The types of infrastructure that may be considered for a designation are outlined in Schedule 5 of the PR, refer to Section 10.3 – Planning Regulation 2017 .

Chapter 2, Part 5, Section 36 sets out the criteria for making or amending designations (as also partially referenced under Chapter 7, Part 1, Section 2.2j of the MGR). Table 34 identifies how the Planning Act criteria for making a Designation has been addressed.

Table 34: Assessment against s36 PA

Criteria Response

(1) To make a designation, a designator must be satisfied that—

 RCC have resolved to support the sub-regional (a) the infrastructure will satisfy statutory requirements, or wastewater treatment solution to service the Southern budgetary commitments, for the supply of the Redland Bay catchment. There is an existing infrastructure infrastructure; or agreement between RCC and Lendlease, which will be updated to reflect the sub-regional solution. This agreement sets the budgetary commitment for the supply of the infrastructure required to service the growth of the sub-region. Lendlease have development approvals over the Shoreline master planned development that require the supply of the infrastructure, which as noted above is to service not only Shoreline but the Southern Redland Bay catchment.

151

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Refer to Section 3.2.2– Infrastructure Overview .

 There is a need for the efficient and timely supply of the (b) there is or will be a need for the efficient and timely infrastructure to enable land within the Southern Redland supply of the infrastructure. Bay, an identified major expansion area, to be developed in accordance with Goal 1: Grow of ShapingSEQ . Lendlease have development approvals over the Shoreline master planned development that require the supply of the infrastructure, which as noted above is to service not only Shoreline but the Southern Redland Bay catchment. The Shoreline development is currently under construction therefore there is a need for the timely supply of this wastewater infrastructure to service development in the catchment.

(2) To make or amend a designation, if the designator is the  The EAR seeks a MID. Refer to Section 7 – Minister, the Minister must also be satisfied that adequate Environmental Assessment for a detailed assessment of environmental assessment, including adequate the environmental impacts of the proposed ID. consultation, has been carried out in relation to the development that is the subject of the designation or Significant pre-consultation (including informal and amendment. formal pre-consultation) has been carried out over an approximate 18-month period and is described in detail within Section 13 . Adequate pre-consultation has been carried out. Formal consultation will commence upon instruction from the Minister.

(3) The Minister may, in guidelines prescribed by regulation,  The MID is being undertaken in accordance with set out the process for the environmental assessment and Chapter 7 of the MGR. consultation.

(4) The Minister is taken to be satisfied of the matters in  An assessment against sub-section 2 of the MGR has subsection (2) if the process in the guidelines is followed. been undertaken and is satisfied. Refer to Section 3.6

(5) However, the Minister may be satisfied of the matters in  the Minister invited the proponent to lodge an EAR in another way. December 2019 following pre-consultation (informal and formal) and a request for endorsement to lodge an EAR.

(6) Sections 10 and 11 apply to the making or amendment of Not Applicable - it is not sought to make or amend the guidelines as if the guidelines were a State planning guidelines. policy.

(7) To make or amend a designation, a designator must have regard to—

 An assessment of all Commonwealth, State and local (a) all planning instruments that relate to the premises; and instruments applicable to the ID has been undertaken. Refer to Sections 9 to 11 of this EAR.

 Refer to Section 12 – Approvals matrix identifying (b) any assessment benchmarks, other than in planning additional approvals and permits required to construct instruments, that relate to the development that is the and operate the WWTP and wetlands, other than in subject of the designation or amendment; and planning instruments.

152

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Not applicable - the proposed ID is not located within a (c) if the premises are in a State development area under State Development Area or any development scheme the State Development Act—any approved under the State Development Act. development scheme for the premises under that Act; and

(ca)if the premises are in a priority development area under the Economic Development Act 2012—any development scheme for the priority development area under that Act; and

 Informal and formal pre-consultation has been (d) any properly made submissions made as part of the undertaken as part of Part 1 of the MID process over an consultation carried out under section 37; and approximate 18-month period. Formal consultation is yet to be carried out in accordance with Part 4 and can only be carried out upon invitation by the Minister.

Refer Section 13 outlining pre-consultation (formal and informal) to date and the proposed formal consultation strategy.

 The infrastructure entity has been collaborating with (e) the written submissions of any local government. RCC and RW over a period of over 18-months, regarding wastewater treatment solution to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment and the proposed WWTP and wetlands. Most recently, informal pre-consultation with State Government Agencies and the local government was undertaken as part of Part 1 of the MID process which assisted in informing the design and this EAR.

Formal submissions may be received during Part 4 - Consultation and State Interest Review.

10.3 Planning Regulation 2017 The PR identifies types of infrastructure that may be designated. We have carried out an assessment of the infrastructure categories under Schedule 5, Part 2 of the PR in accordance with section 2.2(d), Part 1, Chapter 7 of the MGR.

The proposed infrastructure aligns with the following categories –

. Item 17 : Water cycle management infrastructure; . Item 19 : Any other facility not stated in this part that is intended mainly to accommodate government functions.

Within Part 1 – Pre-lodgement of the MID process, the Minister (represented by the ID Team) considered and agreed that the proposed infrastructure for the Southern Redland Bay WWTP and wetlands is community infrastructure; and that the project could satisfy Section 36 (1) of the PA (refer to Section 10.2 – Planning Act 2016 ). Refer to Section 3.5 – Pre-lodgement and Endorsement confirming the Minister’s invitation for the proponent to lodge an EAR.

153

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

10.4 State Planning Policy The State Planning Policy (SPP), July 2017 sets out the State’s interests in land-use planning and development across Queensland. The SPP identifies 17 State interests across five broad themes. The State interests are supported by mapping. The SPP has effect throughout Queensland and sits above regional plans and local government planning schemes under the hierarchy of planning instruments set out under section 8(4)(a) of the PA.

When making or amending a designation, the Planning Minister must have regard to the relevant parts of the SPP as identified Figure 3: Application of SPP (page 9) of the SPP, as reflected in Table 35. When reading the below table, reference should also be made to the State Planning Policy mapping in the context of the proposed MID ( Appendix DD ).

Table 35: SPP applicability

Part of SPP Purpose Report Section

Part A – Introduction and Context  Applicable No response is required. Explains the role of the SPP in Queensland’s planning system.

Part B – Application and Operation  Applicable No response is required. Explains how the SPP applies and operates in different circumstances under the PA and PR.

Part C – Purpose and Guiding  Applicable Refer to Section 10.4.1 – Principles Explains the purpose of the SPP and establishes Part C – Purpose and a series of linked principles that must underpin Guiding Principles plan making and development in Queensland Assessment

Part D – State Interest Statements  Applicable Refer to Section 10.4.2 – Identifies the overall outcome for each state Part D – State Interest interest in land use planning and development. Statements Assessment

Part E – State Interest Policies and  Applicable Refer to Section 10.4.3 – Assessment Benchmarks Establishes the policies to support the overall Part E – State Policies and outcome for each state interest, organised into Assessment Benchmarks five (5) broad themes. Some state interests also include assessment benchmarks for certain development, which apply if the state interest has not been appropriately integrated in a local planning instrument.

Part F – Glossary  Applicable No response is required. Provides a list of abbreviations and terms that assist readers to interpret the SPP.

Part G – Appendices  Applicable No response is required. Provides additional information on mapping and stormwater management design objectives

154

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

10.4.1 Part C – Purpose and Guiding Principles Assessment Table 36 provides an assessment against Table 1: Guiding Principles within Part C – Purpose and Guiding Principles of the SPP, as it applies to the proposed MID.

Table 36: Assessment against Part C of SPP

Guiding Principle – Outcome Focused Clearly focus on the delivery of outcomes

. Plans and development outcomes integrate and balance the economic, environmental and social needs of current and future generations in order to achieve ecological sustainability. . Plans express clear performance outcomes for development, supported by a range of acceptable outcomes, where possible. . Innovative and flexible approaches to design and development are supported and encouraged when consistent with a plan’s strategic intent. . Decision making ensures that, where acceptable, when outcomes are satisfied by development, then the relevant performance outcome is taken to be satisfied in full. Performance outcomes may still be satisfied, even though an associated acceptable outcome is not met. . Plans and development outcomes support stated objectives, needs and aspirations of the community at the state, regional and local level.

Assessment:  The ID aligns with the ‘outcome focused’ guiding principle.

The proposed MID considers economic, environmental and social impacts of the critical community infrastructure which is required to support the future development of the Southern Redland Bay catchment (land within the Urban Footprint). Where impacts have been identified, clear plans to avoid, mitigate or offset have been recommended by technical consultants that achieves compliance with relevant standards, laws and policies. Strategies to deal with impacts are streamlined to ensure that they are appropriately incorporated and integrated into the project scope in a timely manner within the lifecycle of the project i.e. prior to construction, whilst operational and decommission.

The proposed MID is an innovative project that will be an exemplar of best practice in environmental sustainability and recycled wastewater management. The MID will have ancillary benefits such as carbon sequestration, a net increase in biodiversity values, the provision of additional marine and terrestrial flora and fauna habitat and the delivery of a net improvement or non-worsening of water quality in the Logan River. The final sub-regional solution has come about as a result of a detailed options assessment process adopting a multi-criteria assessment which determined the best environmental, economic and social outcome for managing wastewater from the Southern Redland Bay catchment, achieving the greatest benefit to the environment, community and local government.

Guiding Principle – Integrated Reinforce the role of local planning schemes as the integrated, comprehensive statement of land use policy and development intentions for a local area

. Plans coordinate and integrate land use policy for a local area by considering: o international agreements, such as the UNESCO world heritage listing of the Great Barrier Reef and Ramsar Convention o national, state, regional and local matters, to the extent relevant. . Plans integrate land use; resource management and infrastructure need and considerations.

155

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. Plans support a 15-year supply of land for development. . The zoning of land reflects and responds to the characteristics of the land that constrain its use. . Overlays should be compatible with and not operate either individually or cumulatively to prevent or restrict land from being used for the purpose for which it has been zoned.

Plans include a performance-based assessment of development against a clear hierarchy of policies linked to the achievement of realistic and long-term strategic planning.

Assessment: Not Applicable The ‘integrated’ guiding principle is not applicable to the ID.

The proposal is for an ID and not for local government plan making and therefore, is not applicable. The zoning of the site under the RCC’s planning scheme is Rural under which the proposed use for ‘utility installation’ is impact assessable where not undertaken by a public sector entity. Notwithstanding, the Designation itself is a form of plan- making when considering that the Designation is the planning instrument that would apply to the site in lieu of the local government categorising instrument. In this regard, there is broad alignment between the proposal (the plan) and the ‘integrated’ guiding principal as follows:

. The proposal provides for wastewater servicing of the Southern Redland Bay catchment, which is the key greenfield development area within the Redland LGA. Timely supply of this infrastructure will ensure that the Redland LGA can maintain at least a 15-year supply of land for development; . The proposal generally responds well to matters of State environmental significance (and overlay mapping as part of the Redland City Plan 2018); and . The proposed infrastructure solution involving a land-based discharge to new wetlands is an environmentally sustainable alternative to a conventional wastewater treatment system involving discharge to the ocean or waterway. As noted in the Options Assessment Report, the other shortlisted option for wastewater servicing involved an ocean outfall to Southern Moreton Bay, which may have caused impacts on Ramsar wetlands.

Guiding Principle – Efficient Support the efficient determination of appropriate development

. Plans and assessment processes result in development outcomes that are certain, responsive and performance- based. . Plans regulate development only to the extent necessary to address potential impacts. When applied, plans adopt the lowest appropriate level of assessment required to efficiently and effectively address those impacts. . The level of assessment for development is proportionate to the potential impacts and level of risk of the development being regulated and a plan’s strategic intent and purpose of the relevant zone, local plan and/or precinct, for instance development that is: o minor, low-risk and that is encouraged or contemplated in a zone should be identified as accepted development o consistent and in accordance with the broad intent of a zone and able to be assessed against assessment benchmarks, should be identified as code assessable development o contrary to the intent of a zone, requires public input or is unforeseen by a planning scheme, should be identified as impact assessable development and assessed against a broader range of matters.

Assessment: Not Applicable - the ‘efficient’ guiding principle is not applicable to the MID.

156

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The proposal is for an MID and not for local government plan making and therefore, is not applicable. A MID is critical to facilitate the proposed WWTP and wetlands proposal providing a sub-regional wastewater solution for the Southern Redland Bay catchment. Notwithstanding, it is noted that the proposal makes efficient use of new critical infrastructure, addressing impacts and potential impacts as demonstrated in Section 7 of this EAR.

Guiding Principle – Positive Enable positive responses to change, challenges and opportunities

. Contemporary information, challenges and community needs and aspirations are reflected through up-to-date plans. . Evidence and objectively assessed needs form a basis for planning that uses the best available knowledge. . Plans are written using clear, concise and positive language to describe what outcomes are sought, required or encouraged in a particular location, rather than what is to be avoided, prevented or discouraged. . Community health and wellbeing, and resilience and adaptability to change (including economic change, social change, and climate change adaptation and mitigation), are promoted in plans and development outcomes. . Plans adopt a performance-based approach to development assessment to allow for innovation and flexibility in how development in a local area can be achieved. . Plans are drafted to ensure that development is assessed on its individual merits.

Assessment:  The ID aligns with the ‘positive’ guiding principle.

Whilst the proposal is not for local government plan making, the proposed MID will provide a sub-regional infrastructure solution for the Southern Redland Bay catchment and enable a new community (including related facilities) to develop as intended as part of Redland City Plan 2018.

Guiding Principle – Accountable Promote confidence in the planning system through plans and decisions that are transparent and accountable

. Plans and development outcomes reflect balanced community views and aspirations based on a clear understanding of the importance of the community’s involvement in plan making. . Plans resolve competing state and local interests through using an evidence-based approach, which balances community needs, views and aspirations. . Reasonable, logical and fair development decisions are supported by clear and transparent planning schemes. . Plans only seek to regulate land use and planning outcomes and do not address matters regulated outside of the planning system, for instance building work regulated under the Building Act 1975 (unless permitted). . Obtaining access to planning information is simple and direct, capitalising on opportunities presented by information technology.

Assessment: The ID aligns with the ‘accountable’ principle.

Whilst the proposal is not for local government plan making, the proposed ID is being carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act , Planning Regulation and MGR (and other relevant legislation). The proposed WWTP and wetlands proposal has considered national, State and local interests and through consultation, will consider community views and aspirations.

157

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

10.4.2 Part D - State Interest Statements Assessment Table 37 provides an assessment against Part D - State interest statements of the SPP, as it applies to the proposed ID.

Table 37: Assessment against Part D of SPP

State Interest State Interest Statement Assessment

Liveable communities and housing

Housing Supply and Diverse, accessible and well-serviced housing, and Applicable - the MID aligns with the Diversity land for housing, is provided and supports housing supply and diversity state interest. affordable housing outcomes. The proposed MID for provision of critical community infrastructure will enabling the supply of land for future dwellings as part of the Southern Redland Bay catchment. It will assist in ensuring that the new community is well-serviced.

Liveable Communities Liveable, well-designed and serviced communities  The MID aligns with the liveable are delivered to support wellbeing and enhance communities State interest. quality of life. The MID provides critical community infrastructure necessary to support a new community within the Southern Redland Bay catchment, ensuring the community is well-serviced. The MID seeks to implement integrated land use and infrastructure planning, maximising the benefits of the investment for an affordable and connected community.

Economic growth

Agriculture The resources that agriculture depends on are  The MID aligns with the agriculture State protected to support the long-term viability and interest. growth of the agricultural sector. There are nearby aquaculture uses along the Logan River that are reliant upon the Logan River. Comprehensive assessment of potential impacts upon aquaculture users (by way of water quality impacts) is included within Section 7 of this EAR and the Southern Redland Bay Receiving Water Environmental Assessments (Appendix K ). Water Technology recommended that additional disinfection be included in the design, including treatment of wet weather

158

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

events. UV disinfection was incorporated into the design as per this recommendation to mitigate potential impacts associated with human enteric viruses. Other mitigation measures include re-use of recycled water (where possible), establishment of new wetlands (a land-based discharge) and an initial establishment period for the wetlands. With these mitigation measures, Water Technology found that recycled water discharge into the wetlands will not have adverse impacts on the Logan River estuary.

Development and Employment needs, economic growth, and a  The MID aligns with the development Construction strong development and construction sector are and construction State interest. supported by facilitating a range of residential, commercial, retail, industrial and mixed-use The MID will facilitate the efficient and development opportunities. timely supply of infrastructure needed to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment and support employment and economic growth within the Redland LGA. Development within the Southern Redland Bay catchment is anticipated to support a significant number of construction (and ongoing) jobs through provision of different land uses (including residential dwelling construction, commercial uses, school, parks, sporting facilities etc).

Mining and Extractive Extractive resources are protected and mineral, Not Applicable- the MID is not for a Resources coal, petroleum and gas resources are mining or extractive industry purpose and appropriately considered to support the does not impact on any existing mining or productive use of resources, a strong mining and extractive industry resources. resource industry, economical supply of construction materials, and avoid land use conflicts where possible.

Tourism Tourism planning and development opportunities Not Applicable –the MID is not for a that are appropriate and sustainable are tourism use and does not impact on any supported, and the social, cultural and natural existing tourism uses. values underpinning tourism developments are protected. It is noted, however, that development of the Southern Redland Bay catchment, for which this infrastructure allows, will facilitate the development of regional recreation parks including regionally

159

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

significant foreshore parks along Southern Moreton Bay. Opening of foreshore areas along Southern Redland Bay would promote tourism within the immediate area may allow for Southern Redland Bay to become part of the Southern Redland Bay Tourist Drive (this drive currently does not travel through Southern Redland Bay).

Environment and Heritage

Biodiversity Matters of environmental significance are valued  The MID aligns with the biodiversity and protected, and the health and resilience of State interest. biodiversity is maintained or enhanced to support ecological processes. SPP mapping identifies various MSES layers affecting the site ( Appendix DD ). The MID and this EAR has addressed matters of State environmental significance. The MID incorporates best- practice in wastewater management and will increase biodiversity through the provision of additional marine and terrestrial flora and fauna habitat. Section 7 of this EAR addresses all environmental impacts of the MID.

Coastal Environment The coastal environment is protected and  The MID aligns with coastal enhanced, while supporting opportunities for environment state interest. coastal-dependent development, compatible urban form, and maintaining appropriate public The premise is located within the coastal use of and access to, and along, state coastal management district and adjoins the land. Logan River. Impacts associated with the coastal environment and processes are addressed within Section 7 of this EAR. The coastal environment is protected and enhanced as part of the MID, however the MID is not coastal- dependent development – it is critical community infrastructure. To assist in State interest assessment, a response to State Code 8 is provided within the Southern Redland Bay Receiving Water Environmental Assessments (Appendix K).

Cultural Heritage The cultural heritage significance of heritage  The MID aligns with the cultural places and heritage areas, including places of heritage state interest. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural

160

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

heritage, is conserved for the benefit of the The site has an existing Cultural Heritage community and future generations. Management Plan established with the Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People (Appendix Q ) implementing avoidance or mitigation measures for protecting Aboriginal cultural heritage. The site is not listed on the Queensland Heritage Register or as a local heritage place in the Redland City Plan 2018.

Water Quality The environmental values and quality of  The MID aligns with the water quality Queensland waters are protected and enhanced. state interest.

The MID protects and enhances the environmental value of the Logan River estuary through provision of increased biodiversity (marine and terrestrial flora and fauna habitat). A comprehensive assessment of water quality impacts to the receiving environment is contained in the Southern Redland Bay Receiving Water Environmental Assessments (Appendix K ) and summarised in Section 7 .

Safety and Resilience to Hazards

Emissions and Community health and safety, and the natural  The MID aligns with the emissions and Hazardous Activities and built environment, are protected from hazardous activities state interest. potential adverse impacts of emissions and hazardous activities. The operation of The MID has demonstrated that impacts appropriately established industrial development, from the WWTP can be avoided, major infrastructure, and sport and recreation mitigated or offset to ensure the activities is ensured. protection of the health, safety and amenity of the existing and future surrounding environment. The MID will obtain and satisfy ERA63 requirements prescribed under the Regulation for a WWTP. Section 7 provides a summary of the impact assessments relating to emissions (water quality, noise and air quality).

Natural Hazards, Risk The risks associated with natural hazards,  The MID aligns with the natural hazards, and Resilience including the projected impacts of climate risk and resilience state interest. change, are avoided or mitigated to protect people and property and enhance the State SPP mapping (Appendix DD ) community’s resilience to natural hazards. overlays are identified with any applicable risks carefully managed so

161

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

they are avoided or mitigated to protect people and property. Refer to Section 7 for a summary of the assessment of natural hazard risks and response/mitigation measures.

Infrastructure

Energy and Water The timely, safe, affordable and reliable provision Not applicable - the MID is not for Supply and operation of electricity and water supply provision or operation of electricity or infrastructure is supported and renewable energy water supply infrastructure. development is enabled.

Infrastructure The benefits of past and ongoing investment in  The MID aligns with the infrastructure Integration infrastructure and facilities are maximised integration State interest. through integrated land use planning. The MID is for critical community infrastructure that provides multiple economic, social and environmental benefits from the infrastructure investment, as outlined in this EAR. The development of the Southern Redland Bay catchment for urban purposes aligns with Goal 1 of ShapingSEQ and this infrastructure is required to service the needs of the future community. A comprehensive Options Assessment was carried out by Stantec (Appendix F), which included a multi-criteria assessment. Collaboration with RCC and RW has ensured that the proposed infrastructure solution is integrated with RCC (and Shoreline) land use planning.

Transport The safe and efficient movement of people and  The MID aligns with the transport Infrastructure goods is enabled, and land use patterns that infrastructure State interest. encourage sustainable transport are supported. The WWTP obtains access from Longland Road, a State-controlled road. Planning for the development considers impacts on the network and implements mitigation measures that maintains the safety, structural and operational integrity of the state transport infrastructure. Refer to Section 7 of this EAR and to the Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment ( Appendix U ).

Strategic airports and The operation of strategic airports and aviation Not Applicable – the MID is not for an aviation facilities facilities is protected, and the growth and airport or aviation facility and does not

162

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

development of Queensland’s aviation industry is impact on any nearby airports or aviation supported. facilities.

Strategic ports The operation of strategic ports and priority ports Not applicable - the MID is not for a port is protected and their growth and development is and does not impact on any nearby supported. strategic ports.

10.4.3 Part E – State Interest Policies and Assessment Benchmarks A copy of the SPP Mapping applying to the premises is included in Appendix DD. The following SPP layers are identified -

. Biodiversity

o MSES - Wildlife habitat (endangered or vulnerable) o MSES - Wildlife habitat (special least concern animal) o MSES - Wildlife habitat (koala habitat areas - core) o MSES - Regulated vegetation (category B) o MSES - Regulated vegetation (category C) o MSES - Regulated vegetation (essential habitat) o MSES - Regulated vegetation (wetland) o MSES - Regulated vegetation (intersecting a watercourse) o MSES - High ecological significance wetlands

. Coastal Environment

o Coastal management district

. Natural Hazards Risk and Resilience

o Bushfire prone area o Erosion prone area o Medium storm tide inundation area o High storm tide inundation area

. Transport Infrastructure

o State-controlled road

Table 38 provides an assessment against Part E - State interest policies and assessment benchmarks of the SPP, as it applies to the proposed MID. State interest policies and assessment benchmarks correspond with the State interest statements where it has been identified as ‘applicable’ to the MID in Section 10.4.2 Part D – State Interest Statements Assessment .

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

State Interest – Liveable communities All of the following state interest policies much be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant.

Built and natural environment: (1) High quality urban design and place making outcomes are facilitated and promote: (a) affordable living and sustainable and complete communities

163

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

(b) attractive, adaptable, accessible and inclusive built environments (c) personal safety and security (d) functional, accessible, legible and connected spaces (e) community identity through considering local features, character, needs and aspirations. (2) Vibrant places and spaces, and diverse communities that meet lifestyle needs are facilitated by: (a) good neighbourhood planning and centre design (b) a mix of land uses that meet the diverse demographic, social, cultural, economic and lifestyle needs of the community (c) consolidating urban development in and around existing settlements (d) higher density development in accessible and well-serviced locations (e) efficient use of established infrastructure and services (f) supporting a range of formal and informal sporting, recreational and community activities. (3) Development is designed to: (a) value and nurture local landscape character and the natural environment (b) maintain or enhance important cultural landscapes and areas of high scenic amenity, including important views and vistas that contribute to natural and visual amenity (c) maintain or enhance opportunities for public access and use of the natural environment.

Infrastructure and services: (4) Connected pedestrian, cycling and public transport infrastructure networks are facilitated and provided. (5) Community facilities and services, including education facilities (state and non-state providers), health facilities, emergency services, arts and cultural infrastructure, and sport, recreation and cultural facilities are well-located, cost- effective and multi-functional. (6) Connection to fibre-optic telecommunications infrastructure (e.g. broadband) is supported in greenfield areas. (7) All development accessed by common private title is provided with appropriate fire hydrant infrastructure and has unimpeded access for emergency service vehicles to protect people, property and the environment.

Assessment: The proposed infrastructure assists in consolidating urban development within the Urban Footprint of ShapingSEQ by servicing land within the Southern Redland Bay catchment (Redland Bay expansion area); and allows for the new community of Southern Redland Bay to develop consistent with ShapingSEQ .

State Interest – Development and construction All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant.

(1) A sufficient supply of suitable land for residential, retail, commercial, industrial and mixed-use development is identified that considers: (a) existing and anticipated demand (b) the physical constraints of the land (c) surrounding land uses (d) the availability of, and proximity to, essential infrastructure required to service and support such development. (2) Appropriate infrastructure required to support all land uses is planned for and provided. (3) Mixed use development is achieved by appropriately zoning the land. (4) An appropriate mix of lot sizes and configurations for residential, retail, commercial, mixed use and industrial development is provided for in response to the diverse needs of these uses and ancillary activities. (5) Efficient delivery of development is facilitated by the adoption of the lowest appropriate level of assessment for development that is consistent with the purpose of the zone. (6) Land uses are consistent with the purpose of the zone.

164

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

(7) State development areas and Priority Development Areas are: (a) identified and appropriately considered in terms of their planning intent (b) supported by compatible and complementary land uses and services on surrounding land. (8) Public benefit outcomes on state-owned land are achieved by appropriately zoning the land.

Assessment: The project supports this State interest by providing appropriate infrastructure required to support all land uses is planned for within the Southern Redland Bay catchment (Urban Footprint) consistent with ShapingSEQ (refer to Section 10.6 below); and ensuring suitable supply of land is available within the Southern Redland Bay catchment consistent with ShapingSEQ .

Environment and Heritage

State Interest – Biodiversity Matters of environmental significance are valued and protected, and the health and resilience of biodiversity is maintained or enhanced to support ecological processes.

All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant. (1) Development is located in areas to avoid significant impacts on matters of national environmental significance and considers the requirements of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. (2) Matters of state environmental significance are identified and development is located in areas that avoid adverse impacts; where adverse impacts cannot be reasonably avoided, they are minimised. (3) Matters of local environmental significance are identified and development is located in areas that avoid adverse impacts; where adverse impacts cannot be reasonably avoided, they are minimised. (4) Ecological processes and connectivity is maintained or enhanced by avoiding fragmentation of matters of environmental significance. (5) Viable koala populations in South East Queensland are protected by conserving and enhancing koala habitat extent and condition.

Assessment: A comprehensive assessment of the biodiversity State interest is provided within the Ecological Assessment Report (Appendix M ), which includes a MNES Significant Impact Guideline Assessment and a response to State Code 25 (Development in Koala Habitat). The proposed infrastructure is located appropriately on the site considering a range of factors (including non-ecological related factors) and impacts can be appropriately avoided, minimised or offset. Overall, there is a significant net ecological benefit, through the creation of: 9.854ha mangrove forest and saltmarsh wetland comprised of:

o 8.6854ha of mangrove (least concern RE12.1.3; HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) o 1.08ha of saltmarsh (least concern RE12.1.2; HES Wetland; Essential Habitat) o Casuarina glauca (swamp she-oak) planting (1835m²) and natural regeneration o Green couch grasslands adjoining access tracks. . 2.26ha of Koala habitat (RE12.3.5/12.3.6) . 0.58ha of Koala habitat (RE12.11.27/12.11.23/12.11.26) . Planting of 100 juvenile Koala habitat trees along the outer margins of the linear infrastructure path between the WWTP and Longland Road.

State Interest – Coastal Environment

165

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

The coastal environment is protected and enhanced, while supporting opportunities for coastal-dependent development, compatible urban form, and maintaining appropriate public use of and access to, and along, state coastal land.

All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant. Protection of the coastal environment: (1) Coastal processes and coastal resources state-wide, including in the Great Barrier Reef catchment, are protected by: (a) concentrating future development in existing urban areas through infill and redevelopment (b) conserving the natural state of landforms, wetlands and native vegetation in the coastal management district (c) maintaining or enhancing the scenic amenity and aesthetic values of important natural coastal landscapes, views and vistas (2) Development of canals, dry land marinas, artificial waterways or marine infrastructure avoids adverse impacts on coastal resources and processes. (3) Reclamation of land under tidal water is avoided other than for the purpose of: (a) coastal-dependent development, public marine development or community infrastructure, where there is no reasonable alternative; or (b) strategic ports, priority ports, boat harbours or strategic airports and aviation facilities in accordance with a statutory land use plan, or statutory master plan; or (c) coastal protection works or work necessary to protect coastal resources or coastal processes. Development in the coastal environment : (4) Coastal-dependent development in areas adjoining tidal water is facilitated in preference to other types of development. (5) Opportunities for public use of and access to, and along, state coastal land is maintained or enhanced in a way that protects or enhances public safety and coastal resource.

Assessment: A comprehensive assessment against the Coastal Environment State interest is provided within the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments by Water Technology ( Appendix K ), including a response to State Code 8; and this State interest is also addressed in Section 7 of this EAR.

State Interest – Water quality The environmental values and quality of Queensland waters are protected and enhanced.

All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant. (1) Development facilitates the protection or enhancement of environmental values and the achievement of water quality objectives for Queensland waters. (2) Land zoned for urban purposes is located in areas that avoid or minimise the disturbance to: (a) high risk soils (b) high ecological value aquatic ecosystems (c) groundwater dependent ecosystems (d) natural drainage lines and landform features. (3) Development is located, designed, constructed and operated to avoid or minimise adverse impacts on environmental values of receiving waters arising from: (a) altered stormwater quality and hydrology (b) waste water (other than contaminated stormwater and sewage) (c) the creation or expansion of non-tidal artificial waterways (d) the release and mobilisation of nutrients and sediments. (4) At the construction phase, development achieves the applicable stormwater management design objectives in table A (appendix 2).

166

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

(5) At the post-construction phase, development: (a) achieves the applicable stormwater management design objectives on-site, as identified in table B (appendix 2); or (b) achieves an alternative locally appropriate solution off-site that achieves an equivalent or improved water quality outcome to the relevant stormwater management design objectives in table B (appendix 2). (6) Development in water resource catchments and water supply buffer areas avoids potential adverse impacts on surface waters and groundwaters to protect drinking water supply environmental value.

Assessment: A comprehensive assessment against the Water Quality State interest is provided within the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments by Water Technology (Appendix K ); and is addressed in Section 7 of this EAR.

Planning for safety and resilience to hazards

State Interest – Emissions and hazardous activities Community health and safety, and the natural and built environment, are protected from potential adverse impacts of emissions and hazardous activities. The operation of appropriately established industrial development, major infrastructure, and sport and recreation activities is ensured.

All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant. Protection from emissions and hazardous activities: (1) Industrial development, major gas, waste and sewerage infrastructure, and sport and recreation activities are located, designed and managed to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts of emissions on sensitive land uses and the natural environment. (2) Activities involving the use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials and prescribed hazardous chemicals, dangerous goods, and flammable or combustible substances are located and managed to minimise the health and safety risks to communities and individuals. (3) Prescribed hazardous chemicals, stored in a flood hazard area (where exceeding the hazardous chemicals flood hazard threshold), are located to minimise the risk of inundation and dispersion. (4) Sensitive land uses are protected from the impacts of previous activities that may cause risk to people or property including: (a) former mining activities and related hazards (e.g. disused underground mines, tunnels and shafts) (b) former landfill and refuse sites (c) contaminated land. Protection of industrial development, major infrastructure, and sport and recreation facilities from encroachment: (5) Protect the following existing and approved land uses or areas from encroachment by development that would compromise the ability of the land use to function safely and effectively: (a) Medium-impact, high-impact and special industries. (b) Extractive industries. (c) Hazardous chemical facilities. (d) Explosives facilities and explosives reserves. (e) High pressure gas pipelines. (f) Waste management facilities. (g) Sewage treatment plants. (h) Industrial land in a state development area, or an enterprise opportunity area or employment opportunity area identified in a regional plan. (i) Major sport, recreation and entertainment facilities. (j) Shooting facilities.

167

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

(k) Motor sport facilities. Mitigation of adverse impacts from emissions and hazardous activities: (6) Development that is incompatible with the existing and approved land uses or areas included in policy 5 above, is located to avoid adverse impacts of environmental emissions, or health and safety risks, and where the impacts cannot be practicably avoided, development is designed to minimise the impacts. Acid sulfate soil affected areas: (7) Protect the natural and built environment, and human health from potential adverse impacts of acid sulfate soils by: (a) identifying areas with high probability of containing acid sulfate soils (b) providing preference to land uses that will avoid, or where avoidance is not practicable, minimise the disturbance of acid sulfate soils (c) including requirements for managing the disturbance of acid sulfate soils to avoid or minimise the mobilisation and release of acid, iron or other contaminant.

Assessment: The proposed infrastructure is located on existing rural land, which allows for appropriate buffer distances (>200m) to nearby sensitive receptors. The site of the site (75ha) allows for a significant amount of existing vegetation to be retained and a significant opportunity for rehabilitation works (additional vegetation). Hazards associated with emissions are dealt with within the Concept Design Report ( Appendix G ), which includes odour and noise assessments and recommendations. Hazard associated with acid sulfate soils are addressed within the Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation ( Appendix R ).

State Interest – Natural hazards, risk and resilience The risks associated with natural hazards, including the projected impacts of climate change, are avoided or mitigated to protect people and property and enhance the community’s resilience to natural hazards.

All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant. (1) Natural hazard areas are identified, including: (a) bushfire prone areas (b) flood hazard areas (c) landslide hazard areas (d) storm tide inundation areas (e) erosion prone areas. (2) A fit-for-purpose risk assessment is undertaken to identify and achieve an acceptable or tolerable level of risk for personal safety and property in natural hazard areas. Bushfire, flood, landslide, storm tide inundation, and erosion prone areas: (3) Land in an erosion prone area is not to be used for urban purposes, unless the land is located in: (a) an urban area in a planning scheme; or (b) an urban footprint identified in a regional plan. (4) Development in bushfire, flood, landslide, storm tide inundation or erosion prone natural hazard areas: (a) avoids the natural hazard area; or (b) where it is not possible to avoid the natural hazard area, development mitigates the risks to people and property to an acceptable or tolerable level. (5) Development in natural hazard areas: (a) supports, and does not hinder disaster management capacity and capabilities (b) directly, indirectly and cumulatively avoids an increase in the exposure or severity of the natural hazard and the potential for damage on the site or to other properties

168

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

(c) avoids risks to public safety and the environment from the location of the storage of hazardous materials and the release of these materials as a result of a natural hazard (d) maintains or enhances the protective function of landforms and vegetation that can mitigate risks associated with the natural hazard. (6) Community infrastructure is located and designed to maintain the required level of functionality during and immediately after a natural hazard event. (7) Coastal protection work in an erosion prone area is undertaken only as a last resort where coastal erosion or inundation presents an imminent threat to public safety or existing buildings and structures5, and all of the following apply: (a) The building or structure cannot reasonably be relocated or abandoned. (b) Any erosion control structure is located as far landward as practicable and, on the lot, containing the property to the maximum extent reasonable. (c) Any increase in coastal hazard risk for adjacent areas from the coastal protection work is mitigated. Erosion prone areas within a coastal management district: (8) Development does not occur unless the development cannot feasibly be located elsewhere and is: (a) coastal-dependent development; or (b) temporary, readily relocatable or able to be abandoned development; or (c) essential community infrastructure; or (d) minor redevelopment of an existing permanent building or structure that cannot be relocated or abandoned. (9) Development permitted in policy 8 above, mitigates the risks to people and property to an acceptable or tolerable level.

Assessment: Assessment of impacts and avoidance mitigation measures related to natural hazards is included within Section 7 of this report. In addition, this EAR is supported by: . A Bushfire Management Plan ( Appendix S); . A Biting Insects Management Plan ( Appendix T ); . The Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments by Water Technology ( Appendix K ), including a response to State Code 8

Planning for Infrastructure

State Interest – Infrastructure integration The benefits of past and ongoing investment in infrastructure and facilities are maximised through integrated land use planning.

All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant. (1) The outcomes of significant infrastructure plans and initiatives by all levels of government are considered and reflected, where relevant. (2) Development achieves a high level of integration with infrastructure planning to: (a) promote the most efficient, effective and flexible use of existing and planned infrastructure (b) realise multiple economic, social and environmental benefits from infrastructure investment (c) ensure consideration of future infrastructure needed to support infill and greenfield growth areas (d) optimise the location of future infrastructure within communities to provide greater access to facilities and services and enable productivity improvements. (3) Development occurs: (a) in areas currently serviced by state and/or local infrastructure and associated services; or (b) in a logical and orderly location, form and sequence to enable the cost-effective delivery of state and local infrastructure to service development.

169

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 38: Assessment against Part E of SPP

(4) Existing and planned infrastructure is protected from development that would compromise the ability of infrastructure and associated services to operate safely and efficiently.

Assessment: The proposal provides a wastewater treatment solution that seeks to re-use as much recycled water as possible, as outlined in Section 6 of this report; and provide a land-based discharge to new wetlands. The infrastructure solution has significant benefits (environmental, social and economic) as outlined in Section 7 of this report; and provides an infrastructure solution to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment in accordance with ShapingSEQ. As also outlined in Section 7, the proposal is a cost-effective solution for the supply of wastewater infrastructure compared with a typical wastewater treatment system offering significant operational and capital expenditure savings.

State Interest – Transport infrastructure The safe and efficient movement of people and goods is enabled, and land use patterns that encourage sustainable transport are supported.

All of the following state interest policies must be considered and appropriately integrated in planning and development outcomes, where relevant. All transport infrastructure: (1) Transport infrastructure and existing and future transport corridors are reflected and supported through compatible land uses. (2) Development is located in areas currently serviced by transport infrastructure, and where this cannot be achieved, development is facilitated in a logical and orderly location, form and sequence to enable cost-effective delivery of new transport infrastructure to service development. (3) Development achieves a high level of integration with transport infrastructure and supports public passenger transport and active transport as attractive alternatives to private transport. (4) Development is located and designed to mitigate adverse impacts on development from environmental emissions generated by transport infrastructure. (5) A road hierarchy is identified that reflects the role of each category of road and effectively manages all types of traffic. State transport infrastructure: (6) Development in areas surrounding state transport infrastructure, and existing and future state transport corridors, is compatible with, or support the most efficient use of, the infrastructure and transport network. (7) The safety and efficiency of existing and future state transport infrastructure, corridors, and networks is not adversely affected by development.

Assessment: The proposal aligns with the transport infrastructure State interest policies. The proposal will not impact upon the safety and efficiency of the state transport system. Traffic impacts of the proposal have been addressed in the Traffic Impact Report at Appendix U. This report recommends an appropriate intersection design treatment for the intersection with Longland Road.

10.5 State Development Assessment Provisions The State Assessment Provisions (SDAP) version 2.6 (effective 7 February 2020) is a statutory instrument prescribed under the PR. The SDAP defines the State’s interest in development assessment through assessment benchmarks or matters that the Chief Executive of the State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA) will assess a development application against. Triggers for the assessment benchmarks are identified in schedules 9 and 10 of the PR.

170

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The QTPG provides the DA Mapping System (DAMS) which contains mapping layers that identify matters of State interest. A copy of the DAMS mapping applying to the premises is included in Appendix HH.

The State uses the SDAP to deliver a coordinated, whole of government approach to the State’s assessment of development applications under the PA. The development assessment provisions of the PA and PR are not applicable to a MID , therefore the MID does not trigger assessment against the SDAP provisions. Notwithstanding, Table 39 provides an assessment against the SDAP provisions as applicable to the site under DAMS and this EAR includes a response to the relevant State Codes to assist in demonstrating compliance with the relevant State interests.

Table 39: SDAP Assessment

DAMS Layer PR trigger Relevant State code

SEQ Regional Plan Not applicable Not applicable

. SEQ Regional Plan land use categories (Regional landscape and rural production area)

Coastal Protection If an application was lodged under PA State Code 8: Coastal and PR, the application would trigger development and tidal . Coastal management district assessment against Schedule 10, part 17, works – please refer to the . Coastal area – erosion prone area div 3, table 6 being development Southern Redland Bay . Coastal area – medium storm tide carried out completely or partly in an WWTP – Mangrove Design inundation area erosion prone area in a coastal and Receiving . Coastal area – high storm tide management district. Environmental inundation area Assessments ( Appendix K ) and specifically to Appendix L of this report.

Fish Habitat Areas If an application was lodged under PA State code 18: Construction and PR, the application would trigger or raising waterway barrier . Queensland waterways for assessment against Schedule 10, part 6, works in fish habitats – waterway barrier works div 4, sub 3, table 1 – waterway barrier please refer to the works Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ).

Water Resources Not applicable Not applicable

. Water resource planning area boundaries

Native Vegetation Clearing Not applicable Not applicable

. Regulated vegetation management map (Category A and B extract)

Koala Priority Area If an application was lodged under PA Not applicable – however, and PR, development is prohibited to the a response to State Code . Koala Priority Area extent development involves interfering 25 is provided within the with koala habitat in an area that is both Ecological Assessment

171

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

in the koala habitat area and koala priority Report ( Appendix M ). A area where not ‘Exempted Development’ Koala Management Plan is under Schedule 24 of the PR. The provided (Appendix II ). development is ‘infrastructure’ defined in Schedule 5 of the PR that is being constructed on behalf of RCC and RW to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment. The development is therefore ‘Exempted Development’ under Schedule 24 of the PR.

Koala Habitat Area As above Not applicable – however, a response to State Code . Core Koala Habitat Area 25 is included within the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ).

State Transport Corridor If an application was lodged under PA State Code 1: Development and PR, the application would trigger in a state-controlled road . State-controlled road assessment against Schedule 10, part 9, environment – State Code div 4, sub 2, table 4 - all or part of the 1 has not been completed. premises are within 25 of a State Requirements relating to Controlled Road; and adjacent to a road the State -controlled road that intersects with a State-controlled are satisfactorily addressed Road. within the Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment (Appendix U ).

Areas within 25m of a State Transport As above As above Corridor

. Area within 25m of a State- controlled road

Other If an application was lodged under PA State Code 22: Non-devolved environmentally relevant and PR, the application would trigger Environmentally relevant activity assessment against Schedule 10, part 5, activities. A response to div 4, table 2 - Environmentally relevant this State Code is not activity that has not been devolved to a provided. DES have local government under the advised that an application Environmental Protection Regulation for Environmental Authority can be made concurrently with the MID and will be separately applied for by Stantec.

Other If an application was lodged under PA State Code 11: Removal, Marine Plants and PR, the application would trigger destruction or damage of assessment against Schedule 10, part 6, marine plants – a response div 3, sub 3, table - Development that to State Code 11 is

172

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

involves the removal, destruction or contained in the Ecological damage of marine plants. Assessment Report (Appendix M ).

10.6 ShapingSEQ The South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 , otherwise called ShapingSEQ, is “ the Queensland Government’s plan to guide the future of the South East Queensland region, prepared in collaboration with the region’s 12 local governments ” (ShapingSEQ, August 2017). The plan provides a framework to managing growth, change, land use and development in South East Queensland. It reflects the outcomes sought in the State Planning Policy and informs a range of other more detailed local planning instruments (such as Planning Schemes/Categorising Instruments) to deliver good land use outcomes.

ShapingSEQ is intended to inform infrastructure planning decisions made by State and local governments (and other infrastructure agencies); and can inform the assessment of certain development applications made under the PA. ShapingSEQ sets out a 50-year vision for South East Queensland to be a world leading model of sub-tropical living. The vision is supported by 5 key themes, including:

1. Grow – Sustainably accommodate a growing population 2. Prosper – A globally competitive economic powerhouse 3. Connect – Moving people, products and information efficiently 4. Sustain – Promoting ecological and social sustainability 5. Live – Living in better designed communities

Themes 1 and 4 are directly relevant to the proposed infrastructure, whilst Themes 2 and 5 are partially or indirectly relevant. Dealing with Themes 2 and 5, the project:

. Supports the creation of a new community, which for the reasons outlined in Section 7.11 above will ensure creation of a new community and associated economic benefits to the Redland LGA and region generally; . Ensures the protection of the existing aquaculture industry and other Logan River water users through neutral or positive net impact on water quality in the Logan River; and . Supports better designed communities by ensuring the Southern Redland Bay catchment (land within the Urban Footprint) including the exemplar Shoreline development is appropriately planned and serviced with necessary infrastructure.

Themes are supported by goals, elements and strategies contained within Chapter 3 of ShapingSEQ . An assessment against Goal 1 (Theme 1) and Goal 4 (Theme 4) is included below.

10.7 Goal 1: Grow The plan identifies the type of growth anticipated in each area and key strategic growth areas within individual Local Government Area (LGA). In 2016, the regional plan was amended to add land within Southern Redland Bay within the Urban Footprint.

ShapingSEQ indicates that the population of the Redland LGA is expected to increase from approximately 152,000 people in 2016 to 188,000 people by 2041. According to RPS Economics (August 2020) ‘development of the Southern Redland Bay expansion area must commence in the short term if Redland City is to reach the planned population of 188,000 people by 2041 (Table 13, Shaping SEQ). More importantly, Redland City must continue to develop and evolve all employment opportunities if the LGA is to host the planned 69,200 employees by 2041 (Table 3, Shaping SEQ)’.

173

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The WWTP and wetlands is located within the Regional Landscape and Rural Production Area of the SEQ Regional Plan land use categories . Despite this, the intent of the proposed infrastructure is to service land to the north of the site within Southern Redland Bay catchment (within the Urban Footprint) as shown in Figure 71.

This type of infrastructure (wastewater treatment) is ideally located outside of the Urban Footprint, where amenity impacts can be minimised through appropriate buffering and management measures.

Figure 71: SEQ Regional Plan land use categories (Source: DAMS Mapping, April 2020)

Figure 72 below is extracted from Figure 23: The Metro Sub-region of Shaping SEQ , identifying Southern Redland Bay as a ‘major expansion area’. The identified ‘major expansion area’ is generally consistent with the Southern Redland Bay catchment area to be serviced by the WWTP and wetlands. The proposed infrastructure will therefore service the Southern Redland Bay ‘major expansion area’ which has been included in the Urban Footprint of ShapingSEQ . The need for the proposed infrastructure is driven by the regional planning process and the included goals, plans and strategies.

It should be noted that ‘expansion’ is development occurring on land outside the existing urban area boundary. This was previously known as ‘greenfield development’ as per the explanatory note in ShapingSEQ

The intent of the mapping in ShapingSEQ is for local government planning schemes to provide a more reﬁned planning outcome for the expansion area, and any di\erences arising from that reﬁned planning will not result in the planning scheme being inconsistent with this the mapping. RCC has amended Redland City Plan 2018 to include the Shoreline preliminary approval area within the Emerging Community Zone of the planning scheme, however, the balance of the land in the urban footprint outside of the master planned community remains in the Rural Zone. The zone amendment

174

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project over Shoreline therefore enables the lodgement of assessable development applications for the residential development to proceed. It is anticipated that the rezoning of the balance of land within the Southern Redland Bay Urban Footprint for residential purposes will eventually occur once more detailed structure planning has been undertaken.

Figure 72: Extract of Figure 23: The Metro Sub-region (Source: ShapingSEQ, August 2017, p109) Chapter 3, Part C, Sub Regional Outcomes (item 2, Growth by Expansion, p110) of ShapingSEQ states that the intent of growth by expansion is to “deliver new and more complete communities that area well-planned and serviced.” It additionally states that “Southern Redland Bay will provide residential supply within the Redlands ”. The proposed infrastructure is therefore critical to ensure the intended dwelling supply benchmarks of 4,700 dwellings by 2041within the ‘major expansion area’ can be met. Figure 73 below is an extract from the Dwelling Supply Benchmarks for Redland City Council.

175

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 73: Extract of Figure 7: Dwelling Supply Benchmarks (Source: ShapingSEQ, August 2017, 43)

Table 40 provides an assessment of the proposed infrastructure designation against the elements and strategies of Goal 1: Grow of ShapingSEQ .

Table 40: ShapingSEQ Assessment

Strategies Assessment

Goal 1: Grow Sustainably accommodating a growing population

Element 1: Efficient land use Urban development uses land and infrastructure efficiently.

Strategies: 1Accommodate the region’s urban growth needs in the Urban . 1. Applicable - The WWTP will support the Footprint in an efficient manner (Map 2). growth of Southern Redland Bay catchment 2 Plan for and accommodate the consolidation dwelling supply (‘expansion area’) in the Urban Footprint. benchmarks (Figure 7), and an adequate supply in the interim . 2. Not Applicable – the infrastructure does (Figure 10) through new development in the existing urban area not support the consolidation of dwelling (including redevelopment), with a focus on corridors and supply within an existing urban area. centres. . 3. Applicable - The WWTP will ‘unlock’ 3 Prioritise the investigation, planning and delivery of urban underutilised Urban Footprint land suitable development in suitable locations within the Urban Footprint for development that is: that are underutilised. o in the Emerging community zone, 4 Focus urban redevelopment in locations with spare capacity in o in the Shoreline preliminary approval the infrastructure networks or where existing networks can be area; and cost-effectively augmented. o within the balance land of the 5 Accommodate new rural residential development only in the Southern Redland Bay ‘major Rural Living Area, or in the Urban Footprint where land is expansion area’ subject to a structure unsuitable for urban use (Map 2). planning process. . 4. Not Applicable - The WWTP ill not support urban redevelopment in a location where spare capacity exists in infrastructure networks. . 5. Not Applicable - The WWTP does not support new rural residential development.

Element 2: Focusing residential density Higher density development is located in areas with good access to high-frequency public transport, employment and services .

Strategies: Not Applicable 1 Plan for well-designed and increased residential densities in The proposal is to support the development of new and around centres, including those as described in the guide for greenfield development in the urban footprint. minimum densities (Table 1). 2 Plan for well-designed and increased residential densities at other locations that have good access to high-frequency public transport and employment.

176

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

3 Plan for sensitive residential density increases in other suitable areas close to services and amenities.

Element 3: New communities New communities support a consolidated urban settlement pattern, maximise the use of existing infrastructure and deliver high-quality communities.

Strategies: . 1. Applicable - The WWTP provides a sub- 1 Ensure planning and delivery of land use and infrastructure for regional solution for the growth of the new communities, including major development areas, are Southern Redland Bay ‘major expansion area’. integrated and sequenced, and deliver complete communities in The WWTP is required to service the Shoreline a timely manner. development (currently under construction) 2 Plan for and accommodate the expansion dwelling supply which is within the catchment; and enable the benchmarks (Figure 7), and an adequate supply in the interim continued growth of the master planned (Figure 10). community in a timely manner. 3 Plan for a net residential density of 15–25 dwellings/ha in new . 2. Applicable - It is anticipated that the communities or 30–60 dwellings/ha net residential density if proposed WWTP infrastructure will be these areas are within easy walking distance to an existing or required to be delivered by December 2021 proposed public transport station. allowing for current/projected rates of 4 Protect the potential of areas that may be suitable for future development. urban growth including those listed in Table 2 and as reflected in . 3. Applicable - Shoreline development is a Figure 13. well-planned master planned community that contributes to residential supply and employment generation within the ‘major expansion area’ and within the Southern Redland Bay catchment, which the proposed WWTP will service. It is projected that southern Redland Bay will eventually be home to a community including schools, community services, shopping facilities and parks. . 4. Applicable - An intent to deliver new and complete communities serviced by all infrastructure networks including the future development of the balance of land in the Urban Footprint of Southern Redland Bay subject to appropriate planning processes.

Element 4: Housing diversity Housing diversity meets the changing make-up of our population, community needs and lifestyles, and provides choice and affordability.

Strategies: Not Applicable 1 Provide housing choice by delivering a mix of dwelling types However, it is noted that the regional solution will and sizes in consolidation and expansion locations consistent provide necessary infrastructure for the growth of a with the strategies in elements 1–3. new residential community within the Southern 2 Plan for and deliver a greater range of ‘missing middle’ Redland Bay ‘major expansion area’. The intent of this housing forms (including examples shown in Figure 9) in growth is to provide housing choice and sufficient suitable locations. land, to accommodate the projected population and employment growth within Southern Redland Bay.

177

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

3 Plan for and support innovative solutions in housing to cater for a diverse range of community needs, including an ageing population, multi-generational families, group housing, people with special needs and those from different cultural backgrounds. 4 Maximise the variety of available land in suitable locations to support a range of housing choices under a range of market and economic circumstances.

Element 5: Growing rural towns and villages Rural towns and villages provide for sustainable growth and community development in a way that reinforces local identity.

Strategies: Not Applicable 1 Support the sustainability of rural towns and villages by The proposed WWTP will not service the growth of a providing sufficient land and infrastructure to accommodate rural town or village. population and employment growth. 2 Support the growth of rural towns and villages in a manner that avoids the fragmentation of productive rural land and the regional biodiversity network, including koala habitat. 3 Plan for well-designed growth that integrates sensitively with existing local character and identity, and promotes viability of the rural economy.

10.8 Goal 4: Sustain The proposal promotes the achievement of the elements and strategies of Goal 4 by providing for a best-practice wastewater management solution that has positive environmental benefits, including a net increase in marine and terrestrial flora and fauna habitat; and ensuring ecological impacts associated with the infrastructure are avoided, mitigated or offset as outlined in Section 7 . The proposal responds well to the elements and strategies of Goal 4, as summarised below: . The project will be undertaken in accordance with an existing Cultural Heritage Management Plan ( Appendix Q); . Locates infrastructure on land with limited environmental values and seeks to mitigate ecological impacts through rehabilitation planting to create a net increase in marine and terrestrial flora and fauna habitat; . Mitigates potential water quality impacts in accordance with the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K ) to ensure there is a neutral or positive impact on water quality within the Logan River estuary and Moreton Bay; . Provides innovative water cycle management infrastructure, which re-uses water where possible and provides a land-based discharge to a new wetland ecosystem; . Provides for a solution that is robust to a changing climate, recognising and mitigating against the impacts of future climate change; . Provides for a wastewater solution that allows for appropriate urban development of land within the Urban Footprint (compact development) thereby lessening the pressure on land outside the Urban Footprint to be developed; and . Provides for a wastewater infrastructure solution that is well-separated from surrounding rural residential dwellings and urban areas.

178

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

10.9 Other State Legislation/Requirements Any proposed and future development on the site is to be carried out in a manner that avoids significant adverse impacts to the onsite and surrounding environment and which gives appropriate regard to the provisions of the following (but not limited to) Commonwealth and State legislation—

Table 41: Other State Legislation/Requirements

Legislation Response

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 Please refer to Section 12 of this EAR.

Building Act 1975 The proposed MID does not exempt the project from assessment against the relevant provisions of the Building Act 1975 . Building Works approval will be required under the Building Act 1975 .

Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 No specific assessment requirements under this Act.

Electricity Infrastructure Act 1994 Please refer to Section 12 of this EAR.

Environmental Protection Act 1994 The project will require an Environmental Authority for an Environmentally Relevant Activity (ERA63). Please refer to Section 12 of this EAR.

Nature Conservation Act 1992 Please refer to the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ).

Queensland Heritage Act 1992 The site is not listed on the Queensland Heritage Register, therefore this Act is not applicable.

Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 Please refer to Section 12 of this EAR

Vegetation Management Act 1999 Please refer to the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix M ).

Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2019 Please refer to the Noise Impact Assessment contained within the Concept Design Report ( Appendix G ).

Water Act 2000 DNRME advised during the pre-consultation phase that the Water Act 2000 was not applicable.

As part of the consultation stages of the proposed designation, State agencies have the opportunity to advise of any other relevant legislation and a summary of pre-consultation is included in Section 13 .

179

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 11 Local Planning Framework It is acknowledged that an Infrastructure Designation is being sought for the site, and the Designation will exempt the project from any development approval requirements triggered under the local government’s categorising instrument (Planning Scheme) and under the Planning Act . However, it does not exempt the Southern Redland Bay WWTP from obtaining approvals/licenses and meeting obligations under relevant Commonwealth and State legislation, as identified in Sections 9 and Section 10 . The Planning Act does, however, require the Minister to consider how a proposal is consistent (or otherwise) with a local categorising instrument.

11.1 Local Government Planning Assessment We have carried out an assessment against the key elements of the local government planning framework for RCC, in particular the key provisions under the Planning Scheme, Temporary Local Planning Instruments (TLPI’s) and the Local Government Infrastructure Plan (LGIP).

Whilst we have carried out an assessment against the local government planning framework, it is relevant to note that development of infrastructure on premises that is subject to a designation is Accepted Development under section 44(6)(b) of the Planning Act 2016 , provided it complies with any requirements for the designation under section 35(2) of the Planning Act 2016 .

11.2 Local Framework Overview We have carried out an assessment against key elements of the Redland City Plan 2018, which is the Planning Scheme in effect for the Redlands Local Government Area (LGA).

Table 42 outlines the key elements of the City Plan as relevant to the site –

Table 42: Local Framework Overview

Defined Use Utility Installation Zone Rural Zone

Neighbourhood Plan Not Applicable

Bushfire Hazard Overlay Coastal Protection (Erosion Prone Areas) Overlay Environmental Significance Overlay Overlays Flood and Storm Tide Hazard Overlay Landslide Hazard Overlay Transport Noise Corridor Overlay Waterway Corridors and Wetlands Overlay

11.2.1 Use Definition We believe that the proposed use is defined as ‘utility installation under Redland City Plan 2018, as follows –

Utility Installation means the use of premises for - a) A service for supplying or treating water, hydraulic power or gas; or b) A sewerage drainage or stormwater service; or c) A transport service; or

180

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

d) A waste management service; or e) A maintenance depot, storage depot, or other facility for a service stated in paragraphs (a) to (d)

Note that this definition as prescribed by Section 7 of the PR. The use terms and their definitions are in Schedule 3 – Use terms for local planning instruments, columns 1 and 2 of the PR. 11.2.2 Zone The site is located within the Rural Zone under the Redland City Plan 2018 as shown in the mapping below.

Zone Mapping:

Figure 74: Zone map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map) Assessment: The purpose of the Rural Zone is to provide for wide range of primary production activities while protecting natural resources and significant environmental and landscape values. In accordance with Part 5 – Tables of Assessment, Table 5.4.22 – Rural Zone, utility installation where undertaken by a public sector entity is Accepted Development. The proposed WWTP and wetlands, although undertaken by a private sector entity in this case, would be considered to accord with the values of a utility installation which would otherwise be undertaken by a public sector entity. RCC have resolved to support the proposed sub-regional wastewater treatment solution and RW and RCC will take over the ownership and maintenance of the facility following construction and a maintenance period (if applicable).

It is also relevant to note that this type of infrastructure, provided impacts can be appropriately mitigated and managed, is entirely appropriate within a rural zone where impacts can be more successfully mitigated than within existing urban environments where significant amenity impacts may result. Within rural areas, lot size is generally very large and impacts can be mitigated by way of buffering or rehabilitation works that might otherwise be impossible within an existing urban setting. 11.2.3 Neighbourhood Plan Not applicable, as the site is not identified within a Neighbourhood Plan area of Redland City Plan 2018. 11.2.4 Overlays As assessment against the overlays affecting the site under Redland City Plan 2018 is carried out below.

181

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Bushfire Hazard Overlay . Bushfire Hazard Overlay o Very high potential bushfire intensity o high potential bushfire intensity o medium potential bushfire intensity o potential bushfire intensity

Mapping:

Figure 75: Bushfire hazard overlay map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map) Assessment: The proposed WWTP and wetlands appropriately addresses the bushfire hazard overlay within the Bushfire Management Plan (Appendix S). The overlay mapping in the figure above replicates the State Planning Policy mapping, which has already been addressed in this EAR. As such the proposal has responded to overlay matters, see Section 7 – Environmental Assessment .

Coastal Protection (Erosion Prone Areas) Overlay

. Coastal Protection Overlay o Erosion Prone Area o Coastal Management District

182

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Mapping:

Figure 76: Coastal protection (erosion prone aeas) overlay map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map)

Assessment: The overlay mapping in the figure above replicates the State Planning Policy mapping, which has already been addressed in this EAR. As such the proposal has responded to overlay matters, see Section 7 – Environmental Assessment .

Environmental Significance Overlay

. Environmental significance overlay o Matters of State environmental significance (MSES) o Matters of local environmental significance (MLES)

183

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Mapping:

Figure 77: Environmental significance overlay map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map) Assessment: The overlay mapping in the figure above replicates the State Planning Policy mapping, which has already been addressed in this EAR. As such the proposal has responded to overlay matters, see Section 7 – Environmental Assessment .

Flood and Storm Tide Hazard Overlay

. Flood and storm tide hazard overlay o 2016 Storm tide inundation area o Flood prone area

Mapping:

184

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Figure 78: Flood and stormtide hazard overlay map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map)

Assessment: The overlay mapping for storm tide inundation (in the figure above) replicates the State Planning Policy mapping, which has already been addressed in this EAR. As such the proposal has responded to overlay matters, see Section 7 – Environmental Assessment . In respect of flood prone areas, this has been addressed within Section 7 (Flood Hazard) and within the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments (Appendix K).

Landslide Hazard Overlay

. Landslide hazard overlay o Medium hazard o Low hazard

Mapping:

Figure 79: Landslide hazard overlay map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map) Assessment: Impacts associated with landslide hazards can be appropriately mitigated or avoided through engineering design by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ) and by complying with the relevant engineering standards. Landslide hazard has been considered within Section 7 – Environmental Assessment .

Transport Noise Corridor Overlay

. Transport noise corridor overlay o Category 1 o Category 2

185

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Mapping:

Figure 80: Transport noise corridor overlay map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map) Assessment: Noise impacts from the State-controlled road do not impact on the WWTP site (building location) and do not need to be considered.

Waterway Corridors and Wetlands Overlay

. Waterways corridors and wetlands overlay o Waterway corridors and wetlands

Mapping:

Figure 81: Waterway corridors and wetlands overlay map and legend (Source: Redlands Red-e-map)

186

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Assessment: The overlay mapping in the figure above replicates the State Planning Policy mapping and DAF mapping, which has already been addressed in this EAR. As such the proposal has responded to overlay matters, see Section 7 – Environmental Assessment .

11.3 Temporary Local Planning Instruments There are no Temporary Local Planning Instruments (TLPIs ) in effect within Redland City Council.

11.4 Local Government Infrastructure Plan We have carried out an assessment against the current and draft LGIP for the RCC. The Priority Infrastructure Area (PIA) identifies the area prioritised for the provision of trunk infrastructure to service the existing and assumed future urban development up to 2027 and does not include the proposed premise within the PIA.

187

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 12 Approvals Matrix Approvals required to facilitate construction of the infrastructure and the applicable legislation are outlined in Table 43 below.

Table 43: Project Approvals

Legislation Approval

Environment Protection and An action that is likely to have a significant impact on MNES must be Biodiversity Conservation Act referred for assessment against the EPBC Act. Refer to Section 9 of this EAR. 1999

Planning Act 2016 (Qld) - This EAR supports an application for Ministerial Infrastructure Designation Ministerial Infrastructure (MID), pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 5, Section 36 of the PA. The project will be Designation assessed under the MGR Chapter 7 – Guidelines for the process for environmental assessment and consultation for making or amending a Ministerial designation.

Environmental Protection Act 1994 The operational license for the WWTP will require an Environmental (Qld)- Environmental Authority Authority (permit) under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 . An Environmental Authority is required to perform an environmentally relevant activity (ERA). ERAs are industrial or intensive agricultural activities with the potential to release contaminants into the environment. Prescribed ERAs are industrial or intensive agricultural activities that have potential environmental risks. Examples include chemical manufacturing, sewage treatment, cement manufacturing and poultry farming.

The project requires an Environmental Authority for ERA 63 ( operating Sewage treatment works, other than no-release works, with a total daily peak design capacity of more than 10,000 but more than 50,000EP ).

As per advice from DES during pre-consultation, the application for Environmental Authority can be lodged concurrently with the MID and will be progressed by Stantec.

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act An ‘Agreement’ has been reached between Lendlease Communities 2003 (Shoreline) Pty Ltd and the Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People in the form of the Cultural Heritage Management Plan, dated 18 February 2020 (Appendix Q ).

Biosecurity Act The Biosecurity Act 2014 , which commenced on 1 July 2016, establishes a framework to regulate and control invasive plants and animals. Under the act, landowners are responsible for taking all reasonable and practical steps to minimise the risks associated with invasive plants and animals under their control. This is known as the general biosecurity obligation. Restricted matters observed within the site area are discussed in the Ecological Assessment Report (Appendix M) and must be managed and reported under the Biosecurity Plan for the Local Government Area.

188

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Building Act 1975 A Designation, if granted, exempts infrastructure from any further Building Regulation 2016 assessment under the PA, however does not exempt the project from requirements under the Building Act 1975 or Building Regulation 2016. Building Works approval will be required under the Building Act 1975 .

Nature Conservation Act 1992 The NCA classifies and protects significant areas (Protected Areas) and protects threatened plant and animal species. The Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 2006 lists plant and animal species presumed extinct, endangered, vulnerable, near threatened, least concern, international or prohibited.

The Protected Plants regulatory framework under the Nature Conservation Act commenced on 31 March 2014, establishing approval triggers and processes for clearing protected plants. Species defined as Extinct, Extinct in the wild, Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable and/or Near Threatened and listed by name in the Nature Conservation (Plants) Regulation 2020 are considered threatened species. Least Concern wildlife, not listed by name but identified as a plant indigenous to Australia in Schedule 6, is also protected under the regulation. Under the NCA, a Protected Plant that is in the wild must not be ‘taken’, which includes being cleared, unless taking is under:

. a conservation plan applicable to the plant; . a license, permit or other authority under a regulation; or . an exemption under a regulation.

A search of the Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map identified that the site is not located within a High-Risk Area for Protected Plants. Notwithstanding, a separate permit under the Nature Conservation Act may be required where impacting on any protected plants.

Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 An approval will be required for construction works on a State-controlled road under the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994.

Electricity Act 1994 Approval will be required under the Electricity Act 1994 to modify and/or construct new electricity infrastructure to service the WWTP.

Planning Act 2016 A development approval will be required under the Planning Act 2016 and Planning Regulation 2017 Planning Regulation 2017 for any operational works that are outside the Designation boundary. This infrastructure may include the construction of pipelines (recycled water and rising mains) within Longland Road and Serpentine Creek Road to connect the proposed WWTP with the reticulation network in the Southern Redland Bay catchment.

189

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 13 Consultation and Tranche Submissions A comprehensive pre-consultation on the proposal has already been undertaken. This consultation involved informal pre-consultation, formal pre-consultation and ongoing pre-consultation with State agencies, local government, elected representatives, technical consultants, academic experts, Native Title partners and special interest groups. This section provides a summary of all the consultation undertaken to date, including informal consultation; responses to issues raised during pre-consultation; a strategy for undertaking formal consultation; and ongoing consultation during the assessment phase but outside of the formal consultation period.

The formal consultation strategy has been prepared in accordance with the relevant sections of the 2017 publications of the Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning:

. MGR, Chapter 7 Part 4 - Consultation and State Interest Review; and . Community Engagement Toolkit for Planning (CETP).

The formal consultation will take place following lodgement of the MID will involve a combination of general community consultation and targeted consultation to specific-interest groups and landowners. For the formal consultation strategy, please see Appendix AA .

Informal and formal pre-consultation in relation to the project has been occurring since August 2018, culminating in the most recent technical advice received from State agencies on draft reporting in October 2020. Consultation on the proposed development is best-practice and ensures that, upon lodgement, the MID application addresses all of the issues identified in pre-consultation.

13.1 Identification of Stakeholders Table 44 identifies the stakeholders for proposed ID –

Table 44: Stakeholders

Level of Government Elected Representatives

. Dr Andrew Lamming MP – Member for Bowman (LNP) Federal Government . The Hon Stewart Robert MP – Member for Fadden (LNP) and Minister for

Government Services and NDIS

. Queensland Treasury – Planning Group (formerly State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning); . Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships; Queensland . Department of Agriculture and Fisheries; Government . Department of Environment and Science; . Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy; . Department of State Development, Tourism and Innovation; . Department of Transport & Main Roads;

190

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 44: Stakeholders

. The Hon Cameron Dick MP, Queensland Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning; . The Hon Leeanne Enoch, Minister for Environment and Great Barrier Reef, Minister for Science and Minister for the Arts . The Hon Mark Furner, Minister for Agricultural Industry Development and Fisheries Ms Kim Richards MP, Member for Redlands; o site of infrastructure . Ms Melissa McMahon MP, Member for Macalister; o immediately upstream northern bank Logan River . Mr Michael Crandon MP, Member for Coomera; o southern bank of Logan River

. Cr Karen Williams, Redland City Mayor . Cr Wendy Boglary, Division 1 . Cr Peter Mitchell, Division 2 . Cr Paul Golle, Division 3 . Cr Lance Hewlett, Division 4 . Cr Mark Edwards, Division 5 . Cr Julie Talty, Deputy Mayor & Division 6 . Cr Rowanne McKenzie, Division 7 Redland City Council . Cr Tracey Huges, Division 8 . Cr Adelia Berridge, Division 9 . Cr Paul Bishop, Division 10

Officers:

. Mr Andrew Chesterman - CEO . Dr Nicole Davis - General Manager Infrastructure and Operations . Mr John Oberhardt – General Manager Organisational Services

Gold Coast City . Cr Donna Gates – Deputy Mayor and Councillor for Division 1 Council o Southern Bank of Logan River

Logan City Council . Cr Miriam Stemp – Councillor for Division 10

Business Advocacy . Mr Matt West – President, Australian Prawn Farmers Association Groups . Ms Kim Hooper – Executive Officer, Australian Prawn Farmers Association

Adjoining and Directly affected Landowner’s As identified and advised by the Queensland Government (refer to Appendix HH ).

. Adjoining landowners as per advice from the ID Team at Appendix HH; Landowner’s . Directly affected landowners as per advice from the ID Team Appendix HH ; and . Surrounding landowners .

Native Title Partners . Quandamooka People

191

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 44: Stakeholders

. Five Rivers People

Geographic Community of Interest

. The community of Interest includes: o Redlands City; o Logan City; o Eagleton, Alberton, Woongoolba (south side of Logan River).

Special Interest Groups

. Environmental: o Healthy Land and Water o Australian Marine Conservation Society o South East Queensland Catchments Members Association o Wildlife Bayside (Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland, Bayside Branch) . Community Groups o Redlands2030 o Community Alliance for Responsible Planning – Redlands Inc (CARP) o Balance.org o Birkdale Progress Association o Alberton and District Progress Association Inc (Kim Eley, Mary MacMillan) o St Peters Lutheran Hall, Alberton . Recreational Fishing/river user groups Community o Albert and Logan River Fishing Fanatics (Facebook) o Logan River Fishing Group (Facebook) o Alberton Road/Beitz Road Public Boat Ramp users

Business and Commercial

. Business groups and associations o Redland City Chamber of Commerce o Queensland Seafood Industry Association o Aquaculture Association of Queensland o Australian Prawn Farmers Association . Logan River south bank prawn farms o Gold Coast Marine Aquaculture (GC Tiger Prawns), (148 Marks Road) – Noel Herbst/Nick Moore o Truloff Prawn Farms Pty Ltd (Stapylton Jacobs Well Road) o GI Rural/Paradise Prawns, Ian and Geoff Rossman (Rotary Road Park) o DS Farms Pty Ltd/Tasty Prawns (Rotary Park Road) o Blacklene Pty Ltd (Enkelmanns Road) o Chazlake Pty Ltd (Faciles Road) o Gold Coast Marine Aquaculture (Marks Road) o Prawn Park (Rocky Point Road, Steiglitz) o Rocky Point Prawn Farm (Holmstead Road) o Rocky Point Hatchery (Rocky Point Road) o Serena Zipf, prawn farmer

192

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 44: Stakeholders

. Other Businesses o Research Fishfarm o Coomera Houseboats o Alberton Gem Bait and Tackle

All identified stakeholders were consulted with during either the informal or formal pre-consultation period. In addition to the stakeholders listed in the above table, consultation with the Federal Electoral Division of Griffith, Ms Terri Butler MP and Premier of Queensland, Annastacia Palaszczuk was carried out during the formal pre-consultation period.

13.2 Informal Pre-Consultation Informal pre-consultation was carried out over the period from August 2018 to October 2019. Pre-consultation was carried out with key stakeholders including State and local government, elected representatives, technical consultants, academic experts, Native Title partners and special interest groups. A summary of the meetings, discussions and workshops is included below. 13.2.1 State Government Pre-Consultation . 3 October 2019 – Initial meeting with QTPG (ID Team); . 27 November 2018 – Meeting with QTPG (ID Team) and RCC; . 7 March 2019 – Meeting with QTPG (ID Team); . 24 April 2019 – Meeting with DES; . 24 May 2019 – Meeting with QTPG (ID Team) and DES; . 19 June 2019 – Formal Pre-lodgement Meeting with DSMIP (ID Team), DAF, TMR, DES, DNRME, EDQ, and RCC; . 12 July 2019 – Pre-lodgement meeting with DES (including QTPG); . 23 August 2019 – Pre-lodgement meeting with DAF and DNRME (including QTPG); and . 1 October 2019 – Meeting with QTPG (ID Team). 13.2.2 Local Government Pre-Consultation . 31 August 2018 – Initial meeting with RCC and RW; . 12 September 2018 – Shoreline Management Team Meeting; . 8 November 2018 – Shoreline Management Team; . 13 November 2018 – Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 27 November 2018 – Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 11 December 2018 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 22 January 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 5 February 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 15 February 2019 – Logan City Council Meeting (Options Analysis); . 19 February 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 5 March 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 19 March 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 2 April 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 16 April 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 30 April 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 2 May 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 11 June 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 23 July 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW;

193

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. 20 August 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 17 September 2019 - Fortnightly meeting with RCC and RW; . 14 October 2019 – Presentation to RCC Executive Leadership Team; and . 29 October 2019 – Site Meeting with RCC and RW. 13.2.3 Workshops . 17 August 2018 – Introductory Workshop with Lendlease and Consultant Team; and . 31 January 2019 – Workshop with RCC, RW, DES, Consultant Team and Contractor. 13.2.4 Elected Representatives . 22 November 2018 – Meeting with Local Councillor (Cr. Julie Talty); . 26 February 2019 – Meeting with Local Councillor (Cr. Julie Talty); . 13 May 2019 – Full Council Presentation (11 Councillors and ELT); . 23 July 2019 – Meeting with Local Councillor (Cr. Julie Talty); . 29 July 2019 – Meeting with the Mayor; . 21 August 2019 – Meeting with Local Councillor (Cr. Julie Talty); . 29 August 2019 – Meeting with Federal Member (Andrew Lamming); and . 24 September 2019 – Meeting with Local Councillor (Cr. Julie Talty). 13.2.5 Native Title Partners . 1 October to 11 October 2019 – Site investigations with Five Rivers. 13.2.6 Special Interest, Business and Industry Groups . 26 April 2019 – Meeting with CSIRO.

Meeting notes/minutes from the abovementioned meetings, briefings and workshops can be provided on request. At the completion of informal pre-consultation, an Endorsement Request was submitted to the ID Team describing the proposal (and intention to lodge a MID); and requesting to commence formal pre-consultation (see Section 13.3 below).

13.3 Formal Pre-Consultation The ID Team advised the project team could commence pre-consultation on 30 October 2019 based on draft materials provided to the ID Team in October 2019. Pre-consultation commenced on 20 November 2019 and concluded on 11 December 2019.

The project’s community engagement consultant, Threeplus, has prepared a report on the pre-consultation that was undertaken (Appendix Z). The report contains details of the materials disseminated during the pre-consultation period along with communications, meetings and briefings. A total of 16 submissions were received during the formal pre-consultation. A copy of the submissions are included at in the pre-consultation report ( Appendix Z).

A comprehensive assessment of the submissions has been carried out and the issues raised have been grouped into categories. A summary of matters raised by key stakeholders during the pre-consultation, the project team response and actions are included below in Tables 45-48.

194

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Table 45: Summary of Pre-Consultation (Directly Affected Landowners) Matters Frequenc Sample of Project Team Response Action Raised y Community Comments (typical of all responses) Noise and 7 Concerned about Odour: The risk of odour nuisance at the The EAR should provide Odour noise and odour site is low and any odour issues can be an Odour Assessment emissions from managed in the design, based on the and a Noise Assessment.

WWTP detailed odour study outcomes. The Concept Design For the proposed site, the nearest Report ( Appendix G) sensitive residential receptor is 230m contains an Odour (existing residence) away from the Impact Assessment and nearest process units. Longland Road is Noise Impact circa 200m from the process unit. The Assessment. Both studies separation distance recommended by were considered to be the DES Guidelines of 238m does not existing studies (already apply if odour modelling shows that the underway at the time of 2.5ou criteria is achieved at the formal pre-consultation). boundary.

The proposed WWTP will include odour capture and treatment from the inlet works and sludge processing facilities as a minimum.

Noise: the major noise sources at the WWTP will be the air blowers, pumps and other motors and extraction fans. As assessed these noise sources do not cause any noise nuisance at adjacent residences. The WWTP design will need to consider noise attenuation for mechanical equipment to achieve compliance with the state requirements. Noise limits will be specified as part of the engineering design to ensure that noise compliance is achieved.

New location 5 Why has the WWTP The original proposal was to have a No action required – an of WWTP moved to a different WWTP site and an outfall for the treated extensive options location than where water to Moreton Bay. The current analysis was undertaken,

the previous proposal is a superior environmental and the proposed developer had solution for the Logan River and infrastructure is a planned for? Moreton Bay.

195

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

superior environmental solution.

Please refer to the Options Analysis Report prepared by Stantec (Appendix F). The Options Analysis is considered to be an existing study (already substantially completed at the time of formal pre- consultation).

Mosquitos 5 Concern that an Mosquito breeding habitat will be The proponent introduced minimised by reducing the occurrence committed to obtaining mangrove offset will of shallow pools of water where water comment or peer review cause increased was likely to stand for more than 5 days. from a mosquito expert mosquito activity. The impacts on neighbouring and this would form part communities will also be minimised by of the EAR. providing open space buffer zones (i.e. well drained marine couch or samphire Please refer to the Biting habitat) that would not provide Insects Management Plan roosting sites for mosquitoes. prepared by frc environmental (Appendix T). This is considered to be a new study as it was not underway at the time of formal pre-consultation.

Septic vs 4 Will residents The Southern Redland Bay WWTP will No action required – this Sewer outside of the have the capacity to cater for all areas is a matter for Redland Shoreline footprint that are currently in the SEQ Regional City Council and Redland be able to connect Plan urban footprint. If current Water. to sewer? residents are in this area and want to connect to the system, they will need to contact Redland Water.

How does the 3 Does this WWTP The WWTP will operate as per a The EAR should contain a WWTP operate differently traditional system, the water will then detailed description of operate from other systems? be discharged into a proposed the components of the freshwater pond/wetland and the WWTP and how the mangrove/salt-marsh habitats which WWTP will operate. will further treat the recycled water before discharge into the Logan River. This EAR includes a detailed description of the WWTP and wetlands (all project components)

196

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

and how they function together.

Please also refer to the Concept Design Report (Appendix G) prepared by Stantec. The concept design was considered to be an existing report (already underway at the time of formal pre- consultation).

WWTP Look 3 What will the WTP Lendlease has committed to creating a As part of the EAR and to and Feel look like? Will I be fly-through to form part of the assess visual impact, a 3D able to see the WTP application to the state. The fly- model of the site/project from road? through will include imagery from all will be developed in adjoining roads and properties. which it will be possible to look at the project from key locations.

The Environmental Assessment Report includes a visual impact assessment with 3D perspective views of the project from nearby sensitive receptors (refer to Section 7 of this report) and the perspective images (Appendix CC ). The visual impact assessment is considered to be a new study as it was not underway at the time of formal pre-consultation.

A 3D model of the development is currently under preparation and will be available by the time of formal consultation.

Local road up- 3 Will there be road Serpentine Creek Road will be The proponent grades upgrades? What upgraded along the boundary of the committed to providing a about increased Shoreline development and there are Traffic Impact

197

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

traffic like vehicles various intersections that will also be Assessment for the coming and going upgraded in accordance with the proposed WWTP. from WTP? Shoreline State Government Approval. Upgrades to Longland Access to the WWTP site will also be Road are required to assessed by DTMR and appropriate facilitate site access to measures will be implemented. the WWTP.

Please refer to the attached Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by SLR Consulting (Appendix U) and the Engineering Plans (Appendix D ) which include a concept design for the Longland Road intersection.

This Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment is considered to be an existing report as it was underway at the time for formal pre-consultation.

Property 3 Will the addition of a Lendlease has not speculated on No action required – values local WTP be property values in the area however we perceived impact to detrimental to have identified the infrastructure and property values is not a property prices? amenity that will come to the local area material planning with new development including a consideration. state school, parks and district shopping centre.

Shoreline 3 What will be the The average block size at Shoreline is No action required - the average block average block size approximately 450sqm. average block size in the size? with Shoreline? Shoreline development is not relevant to the proposal.

Second round 3 Will this MID process Yes, there will be full community There will be a formal of Community allow for a second consultation once the formal consultation period. Consultation round of community application is lodged. Refer to Section 13.8 of consultation? this report.

MID process 2 What is the MID The MID process was explained, and it No action required. and Timing process and how was also advised that the approval long does it take? timeframe would be up to 12 months from the time of lodgement.

198

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Financial 2 Will Lendlease There are no compensation plans for No action required – Compensation financially the neighbouring properties. perceived impact to compensate me or Properties that are of interest to property values or purchase my Lendlease have already been financial compensation property? contracted. are not material planning considerations. Environmental impacts (and benefits) associated with the proposal are addressed within this EAR.

Technical 2 When can we see Lendlease is in the process of finalising All the technical reports Reports the technical reports all technical reports and peer reviews. and plans will be that you are relying These reports will be made available submitted as part of the upon? We need to once the plans for the WWTP are lodged EAR and will be available see them in plenty with MID team for approval. Once these to the public to view of time. have been lodged there will be an upon lodgement of the additional consultation period in which application. The material the public are able to provide will be available for comment. viewing on the Queensland Treasury - Planning Group website.

Start and 2 When will you Construction commencement is No action required. completion of commence dependent on gaining approvals for the WWTP construction and WWTP (Environmental Assessment complete the WWTP Report and consultation strategy; build? Preliminary assessment by the QTPG; Consultation and assessment and Final Assessment). It is estimated approval will be granted by December 2020 and construction would be complete by December 2021.

Marina 2 Has Lendlease Lendlease is not considering a marina No action required – the considered building or ramp at the designated WWTP site. proposal is not for a a marina or ramp? The planning provisions and zoning marina. preclude this type of development.

Risks to 1 What risks does the The WWTP does not pose any risk to A range of technical mangroves WWTP pose to local fauna or flora. The CSIRO has peer assessments will consider and fish mangroves and fish/ reviewed the solution proposed and the issues raised here Does putting fresh has identified that the treatment system (risk to fish health, salinity water into will remove viruses from the recycled etc) and the proponent mangroves damage water. Further, salinity modelling has has committed to them? been completed for the site and it has lodging these with the been concluded that the mixing of the EAR. recycled water with the tidal influx from

199

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

the Logan River is ideal conditions for Please refer to the mangroves to grow. Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments prepared by Water Technology (Appendix K), which addresses all the issues raised. This is considered to be an existing study as it was already underway at the time of formal pre- consultation.

Move WTP to 1 Why not move WTP It is not possible to use the treated No action required. better along further so the effluent at the Bayview Conservation location? treated water can be area for irrigation as the species of tree used to irrigate the in this area is a dry climate species and driest areas of trees over watering may cause the trees to etc? die.

Move WTP 1 Why can’t Lendlease It is not commercially feasible to locate No action required – the into Shoreline rededicate land the WWTP due to the area required for proposed WWTP is footprint? marked for the plant and associated buffers. considered to be in the residential with most ideal location to Shoreline for this provide a superior WTP? environmental outcome. Location within the Shoreline development footprint would likely require disposal of water via an ocean outfall (to Moreton Bay) and would cause significant impacts to the existing and future Redland Bay residential areas. At the proposed location, there is only one dwelling within approximately 650m of the WWTP (that is not owned by Lendlease).

Refer to the Options Assessment Report prepared by Stantec (Appendix F ).

200

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Shoreline 1 Will Shoreline be a Shoreline is targeted at 2nd and 3rd No action required – the low-cost housing home owners. Pricing has not yet been pricing of land within development? released for the project, however, it is Shoreline is not relevant Lendlease’s intention that the to the proposed development is not a low-cost housing infrastructure. development.

Acid Sulfate 1 Are you aware of Geotechnical investigations on site The proponent Soils acid sulfates in the have highlighted that acid sulfate soils committed to lodging a soil? are present. Geotechnical Report with the EAR. Although the site based geotechnical assessment agreed with the Please refer to the Acid Department of Natural Resources and Sulfate Soils Investigation Mines mapping, the level of Acid sulfate prepared by Douglas soil material detected indicated that the Partners ( Appendix R). site does not require an Acid Sulfate This investigation Soils Management Plan. includes a Provisional Acidic Sulfate Soils Lendlease will however use a Management Plan. This is neutralising agent (such as ag-lime) considered to be an during site works with appropriate existing study as it was management procedures. already underway at the time of formal pre- consultation.

Tourism 1 Why not turn this Lendlease has not currently No action required – the pristine area into a investigated the opportunity of this site proposal is not for a tourism destination? as a tourism destination. The planning tourism use. provisions and zoning preclude this type of development.

Should the mangroves produce significant birdlife (or other items of tourism interest) it will be the decision of RCC whether they wish to pursue this path.

University 1 What happened to Lendlease has not been involved in any No action required – the the plan to build a plan to build a university on this site proposal is not for a university here? and as such cannot comment. university.

Recycled 1 Will local businesses The use of recycled water is a No action required – this water access be able to get sustainable option for some rural is a matter for Redland access to recycled businesses. The proposed WWTP will City Council and Redland water from the be handed over to RCC for Water. WWTP? management and ownership so it will be their decision as to whether they will provide the opportunity to supply the recycled water to local businesses.

201

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Volume of 1 How much recycled Lendlease is currently investigating the The proponent recycled water water from WWTP options of returning recycled water to committed to will be returned to Shoreline for irrigation of parks and investigating the options Shoreline? sports fields. The volume to be returned for utilising recycled has not yet been determined and will wastewater from the ultimately be the decision of Council as WWTP. it will form part of their maintenance and ownership. The mangroves Please refer to the however, have been sized to Recycled Water accommodate no water recycling from Management Plan the WWTP and therefore has been prepared by Stantec future proofed. (Appendix I). This is considered to be an existing study as it was already underway at the time of formal pre- consultation. Recycled water from the WWTP will be re-used where possible, with the excess water discharged into a freshwater lagoon and then wetlands.

Mangroves 1 How long will it take The mangrove forest will be fully The proponent to grow the established after 10-15 years. Other committed to lodging a mangrove forest? mangrove restoration projects in SEQ rehabilitation plan with have achieved full established results in the EAR, which details 5-6 years. The mangroves can remove how the mangrove forest nutrient from the water while they are will be propagated and growing however there will also be an maintained. establishment period prior to any recycled water discharge into the Please refer to the mangroves. Concept Mangrove Offset Rehabilitation Management Plan prepared by Saunders Havill Group ( Appendix O). This is considered to be an existing technical input as it was already underway at the time of formal pre-consultation.

Temporary 1 How long will the The temporary irrigation has been sized The proponent Irrigation area temporary irrigation to run for 5-6 years. Lendlease expect committed to ensuring area need to that the establishment period of that details of the

operate? mangroves will be shorter than this and, duration of temporary

202

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

in that case, the temporary irrigation irrigation area will be area will be decommissioned earlier. included as part of the EAR.

Please refer to the Recycled Water Management Plan prepared by Stantec (Appendix I). This is considered to be an existing study as it was already underway at the time of formal pre- consultation.

Temporary 1 What will that patch The use for the land which will be Details of the use of the Irrigation of irrigated land be irrigated has not yet been confirmed irrigation area are Area uses used for? Cattle? but it is likely to be used for grazing. included as part of the EAR, although it is noted that the temporary irrigation area does not form part of the proposed Designation.

Please refer to the Recycled Water Management Plan prepared by Stantec (Appendix I). This is considered to be an existing study as it was already underway at the time of formal pre- consultation.

WWTP site 1 Does lend lease Lendlease does not currently own the As part of the MID ownership currently own the site for the WTP, they do have a legal process, Lendlease will site for the WTP? option over the site and an agreement need to demonstrate with the current owner. they have appropriate control over the land prior to the designation.

Redland City 1 How is it that RCC has been in negotiation and No action required. Council and Redland City and consultation with Lendlease over the Logan City Logan City Councils past year on this project and has Council have have no knowledge detailed knowledge of the WWTP. no knowledge of this WWTP? The site does not sit within Logan City of this? Council’s catchment however their

203

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

technical sewerage teams are aware of the project.

T Junction on 1 Will there be an There is currently no upgrade proposed The proponent Rocky Passage upgrade to the for the T Junction on Rocky Passage committed to preparing a Road. dangerous T Road. Traffic Impact Junction on Rocky Assessment for the Passage Rd proposed WWTP. Upgrades to Longland Road are required to facilitate site access to the WWTP, however upgrades to Rocky Passage Road are not required.

Please refer to the Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by SLR Consulting ( Appendix U). This is considered to be an existing study as it was already underway at the time of formal pre- consultation.

Alisabawi 1 If the WWTP has a Lendlease has committed to investigate No action proposed at Family– There secured perimeter it this fire escape route with Redland City this stage other than is an escape will prevent access Council. Any formal emergency escape ongoing discussions with gate that will to the escape gate route will be negotiated and Redland City Council and be interrupted we use on our maintained with the Alisabawi family. the Alisabawi family. if the WWTP property in case of has a secured fire and emergency. perimeter

Table 46: Summary of Pre-consultation (Redland City Council) Matters raised Description Project Team Response Action Mangrove Council is The project team recommended that More detailed technical analysis Option interested in Council engage an independent and reporting will be required to (generally) understanding consultant to peer review the initial due support the EAR; and address the whether the diligence report prepared by Water comments made by GHD within proposal will Technology. GHD was commissioned by their peer review. The initial due function Council to review the proposal and found diligence report has been updated appropriately to that “the option proposed by Lendlease into the Southern Redland Bay for the tertiary treatment of WWTP WWTP – Mangrove Design

204

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

deliver the required effluent through a combination of and Receiving Environmental water quality. construction freshwater and saltwater Assessments ( Appendix K). This is wetlands has the potential to be considered to be an existing study successful”. In addition, they stated that as it was already underway at the “The project presents a green time of formal pre-consultation; infrastructure solution that supports however, additional assessments greenhouse gas reduction, carbon have been incorporated into this sequestration and sustainability initiatives report as a result of the matters whilst protecting environmental values raised within formal and informal that could have otherwise been pre-consultation. potentially impacted through construction of an ocean outfall.”

Maintenance Council is Several technical assessments need to be More detailed technical analysis interested in completed before firm recommendations and reporting will be required to understanding the and cost estimates can be provided for support the EAR. maintenance maintenance. Initial cost estimates obligations of the provided by Stantec indicated that there Please refer to the Southern proposed would be OpEx and CapEx savings with Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove infrastructure the proposed infrastructure compared Design and Receiving compared with a with the conventional outfall option. Environmental Assessments conventional outfall (Appendix K). Please also refer to option. the Operational Environmental Management Plan prepared by Stantec (Appendix Y).

Odour Odour control and Agreed that the site was suitable from an As part of any future EAR, it is buffer to existing odour nuisance perspective due to the intended to supply odour

properties. distance to existing properties (more than assessment reports. 200m). The Concept Design Report (Appendix G) contains an Odour Assessment and Noise Assessment. These are considered to be existing studies as they were already underway at the time of formal pre-consultation.

Noise Control Noise impacts on It was agreed that noise should not cause As part of any future EAR, it is closest nearby any issues to sensitive receptors, due to intended to supply noise impact sensitive receptors. the remote site with significant assessment report. vegetation cover. The Concept Design Report (Appendix G) contains an Odour Assessment and Noise Assessment. These are considered to be existing studies as they were already underway at the time of formal pre-consultation.

205

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Site Access RCC has requested The project team recognises the A Traffic Impact Assessment will be that the access to importance of providing a safe site access prepared as part of any future EAR. the site not be that is not affected by natural hazards. The results of the Water affected by flooding Technology Flooding and due to the remote A Flooding and Stormwater Management Stormwater Assessment and site with significant Plan will be prepared which will inform Bushfire Management Plan also vegetation cover. the location for the site access. A Bushfire inform the site access and an Management Plan will also be prepared, emergency access/egress may be which will address hazards relating to required. bushfire. Please refer to the: Site access is also informed by sight . Southern Redland Bay WWTP – distance to Longland Road. Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments ( Appendix K); . Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by SLR Consulting (Appendix U); and . Bushfire Management Plan prepared by LEC Consulting (Appendix S).

Energy Energy RCC agreed that the plant could utilise the No action required Management efficiency/operating natural slope of the land to reduce energy cost. usage.

Recycled Quality of recycled The quality of the recycled water was The Environmental Assessment Water water from WWTP. agreed as an enhanced Class A based on Report will include a Concept the Australian guidelines, which are Design for the WWTP which will higher requirements than the Queensland include components to allow for guidelines. water treatment to meet this standard.

Please refer to the Concept Design Report prepared by Stantec (Appendix G) and the Recycled Water Management Plan prepared by Stantec ( Appendix I). These are considered to be existing reports or studies that were already underway at the time of formal pre-consultation.

Management Compliance with RCC generally agreed to the biosolids The Environmental Assessment of Solids the recent End of management process proposed by Report will include a Concept Waste Code. Stantec as part of the concept design Design for the WWTP which will currently underway.

206

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

include details of the biosolids management process.

Please refer to the Concept Design Report prepared by Stantec (Appendix G).

Function of the It is believed that It is intended to retain the existing The need for the freshwater Freshwater the combination of freshwater wetland as a storage and wet wetlands were informed by more Wetland the WWTP and weather buffer. The need to expand the detailed technical studies and mangrove wetland existing wetland for use as seasonal more detailed design of the WWTP. will be sufficient to storage in the first 5-6 years will be As a result of these further studies deliver the assessed in the detailed design stage. it was determined that a freshwater reduction of (floating) wetland was not required nutrients without and therefore does not form part of the freshwater the project. wetland. Council has some concerns about the maintenance of the freshwater wetland.

Table 47: Summary of Pre-consultation (Business/Industry Groups) Matters raised Frequency Sample of Project team response Action community comments (typical of all responses) Nil N/A N/A N/A N/A

Table 14: Summary of Pre-consultation (Correspondence Received) Correspondence Issues Raised Project team response Action Letter to Objection to WTP: No response provided The proposed infrastructure services the Minister as the correspondence Southern Redland Bay catchment and does . Is to service a privately- was sent directly to the not service only the Shoreline from 4 residents owned development Minister. development. It is appropriate to locate . Is outside the major/critical community infrastructure boundaries of Shoreline (particularly infrastructure of this nature) Mater Planned area away from residential areas where impacts . Is outside of the SEQ can be better managed and mitigated. In Regional Plan urban this instance, there is only one residential footprint. dwelling not owned by Lendlease within approximately 650m of the WWTP.

207

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

The proposed infrastructure provides a necessary regional solution that would also ensure urban development of Southern Redland Bay is ‘well serviced’, consistent with the intent of Goal 1 of ShapingSEQ . The proposed infrastructure is infrastructure defined in Schedule 5, Part 2 of the PR and satisfies both statutory requirements and budgetary commitments for the timely and efficient supply of the infrastructure in accordance with Section 36(1) of the PA.

Lendlease have, however committed to continuing discussions with the 4 residents from whom the letter originated.

13.4 Changes in Response to Formal Pre-consultation As a result of the formal pre-consultation, only one aspect of the proposed development has been changed, which was the removal of the freshwater wetland [note: further changes were made during the subsequent additional informal pre-consultation with relevant State agencies – refer to Section 13.5 below].

The matters raised during formal pre-consultation were appropriately responded to as per below:

. Action required – A change to the proposal is required. . No action required – the matter is not relevant does not require any further response; or . Existing studies – studies that were already underway at the time of formal consultation appropriately deal with the matters raised; or . New studies – additional studies that were not already underway at the time of formal consultation could appropriately deal with the matters raised.

Tables 45-48 above clearly outline where either no action is required, existing studies or new studies respond appropriately to the matters raised.

Following the formal consultation, the proponent entered an additional informal pre-consultation phase from December 2019 to October 2020 (see Section 13.5 below), which involved continuing meetings, workshops and discussions with key stakeholders (and including directly affected land owners). It was agreed with the ID Team that the additional informal pre-consultation could involve submission of draft documentation (Tranche Submissions) for preliminary assessment to ensure that all the relevant State interests and assessment matters are appropriately addressed.

208

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

13.5 Tranche Submissions It was agreed with the ID Team following formal pre-consultation that several key assessment matters needed further consideration/investigation; and that to ensure State interests are appropriately addressed that draft material (including plans and reporting) could be submitted to the ID Team for preliminary assessment. It was proposed by the proponent that documentation would be provided in several different tranches, coinciding with the material becoming available. The intent of the Tranche Submissions and preliminary assessments was two-fold:

. Due to the timeframe involved in significant additional water quality testing being carried out by Water Technology (in a variety of seasons and conditions), submission of draft documentation for preliminary assessment would allow the project to progress (albeit informally) whilst these additional studies were undertaken; and . Submission of draft documentation for preliminary assessment would ensure that comments from the relevant State agencies could be received and responded to prior to submission of the ID, ensuring that the material lodged is comprehensive and robust.

Tranche Submissions were lodged from May 2020 to September 2020, as follows:

Table 49: Summary of Tranche Submissions

Tranche State Agency/Interest Submission Comments Tranche 1 TMR – State Controlled Road Submitted Draft Traffic Impact ID Team provided feedback (Longland Road). Assessment prepared by SLR on 20 May 2020. No further Consulting, including concept action was necessary. intersection design.

Tranche 2 DNRME – Vegetation Submitted a draft Property Map ID Team provided feedback Management Act (Regulated of Assessable Vegetation on 12 and 27 August 2020, Vegetation), MSES Regulated (PMAV), draft Preliminary which included preliminary Vegetation, State Land Asset Vegetation Management Plan, comments from DNRME. Management, Water Act draft Bushfire Management Plan Please refer to Section and plan showing works within 13.5.2 below for further Serpentine Creek details.

Tranche 3 DAF – MSES Marine plants, Submitted draft Ecological ID Team provided feedback fisheries waterways and Assessment Report (including on 10 August 2020 and 4 waterway barrier works frc reporting). Submitted Biting September 2020, which DES – MSES Koala habitat, Insects Management Plan (no included preliminary MSES High ecological relevant state interest). comments from DAF and significance wetlands and DES. Please refer to wetland vegetation Section 13.5.3 below for further details.

Tranche 4 DES Environmental Authority Submitted draft Options ID Team provided feedback – Contact Chris Mooney & Assessment, draft Concept on 23 June 2020. Stantec David Quinn Design Report, draft Odour updated reporting as Report, draft Noise Impact necessary. Please refer to Assessment, draft Recycled Section 13.5.4 below.

Water Management Plan and disinfection Tech Memo.

209

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Tranches 5 & 6 DES –Coastal Processes (MSES Submitted draft Estuarine ID Team provided feedback coastal management district, Impact Assessments Report on 9 and 16 of October erosion prone area and (including groundwater 2020 which included medium/high storm tide assessment and comments from DAF and inundation), Koala Habitat flooding/stormwater DES. Please refer to (MSES wildlife habitat) and assessment), draft Coastal Section 13.5.5 below. MSES water quality & Processes assessment; draft environmental authority Hydrodynamic Modelling for DAF – Agriculture, fisheries, Culvert Sizing waterway barrier works.

13.5.1 Tranche 1 On 19 May 2020, a draft Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by SLR Consulting was submitted to the ID Team. It was subsequently confirmed in an email on 20 May 2020 that sight distance is compliant based on an assessment undertaken by KN Group using the existing site survey. The ID Team subsequently confirmed via return email that TMR would undertake assessment of the Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment during assessment of the ID. No changes have been made to the Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment (Appendix U ). 13.5.2 Tranche 2 On 21 July 2020, draft documentation for Tranche 2 was submitted. The ID Team forwarded comments from DNRME in relation to the documentation submitted in Tranche 2 on 12 August 2020 and revised advice on 27 August 2020. A summary of the preliminary assessment comments and a response is included below in Table 50.

Table 50: Responses to DNRME Preliminary Assessment (State land, Vegetation Management Act, Water Act)

Comments Response Action

Refined designation boundary The proposal plans 8868 P 02 Rev P- Please refer to the proposal A plan should be provided that clearly shows SK01-SK07 ( Appendix B) clearly show plans 8868 P 02 Rev P-SK01- the boundary of all land proposed to be the boundary of all land proposed to SK07 ( Appendix B) and sketch designated. This should not only include the be designated. The supplementary plan 8868 S 13 SK A relevant freehold land but also include any sketch plan 8868 S 13 SK A (Appendix CC ). Shapefiles will state tidal land that is proposed to be (Appendix CC ) shows the part of the be provided separately. captured within the designation boundary. A land within Serpentine Creek (below spatial data file (shapefile or KMZ) for the top of bank) that is affected by the boundary should also be provided. proposed stability works.

Tidal boundary survey A full survey of the site has not been No action required at this In order to clearly delineate the boundary of undertaken. It is proposed to stage, however we will await the land which is proposed to be designated, Designate land based on the existing further advice from DNRME. ambulatory boundaries should be surveyed. cadastral boundaries of the site and This survey can be either a full the part of Serpentine Creek shown survey/resurvey or an identification survey on the attached sketch plan and must be completed to a professional (Appendix CC ) for creek stabilisation standard in accordance with Part 7 of the works. Surveying and Mapping Infrastructure Act.

Land Act tenure may not be required for No response appears to be required. No action required. tidal works We await the DNRME response during ID assessment.

210

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Once the designation is complete, development in relation to infrastructure under the designation will become ‘accepted development’ as per section 44(6)(b) of the Planning Act 2016 (as per usual processes).

If included in the ID boundary, the subject state tidal land would then be designated land.

The subject tidal works on the state tidal land would then be considered to be ‘infrastructure under the designation’. Accordingly, the subject tidal works will become ‘accepted development’ under the Planning Act.

As the works would then be ‘accepted development under the Planning Act’, a ‘right to occupy and use the state tidal land’ may apply under section 123(4)&(5) of the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995. A right to occupy and use state tidal land would extend to carrying out the tidal works and maintaining and using the structure.

If it can be demonstrated that a right to occupy and use state tidal land under s123 of the Coastal Act would exist for the works, there would be no requirement for a Land Act 1994 tenure (e.g. lease) over the tidal land.

Owners consent for state tidal land No response appears to be required. No action required. Chapter 7, Section 9.4 of the Minister’s We await the DNRME response Guidelines and Rules states: during ID assessment. If the infrastructure entity does not have acquisition powers under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967 and is proposing a designation over premises not owned by the infrastructure entity, the infrastructure entity must give an assurance to the Minister that the infrastructure entity will have access to the premises the subject of the proposed designation in order to construct and operate the infrastructure (This may include written landowner consent or a contractual agreement).

211

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

It appears that this assurance may be able to be provided later in the ID process (unlike owners consent for a development application, which must be provided before the application is properly made).

If DNRME provides no objection to the proposal at state interest review stage, and the land proceeds to be designated, then a ‘right to occupy and use the state tidal land’ under the Coastal Act may then apply as previously described.

A resulting ‘right to occupy and use the state tidal land’ may be assurance enough that the infrastructure entity will have access to the state tidal land. However, if more specific landowner consent is required then DNRME may be able to consider a request for consent concurrently during the state interest review stage.

Vegetation Management Act No response required. No action required. Based on the information provided, the proposed ID will not require referral to DNRME. Findings include:

. the total extent of regulated vegetation that would be cleared as a result of the proposal does not exceed the thresholds listed in Schedule 3 of the SLA; . the proposed ID does not involve State land; and . the proposed ID does not involve taking water and does not impact on any watercourses under the Water Act 2000.

If any changes are made that would alter the above findings, DNRME would appreciate an opportunity to reassess the proposal.

If the designation proceeds, it is recommended that the plan of designation prepared by Queensland Treasury clearly delineates areas where clearing can and can not be undertaken as part of this ID.

212

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

13.5.3 Tranche 3 On 21 July 2020, draft documentation for Tranche 3 was submitted. The ID Team forwarded comments from DAF in relation to the documentation submitted in Tranche 3 on 10 August 2020 and advice from DES was provided on 4 September 2020. A summary of the preliminary assessment comments and a response is included below in Table 51.

Table 51: Responses to DES and DAF Preliminary Assessment (Marine Plants, Koala Habitat, MSES – Protected Flora and Fauna)

Comments Response Action

Prohibited Development The development will be assessed by No action required. DES consider the project prohibited a Ministerial Infrastructure development under Schedule 10, Part 10, Designation, where provisions of the Division 2, Section 16A of the Planning Planning Regulation 2017 are not Regulation as the development is located applicable. Notwithstanding, the within a Priority Koala Area and involves development meets the definition of interfering with Core Koala Habitat. ‘exempted development’ as listed under Schedule 24 of the Planning Regulation 2017 being ‘development of infrastructure stated in Schedule 5 [water cycle management facilities] if the development is carried out by or for the State or a public sector entity’. In this instance, the development is community infrastructure for the establishment of the Southern Redland Bay WWTP to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment (a sub-regional solution endorsed by Redland City Council) and will be infrastructure that will be handed over to Redland Water once construction and an initial maintenance period is completed.

Impact to Koala Habitat The impact area considers clearing Please refer to the Ecological Clarify impact to koala habitat area. It is associated with the 38.1m wide Assessment Report ( Appendix unclear if exemptions have been incorporated bushfire buffer and 10m bushfire M), which includes a response into the impact area (i.e. bushfire buffer. It is exemptions along boundaries for the to State Code 25. advised that the impact is provided in both a proposed mains connection (refer plan and kml. Plan 21). However, it is noted that the Bushfire Management Plan only recommends clearing of non- endemic vegetation, dead trees and vegetation less than 10cm DBH.

No clearing will occur beyond the impact area shown in Plan 21 of the Ecological Assessment Report.

213

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

A request for a mapping amendment has been made to DES. Under this amendment the project does not involve interfering with Core Koala Habitat.

Mapping Amendment A Koala Habitat Area mapping Refer to the Ecological Request to amend koala habitat area amendment request, in accordance Assessment Report ( Appendix determination on the subject site – DES with the Guideline – Request to make, M), which includes a response suggest making a mapping amendment amend or revoke a koala habitat area to State Code 25. request to reflect the PMAV. determination , has been submitted as to the Koala Assessment and Compliance Team to support this application.

Koala Habitat Considering this methodology, a KHA Refer to the Ecological DES provided details of their methodology for mapping amendment request, in Assessment Report ( Appendix mapping KHA. accordance with the Guideline – M), which includes a response Request to make, amend or revoke a to State Code 25. koala habitat area determination , has been submitted as part of this application.

Development Description A detailed description of the action is Refer to the Ecological DES request a detailed description of the provided in in this EAR and in the Assessment Report ( Appendix proposed development be provided. Ecological Assessment Report M). (Appendix M). Relevant koala information is provided in the Ecological Assessment Report with respect to koala habitat mapping at Section 4.5.2.1, koala habitat survey, results and impacts (Sections 3.2.2, 6.4.1) and koala management (Section 9.1.6)

State Code 25 Although not applicable where Refer to the Ecological DES requested a response to State Code 25 be assessed under a Ministerial Assessment Report ( Appendix provided which demonstrates a no net loss of Infrastructure Designation, a M), which includes a response koala habitat and that the development has response to State Code 25 has been to State Code 25; and Concept demonstrated impacts have been reasonable included within the Ecological Wastewater Treatment Plan avoided, minimised, mitigated and offset (if Assessment Report ( Appendix M). Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix required). The WWTP footprint including linear P). Please refer also to the infrastructure through to Longland Koala Management Plan Road and bushfire buffer to the plant (Appendix II ). will result in the direct impact to 21 NJKHT, however, the project involves the rehabilitation of Koala habitat (RE12.3.5/12.3.6) and planting of 100 Koala habitat trees along the outer

214

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

margins of the linear infrastructure corridor and as such results in no net loss to Koala habitat.

A Koala Management Plan has also been prepared to support the application which requires vegetation clearing undertaken by a Koala Spotter, fauna exclusion fencing and road calming, and dog prohibitors (refer to Appendix II )

NCA fauna surveys A habitat and impact assessment for Refer to the Ecological DES raised the site may provide habitat for a special least concern fauna is Assessment Report ( Appendix number of special least concern animals. included in the Ecological M). Assessment Report ( Appendix M). A habitat and impact assessment for Greater Glider is also included. Impacts to least concern species are minimal and can be managed under proposed environmental management plans.

Frog Surveys It is acknowledged that survey timing Additional surveys are Target survey methodology for listed frogs was not consistent with the currently being carried out guidelines for target frog species and will be submitted as an however is considered sufficient for addendum to the Ecological this assessment as Tusked Frog and Assessment Report. Wallum Froglet are unlikely to occur on the site given no recent records for the species on or within a 5km radius of the site. No suitable habitat exists within the impact area although there is potential for suitable habitat to occur along waterways within the balance land to the east associated with palustrine wetlands. These watercourses are located within land to be retained by the development and upstream of development impacts. Impacts have been avoided by retaining suitable habitat in-situ. To demonstrate compliance with technical guidelines, 4 days of dusk surveys as well as deployment of a songmeter and motion detection cameras are currently being completed for target

215

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

frog species. These surveys are currently occurring and an addendum to the Ecological Assessment Report will be provided when the results of the survey become available.

Water Quality It is acknowledged that DES reviewed Please refer to the Southern Potential impacts on MSES wetlands and the Ecological Assessment Report Redland Bay WWTP – wildlife habitat as a result of changed in water prior to the submission of Tranches 5 Mangrove Design and quality. & 6 material (Coastal Processes and Receiving Environmental Water Quality). The Ecological Assessments ( Appendix K) Assessment Report has since been prepared by Water updated to incorporate the findings Technology. of these studies (in Section 8.4 and 8.5). Importantly, modelling by Water Technology confirms no worsening of water quality at the Logan Estuary with the project either maintaining or providing improved quality.

13.5.4 Tranche 4 On 29 May 2020, draft documentation for Tranche 4 was submitted. The ID Team forwarded comments from DES in relation to the documentation submitted in Tranche 4 on 23 June 2020. A summary of the preliminary assessment comments and a response is included below in Table 52.

Table 52: Responses to DES Preliminary Assessment (Environmental Licence)

Comments Response Action

MID Application It is the proponent’s intention to No action required. As previously discussed with Stantec, the MID lodge the EA application application will need to be made before the concurrently with or shortly after the EA application is submitted. The MID need not MID. be granted at the time the EA application is lodged.

Registered Suitable Operator We can confirm that Lendlease EA application to resolve the If Lendlease is the intended applicant then it Engineering Pty Ltd will not be the Registered Suitable Operator. should ensure that the relevant corporate Registered Suitable Operator. The entity is a registered suitable operator. It can Registered Suitable Operator will be make an application before or at the same dealt with as part of the EA time as applying for the EA. I note that there is application, which will be lodged one Lendlease company that appears on the concurrently with or shortly after the Suitable Operator Register: ID.

LENDLEASE ENGINEERING Pty Ltd ACN 201516 RSO number 405856

216

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

EA application is for 20 yrs operation The Concept Design Report prepared Please refer to the Concept The Concept Design Report (CDR) (p11) by Stantec ( Appendix G) has been Design Report prepared by indicates that an EA is required that covers a updated to clarify some of the items Stantec ( Appendix G) 20 year period of operation. This will within this commentary. It should be encompass Phases 2 to 4 of the proposed noted, however that: recycled water management. Three stages . The intention is not to provide have been identified for the construction and for A+ class recycled water, but expansion of the capacity of the STP (Stages to achieve similar 1A, 1B and 2). It would appear that the STP contaminant/nutrient removal will need to achieve waterway discharge parameters to A+ class water; quality from Stage 1A (Phase 3); this includes and high levels of nutrient removal with . The discharge (licence) point is concentrations of TN and TP of 3 and 1 mg/L intended to be the discharge respectively (Recycled Water Strategy (RWS), from the WWTP (into the p9) expected. The effluent will be treated to freshwater lagoon). Class A+ with E Coli < 1 cfu/100ml, making it suitable for irrigation where there is public The EA will be separately progressed access. The STP’s final stage (from year 10) by Stantec and Lendlease in design capacity will be 13500 EP. The EA will consultation with RCC, RW and DES. need to authorise ERA threshold 63(1)(f) - operating sewage treatment works, other than no-release works, with a total daily peak design capacity of 10000 – 50000 EP.

An EA is not required for Phase 1 where sewage will be tankered for the first 200 lots developed. In Phase 2 (year 2) all treated effluent will be re-used for construction, landscaping and local nurseries. In Phase 3 (years 3 to 6), a temporary irrigation area of 10 ha will be established and some discharge to the constructed wetland is likely in wet weather conditions. In Phase 4 (year 7 onwards) the wetland should be established, the temporary irrigation area will no longer be available, and recycled water will be used in sporting ovals and parks within the development. Approximately 18% of effluent will be re-used and the remainder discharged to the Logan River via the wetland.

The EA will need to authorise a range of effluent re-uses including irrigation to a dedicated area for up to five years and ultimately, discharge to Logan River. The EA will likely include a separate set of effluent quality limits for irrigation to land and release

217

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project to surface waters. Conditions will also require the development and implementation of an irrigation management plan. However, these conditions would not extend to locations owned/ controlled by other parties such as Redland City Council (parks and sports oval). Instead, there would be a condition authorising 3rd party re-use.

Lendlease may wish to reconsider whether all STP construction stages and disposal phases need to be captured in the initial EA that is granted. A lower ERA threshold (4000- 10000EP) could be applied for which would carry the project through to Year 10. This represents a saving in the initial application fee and the annual fees for 10 years. An even lower ERA threshold (1500-4000EP) could be applied for if a shorter horizon is settled on (to Year 5). Also, the conditioning of the EA will be a little convoluted to reflect all stages/ phases. The MID will reflect the entirety of the project. The EA could be for the land irrigation/ re-use only phases and amended later on to accommodate the additional phases. This would result in the simplest conditioning upfront and less information/ assessment requirements. It is up to Lendlease, and the following assumes the EA application is for all stages/ phases.

Section 125 Information Requirements All of the required information will be Please refer to the various Some general advice has been provided by submitted with the EA application, impact assessments (plans, DES previously and to recap: which will be lodged concurrently reports and studies) that form with or shortly after the ID. part of this EAR. Supporting information for the environmental authority application must include all The EA will be separately progressed information listed under s125 of the by Stantec and Lendlease in Environmental Protection Act 1994 (available consultation with RCC, RW and DES. at https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/). Most importantly, include relevant technical This EAR contains all of the information, encompassing: information required to address all environmental impacts and benefits. . A description of the proposed activities, . A description of the land on which the activities will be carried out,

218

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

. An assessment of the likely impact of each relevant activity on the environmental values (EVs), including— o a description of the environmental values likely to be affected by each relevant activity; and o details of any emissions or releases likely to be generated by each relevant activity; and o a description of the risk and likely magnitude of impacts on the environmental values; and o details of the management practices proposed to be implemented to prevent or minimise adverse impacts; and o details of how the land the subject of the application will be rehabilitated after each relevant activity ceases; and . A description of the proposed measures for minimising and managing waste generated by each relevant activity; and . Details of any site management plan that relates to the land the subject of the application.

There would appear to be sufficient information on noise and odour impacts contained in the respective assessment reports submitted. In addition, the Options Assessment report appears to provide sufficient information about the STP site and wetland/ mangrove site, including potential flooding, surrounding MSES, Koala Habitat, and how these have been avoided . This same report will provide useful information for the MID application.

Irrigation to Land All of the required information will be No action required As indicated above, the operation of the submitted with the EA application, dedicated temporary irrigation area will be which will be lodged concurrently conditioned and this will be informed by an with or shortly after the ID. assessment of potential impacts to surface and ground waters as well as soil. I note there The EA will be separately progressed is a plan showing the reuse locations (Figure by Stantec and Lendlease in 3, RWS). There should be a higher resolution consultation with RCC, RW and DES.

219

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project map of the temporary irrigation area showing proximate watercourses and any other sensitive receptors. This will be a starting point for addressing s125. The EVs and water quality objectives for those watercourses should be described. The location of the storage pond and spillway should be included.

A key to the assessment is the quantification of the water and nutrient balances. DES has a preference for using MEDLI, which models both. It predicts surface run off, deep drainage and overtopping of the storage pond. It also makes predictions about nutrient build-up or deficits and proposed crop choice including the effects of nutrient and salt concentrations.

It would appear a water balance model was used to predict the timing and volume of residual discharge to the constructed wetland (RWS, p15). It would appear also that some MEDLI modelling has been used to model nutrient leaching (RWS, p23). The MEDLI reports, data files and comprehensive analysis should be submitted with the application. That analysis would support the required description of impacts (risk and magnitude) required by s125. The link below is to an irrigation guideline DES has published which may be of assistance.

Groundwater A Groundwater Assessment has been Please refer to the Southern At this point the only consideration of impacts carried out by Water Technology as Redland Bay WWTP – to groundwater from the land irrigation is in part of their Southern Redland Bay Mangrove Design the Risks and Mitigation Table (RWS, WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Appendix A p32). This is limited to a reference and Receiving Environmental Assessments (Appendix K), to mitigation measures - high effluent quality Assessments ( Appendix K). specifically Section 10 of this and irrigation management. The EVs (potable report. use, stock watering, agriculture etc) should be described. This should include proximate registered bores and their uses. The location and depth to groundwater (including perched aquifers or water tables), soil profile and predicted deep drainage should feature. It is acknowledged that low nutrient content is a mitigating factor, but potential other contaminants that may persist in treated

220

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project effluent should also be considered in the light of the EVs identified.

Constructed Wetlands During the formal pre-consultation Please refer to the Southern The balance of the plant’s recycled water will phase, the freshwater wetland was Redland Bay WWTP – be directed to a waterway discharge, i.e. to a found not to be required and was Mangrove Design freshwater wetland and separate mangrove therefore removed from the and Receiving Environmental wetland prior to eventual discharge to the proposal. The WWTP discharges into Assessments ( Appendix K) Logan River (CDR, p8). The freshwater wetland a freshwater storage lagoon prior to which contains detailed will be approximately 1 ha and the mangrove, eventual discharge into the assessments of water quality 8-10 ha (RWS, p9). The CDR (p1) refers to other mangrove offset. and nutrient assimilation (as reports relating to the design and part of Section 9). performance of the wetlands. This additional information could not be located amongst the reports provided.

DES considers that the Logan River has reached assimilative capacity in terms of nutrient loads. Any proposed discharges with a residual nutrient load would need to be demonstrated as unavoidable, and offset under the Point Source Water Quality Offset Policy 2019 (the Offset Policy). The term “nutrient offset” has been used several times in the material presented. It would appear the wetland/ mangrove is the final component in the treatment train, but also the mangrove is providing an additional offset through nutrient uptake and sediment accretion during tidal influx. The Options Report for site 5 shows that the combined wetland/ mangrove will sequester 2.7 T/yr whilst the STP load will ultimately be 2.5 T/yr. The processes in the mangrove can be characterised as an offset if there is a residual load from the STP reaching the river. DES will require more detail regarding the proposed design and sizing of the wetland and mangrove, and modelling of the nutrient removal/ sequestration. If there is a residual load being offset then the EA will reflect the adoption of the Offset Policy and it is likely that the same documents detailing the design etc will be referred to and appended to the EA.

Acid Sulfate Soil Please refer to the Douglas Partners Please refer to the Douglas Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation Partners Acid Sulfate Soils

221

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Major disturbance of acid sulphate soils is (Appendix R) which contains details Investigation ( Appendix R) likely to occur in the establishment of the about whether acid sulfate soils are which includes a Provisional saltwater mangrove. I understand that much likely on the site and recommended Acidic Soils Management Plan. of the material will be retained on site for treatment methods. The report earthworks. A draft acid sulphate soil found that an acid sulfate soils management plan should be submitted with management plan is not necessary the application. Treatment and management but did, however provide of acid sulphate soils must comply with the recommendations for treatment of guidance provided in the current edition of soils. the Queensland Acid Sulfate Soil Technical Manual

Stormwater management and Storage Please refer to the Southern Redland Please refer to the Southern A preliminary review of the siting of the plant Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design Redland Bay WWTP – indicates that it is flanked on three sides by and Receiving Environmental Mangrove Design high ecological value wetlands. The Assessments ( Appendix K) which and Receiving Environmental application should include a draft stormwater contains details about how Assessments ( Appendix K) management plan showing how stormwater is to be managed. Please and Ecological Assessment contaminated stormwater flows will be also refer to the Ecological Report ( Appendix M) managed, and clean stormwater diverted. In Assessment Report ( Appendix M) addition, further details of proposed storage which contains details in relation to of chemicals and bio-solids to prevent the high ecological value wetlands. release/ avoid inundation should be provided. In its pre-lodgement advice, DES considered there was a low possibility there would be any impact to HEV wetlands.

Environmental Protection Policies Please refer to the Southern Redland Please refer to the Southern The application should also reference the Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design Redland Bay WWTP – relevant environmental protection policies. and Receiving Environmental Mangrove Design Under 35 1 (d) EP Reg the department will Assessments ( Appendix K) which and Receiving Environmental need to consider each of the following under includes comprehensive water Assessments ( Appendix K) any relevant environmental protection quality assessments. policies: i) the management hierarchy: ii) environmental values; iii) quality objectives; and iv) the management intent (where applicable).

Of particular relevance to sewage treatment are the Environmental Protection (Water and Wetland Biodiversity) Policy 2019 (EPP (Water)), and the Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2019 (available at https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/). The management hierarchy prioritises how emissions to the environment are to be

222

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project managed. For example, under the EPP (Water), irrigation of treated effluent to land is more preferable to releases to waters. It is already evident that Lendlease is prioritising re-use. The EPP (Water) should be referenced and it should be demonstrated that releases to waters have been deferred and minimised as much as is reasonably possible.

The policies also detail environmental values and quality objectives which will inform the s125 requirements; specifically the description of environmental values, and the risk and likely magnitude of impacts on those values. The policies will also inform what are considered acceptable residual impacts. Schedule 1 of the EPP(Water) lists the catchment documents that have been prepared for the policy. They describe the EVs and water quality objectives for all waters in these catchments.

Schedule 8, Part 3, Table 1 This EAR includes a comprehensive No action required. The application must also address the assessment of all environmental performance outcomes for the environmental impacts and benefits of the proposal. objectives of the operational assessment Recommendations to prescribed in Schedule 8, Part 3, Division 1 of mitigate/control impacts (where the Environmental Protection Regulation impacts are present) are outlined in 2019 (EP Reg) (available at Section 7 of this report. https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/). Of particular relevance to sewage treatment with both land and surface water disposal will be an operational assessment of land, air, water, and groundwater. The applicant should detail mitigation/control measures that address the performance outcomes. Most of these measures have already been mentioned in the various reports provided. This could be presented in a tabular format.

13.5.5 Tranches 5 & 6 On 21 September 2020, the proponent provided draft documentation to the ID Team relating to Tranches 5 & 6. The ID Team forwarded comments from DAF on 9 October 2020 and DES on 16 October 2020. A summary of the preliminary assessment comments and a response is included below in Table 53.

Table 53: Responses to DES and DAF Preliminary Assessment

Comments Response Action

223

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Department of Environment and Science

Southern Redland Bay WWTP Stage 3 It is noted that a response cannot be No action required. Assessments (Water Technology) was referred provided until November 2020, to the Technical Support and Water Science however lodgement is to proceed Team. A response cannot be provided until 6 prior to this date. Any comments November 2020 from the Technical Support and Water Science Team can be provided during the formal State interest review.

High Ecological Significance Wetlands Revised impact calculations are Please refer to the Ecological The Ecological Assessment Report (EAR) provided in the Ecological Assessment Report ( Appendix (16.7.20) states that the development Assessment Report ( Appendix M). M). Please also refer to the involved clearing of 0.617 ha of mapped HES Concept Mangrove Offset Wetland (comprised of 0.526 ha of RE12.1.2 Rehabilitation Plan ( Appendix and 0.091 ha RE12.1.3) (p29). The RE12.1.2 has O), which includes details of been ground-truthed as 1.44ha and the rehabilitation of the mangrove RE12.1.3 as 0.03 ha respectively (p103). If there offset area to include has been any revision of the size of the mangrove, salt-marsh and impacted areas then this should be other coastal vegetation. incorporated in the EAR.

HEV Wetlands/Waters Nil No action required. Concur that there are no impacts likely.

Marine Park Nil No action required. Concur that there are no impacts likely.

Coastal Processes (State Code 8) The WWTP site will be above 10m Please refer to the The document states - “Currently the site is AHD and erosion and sediment Construction Environmental intermittently inundated by tides of the order control measures will Management Plan ( Appendix of Mean High Water Springs via Serpentine be implemented into the design W) and Operational Creek and other small waterways. Once proposed development. Environmental Management developed, incoming tides will inundate the Plans ( Appendices X and Y ). Mangrove Offset Area via a unidirectional We also note that certain site levels inlet to the east of the site and then drain out (such as the wetlands) are designed through a unidirectional outlet to Serpentine for intentional inundation. The Creek to the west of the site. The Site will proposed vegetation within the experience regular inundation during all tidal wetland is intended to inundate and cycles”. as such, no mitigation is required.

DES response: This statement signifies the Erosion and sediment control need for the applicant to mitigate and measures form part of the manage the risk of inundation and coastal Construction Environmental hazards over the subject site. It is noted that Management Plan and Operational the applicant has provided evidence that the Environmental Management Plans. wastewater treatment plant will be raised to a minimum level of 10m AHD and they will implement erosion and sediment control

224

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project measures into the design of the proposed development.

Coastal Processes (State Code 8) The predicted changes in tidal prism Please refer to Section 9.2 of The document states - “The establishment of are small (1.7% and 0.3% during the Southern Redland Bay the Mangrove Offset Area (MOA) will change spring and neap tides, respectively) WWTP – Mangrove Design the tidal prism of the river. At the full and will have no impact on bed and and Receiving Environmental operational capacity of the WWTP and upon bank stability or coastal processes Assessments ( Appendix K). complete establishment of the within adjacent sections of the mangrove/saltmarsh habitats, the change in Logan River. Long-term recession of tidal prism of the Logan estuary was foreshores due to longshore estimated to be between 0.6% (during neap sediment transport differentials, tides) and 1.5% (during spring tides). These migration and geomorphologic changes are small and will have no impact on changes of the bank will not result bed and bank stability or coastal processes from the wetlands but are more likely within adjacent sections of the Logan River. to be natural coastal processes Therefore, erosion/migration of the riverbank associated with the Logan River is anticipated to be best managed by estuary. We note that sea level rise maintaining currently stable and well which is occurring will have a far vegetated riverbanks. It is anticipated that greater impact on any such processes long-term recession of foreshores due to than any minor changes associated longshore sediment transport differentials, with the wetlands. migration and geomorphologic changes to estuaries and tidal inlets, and impacts of other works and structures along the shoreline will not have a detrimental impact on the Logan River”.

DES response: Changing tidal prism is a consideration under the State Code 8. Long term recession of the foreshore may need further mitigation to prevent degradation of the Logan Riverbanks.

Coastal Processes (State Code 8) The section of Serpentine Creek in Please refer to the Preliminary The document states –” Although Serpentine which stability works are to take Vegetation Management Plan Creek is outside the site boundaries, it is place do not result in the removal of (Appendix N), the Draft important that the vegetation along the any existing vegetation – refer to the Operational Environmental banks of Serpentine Creek is maintained and Preliminary Vegetation Management Management (OEMP) by preferably revegetated to mitigate any Plan ( Appendix N). Stantec ( Appendix X) and the potential for localised erosion.”. preliminary Site-Based In order to accommodate the Management Plan by Water DES response: More information regarding earthworks for the wetland area, one Technology (Appendix Y) for how the proposed revegetation will be (1) mangrove (Avicennia marina ) further details. managed on Serpentine Creek and adjoining the bank of Serpentine maintained will be required Creek is proposed to be removed. The proponent intends to minimise any works within Serpentine Creek

225

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

and as such, rehabilitation planting will occur internally to the site (within the wetland area); and rehabilitation of the Serpentine Creek area will be limited to stabilisation works only.

Coastal Processes (State Code 8) This has been addressed in the Please refer to the Preliminary The document states – “Disposal of sediment preliminary Site- Based Management Site Based Management Plan from the sediment basin will need to be Plan (Water Technology). The Site- prepared by Water addressed and a management plan Based Management Plan is a working Technology ( Appendix Y). developed”. document and will be updated on an ongoing basis throughout the DES response: This will need to be managed detailed design and subsequent site accordingly with a plan submitted as part of construction and operation process. the future development application.

Department of Agriculture and Fisheries

Agriculture The existence of the operational Please refer to the Southern Section 9.4 outlines ‘the need to review prawn farm opposite the proposed Redland Bay WWTP – emerging contaminants in the Logan River WWTP along with other adjacent Mangrove Design and other potential contaminants from the aquaculture farms is acknowledged. and Receiving Environmental proposed SRBWWTP arises from concerns Water Technology and Lendlease Assessments ( Appendix K), raised by the local prawn farmers association’. have consulted with the Australian specifically Section 9 – Considering the prawn farm opposite the Prawn Farmers Association Estuarine Impact Assessments. proposed WWTP is operational (along with (during both the due diligence other adjacent aquaculture farms), it is process and then followed by the strongly recommended further consultation design process). This engagement occurs with the Australian Prawn Farmers with the APFA is ongoing. Association (APFA) and adjacent aquaculture farmers not members of the APFA, to ensure Water Technology undertook their concerns have been addressed. DAF is substantial additional testing, happy to facilitate discussions with farm analysis and assessment of a range of operators. additional emerging contaminants and other constituents of concern as a result of pre-consultation with the ID Team and DAF. The additional testing recommended during pre- consultation was undertaken over a period of approximately 6 months. Testing of over 400 contaminants was undertaken, which is unprecedented for this type of infrastructure.

Section 9.4.2 outlines contaminants and The Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Please refer to the Southern parameters relevant to aquaculture. It is noted Mangrove Design and Receiving Redland Bay WWTP – that certain indicators exceeded prescribed Environmental Assessments Mangrove Design and guidelines (e.g. Aluminium, Iron, Zinc). The (Appendix K) includes a Receiving Environmental load limits in the Logan (i.e. levels sampled in

226

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project the Logan River already exceeding guidelines) comprehensive investigation of Assessments ( Appendix K), vs effluent from the SRBWWTP possibly potential contaminants. As noted specifically Section 9 – increasing such loads should be considered. above, testing of over 400 different Estuarine Impact Assessments contaminants was carried out which and Section 14 – is unprecedented for this type of Prelodgement Comments and infrastructure. Responses.

As discussed in Section 9.4.2 of the Water Technology report, the average measured values for some contaminants (such as aluminium, iron and zinc) for the reference SEQ WWTP were slightly above prescribed guideline values. However, it is noted:

. Water quality in the Logan River already exceeds desirable levels for some contaminants. Assuming that the proposed SRBWWTP effluent matches the quality of the reference SEQ WWTP, discharges will be of a concentration that is actually lower than ambient levels in the Logan River, and should contribute to an (albeit small) reduction in these levels in the Logan River by way of dilution. . The information provided for the reference SEQ WWTP is intended as a guide to what Southern Redland Bay WWTP effluent may comprise. We note that the catchment for the other SEQ WWTP included industrial waste contributions. The Southern Redland Bay WWTP catchment will be predominantly residential. It is highly likely that the ultimately generated wastewater effluent will contain lower concentrations of contaminants than those associated with the reference SEQ WWTP.

Section 3.3.2 outlines the Mangrove and Salt We note that DAF has recognised the Please refer to the Southern Marsh Nutrient Offset provisions. It is noted ‘new and innovative’ approach to Redland Bay WWTP – that single daily nitrogen capture figures are wastewater management and Mangrove Design and

227

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project quoted in the Stage 3 Assessment for the offsetting nutrients. We would go Receiving Environmental Mangrove Offset Area (MOA) but any further and suggest that this Assessments ( Appendix K), uncertainty attending these figures is not approach could be used as an specifically Section 9 – discussed. It is recognised that the approach is environmental sustainability Estuarine Impact Assessments ‘new and innovative’ and that a margin of benchmark for similar projects in and Section 14 – safety is built in- but protection of water South East Queensland and Prelodgement Comments and quality in the estuary hinges upon the Nationally. Responses. ongoing function of that offset. The extensive assessments carried out towards the design of the wetlands have assumed a conservative factor of safety. It is understood that with the concept behind the wetlands being new, a certain level of uncertainty is expected. However, in order to demonstrate that the concept is robust and viable, Water Technology and Lendlease are currently in discussions with Griffith University (Dr. Fernanada Adame) regarding the possibility of a long-term (5 year) ARC Linkage research based monitoring program for the project (noting that if the ARC Linkage submission is unsuccessful that a comparable, though almost certainly smaller, scientific research and validation program will still take place). The monitoring program will include several aspects including studies of the establishment of the marine plants and associated water quality and hydrological aspects. It is also expected to cover the following:

. Measurements of marine plants (e.g. percent coverage); . Monitoring of growth rates; and . Measurement of nutrient assimilation rates to establish the intended function of the wetlands.

It is also noted that several potential key pollutant removal ‘pathways’ were deliberately not included in the analysis to provide even further

228

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

factors of safety (e.g. removals of sediment in the sediment forebay, losses due to salt marsh uptake, etc). These processes will however be included in the ARC Linkage (or equivalent) assessments.

Appendix 1 University of Queensland letter It is acknowledged that the No further action. outlines that ‘Currently, the aquaculture aquaculture farm opposite the facility does not appear operational […]’. It is proposed WWTP and adjacent farms uncertain which aquaculture facility this letter are operational. We do not believe is referring to, however the aquaculture farm that the statement contained in the opposite the proposed WWTP (and adjacent letter materially affects the advice, as farms) are operational. the letter goes on to forecast that the facility in question (and adjacent farms) may become operational.

In regards to reference papers quoted, it is The implication of this statement is Please refer to the Southern noted that the wetland studied by Dr Adame not clear. The reference list contains Redland Bay WWTP – et al was a paperbark swamp up north and it articles that have been referred to for Mangrove Design and consumes nitrate - which aquaculture doesn’t general guidance and as supporting Receiving Environmental emit to any great extent. So the scheme can’t information based on Water Assessments ( Appendix K), apply directly to aquaculture. Technology’s discussions with Section 14 – Prelodgement experts in the field. The wetland is Comments and Responses. intended to offset nutrients loads in the recycled water produced by the proposed Southern Redland Bay WWTP . The wetlands are not intended to offset nutrient loads arising from local aquaculture practices.

Biodiversity The abiotic conditions within the Please refer to the Southern Waterways providing for fish passage wetlands (and drain) will be Redland Bay WWTP – consistent with those of the Logan Mangrove Design and . It is stated that an ancillary benefit of the River. Any changes in such abiotic Receiving Environmental MOA will be provision of fish habitat. Fish conditions are considerably Assessments ( Appendix K), passage into and through the MOA negligible. This is evidenced in the specifically Section 9 – habitats should not compromise the assessments detailed in Sections 9, 10 Estuarine Impact Assessments health, productivity, marketability or and 11 of the Southern Redland Bay and Section 14 – suitability for human consumption of fish. WWTP – Mangrove Design and Prelodgement Comments and If passage into the MOA is proposed, Receiving Environmental Responses. include the following information: Assessments ( Appendix K). The o Detail how abiotic conditions design process for the wetland Please also refer to the within the drain are suitable for emphasises the maintenance of Ecological Assessment Report fish. abiotic conditions in consistency with (Appendix M ), which includes o Fish strandings and entrapment the Logan River as this is vital for the a response to State Code 18. within the MOA will be managed establishment and rehabilitation of in accordance with the mangroves within the wetland. Guidelines for Fish Salvage.

229

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

o The source of any fish kills within the MOA, or adjacent habitats connected to the MOA, is to be identified and rectified.

There appears to be numerous design It is noted that because the draft Please refer to the following elements within the supplied draft design documentation was provided in documentation provided as drawings which indicate that adequate fish separate tranches that some part of this application: passage through the MOA may not be information may not have been . Engineering Plans achieved. These elements include drops available at the time that DAF prepared by KN Group between structures, tidal gates, designs which provided its comments. The (Appendix D); many entrap or cause potential injury to fish Hydrodynamic Modelling for Culvert . Hydrodynamic Modelling and structures which may delay fish passage Sizing prepared by Water Technology for Culvert Sizing during flow events. Provide the following (Appendix L) was not available to be prepared by Water information: submitted with any of the tranches, Technology ( Appendix L) however is crucial in understanding . Confirm if fish passage into and through . Concept Mangrove Offset the wetlands hydrology. the MOA will be beneficial for the health Rehabilitation Plan

of fisheries resources. If deemed to be prepared by Saunders The mangrove offset area, including beneficial, demonstrate how adequate Havill Group ( Appendix drainage channel and inlet/outlet fish passage will be achieved by O) works is designed in order that there addressing/rectifying the following is always standing water in the issues: channel. Reference to the o Drawing 19-189-33, prepared by Hydrodynamic Modelling for Culvert Saunders Havill Group, dated May Sizing Report ( Appendix L) of the 2020 and Revision B, shows a tidal range influence on the proposed significant drop from the upstream mangrove footprint, at 10-minute exit of culvert 01 (where the flood intervals, from 6am Tuesday 21st gate is located) into the sediment pit January 2020 to midnight Tuesday below it. This initial 40cm drop may 4th February 2020 demonstrates the cause injury to fish. lowest standing water level is of the o It appears that the tidal water level order of RL 0.10m (4th Feb 2020) and would need to rise from the invert the highest standing water level of level of the sediment pit (RL-1.4) to the order of RL 1.06m AHD (24 Jan what appears to be the invert level of 2020). Within the Engineering Plans the drain (RL-0.5) before any fish passage is provided into the drain. (Appendix D ), a standing water level This may not be appropriate and the of 0.0m AHD is adopted. timing of this delay should be quantified. On this basis, there will not be any o The flow through the proposed significant drop at either the inlet or wetland drain is one way. A outlet culvert and fish passage is longitudinal section of Drain 01 from provided at all times. Since the Logan River, throughout culvert submission of the tranche 01, the drain, culvert 02 and through documentation, the ‘standing water to the tie-in with the natural level’ has been added to KN Group’s waterway Serpentine Creek should plans 19-189-33 and 19-189-34 be provided to demonstrate that (Appendix D).

230

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

there are no drops in elevation between the joins. The plan 8868 P 02 SK04 is prepared o Plan: Southern Redland Bay by Saunders Havill Group and refers Wastewater Treatment Project – to 19-189-33 (inlet works) and 19- Mangrove Offset, 8868 P 02 SK04, 189-34 (outlet works), both of which prepared by Stantec, undated and were provided to DAF as part of the Rev. N, shows ‘Inlet Works’ and refers Engineering Plans (Appendix D). As to Plan 19-189-33 for further details. noted above, the inlet/outlet works This plan should be provided. plans have been updated to show the o Hydraulic information will need to be standing water level and some other provided in relation to whether there minor improvements in design. will be a standing level of water within the drain and proposed KN Group utilised the findings from sediment basin and when the water the Water Technology report to level will reach the invert of culvert design the earthworks and 02 to allow fish to move back into the inlet/outlet structures (refer to Logan River. Any delays to fish Sections 6.8.2 and 6.8.4 above). KN passage must be quantified. Group also calculated inlet and outlet o The relative levels of the inverts, velocity assessments based on the outlets and other structures within Water Technology modelling and the the MOA should be shown on all selected inlet/outlet works design. plans in relation to tidal levels. The velocities are typically extremely o It should also be demonstrated that low and suitable for fish passage. abiotic conditions within the drain are suitable for fish.

Alternatively, if fish passage is to be Fish passage is not intended to be No action required. specifically prevented, provide details of prevented. The project will provide measures taken to exclude fish from the MOA 9.854ha of wetland ecosystem and how the proposal will deal with any including 8.69ha of mangrove forest unexpected fish entrapment issues within the as part of the ‘mangrove offset’ which MOA. will be an important new habitat for aquatic and non-aquatic fauna, and a significant positive environmental benefit for the project.

There are multiple waterways providing for The plans and reporting have been Please refer to the following fish passage as per the spatial data layer updated to: documentation provided as Queensland waterways for waterway barrier part of this application: . Show that the waterway along works, both within and directly adjacent to the northern boundary of the site . Engineering Plans the proposed footprint of the Site Option 5. does not currently connect with prepared by KN Group The site may also contain unmapped features the existing freshwater dam; (Appendix D); which still constitute a waterway as per the . Show the waterway along the . Ecological Assessment definition in the Fisheries Act 1994. All northern boundary of the site Report prepared by impacts to the MSES: waterways providing for connected under Road 1 via a Saunders Havill Group fish passage must be avoided in the first culvert and connecting with (Appendix M) instance to ensure the health and resilience of Drain 1 (wetlands). biodiversity is maintained or enhanced.

231

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Where this is not possible, all impacts must be . Show the drainage feature at the . Concept Mangrove Offset minimised and mitigated to the greatest south-eastern corner of the Rehabilitation Plan extent possible. Wastewater Treatment Plant is prepared by Saunders not impacted by the proposed Havill Group ( Appendix . Provide details on all potential barriers to earthworks; O) fish passage through the natural existing . Shows the extent of works within . Concept Wastewater waterways and how these will be Serpentine Creek, which amount Treatment Plant avoided, minimised and mitigated. to stabilisation only; and Rehabilitation Plan . Provide a response to State Code prepared by Saunders 18. Havill Group ( Appendix P)

Development of the Southern Redland Bay The Ecological Assessment Report Please refer to the following WWTP will impact on marine plants however, (Appendix M) has been updated to documentation provided as the MOA is expected to result in a net gain of provided plans showing type and part of this application: marine plants. It is noted the primary function area of marine plants proposed to be . Southern Redland Bay of the MOA is to offset nutrients from the impacted and proposed to be gained. WWTP – Mangrove Design WWTP, an ancillary benefit may be provision and Receiving of fish habitats through the establishment of a In addition, the Concept Mangrove Environmental marine plant community. For the MOA to Offset Rehabilitation Plans Assessments prepared by successfully provide fish habitats and achieve (Appendix O) have been updated to Water Technology the objectives of State Planning Policies two exclude the use of herbicides within (Appendix K ), and three, the following is to be addressed and adjacent to waterways and tidal . Hydrodynamic Modelling and clarified in the application: land. for Culvert Sizing

prepared by Water Provide two clear plans that show: As mentioned above, Water Technology ( Appendix L ); Technology and Lendlease are . Type (not regional ecosystems), and area . Ecological Assessment currently in discussions with Griffith (square metres) of marine plants Report prepared by University (Dr. Fernanada Adame) proposed to be impacted; and Saunders Havill Group regarding the possibility of a long- . Type (not regional ecosystems), and area (Appendix M); term research based monitoring (square metres) of marine plants . Concept Mangrove Offset program for the project. The proposed to be gained. Rehabilitation Plan monitoring program is expected to . Confirm the absence of marine plants in prepared by Saunders include several aspects including the the vicinity of Access 01, or alternatively Havill Group ( Appendix establishment of the marine plants include the marine plants proposed to be O); and associated water quality and impacted in the areas of disturbance. . Preliminary Site Based hydrological aspects. It is also . Determine and quantify the impact of Management Plan expected to cover the following: extending the proposed development prepared by Water including Access 01 across areas below . Measurements of marine plants Technology ( Appendix Y) HAT on existing tidal and inundation (e.g. percent coverage);

patterns within and adjacent to . Monitoring of growth rates; and Serpentine Creek. . Measurement of nutrient . Amend documentation to reflect the assimilation rates to establish the exclusion of herbicide use within and intended function of the MOA. adjacent to waterways and tidal lands. Subsequent to the submission of . It is advised that attending a ‘pre-start Tranches 5 & 6, a Preliminary Site and compliance (on and off maintenance) Based Management Plan for the inspections’ is not a responsibility of the

232

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

assessing authority and it is wetlands has been prepared by recommended that this aspect is Water Technology ( Appendix Z) removed from the documentation. which refers to ongoing . Amend plan Southern Redland Bay management and monitoring Wastewater Treatment Plant Concept requirements. Rehabilitation Plan – Management Zones, In relation to ongoing protection and dated 01/07/2020, ref. 8868 E 06CRMP A ensuring the area is protected from to exclude the use of herbicides. development, it is proposed that the . As specified in the Appendix I – Letter infrastructure be designated. The from Dr Maria Fernanda Adame in the designation will apply to the site until Report, Water Technology dated 18 such time as it is revoked, and the September 2020, a monitoring program conditions imposed on any to follow up on the establishment of the designation will continue to apply for marine plants and the adequacy of the the life of the development. In this hydrology throughout the MOA is instance, we would expect that as a important to include in the project. This condition of any designation, the should include quantifiable Minister will require the proponent to measurements of marine plants (e.g. undertake the required rehabilitation percent coverage) at identified times (e.g. works and ensure their ongoing annually) to ensure success of the MOA is maintenance. on track. In addition, the monitoring program should include alert to actions In the future, if the site is no longer and reporting requirements to ensure the needed for community infrastructure, proposed MOA establishes and functions the designation may be revoked and as intended. Include a monitoring the Planning Act 2016 (and any other program that reflects the above in the related provisions) would apply to project and provide details in the development. application. . To ensure ongoing conservation of the marine plants (MSES) that establish within the MOA, detail how the area will be protected from future development inconsistent with the intention of the MOA. . Include a statement that any marine plants collected for the purpose of rehabilitation planting will be conducted in accordance with the Accepted development requirements for operational work that is completely or partly within a declared fish habitat area. . Further to the recommendations regarding fish stocking by the DPI in the Biting Insects Management Plan, it is advised that only those species native to the Logan River system are stocked as there may be unintended consequences

233

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

(e.g. increased predation, etc.). This measure should only be taken if it is demonstrated that the natural fish population from the Logan River is not effective. Spraying should not be undertaken. The report should reflect these proposed changes.

13.6 Summary of Pre-consultation Further to the above pre-consultation summary, below is a summary of key amendments and/or additional information provided to support the ID:

. Freshwater wetlands (approximately 1ha) was removed from the proposal as detailed water quality investigations found that it was not necessary; . Ultraviolet (UV) light treatment for discharged water was incorporated into the design, in order to provide a factor of safety relating to human enteric viruses; . The Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments report by Water Technology included significant additional water quality investigations and assessments following advice from DES and DAF; . The Ecological Assessment Report has been updated to address comments from DES and DAF; . The Concept Mangrove Offset Rehabilitation Plan and Concept Wastewater Treatment Plan Rehabilitation Plan have been amended to address comments from DES and DAF; . The Preliminary Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan has been updated to address comments from DES and DAF; . A sketch plan for works within Serpentine Creek has been prepared following comment from DNRME; . A Biting Insects Management Plan has been prepared following comments during formal pre-consultation; . A Process Flow Chart (for an MBR treatment plant) has been prepared following comments during formal pre- consultation; and . A Coastal Processes Assessment (including response to State Code 8) has been amended by Water Technology in response to comments from DES.

13.7 Formal Consultation A consultation strategy for the project has been prepared by Threeplus. A draft of the strategy has previously been provided to the ID Team. A final version of the consultation strategy is included as Appendix AA . 13.7.1 Minimum Consultation Requirements The following minimum requirements for consultation are contained with Part 4, Chapter 8 of the MGR –

. Giving notice to the Minister, all affected parties and stakeholders identified in the draft environmental assessment report that includes – o How the draft environmental assessment report can be viewed or accessed; o How to make a submission to the Minister within the consultation period; and

. Publishing a public notice in a newspaper generally circulating in the area (either the Courier Mail or local newspaper) at the same time as giving the notice that states – o The proposed infrastructure designation; o Description of the land to which the proposed designation applies;

234

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

o Type of infrastructure for which the land is proposed to be designated; o How the draft environmental assessment report can be viewed or accessed; o How to make a submission about the proposed infrastructure designation; and o The day by when submissions may be made to the Minister.

The proposed formal consultation strategy goes beyond minimum consultation requirements, which is appropriate in this circumstance and for such an important project.

13.8 Ongoing Consultation Following the end of the formal consultation, it is intended that consultation will continue as per the Threeplus consultation strategy.

235

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 14 Conclusion and Recommendations This EAR is written on behalf of the infrastructure entity who seeks a MID over the premises at 38 Longland Road, Redland Bay for the Community Infrastructure, being the proposed Southern Redland Bay WWTP and wetlands project, pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 5, section 36 of the Planning Act 2016 (PA). Saunders Havill Group have prepared this EAR to support the request in accordance with the MID process overview (version 1.3 – 17 June 2019, D18/227762) from QTPG and the MGR, Chapter 7 – Guidelines for the process for environmental assessment and consolation for making or amending a Ministerial designation .

The proposed MID is needed under this framework to facilitate the efficient and timely supply of infrastructure as per the PA, in order to service land within the Urban Footprint in Southern Redland Bay, being the key greenfield dwelling supply area for the Redland LGA identified in ShapingSEQ . The project aligns with the following two (2) infrastructure categories under Schedule 5, Part 2 of the PR:

. Category 17 - water cycle management infrastructure; and . Category 19 - any other facility not stated in this part that is intended mainly to accommodate government functions.

The EAR has been prepared to provide information to the Minister and stakeholders in accordance with the MGR. This EAR has considered the following key environmental impacts: operational risks, water quality, odour, noise, biodiversity (including marine and terrestrial ecosystems), coastal processes, natural hazards, amenity and traffic impacts.

The proposal appropriately manages or mitigates potential on-site and off-site impacts of the project during both the operational and construction phases. Changes have been made to the proposal and/or additional information provided as part of an extensive pre-consultation with key stakeholders and State agencies. This EAR addresses the issues raised within the pre-consultation phase. The proposed Designation aligns with the guiding principles, policies and assessment benchmarks for the key State interests under the State planning framework.

The proposed designation is critical to ensure the timely and efficient supply of Community Infrastructure to service the Southern Redland Bay catchment, consistent with Goal 1 of ShapingSEQ . The proposed WWTP and wetlands proposal is an exemplar environmentally sustainable project that provides significant environmental, social and cost advantages over traditional wastewater solutions, which would typically involve treatment and direct disposal to the ocean or river system.

The proposed designation aligns with the guiding principles, policies and assessment benchmarks for the key State interests under the State Planning Framework. The project has undergone a comprehensive environmental assessment (including extensive pre-consultation) that is of a standard to satisfy the Minister to make a designation under with s36 of the PA.

14.1 Recommended Conditions To ensure that the project is undertaken in accordance with this EAR and impacts are appropriately avoided, mitigated or offset it is recommended that the Minister require the infrastructure entity to carry out the development generally in accordance with the following plans:

. Proposal Plans (Site Plans) o 8868 P 02 Rev P – SK01 dated 26/10/2020 o 8868 P 02 Rev P – SK02 dated 26/10/2020 o 8868 P 02 Rev P – SK03 dated 26/10/2020

236

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

o 8868 P 02 Rev P – SK04 dated 26/10/2020 o 8868 P 02 Rev P – SK05 dated 26/10/2020 . Reconfiguration of a Lot Plan; o 8868 P 10 Rev C – PP01 dated 21/08/2020 . Engineering Plans; o Drawings 19-189-01 to 19-189-39 prepared by KN Group . Concept Design Report o Southern Redland Bay WWTP Concept Design Report dated 01/09/2020 prepared by Stantec (including acoustic and noise impact recommendations)

In addition, it is recommended that the Minister require the Infrastructure Entity to undertake the development and ongoing operation in accordance with the following management plans:

It is further recommended that the Minister impose the following conditions on any Designation:

Servicing

. Infrastructure should be provided (where not already existing) or upgraded to cater for the proposed development in accordance with the Engineering Services Report by Stantec dated 22/09/2020 . Connect the development to all relevant infrastructure necessary to service the development

Geotechnical . As part of detailed design, undertake a geotechnical investigation that confirms the ground conditions and informs building requirements.

Erosion and Sediment Control

. Prepare an erosion and sediment control plan that addresses the erosion risk and surface water run-off, to be included within the Construction Environmental Management Plan by Stantec dated 02/11/2020.

Water Quality

. The infrastructure entity (or future operator) is required to comply with the licence conditions of any Environmental Authority. . The detailed design of the WWTP is to ensure compliance with the recommendations outlined in the Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments for the Infrastructure Designation Process. . Ongoing water quality monitoring is to occur in accordance with the Operational Environmental Management Plan (incorporating Site Based Management Plan – Wetlands).

237

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project 15 Appendices

Appendix A MID Process Overview and MID Process Flow Chart

Appendix B Southern Redland Bay WWTP Project –Proposal Plans (Site Plans)

Appendix C Southern Redland Bay WWTP Project –Proposal Plans (Reconfiguration of a Lot Proposal Plan)

Appendix D Southern Redland Bay WWTP Project –Proposal Plans (Engineering Plans)

Appendix E Existing Site Plan

Appendix F Southern Redland Bay WWTP Options Assessment Report

Appendix G Southern Redland Bay WWTP - Concept Design Report

Appendix H Engineering Services Report

Appendix I Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Recycled Water Management Plan

Appendix J WWTP Process Flowchart

Appendix K Southern Redland Bay WWTP – Mangrove Design and Receiving Environmental Assessments

Appendix L Hydrodynamic Modelling for Culvert Sizing

Appendix M Ecological Assessment Report Including aquatic surveys and reporting

Appendix N Preliminary Vegetation Clearing and Fauna Management Plan

Appendix O Concept Mangrove Rehabilitation Plan

Appendix P Concept WWTP Rehabilitation Plan

Appendix Q Cultural Heritage Management Plan

Appendix R Acid Sulfate Soils Investigation

Appendix S Bushfire Management Plan

Appendix T Biting Insect Management Plan

Appendix U Traffic and Transport Assessment

Appendix V Visual Impact Assessment Mapping

Appendix W Construction Environmental Management Plan

Appendix X Operational Environmental Management Plan (WWTP)

Appendix Y Preliminary Site Based Management Plan (Wetlands)

Appendix Z Pre-Consultation Report

Appendix AA Formal Consultation Strategy

Appendix BB Survey Sketch Plan

238

■ Environmental Assessment Report - Southern Redland Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wetlands Project

Appendix CC Perspective Images

Appendix DD MSES Mapping

Appendix EE RCC PD online property summary

Appendix FF Adjoining Landowners and Directly Affected Landowners

Appendix GG Property Searches

Appendix HH Development Assessment Mapping (State)

Appendix II Koala Management Plan

239