Part 9 - Department of Transport and Main Roads

Transcription

R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Petrie to Redcliffe Multimodal Corridor - Natural Env.pdf - Page Number: 50 of 68
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Appendix B Fauna Corridors Assessment
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Petrie to Redcliffe Multimodal Corridor Project
J:\MMPL\60013404\Engineering\PHASE 6\NE Report\080728 Petrie to Kippa-Ring Ecological Assessment Report.doc
Revision 3 28 July 2008
Page B
Appendix B
Fauna Corridors
Assessment
Background
This chapter is intended to provide detailed
information on the species present within the locality,
their specific needs in regards to fauna crossing
mechanisms and the desired location of the
proposed structures to facilitate the effective
crossing of the proposed multimodal corridor.
Fauna Corridor Design Principles
In review of the current knowledge of Ecological
Corridor, CEPLA (2003) found that wide wildlife
corridors of integral vegetation are required for many
species of wildlife that utilise the thickest parts of
forests. Wide corridors are also valuable in areas
where adjacent incompatible land uses continually
degrade edges. A study of fauna corridors in Eden,
New South Wales (Recker 1997) found the following:
•
Corridors of 250m width retained a complete
suite of bird species; and
Focal Species and Specific Design
Requirements
The requirements of specific species known to utilise
corridors can assist in determining the appropriate
form of a corridor in terms of width, vegetation
community, vegetation density, specific species of
flora, presence of water etc.
An assessment of the fauna known to utilise
particular corridors and their known corridor/habitat
requirements are presented in Table B1.
•
Corridors of width >100m retained the full suite
of arboreal mammals apart from the Yellowbellied Glider, which was only recorded in the
widest (250m) corridor.
This study occurred in native forest buffers by pine
plantations. In the absence of this buffering
capacity, additional buffers are required to reduce
edge effects. Murcia (1995) identified that most
abiotic and direct biological edge effects extend 0 to
50m into bushland. Therefore corridors of 250m
wide should be viewed as a minimum to reduce edge
effect impacts.
It is generally accepted that high rates of movement
of animals will occur through high quality habitat if it
is buffered by medium quality habitat (DMR, 2000).
Therefore, it is necessary to incorporate a diversity of
habitat types in wide corridors to cater for a broad
suite of species.
d
e
s
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Page B-1
Table B1
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Page B-1
Location and Discussion of Recommended Fauna Crossing Points
The following key locations have been identified as viable fauna corridors within the context of design limitations for the proposed Multimodal Corridor. . The locations of these four crossing points are illustrated Figure 8.
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Page B-1
Appendix C EPBC Act Self Assessment
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Page C
Appendix C
EPBC Act Self
Assessment
EPBC Act Self Assessment
Actions that are likely to have a significant impact on
a matter of National Environmental Significance
(NES) are subject to a rigorous assessment and
approval process under the environmental
assessment provisions of the EPBC Act.
Matters of NES should be considered in the
environmental assessment process. In particular the
presence of wetlands of international importance,
Commonwealth listed threatened flora and fauna
species and ecological communities, and migratory
species listed under international agreements (e.g.
JAMBA and CAMBA). If the works are likely to result
in a significant impact upon a NES matter a referral
will need to be made to the Commonwealth
Department of Environment and Heritage for
determination on whether the works are a controlled
action.
Ramsar Wetland
Threatened Species
Hays Inlet will be directly impacted by the proposed
multimodal corridor. As clearing, excavations, filling
and piling works will be required within this area,
there is potential for impacts to occur.
The site may provide potential habitat resources for
several nationally listed migratory species. However,
the site is unlikely to represent an area of important
habitat for these species. Furthermore, the extent of
proposed habitat removal is unlikely to disrupt an
ecologically significant proportion of any populations
of migratory species likely to occur. Therefore, the
proposed development is unlikely to have a
significant impact on migratory species currently
listed on the EPBC Act.
An action is likely to have a significant impact on the
ecological character of a declared Ramsar wetland if
there is a real chance or possibility that it will result
in:
•
Areas of the wetland being destroyed or
substantially modified;
•
A substantial and measurable change in the
hydrological regime of the wetland, for example,
a substantial change to the volume, timing,
duration and frequency of ground and surface
water flows to and within the wetland;
The site is likely to provide limited habitat resources
for three nationally listed threatened species. The
potential impact of the proposed development on
these species is assessed in the following sections.
•
The habitat or lifecycle of native species,
including invertebrate fauna and fish species,
dependant upon the wetland being seriously
affected;
•
A substantial and measurable change in the
water quality of the wetland – for example, a
substantial change in the level of salinity,
pollutants, or nutrients in the wetland, or water
temperature which may adversely impact on
biodiversity, ecological integrity, social amenity
or human health; or
Sixteen flora species listed as threatened in the
EPBC Act have been recorded within 10 kilometres
of the site (see Table D1). Of these species Acacia
attenuata and Hydrocharis dubia have a moderate
likelihood of occurrence and as a consequence were
specifically targeted during field survey. These
species were not detected and are therefore not
expected to be impacted by the proposed multimodal
corridor
The following assessment has been undertaken to
determine if any action is likely to have a significant
impact upon any matter of NES present within the
study corridor.
•
s
a
le
The proposed multimodal corridor will directly impact
upon a Ramsar wetland through the construction of
the rail corridor which will involve direct impacts upon
the vegetation and hydrology of the wetland.
Therefore, a referral to the Commonwealth Minister
for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts should be
made.
Re
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
n
u
An invasive species that is harmful to the
ecological character of the wetland being
established (or an existing invasive species
being spread) in the wetland.
ed
R
M
None of the other threatened flora species were
recorded during the survey period and subsequently
have a low potential of occurring in the construction
footprint of the alignment.
The grey-headed flying fox was identified foraging in
vegetation adjacent to creek lines throughout the
study area. No roost camps were identified within
the study area. The loss of potential foraging
resource associated with the clearing of vegetation
for this project is unlikely to significantly affect the
grey-headed flying fox population.
.
Page C-1
R
M
I
T
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
Conclusion
Therefore with respect to the preceding species, the
proposed works associated with the construction of
the Multimodal Corridor are not expected to:
•
Decrease the size of a threatened population;
•
Reduce the area of occupancy of the species;
•
Fragment an existing population;
•
Adversely affect critical habitat;
•
Disrupt the breeding cycle of a population;
•
Affect the availability or quality of habitat to the
extent that the species is likely to decline;
•
Result in harmful invasive species becoming
established in the study area; or
•
Interfere with the recovery of the species.
The species likely to occur on the site consist of:
Forest Birds, Flying Mammals and Mammals
•
White-bellied sea eagle (Haliaeetus
leucogaster);
•
Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolour);
•
Black-throated Finch (Poephilia cincta cincta);
•
Regent Honeyeater (Zanthomyza phyrgia)
•
Spotted-tailed Quoll (Dasyurus maclates
maculates);
•
White-throated needletail (Hirundapus
caudacutus); and
•
Grey-headed flying fox (Pteropus
poliocephalus).
These terrestrial species may occasionally use the
site as foraging habitat. However, as the distribution
of vegetation communities supported is not confined
to the site, and as they are in relative abundance
throughout the area, and the fact that these species
are wide-ranging, it is unlikely that the proposal will
have a significant impact on these species. The
following assessment has been undertaken for these
species in accordance with the Self Assessment
Guideline (Version 1.1) produced by the Department
of Environment and Water. In conclusion this
assessment has found that the proposal will not:
•
substantially modify, destroy or isolate an area
of important habitat of any migratory species;
•
•
result in harmful invasive species becoming
established in the site; or
disrupt the life cycle of an ecologically
significant proportion of a population of the
species.
Detailed Species Specific Self
Assessments
Modify, destroy, remove, or isolate or decrease
the availability or quality of habitat to the extent
that the species is likely to decline
Considering the high mobility of the species and
large extent of similar and suitable foraging habitat in
the locality, the small proportion of habitat removal
required for the proposed development is unlikely to
impact on the long-term breeding success or
population size of the local population of greyheaded flying-fox.
Threatened Species
Grey-headed Flying-fox
“An action has, will have, or is likely to have a
significant impact on a vulnerable species if it does,
will, or is likely to:”
Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an
important population of a species
population size of the local population of greyheaded flying-fox.
Reduce the area of occupancy of an important
population
If this factor were taken literally then the removal of
as little as one flowering eucalypt within the known
range of the grey-headed flying-fox would effectively
reduce the area of occupancy of the species.
However, in practical terms the relatively small extent
of habitat removal required for the proposed
development represents an extremely small
reduction in the potential area of occupancy of the
species, and is unlikely to have a significant impact
on the species.
d
e
s
Result in invasive species that are harmful to a
vulnerable species
The extent of habitat removal would not increase the
potential occurrence of the black flying-fox, which is
known to hybridise with the grey-headed flying-fox.
The grey-headed flying-fox is not known to be
vulnerable to introduced predators such as the fox or
cat. Nevertheless, the extent of clearing for the
proposed development is unlikely to increase the
accessibility of these species into the site.
R
M
u
a
e
el
R
Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of
a species
The site represents a small area of potential foraging
habitat for the species, and does not provide an
important “camp site”. Considering the large extent
of suitable foraging habitat in the locality and the
high mobility of the species, the small area of
potential foraging resources on the site is unlikely to
represent critical habitat for the species.
Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important
population
Habitat on the site is not a known “camp site” for the
species. The extent of foraging habitat removal
would not be of such a magnitude as to impact on
the breeding success of the species.
R
r
e
nd
Fragment an existing important population into
two or more populations
The grey-headed flying-fox is a highly mobile
species, the movements of which would not be
hindered by the extent of habitat removal required for
the proposed development.
I
T
Spotted-tailed Quoll
T
D
Due to the current high levels of anthropogenic
disturbance within the locality, it is unlikely that a
viable population of spotted tailed quoll occur within
or adjacent to the study area. This species is
sensitive to anthropogenic impacts. Further to this,
considering the high mobility of this species and the
large extent of better quality habitat to the west and
east of the locality, the small proportion of habitat
removal required for the proposed development is
unlikely to impact on the long-term breeding success
or population size of a local population of spottedtailed quoll.
population
The current high levels of disturbance present within
the study area suggest that spotted tailed quoll is
unlikely to occur. However, the relatively small
extent of habitat removal required for the proposed
development represents an extremely small
reduction in the potential area of occupancy of this
species within south east Queensland. Therefore as
this species is unlikely to occur, the proposed
development is unlikely to have a significant impact
on this species.
Page C-3
The spotted-tailed quoll is a highly mobile species,
the movements of which would not be hindered by
the extent of habitat removal required for the
proposed development.
a species
habitat for this species. As this species was not
detected during targeted field survey, and due to the
high levels of disturbance currently occurring
throughout the study area, the study area is not
expected to provide a critical habitat for this species.
population
Following targeted survey and detailed literature
review, the habitats on site are not known habitat for
the species. The extent of foraging habitat removal
Considering that this species was not detected
during targeted field survey, together with the high
mobility of the species and large extent of similar and
suitable foraging habitat in the locality, the small
proportion of habitat removal required for the
proposed development is unlikely to impact on the
long-term breeding success or population size of the
local population of spotted-tailed quoll.
vulnerable species
The extent of habitat removal would not increase the
potential occurrence of invasive species that could
potentially impact upon this species.
The spotted-tailed quoll is not known to be
Eastern Curlew
population size of the local population of eastern
curlew.
population
The relatively small extent of habitat removal
required for the proposed development represents
an extremely small reduction in the potential area of
occupancy of the species, and is unlikely to have a
significant impact on the species.
The eastern curlew is a highly mobile species, the
movements of which would not be hindered by the
development.
a species
habitat for the species. Considering the large extent
potential foraging resource in the study area is
unlikely to represent critical habitat for the species.
population
Habitat in the study area is not a known roosting site
for the species. The extent of foraging habitat
removal would not be of such a magnitude as to
impact on the breeding success of the species.
population size of the local population of eastern
curlew.
vulnerable species
The eastern curlew is not known to be vulnerable to
introduced predators such as the fox or cat.
Nevertheless, the extent of clearing for the proposed
development is unlikely to increase the accessibility
of these species into the site.
Migratory Species
Considering the high mobility of these species and
population size of the local population of ruddy
turnstone, curlew sandpiper, Latham’s snipe, Bartailed godwit, Wimbrel or Terek sandpiper.
Ruddy Turnstone, Curlew sandpiper, Latham’s snipe,
Bar-tailed godwit, Wimbrel and Terek sandpiper
vulnerable species
The ruddy turnstone, Curlew sandpiper, Latham’s
snipe, Bar-tailed godwit, Wimbrel and Terek
sandpiper are not known to be vulnerable to
of these predator species into the site.
the large extent of similar and suitable foraging
habitat in the locality, the small proportion of habitat
removal required for the proposed development is
unlikely to impact on the long-term breeding success
or population size of the local population of these
species.
population
occupancy of these species, and is therefore unlikely
to have a significant impact on the area of occupancy
of these species in the locality.
d
e
s
R
M
a
e
el
R
a species
habitat for these species. Considering the large
extent of suitable foraging habitat in the locality and
the high mobility of these species, the small area of
represent critical habitat for these species.
population
Habitat on the site is not a known roosting site for
these species. The extent of foraging habitat
impact on the breeding success of these species.
I
T
R
r
e
d
n
u
These species are all highly mobile species, the
development.
T
D
White-Bellied Sea-eagle
population size of the local population of whitebellied sea eagle.
population
The White-bellied sea eagle is a highly mobile
a species
Page C-4
population
Habitat on the site is not a known roosting site for the
population size of the local population of whitebellied sea-eagle.
vulnerable species
The white-bellied sea-eagle is not known to be
Grey-tailed Tattler
population size of the local population of grey-tailed
tattler.
population
The grey-tailed tattler is a highly mobile species, the
development.
population
a species
The site represents a small area of potential
foraging habitat for the species. Considering the
large extent of suitable foraging habitat in the locality
and the high mobility of the species, the small area of
The white-throated needletail is a highly mobile
population
a species
population size of the local population of grey-tailed
tattler.
vulnerable species
The grey-tailed tattler is not known to be vulnerable
to introduced predators such as the fox or cat.
White-throated Needletail
population size of the local population of whitethroated needletail.
population
population
The rainbow bee-eater is a highly mobile species,
R
M
a
e
el
R
vulnerable species
The white-throated needletail is not known to be
Rainbow Bee-eater
I
T
T
D
a species
R
r
e
d
n
u
population size of the local population of whitethroated needletail.
d
e
s
population size of the local population of rainbow
bee-eater.
population
population size of the local population of rainbow
bee-eater.
vulnerable species
The rainbow bee-eater is not known to be vulnerable
Page C-5
Black-faced Monarch
Considering the high mobility of the Black-faced
monarch and large extent of similar and suitable
foraging habitat in the locality for this species, the
small proportion of habitat removal required for the
proposed development is unlikely to impact on the
long-term breeding success or population size of the
local population of black-faced monarch.
population
The black-faced monarch is a highly mobile species,
a species
of better quality foraging and nesting habitat in the
locality and the high mobility of the species, the small
area of potential foraging and nesting resources on
the site is unlikely to represent critical habitat for the
species.
population
population size of the local population of black-faced
monarch.
vulnerable species
The black-faced monarch is not known to be
Spectacled Monarch
population size of the local population of spectacled
monarch.
population
The spectacled monarch is a highly mobile species,
a species
population
The satin flycatcher is a highly mobile species, the
development.
population
a species
population size of the local population of spectacled
monarch.
vulnerable species
Spectacled monarch are not known to be vulnerable
d
e
s
R
population size of the local population of satin
flycatcher.
I
T
T
D
population
R
r
e
d
n
u
a
e
el
Satin Flycatcher
R
M
population size of the local population of satin
flycatcher.
vulnerable species
The satin flycatcher is not known to be vulnerable to
Australian Pygmy Goose
Page C-6
population size of the local population of Australian
pygmy goose.
population
The Australian pygmy goose is a highly mobile
a species
population
population size of the local population of Australian
pygmy goose.
vulnerable species
The Australian pygmy goose is not known to be
Great Egret and Cattle Egret
population size of the local population of great egret
or cattle egret.
population
occupancy of these species, and is unlikely to have a
significant impact on these species.
The great egret and cattle egret are highly mobile
a species
habitat for these species. Considering the large
extent of suitable foraging habitat in the locality and
the high mobility of these species, the small area of
represent critical habitat for these species.
population
Habitat on the site is not a known roosting site for
these species. The extent of foraging habitat
impact on the breeding success of these species.
population size of the local population of great egret.
population
vulnerable species
The great egret and cattle egret are not known to be
population size of the local population of rufus fantail.
vulnerable species
The rufus fantail is not known to be vulnerable to
R
M
Rufus Fantail
Considering the high mobility of the rufus fantail and
population size of the local population of rufus fantail.
d
e
s
R
r
e
d
n
u
population
a
e
l
Re
The rufus fantail is a highly mobile species, the
development.
a species
I
T
T
D
a species
population
population size of the local population of pacific
golden plover.
Pacific Golden Plover
population size of the local population of pacific
golden plover.
population
The pacific golden plover is a highly mobile species,
Page C-7
vulnerable species
The pacific golden plover is not known to be
Painted Snipe
population size of the local population of painted
snipe.
population
The painted snipe is a highly mobile species, the
development.
a species
population
R
M
I
T
Considering the high mobility of the pacific golden
plover and large extent of similar and suitable
foraging habitat in the locality, the small proportion of
habitat removal required for the proposed
development is unlikely to impact on the long-term
breeding success or population size of the local
population of pacific golden plover.
vulnerable species
The pacific golden plover is not known to be
T
D
R
r
e
d
e
s
d
n
u
a
e
el
R
EPBC Act Conclusion
The proposal is not expected to have a significant
effect upon the health and viability of any threatened
or migratory species listed under the provisions of
the EPBC Act. As clearing, excavations, filling and
piling works will be required within the Hays Inlet
area, there is potential for impacts to occur to this
Ramsar Wetland. Therefore, a referral to the
DEWHA should be made. It must be noted that only
the rail component of the project impacts upon this
Ramsar wetland. The up-grading of roadways will
not require further consideration under the EPBC
Act.
Page C-8
R
Moreton Bay Rail Project
9/10/14
Re
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
Environmental Assessment Report
www.smec.com
MBRL - Environmental Assessment Report.pdf - Page Number: 1 of 455
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
ed
as
ele
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
Glossary
Acid sulphate soils are a commonly occurring problem in low-lying areas and refer specifically to soils which
contain iron sulfides. Exposure of these soils to oxygen causes oxidation and the resultant production of
sulfuric acid.
Afflux refers to the flow of water. Afflux modelling investigates the predicted changes in afflux as a result of the
proposed project.
Australian Height Datum (AHD) is the measurement used to determine elevations in Australia where mean sea
level is 0.0m. It has been adopted as the datum to which all vertical control for land based mapping is to be
referred.
Aquifer refers to permeable rock that can either contain or transmit groundwater.
R
‘A’-weighted sound level dB (A) is the unit typically used for measuring noise. It is the A-weighted sound
pressure level in decibels, displayed as dB (A). The weighting is based on the frequency response of the human
ear and has been found to correlate well with human subjective reactions to various sounds.
TM
Bathymetric data includes any form of data that describes the bed or flood of a waterbody. This may refer to
the underwater terrain of oceans, rivers, streams or lakes.
-D
Baseline assessments and monitoring are undertaken to determine the existing environment within the project
area. This term is can be applied across all issues within this study.
rR
TI
Climate change refers to alterations of the climate that persist for an extended period, from decades to
millions of years. Article 1 of The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change defines climate
change as ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the
composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over
comparable time periods’.
de
Coastal Management District is the area defined under the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 in
which the Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning is responsible for assessing certain
development applications, including operational works, material change of use and reconfiguring a lot.
un
Controlled action is the term used to describe development projects in which significant environmental
impacts are likely to occur, if determined by assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999. Once deemed a controlled action, projects are referred to the environmental
assessment and approval stages of the process.
lea
se
d
Cultural Heritage is any significant area or object, or evidence of archaeological or historic significance that is
significant because of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander tradition or history.
Declared fish habitat area is defined by the Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sports and Racing as ‘an
area protected against physical disturbance from coastal development, while still allowing legal fishing’.
Re
Declared pests are plants or animals listed as Class 1, 2 or 3 in the Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route
Management) Regulation 2003. Declared pests pose a threat to Queensland’s industries, natural resources,
environment and human welfare. Declaration of these species imposes certain regulations on landowners to
control these pests.
Dispersive soils are those which diffuse into small particles of sand, silt or clay when they come into contact
with water. They can create water quality issues and require specific development and construction
considerations.
Environmental values (EVs) are outlined in the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009. These are values
which need to be protected for each waterway as they are important to stakeholders and the community. This
includes aquatic ecosystems and human uses e.g. drinking water, agriculture or recreational use.
Fauna crossings are a means of providing fauna movement when linear infrastructure fragments fauna habitat.
Fauna crossings may be in the form of an overpass such as a land bridge, canopy bridge or poles, or an
underpass such as a tunnel or culvert.
Fugitive dust is particulate matter (solid particles, typically from soil) suspended in the air by wind or
anthropogenic activities. Fugitive dust can cause a range of environmental and human health impacts.
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | viii
Groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDE) are defined by Geoscience Australia as ‘ecosystems that rely on
groundwater for some or all of their water requirements’. There are six types of GDEs: terrestrial vegetation,
wetlands, river baseflow systems, aquifer and cave ecosystems, terrestrial fauna and estuarine and near-shore
marine systems.
Highest astronomical tide (HAT) is the highest level which can be predicted to occur under average
meteorological conditions and any combination of astronomical conditions. These levels will not be reached
every year.
LA10 (18h) is the sound pressure level, measured in dB (A), that was exceeded for 10% of an 18hour period. This is
a typical measurement of road and rail noise.
LAeq is the equivalent continuous Level, measured in dB (A). It is a widely used noise parameter describing a
sound level with the same energy content as the varying acoustic signal measured.
TM
R
Marine plants are defined under the Fisheries Act 1994 as: (a) a plant (a tidal plant) that usually grows on, or
adjacent to, tidal land, whether it is living, dead, standing or fallen; (b) material of a tidal plant, or other plant
material on tidal land; or (c) a plant, or material of a plant, prescribed under a regulation or management plan
to be a marine plant.
-D
Moreton Bay Rail Project refers to the entire proposed development from Petrie to Kippa-Ring, including the
rail line, stations, stabling yard, clear and grub footprint and all ancillary infrastructure.
Noise sensitive places are defined under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 1997 (superseded) as:
A dwelling
x
A library, childcare centre, kindergarten, school, college, university or other educational institutions
x
A hospital, surgery or other medical institutions
x
A protected are, or an area identified under a conservation plan as a critical habitat or an area of
major interest, under the Nature Conservation Act 1992
x
A marine park under the Marine Parks Act 1982
x
A park or garden that is open to the public (whether or not on payment of money) for use other than
for sport or organised entertainment.
un
de
rR
TI
x
lea
se
d
Non-juvenile Koala habitat tree is a tree from the genera Eucalyptus, Corymbia, Lophostemon, Angophora,
Melaleuca that has a height of more than four metres, or a trunk circumference of more than 31.5 centimetres
at 1.3 metres above the ground.
Offsets are measures that compensate for the residual impacts of an action on the environment, after
avoidance and mitigation measures are taken.
Re
PM10 refers to particulate matter that is less than 10 micrometers in diameter. Particles of PM10 are
considered a pollutant as they are easily inhaled into human lungs and potentially damaging to health. Sources
of PM10 include various industry, diffuse sources such as lawn mowing and wood fires, natural sources
including bushfires, dust storms and pollen, and transport of vehicles through burning of fuels or wear from
tyres.
Project Footprint describes the area within the project boundary, prescribed in Schedule 4 Table 5 of the
Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009.
Project Area describes the wider project area, extending from Lawnton to Petrie, where the potential for
environmental impacts and management of impacts has been addressed in this report.
Regional Ecosystems (REs) were originally defined by Sattler and Williams (1999) as vegetation communities in
a bioregion that are consistently associated with a particular combination of geology, landform and soil. The
Department of Natural Resources and Mines has created maps of remnant vegetation in Queensland, which
classify vegetation into various REs. These are assigned a conservation status of endangered, of concern or not
of concern and have an associated level of protection under the Vegetation Management Act 1999.
Regulated waste refers to waste that is commercial, industrial, construction or demolition waste. Regulated
wastes are listed in schedule 1 of the Waste Reduction and Recycling Regulation 2011. Regulated waste
excludes acid sulphate soil and contaminated soil.
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | ix
Remnant vegetation includes woody and non-woody vegetation as defined by the Department of Environment
and Heritage Protection. Regional ecosystem mapping provided by the Department of Natural Resources and
Mines shows the extent of remnant vegetation in Queensland.
Single event maximum (SEM) level is defined as the arithmetic average of all maximum noise levels from the
highest 15 single events over a given 24 hour period.
Slaking is the breakdown of soil into smaller fragments after coming into contact with water. Clay swells and
causes the trapped air within the soil to burst. This is similar to dispersion of soils.
Stabling Yard is an area where trains are to be stored overnight.
Special Least Concern plants, formerly known as Type A restricted plants, are defined as plants in the families
and genera listed in Schedule 3A in the Nature Conservation (Wildlife Management) Regulation 2006. For the
purpose of this EAR, special least concern plants refer to plants in the genera Xanthorrhoea and Livistona.
TM
R
SPOT Assessment Technique (Phillips and Callaghan, 2011). is a method used to determine localised levels of
habitat use by Koalas The technique involves surveying the base of 30 trees for scats for a maximum of two
minutes. If a scat is identified the tree is marked as having activity and survey of the next tree begins.
-D
Sustainability refers to the balance between meeting the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their needs. It promotes improved environmental management practices
and sustainable use of natural resources in businesses and households.
TI
Temporary local planning instrument as defined by Brisbane City Council is ‘a statutory instrument created
under the provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 which may suspend or otherwise affect the
operation of a planning scheme for a period of up to one (1) year from its effective date’.
rR
Threatened is a term commonly used to describe species that are listed as Critically Endangered, Endangered,
Vulnerable or Conservation Dependent.
Vibration dose value (VDV) is a summation of the vibration exposure over a 16-hour day or 8-hour night
period.
de
Waste stream is the flow or movement of waste from the point of generation, through treatment, to final
disposal.
lea
se
d
un
Waste management hierarchy is a strategic framework for the prioritisation of waste management strategies
to achieve the best environmental outcomes. The preferred option is to avoid waste, while the next best
options are to re-use or recycle wastes where possible. The least preferred option in this hierarchy is waste
disposal.
Re
Water quality objectives are the objectives identified under section 10 in the Environmental Protection (Water)
Policy 2009 for protecting the environmental values for the particular waterbody. According to the ANZECC
water quality guidelines, a water quality objective is ‘the specific water quality target agreed between
stakeholders, or set by local jurisdictions, that become the indicators of management performance’.
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | x
LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS
Ambient air quality
AASS
Actual acid sulphate soil
ACHA / TSICHA
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage Act 2003
ACM
Asbestos containing material
AHD
Australian Height Datum
ASRIS
Australian Soils and Resource Information System
ASS
Acid sulphate soils
BH
Borehole
BOM
Bureau of Meteorology
BTEXN
Benzene Toluene and Xylene
CEC
Cation exchange capacity
CHA
Cultural Heritage Assessment
CHMP
Cultural Heritage Management Plan
CLR
Contaminated Land Register
CO
Carbon monoxide
CPESC
Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control
DAFF
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
DECC
Department of Environment and Climate Change
DEHP
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
DERM
Department of Environment and Resource Management (Former)
DNPRSR
Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sport & Racing
DON
DoE
DSDIP
DTMR
EAR
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
DO
Department of Natural Resources and Mines
Dissolved oxygen
Dissolved organic nitrogen
Department of the Environment
Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning
Re
DNRM
R
AAQ
Department of Transport and Main Roads
EC
Electrical conductivity
EIL
Ecological investigation level
EMP(C)
Environmental Management Plan (Construction)
EMP(P)
Environmental Management Plan (Planning)
EMR
Environmental Management Register
EP Act
Environmental Protection Act 1994
EPBC
Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
EPP
Environmental Protection Policy
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | xi
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
EV
Environmental Values
FFSP
Fixed Facility SoundPLAN Predictions
FHA
Fish Habitat Area
FIASR
Final Impact Assessment Study Report
FRP
Filterable reactive phosphorus
GDE
Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems
GED
General environmental duty
GIS
Geographic Information System
GPT
Gross pollutant traps
IDAS
Integrated Development Assessment System
IECA
International Erosion Control Association
IRTM
Interactive Resource and Tenure Mapping
HANZAB
Handbook of Australian New Zealand and Antarctic Birds
HAT
Highest astronomical tide
KAP
(Draft) Koala Action Plan
KTMP
Koala Tagging and Monitoring Program
LOR
Limit of Reporting
MBRC
Moreton Bay Regional Council
MBRL
Moreton Bay Rail Link
MNES
Matter of National Environmental Significance
NCA
NEPM
NJKHT
NNMP
NPI
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
MSQ
Main Roads Technical Specification
Maritime Safety Queensland
Nature Conservation Act 1992
National Environmental Protection Measure
Non-juvenile Koala Habitat Trees
Re
MRTS
R
ESCP
Network Noise Management Plan
National Pollution Inventory
NPR
North Pine River
NTU
Nephelometric Turbidity Units
NOx
Nitrous oxide
OC
Organochlorine
OLE
Overhead line equipment
OP
Organophosphorous
PAH
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PASS
Potential acid sulphate soil
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | xii
Polychlorinated Biphenols
PDA
Priority Development Area
PMST
Protected Matters Search Tool
PRCA
Pine Rivers Catchment Association
PUP
Public Utility Plant
QA
Quality assurance
QASSIT
Queensland Acid Sulphate Soil Investigation Team
QR
Queensland Rail
RE
Regional Ecosystem
REF
Review of Environmental Factors
RNE
Register of National Estate
RNM
Rail Noise Management
SAC
Self-assessable Code
SARA
State Assessment and Referral Agency
SAT
Spot Assessment Technique
SDPWO Act
State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971
SEM
Single Event Maximum
SEQ
South East Queensland
SMEC
Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation
SMP
Species Management Program
SPA
Sustainable Planning Act 2009
SPRAT
SPRP
TEC
TIA
TLPI
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
SPR
State Planning Policy
Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009
Species Profiles and Threats Database
South East Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulatory Provisions
Threatened Ecological Community
Re
SPP
R
PCB
Transport Infrastructure Act 1994
Temporary Local Planning Instrument
TN
Total nitrogen
TOC
Total organic carbon
TP
Total phosphorus
TPH
Total petroleum hydrocarbons
TRH
Total recoverable hydrocarbons
TSS
Total suspended solids
VDV
Vibration dose value
VMA
Vegetation Management Act 1999
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | xiii
Volatile organic carbon
WoNS
Weed of National Significance
WQ
Water quality
WQOs
Water quality objectives
WSUD
Water sensitive urban design
ACHA / TSICHA
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage Act 2003
DNPRSR
Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sport & Racing
EAR
EC
Electrical Conductivity
EMP(C)
Environmental Management Plan (Construction)
EMP(P)
Environmental Management Plan (Planning)
EP Act
Environmental Protection Act 1994
EPBC
Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
GIS
Geographic Information System
IDAS
Integrated Development Assessment System
MNES
Matter of National Environmental Significance
NCA
Nature Conservation Act 1992
PMST
Protected Matters Search Tool
RE
Regional Ecosystem
REF
Review of Environmental Factors
SMP
Species Management Plan
SPP
TIA
DTMR
VMA
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
SPDWO Act
Sustainable Planning Act 2009
State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971
State Planning Policy
Transport Infrastructure Act 1994
Department of Transport and Main Roads
Re
SPA
R
VOC
Vegetation Management Act 1999
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | xiv
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Moreton Bay Rail Project has been the
subject of numerous studies and
investigations to date. This Environmental
Assessment Report (EAR) provides a concise
overview of the investigations completed to
date. It describes the environmental values of
the site and identifies and assesses the
potential project impacts. Furthermore, it
identifies where additional investigations,
mitigation measures or design treatments
may still be required or will be implemented
to address statutory requirements, or to fulfil
project commitments. This EAR does not
constitute an Environmental Design Report.
lea
se
d
un
Re
The project was referred under the
Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), and is not a
controlled action. Although the Koala and
Saltmarsh threatened ecological community
were subsequently listed under the EPBC Act,
this did not require further assessment under
the EPBC Act.
The Moreton Bay Rail Project is prescribed in
Schedule 4 Table 5 of the Sustainable Planning
Regulation 2009 as ‘exempt development
under a planning scheme or temporary local
planning instrument’. This includes ‘all aspects
of development for the construction of the rail
project known as the Moreton Bay Rail Link
described in the document called Moreton
Bay Rail Link, Figure 01, Rev A’.
R
TM
TI
-D
Permits under the Vegetation Management
Act 1999 are not required as the project is
‘community infrastructure’ prescribed under
Schedule 2 of the Sustainable Planning
Regulation 2009 and is exempt from requiring
a permit. Other works including building
works at stations, temporary works and works
in accordance with guidelines are selfassessable.
rR
de
The EAR has been prepared in response to the
Terms of Reference (February 2014) issued by
the Department of Transport and Main Roads.
The Terms of Reference is provided in
Appendix A. The scope of the EAR
encompasses all aspects of the Moreton Bay
Rail Project, which includes track upgrades
between Lawnton and Petrie (formerly known
as the Third Track Upgrade) and a new dual
track from Petrie to Kippa-Ring. The EAR
consists of a Review of Environmental Factors
(REF) and identification of impacts and
mitigation measures. The assessment
contained in this EAR is based on the project
footprint, as at March 2014.
Whilst the project is exempt development
under a planning scheme or temporary local
planning instrument, a number of State
approvals are required including:
Works in a Coastal Management
District/ Prescribed Tidal Works;
Marine Plant Removal;
Riverine Protection Permit;
Marine Parks Permit;
Waterway Barrier Works; and
Quarry Material Allocation.
A Draft Koala Action Plan (DTMR, 2012) has
been prepared. A Koala habitat offset plan is
being prepared by the Department of
Transport and Main Roads. An offset
management plan is also required for the
clearing of marine plants.
A Species Management Program for the
Wallum Froglet has been prepared and
endorsed by the Queensland Government for
implementation on this project.
Clearing of least concern plants is exempt
under the Department of Transport and Main
Roads Protected Plant Exemption under
Section 89 of the Nature Conservation Act
1992 and Section 41 (1)(a)(ii) of the Nature
Conservation (Protected Plants) Conservation
Plan 2000. Works will need to comply with the
requirements of this exemption, in addition to
DTMR’s Species Management Program for
tampering with Animal Breeding Places.
The project area traverses a number of
waterways, which ultimately flow to Moreton
Bay, which is a Marine Park and Ramsar site.
Erosion and sediment control, particularly in
Moreton Bay Rail Project Environmental Assessment Report 2014 | 1
Executive Summary
from the wider project area. Several Special
Least Concern plants have been identified in
the project area. The project will result in the
clearing of regional ecosystems, some Special
Least Concern Plants and marine plants.
Construction areas have been defined to limit
minimise extents.
the vicinity of waterways, will be important
for the protection of water quality values and
ecosystem health, for permanent and
temporary works. The retrainment of
approximately 125m of Yebri Creek will
require specific management and
rehabilitation to re-establish the riparian
habitat contributing to its value as a fauna
movement corridor.
Weeds and pest species have been recorded
in the project area, and will require targeted
management within the construction zones to
minimise their spread and proliferation as a
result of construction activities.
lea
se
d
un
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
The project also traverses areas classified
through investigations as negligible to high
acid sulfate soil risk; treatment requirements
have been recommended based on on-site
sampling and laboratory analysis.
Management of the acid sulfate soil risk to
protect infrastructure and surrounding
environmental values, including groundwater
and aquatic habitats is a key consideration for
the construction phase of the project. The
implementation of acid sulfate soils
management, including lime treatment will
need to be undertaken so that aquatic and
terrestrial habitats are not altered.
Re
Several areas of contamination have been
identified across the project area including the
existing rail corridor.
No material from the existing rail corridor
(Lawnton to Petrie) should be moved into the
new corridor (Petrie to Kippa-Ring).
The project area contains a number of
regional ecosystems, mostly eucalyptus and
melaleuca communities, with marine plants
including saltmarsh and mangroves occurring
in the eastern portion of the project area.
Flora surveys undertaken at various stages of
the project did not identify any of the listed
threatened species. A species likelihood
assessment was undertaken however, based
on habitat suitability and previous records
The project area contains a resident Koala
population. Targeted investigations and
management planning has been implemented
to address the potential impacts of the
project. A tagging and monitoring program
has been running since March 2013, involving
regular health checks, vaccination trials and
monitoring of Koala movements across the
project area. According to data captured in
the Koala Tagging and Monitoring Program,
the most significant threats to the Koala in the
project area are predation by wild dogs,
disease and predation by carpet pythons.
Whilst vehicle strike is a threat to the Koala in
the project area, predation and disease are
documented as more frequent causes of
death in the population being monitored
between March 2013 and January 2014.
Offsets to compensate for the clearing of nonjuvenile Koala habitat trees, and enhance
Koala habitat values in the local area are being
developed by the Department of Transport
and Main Roads.
R
Groundwater has been identified as relatively
shallow across the project area, particularly in
the eastern side. Two of the significant cut
areas are likely to intersect groundwater,
requiring protection through design.
Investigations undertaken to date as part of
the project indicate anthropogenic
disturbances are likely to have contributed to
the existing acidic groundwater conditions
encountered in some areas of the project.
Essential habitat for the Wallum Froglet is
mapped across the project area, however
targeted surveys confirmed breeding habitat
is present, though less extensive than the
areas shown in essential habitat maps. A
small number of individuals have been
documented during field surveys and preclearing trapping and surveys completed to
date.
Animal breeding places have been identified
across the project area. Hollow logs and trees
removed during construction will be offset.
Other fauna likely to occur across the project
area include Grey Kangaroo, Wallaby,
possums, Sugar Gliders and Squirrel Gliders,
Executive Summary
The Turrbal and Gubbi Gubbi people both
have interests in the project area. Cultural
Heritage Management Plans and Agreements
have been developed between both of these
Aboriginal parties and DTMR. These
management plans outline the monitoring and
reporting requirements for the clearing and
topsoil disturbance phase of the project.
Bandicoots, birds such as Grey Goshawk and
Square-tailed Kite, reptiles, several bat species
and snakes.
Provisions to preclude fauna from entering
the rail corridor, whilst maintaining fauna
passage along identified fauna movement
corridors have been considered during the
planning and design for this project. This
includes fauna exclusion fencing, and fauna
furniture at specific underpass locations as
part of the permanent design.
lea
se
d
un
Re
Cultural heritage investigations have identified
both indigenous and non-indigenous heritage
across the project area. A number of cultural
heritage items, including artefact scatters,
shell middens, and some culturally significant
places including Bora grounds and an
Aboriginal pathway have been identified in
the wider project area. Features within or
potentially within the project footprint include
stone artefact scatters in the vicinity of Dohles
Rocks Road, Mango Hill Station (East) and
Chelsea Street. A potential scar tree was
identified during previous surveys near
Chelsea Street, and possible shell midden
south of Hercules Road. Disturbance to
known and previously unidentified cultural
heritage items within the project footprint will
be subject to the project’s Cultural Heritage
Management Plans.
R
TM
-D
TI
Wyllie Park, on the north side of the Pine River
is listed on the Queensland Heritage Register
as one of the North Coast Roadside Rest
Areas. A heritage impact assessment has
been undertaken, and issued to the
Department of Environment and Heritage
Protection for consideration. Approval to
conduct work within this park will be required.
Other non-indigenous places and items are
located across the project area, related to the
historic agricultural and forestry uses in the
area.
rR
de
Integration of fauna furniture, including Koala
refuge poles, logs rails and fencing at
identified crossing points (i.e. bridges and
culverts where sufficient clearances can be
achieved) has been recommended. Whilst
existing literature on fauna crossing design
recommends 3m x 3m box culverts to
accommodate a variety of fauna species, the
Koala Safety and Fencing Guideline
recommends 1.5m x 1.5m minimum box
culvert structures. A clearance from the roof
of the structure of at least 600mm to log rails
is recommended to encourage use by Koala. In
some height limited locations this will provide
dry passage, but may not preclude the risk of
predation by wild dogs. Therefore refuge
poles and other infrastructure targeting
separation of predator and Koala movements
is recommended.
The rail bridge over the North Pine River has
some heritage significance, it is not on the
Queensland Heritage Register. Further
consideration of the future of this rail bridge is
required, as it may be demolished once the
new rail bridge is constructed adjacent to the
east. This aspect has been considered from a
heritage perspective, however further
investigations regarding the logistics, ground
disturbance, and waterway impacts will be
required as demolition of the bridge is not in
project scope, and does not preclude the new
bridge from operating.
Noise and vibration have been considered
during both construction and operation of the
project. Whilst noise nuisance during
construction is short term, opportunities to
manage this through careful timing of
activities, and advance community notice can
help to manage the effects of construction
noise. Vibration during construction is likely to
be associated with piling and intrusive
earthworks. Vibration monitoring is
recommended in response to any pursing
community complaints.
Operational noise and vibration has also been
considered as part of the assessments. Noise
barriers are recommended to help mitigate
the impacts of rail noise and road noise from
associated road upgrades. Assessments
Executive Summary
completed to date have identified a number
of properties where noise treatments will not
be effective, further consultation with these
affected property owners will be required.
Community consultation is recommended
prior to the finalisation of noise treatment
design.
lea
se
d
un
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
Climatic influences and the impacts of climate
change projections have also been considered
for construction and operation in this
assessment. The implications of climate
change projections for design and operation
of the rail, including the potential for
heatwave, extended drying periods, more
intense storms, and sea level rise and flooding
have been considered in the context of rail
operations and function, human and
ecosystem health. These include disruptions
to rail services, reduction in infrastructure
lifespan, increased water use for landscaping
and rehabilitated areas and more frequent
maintenance requirements in response to
flooding.
R
Dust generated by construction activities and
movement of construction vehicles on and
off-site, construction vehicle emissions, and
operational emissions have been considered
in the air quality assessment and identification
of management measures. The influence of
weather conditions has also been considered.
Priority issues for management during
construction and operation include erosion
and sediment control, vegetation clearing and
rehabilitation, fauna movement and
management of nuisance generating activities
during construction (noise, air, visual
amenity). An environmental management
plan (planning) has been prepared, which
collates all recommended environmental
management requirements identified in this
assessment.
Re
Sustainability initiatives targeted to
minimising waste streams, water and energy
use have been identified, along with the
mandatory station design criteria from the
New South Wales Sustainable Design
Guidelines for Rail (Version 2), addressing
energy and greenhouse gas, climate resilience,
materials and waste, biodiversity and
heritage, water and community benefits.
Cumulative interactions within the project
(cumulative impacts) considered in this
assessment include the following:
Vegetation clearing, soil erosion and
sedimentation, water quality and
subsequent effects on aquatic
habitats and fauna
Disturbance of acid sulfate soils,
interaction with groundwater and
surface water, and subsequent
impacts to groundwater dependent
ecosystems, water quality, aquatic
habitats and fauna
Vegetation clearing, habitat
fragmentation and predation of native
fauna, leading to a loss of local
biodiversity
Construction activities (stockpiling,
operation and maintenance of
machinery) and risk of pollutants and
sediments to become entrained in
stormwater runoff, enter waterways
and affect water quality, aquatic
habitats and aquatic fauna.
Waste streams and opportunities for
minimising waste generation have been
identified in this assessment, adopting the
principles of avoid, re-use, recycle, recover
and dispose. Requirements for waste
management and monitoring are also
discussed.
Introduction
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1.Purpose
The Moreton Bay Rail Project has been the subject of numerous studies and investigations, with each
new report or investigation commissioned adding to the significant body of knowledge about the
project. This Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) provides a concise overview of the
investigations completed to date. It describes the environmental values of the site and identifies and
assesses the potential project impacts. Furthermore, it identifies where additional investigations,
mitigation measures or design treatments may still be required or have previously been
recommended to address statutory requirements, or to fulfil project commitments.
TM
R
The EAR has been prepared in response to the Terms of Reference (February 2014) issued by the
Department of Transport and Main Roads. The Terms of Reference are provided in Appendix A. The
scope of the EAR encompasses all aspects of the Moreton Bay Rail Project, which includes the
Lawnton to Petrie Upgrade and a new dual track from Petrie to Kippa-Ring.
-D
1.2.Project Background
1.2.1. Project Need
de
rR
TI
The Moreton Bay region is a key population growth area for South East Queensland. According to the
Project Change Report (AECOM 2011d), the region is not well serviced by public transport. It has
lower levels of employment self-containment, with comparatively higher levels of dependency on
private vehicle usage than other growth areas in South-east Queensland. The Project Change Report
highlights the potential for a ‘rail solution’ to generate approximately 10,000 additional public
transport trips per day, with a corresponding reduction in congestion ‘on roads such as the Bruce
Highway and Gympie Road, and also potentially influencing land development and travel behaviour.
lea
se
d
un
The Caboolture Line is a critical part of the South-east Queensland Rail Network linking the
Metropolitan and the North Coast Line Systems. The Caboolture Line carries commuter and longdistance passenger services while also being a vital link in Queensland’s rail freight network. The
Caboolture Line currently consists of three tracks from Northgate to Lawnton Station. These three
tracks then merge into two tracks crossing the North Pine River on a single bridge between Lawnton
and Petrie Stations. The two-track section across the North Pine River Bridge currently limits the
capacity of the Caboolture line.
1.2.2. Project Benefits
Re
The overall benefits of the Moreton Bay Rail Project as described on the DTMR project website1 are:
Providing a more reliable, economical, and faster alternative to driving to Brisbane’s Central
Business District during peak periods;
Helping reduce congestion on the road network, including the Bruce Highway, and free up
capacity for journeys that can’t be made using public transport;
Providing sustainable and active transport options that reduce carbon emissions – every full
train on the new line will take about 600 cars off the road provide better access to major
employment centres both within and outside the Moreton Bay region;
Helping attract investment to the area and create business opportunities; and
Act as a catalyst for growth along the alignment, with stations becoming hubs of new
development in the region.
1
http://www.DTMR.qld.gov.au/Projects/Featured-projects/Moreton-Bay-Rail.aspx#benefits
Introduction
1.2.3. Project History and Previous Studies
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
According to the DTMR project website, the project’s history dates back to the 1800s. The following
indicative timeline has been derived from this website and the Project Change Report (AECOM,
2011d):
1978-79: Studies by the Metropolitan Transit Authority into a public transport corridor
between Petrie and Kippa-Ring, resulted in the identification of the preferred alignment and
corridor acquisition.
1999-2003: The Petrie to Kippa-Ring Public Transport Corridor Study was undertaken by the
Queensland Government. This included a feasibility assessment and community
consultation. This study concluded that heavy rail would be the preferred transport mode.
2003: Preparation of the Final Impact Assessment Study Report, documenting impact
assessments and identifying potential station locations.
2008: The Queensland Government and Moreton Bay Regional Council decide to submit the
Moreton Bay Rail Link for consideration under the Infrastructure Australia program.
2009: Infrastructure Australia submission lodged jointly by the Queensland Government and
the Moreton Bay Regional Council.
2010: Strategic Assessment of Service Requirement and Preliminary Evaluation Report
completed by the Department of Transport and Main Roads in 2010.
2010: Federal, State and Local Government commit to build the project, with the progression
of the Business Case and community consultation in late 2010.
2010: The project was referred under the EPBC Act, and found to be a ‘not a controlled
action’.
2011: Project Change Report released, documenting the key changes to the project since the
publication of the Final Impact Assessment.
2012: Early works at Kinsellas Road delivered, opened to traffic in early 2013.
2012-2013: Industry briefing (August 2012), tenderer shortlisting (to four in October 2012
and two in February 2013) with the contract awarded to Thiess in August 2013.
2013-ongoing: Progression of detailed design and supporting investigations including
application for development approvals along the alignment. Some changes to design have
occurred as part of this process, including the addition of the Lawnton to Petrie Third Track
Upgrade in the scope of works.
Re
Numerous studies and investigations have been undertaken to support the activities outlined above
and to support detailed design delivery. Reports reviewed during the preparation of this EAR are
referenced throughout the chapters of this document and listed at the end of this document.
1.3.Assessment Area
The project is located within the Moreton Bay Regional local government area, traversing the
suburbs of Lawnton, Petrie, Kallangur, Murrumba Downs, Mango Hill, Rothwell and Kippa-Ring.
Figure 1 shows the project footprint and the wider project area. The project footprint is the area
within the project boundary, encompassing the rail alignment, road realignments and station and car
parking areas. The project area describes the wider area surrounding the project footprint, where
impacts and mitigation have been considered in this assessment.
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
Introduction
1.4.Project Description
The Moreton Bay Rail Project will comprise the upgrade of 1.6 km of track from Lawnton to Petrie,
and construction in a new corridor of approximately 12.6 km of dual track railway connecting Petrie
to Kippa-Ring. The Lawnton to Petrie upgrade will deliver two additional tracks on the Caboolture rail
line between Lawnton and Petrie Stations, also providing capacity for passenger services from the
new Moreton Bay Rail.
TM
R
Petrie station will be upgraded to include:
Extensions to existing platforms and three new platforms to accommodate 7 car trains;
Reinstatement of car parks on completion of works and construction of an additional car
park to the south-east of the station;
New footbridge and ramp connecting platforms; and
Six new stations will be constructed at Kallangur, Murrumba Downs, Mango Hill, Mango Hill
East (previously known as Kinsellas Road East), Rothwell and Kippa-Ring.
rR
TI
-D
The new railway will be fully grade separated from the local road network, with the following
bridges:
Dohles Rocks Road (rail over road);
Goodfellows Road deviation (rail over road);
Brays Road (rail over road);
Bruce Highway (rail over road);
Freshwater Creek Road (road over rail); and
Kinsellas Road East (road over rail).
lea
se
d
un
de
New bridges over waterways or drainage lines are required at:
North Pine River (construction of a new four track bridge);
Yebri Creek (two track bridge);
Cecily Street (vehicle access to Murrumba Downs station);
Freshwater Creek (two track rail bridge);
Anzac Avenue/Rothwell Bridge (two lane bridge); and
Saltwater Creek/Hays Inlet (two track bridge and shared path bridge).
Provision for a future road bridge over rail is allowed for at Mango Hill Boulevard East.
Re
The demolition of the existing rail bridge over the North Pine River has been considered in this
assessment, in a heritage context. The new four track bridge does not necessitate the removal of this
bridge, however it is likely to be demolished for safety reasons at a point in future. Subsequent
investigations and environmental approvals for the demolition of this structure will be required, but
are outside the scope of this assessment.
A short section of Yebri Creek will be retrained to accommodate the railway, which is further
discussed in Chapter 5 and 6.
Train stabling facilities will be provided in the vicinity of Kippa-Ring Station. Bike and pedestrian
paths will also be constructed at specific locations along the corridor. Some public utility plant (PUP)
will require relocation. New PUP associated with the railway will be installed, including
communications cables.
Some realignment of short sections of local roads will occur in association with station accesses.
Temporary construction areas including laydown areas and site offices will be established along the
alignment at the (former) Amcor site in Petrie and Rothwell, and station locations.
Introduction
A section by section description of the project is provided in Table 1.
Table 1: Corridor Characteristics
Characteristics
Lawnton to Petrie
Constructed within existing rail corridor. A new four track (quad) bridge is
proposed over the North Pine River, which will also result in the redundancy of
the existing two track bridge. It is anticipated the existing two track bridge will
be demolished. An additional two tracks will be constructed beside the existing
tracks between Petrie and Lawnton.
Petrie to Yebri
Creek approach
(ch 0-400)
A car park is proposed for vacant land to the east of the North Coast Rail Line,
south of Petrie Station and north of Gympie Road. An access road with cul-desac turn around area and bus bays will be located on the eastern side of Petrie
Station. A new platform will be established at Petrie Station. From chainage
0.0m- 400m, the alignment will be contained within the existing station
footprint. At chainage 400m the alignment begins to deviate away from the
existing North Coast Rail Line into the Amcor Site.
Yebri Creek
Ch 800
Approaching and departing from Yebri Creek just before reaching Chainage
800m the alignment will be on embankment. Approximately 30m of structure is
proposed to span Yebri Creek with an adjacent shared path bridge.
900-1700m
Commencing at chainage 900m, the alignment will be in cut through the Amcor
site for approximately 800m, ending at Chainage 1,700m. At its greatest extent
(Chainage 1,050m) the cut zone is approximately 80m wide and 12.5m deep.
This is described as the ‘Petrie Cut’. At this point there will also be a borrow pit.
1700-2500m
The alignment transitions from cut to embankment, with a culvert located at
approximately Chainage 1850m. The alignment then continues on embankment,
raising to pass over Dohles Rocks Road on structure at around chainage 2,200m.
2600m
The alignment continues towards Kallangur Station. Car parking will be
established on the south side of the rail corridor. A new road connection from
Dohles Rocks Road to Goodfellows Road (including a rail structure at
approximately Chainage 2,900m) will be established. Leaving the Kallangur
Station Car park, a proposed shared path continues east along the southern
boundary of the alignment, crossing underneath the alignment at Brays Road.
4000m
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
The alignment crosses Goodfellows road on structure at approximately Chainage
3,080m and continues on embankment to approximately Chainage 3,700m. The
shared path continues on the north of the alignment.
Re
3000-4000m
TM
R
Location
Murrumba Downs Station is located at Chainage 4,000m. A car park is to be
located on the northern side of the station, and access to the car park will be
provided from Brays Road and Anzac Avenue via Cecily Street, with a new road
bridge proposed over a minor tributary of Freshwater Creek.
4100-4700m
From the eastern end of the station platform the alignment will be positioned
on structure for approximately 100m to span Black Duck Creek and Brays Road
(Chainage 4,250m-4,350m). From Chainage 4,350m to 4,750m the alignment
continues on embankment.
4700-5000m
At approximately Chainage 4,750m the alignment passes onto structure for
approximately 100m to span the Bruce Highway. It continues on embankment
on the eastern side of the highway.
5000-5700m
At Freshwater Creek the alignment is on structure for approximately 120m to
span the creek (clearance of 11.93m). It then returns to embankment from
Introduction
Characteristics
Chainage 5,150m-5,300m. From Chainage 5,350m-5,750m the alignment passes
into a cutting, with a short road bridge over connecting Freshwater Creek Road.
This is described as the ‘Mango Hill Cut’.
5700m
At Chainage 5,750m the alignment enters Mango Hill Station. Car parks
(accessed from Halpine Drive) are located on the northern side of the alignment.
6050m
At Chainage 6,100m, the alignment passes over the northern extremity of
Halpine Lake (an artificial waterbody) before entering a zone of earthworks cut
continuing from Chainage 6,150m to 6,900m.
6900m
At approximately Chainage 6,950m, the alignment passes beneath the Kinsellas
Road East road over rail structure, which is to be realigned as part of early
works.
6900-7900m
From Chainage 6,900m-7,300m the alignment continues predominately at
grade. At Chainage 7,300m the alignment enters Mango Hill East Station. The
station car park will be located on the northern side of the station, and access
will be gained via Capestone Boulevard and Saint Benedicts Close. A road bridge
connecting the future Capestone Masterplanned development to Capestone
Boulevard will be required in the future. The bridge structure over the railway
will be delivered as part of this project with connecting roads completed by
others at a later date. Continuing east, the alignment remains on a slight
embankment.
7900-8950m
The alignment continues on embankment to Chainage 8,500m where a bridge
approximately 320m long will cross Saltwater Creek and its associated
floodplain. The shared path will also be on structure over Saltwater Creek.
8950m
Rothwell Station is located at Chainage 8,950m. A car park on the northern side
of the alignment will be accessed from McKillop Street, and via a new link to
Anzac Avenue. A substation will be located on the northern side of the station.
9120-9280m
The alignment continues on structure from Rothwell station to the east, with
culverts required at approximately Chainage 9,500m. .
9280m-11400m
From Chainage 9,280m, the alignment traverses predominately on embankment
until 11,400m. At its highest, the alignment will be almost 4m above existing
ground level at Chainage 10,343m. There is a small cut of approximately 0.5m
between these two points at Chainage 9,700m. In addition, the alignment will
cross two small drainage channels and tributaries to Hays Inlet near Gynther
Road at Chainage 9,550 and Bremner Road at Chainage 10,500m.
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
11400-11650m
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
Location
At Chainage 11,400m the alignment moves into cut until approximately
Chainage 11,650m. This cut is almost 2m at its deepest point.
11650-12540m
From Chainage 11,650m the alignment returns to embankment. A stabling yard
is located between Chainage 11.700m and 12,200m.
12695m
Kippa-Ring Station is located at Chainage 12,500m and the alignment ends at
Approximately Chainage 12,695m. This station is situated on vacant land
surrounded by residential development. A car park on the northern side of this
station will be accessed from Hercules Road, with a new road alignment to be
constructed to connect Hercules Road directly to Anzac Avenue.
Introduction
1.4.1. Project Footprint
This assessment is based on the project footprint, as of March 2014. Several areas are still
undergoing design review and development, and decisions regarding construction methods may
result in minor design changes. Where these changes are significant or material in the context of
environmental impacts or environmental management requirements, they will be documented
through revisions to the Construction EMP.
1.5.Construction and Ancillary Activities
Re
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
Construction activities and ancillary activities planned for this project and considered in this
assessment include:
Rail formation, station access roads, shared access paths and car park work construction;
- Clearing and site preparation;
- Localised removal of materials unsuitable for rail embankment construction;
- Localised removal and or treatment of Acid Sulphate Soil (ASS) materials, in accordance
with the acid sulphate soils management plan, at confirmed risk locations across the
project area (refer Chapter 6 for further details);
- Localised installation of wick drains;
- Drainage layer construction utilising imported clean rock from a local quarry source
placed on a geofabric layer;
- Rail earthworks construction utilising engineered fill;
- Road and car park earthworks construction utilising engineered fill;
- Construction of temporary haulage roads locally around future culvert sites;
- Installation of temporary low flow culverts;
- Supply and installation of precast drainage culvert structures (that can function as fauna
crossing structures);
- Relocation and installation of new public utility plant/ services; and
- Stabilisation of exposed earthworks areas, in accordance with an erosion and sediment
control plan (temporary works).
Rail Construction:
- Import and place gravel capping layer above earthworks subgrade;
- Drill and cast concrete foundations for steel masts;
- Install overhead wiring on masts;
- Trench and lay PVC conduits for public utility plant/ services;
- Import and place ballast (coarse blue rock gravel) Ballast (coarse blue rock gravel) will be
sourced locally;
- Supply and place concrete sleepers;
- Supply and place steel rail on sleepers;
- Construction of station buildings, car parks and sub-stations;
- Fencing and landscaping of the rail corridor and station precincts; and
- Rehabilitation and stabilisation of permanent earthworks, in association with the erosion
and sediment control plan).
Demolition and rehabilitation works;
- Removal of the existing North Pine Rail Bridge
- Rehabilitation of the approaches to fauna crossing locations; and
- Rehabilitation of areas of marine plants temporarily disturbed during construction.
Introduction
1.6.Operational Phase Activities
Re
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
Operational phase activities considered in this assessment include:
Operation of the railway, stations and station infrastructure;
Maintenance of local roads and structures, including bridges, culverts and fences; and
Ongoing management of the rail corridor, including weed and pest management, and erosion
and sediment control.
Environmental Assesssments, Approvals and Permits
2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSSMENTS, APPROVALS AND
PERMITS
2.1.Commonwealth Approval
TM
R
Referral of the Moreton Bay Rail project occurred pursuant to the Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The project is not a controlled action (12 November
2010 – reference: EPBC 2010/5589), subject to the following criteria:
1. 1. Clearing within the Ramsar site must be no more than 0.15 ha;
2. 2. The stream crossing within the Ramsar boundary must be crossed via a bridge structure at a
level above the Q100 flood level;
3. 3. Mitigation measures must be consistent with the Queensland Acid Sulphate Soils Technical
Manual: Soil Management Guidelines 2002; and
4. 4. Fill material must be certified as clean in that this will be free of biological or chemical
contaminates.
rR
TI
-D
The study corridor defined in the EPBC Act Referral commences to the south of the North Pine River,
and continues to Kippa-Ring. In 2013 TMR conducted a self-assessment against the EPBC Act
Significant Impact Guidelines for the Lawnton to Petrie Third Track project. This self-assessment
concluded that the Lawnton to Petrie Project was unlikely to impact on Matters of National
Environmental Significance (MNES) potentially occurring in the Lawnton to Petrie project area, and
an EPBC Act Referral was not required.
lea
se
d
un
de
Since the EPBC Act Referral of the Moreton Bay Rail Project, the Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus,
combined populations of Qld, NSW and the ACT) has been listed as vulnerable and is considered a
Matters of National Environmental Significance. However as this listing occurred after the Petrie to
Kippa-Ring section of the project was determined to be not a controlled action, a new referral was
not required. The Lawnton to Petrie self-assessment against the EPBC Act Significant Impact
Guidelines was reviewed in the context of the Koala listing. The outcome of the Lawnton to Petrie
self-assessment was confirmed not to have changed as a result of the new listing. It is understood
that further correspondence between TMR and the federal Department of Environment (DoE) in
2014 confirmed the position for both aspects of the project.
The significance of the listing of the Koala has been addressed in this assessment, and is reflected in
management plans. No further Commonwealth environmental approvals are required.
2.2.State Environmental and Planning Approvals
Re
The Moreton Bay Rail Project is prescribed in Schedule 4 Table 5 of the Sustainable Planning
Regulation 2009 under Community Infrastructure Activities as ‘development that can not be declared
to be development of a particular type’ defined in Section 232(2) of the Sustainable Planning Act
20092’. This includes:
‘All aspects of development for the construction of the rail project known as the Moreton Bay
Rail Link described in the document called Moreton Bay Rail Link, Figure 01, Rev A’.
Therefore the Project is considered exempt development, and in accordance with Section 235(2) of
the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, need not comply with planning instruments other than a State
planning regulatory provision. This means the project is not assessable under the local government
planning scheme or Temporary Local Planning Instrument (TLPI 02/13). The environmental aspects
2
Sustainable Planning Act, S232(2) Also, a regulation may prescribe development that a planning scheme, a temporary local planning
instrument or a preliminary approval to which section 242 applies can not declare to be self-assessable development, development
requiring compliance assessment, assessable development or prohibited development.
listed in Table 2 however are assessable or self-assessable under Schedule 3 of the Sustainable
Planning Regulation 2009. Table 2 also lists other environmental approvals required to construct the
project. Appendix C provides a summary of the approvals relevant to the project. Areas subject to
approvals are illustrated on Figure 2 and summarised by location and type in Table 3.
Table 2: Summary of Other State Planning and Statutory Requirements
Aspect
Material
Change of use
of a premises
Relevant activities
For an Environmentally
Relevant Activity
Comments
Under the Environmental Protection Act 1994:
Notifiable activity 32 – railway yards
(potential- by owner/operator)
The project is exempt for works in a declared
fish habitat area. As per Schedule 3 of the
Fisheries Regulation 2008:
The declared fish habitat area [Hay's
Inlet FHA-012] excludes the following—
O the area (the excluded area) of Hay’s
Inlet between the prolongation
across the inlet of the northern and
southern boundaries of lot 23 on
RP210075
O the area within 20m of the excluded
area.
Works must stay within this exclusion area.
A permit granted for the project under the
Vegetation Management Act 1999, has been
withdrawn given recent legislative changes
exempting the project from requiring vegetation
clearing permits. Clearing of regional
ecosystems under the Vegetation Management
Act 1999 is exempt from requiring a permit as
the project is ‘community infrastructure’
prescribed under Schedule 2 of the Sustainable
Planning Regulation 2009.
For clearing native
vegetation
lea
se
d
un
de
Operational
Works
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
For works in a declared
fish habitat area
For tidal work or work
within a coastal
management district
The project traverses parts of the Coastal
Management District (declared under the
Coastal Management Act 1995): The works also
involve tidal works, particularly at North Pine
River, Saltwater Creek and Gynther Road.
Approval was sought for temporary works
(geotechnical investigations) and permanent
works.
The removal of quarry material from land under
tidal water also requires approval and
landowners consent.
For taking or interfering
with water
A Riverine Protection Permit under the Water
Act 2000 is required for works associated with
Yebri Creek re-trainment.
All other works exempt in accordance with the
Riverine Protection Permit exemption guideline.
Water Entitlement- all works are temporary and
exempt under the Water Regulations 2002.
For constructing or
raising waterway barrier
Permanent and a number of temporary works in
watercourses designated as low, moderate, high
Re
Type
Assessable
development
under SPA
Comments
or tidal waterways require waterway barrier
works approval. A detailed schedule is provided
in Appendix C.
For removal, destruction
or damage of marine
plants
Offsets will be provided for clearing of marine
plants under the Fisheries Act 1994. An Offset
Management Plan will be developed in
accordance with the Marine Fish Habitat Offset
Policy (FHMOP005.2) and the Queensland
Environmental Offsets Policy. This requirement
will be addressed through the application for
marine plant removal. A marine plant
rehabilitation plan is currently being prepared.
For removal of quarry
material
Resource entitlement/ landowners consent.
Development on a
Queensland Heritage
place
A development approval or exemption
certificate is required for works over a Qld
heritage place (Wyllie Park).
A Certificate of Exemption for works on Anzac
Avenue State Heritage was obtained by TMR,
with an extension sought to maintain its
currency.
R
Relevant activities
works
TM
Aspect
By the State, a public
sector entity or a local
government
Operational
Works
For taking or interfering
with water
de
All works with the exception of Yebri Creek
retrainment are exempt in accordance with the
Riverine Protection Permit exemption guideline.
Water Entitlement- all works are temporary and
exempt under the Water Regulations 2002.
For waterway barrier
works
Some works will be conducted in accordance
with self-assessable codes (SACs) under the
Fisheries Act 1994 and the Water Act 2000.
For removal, destruction
or damage of marine
plants
The geotechnical investigation program triggers
self-assessment for Marine Plants permit.
Development on a local
heritage place
Development approval for works over a local
heritage place (grapevine). Previously advised
that the project was exempt from this approval,
however DMTR to consult with MBRC to
progress.
lea
se
d
Re
Building work for station sites is self-assessable,
if undertaken for or on behalf of the state
(Sustainable Planning Regulation, Schedule 3,
Part 2 Table 1 s. 1).
rR
Building work
un
Self-assessable
Development
Under SPA
TI
-D
Type
Queensland
Aboriginal
Cultural
Heritage Act
2003 (QCHA)
Cultural
Heritage
Cultural Heritage
Management
Agreements with Turrbal
People,
Cultural Heritage
Management Plan Gubbi
Gubbi
The project area traverses claim areas for the
Turrbal and the Gubbi Gubbi people.
Environmental
Protection Act
1994
Contaminated
Land
Soil Disposal Permit
Contaminated land - Soil disposal permit for
property listed on the environmental
management register or contaminated land
register, and not subject to QR contaminated
Aspect
Relevant activities
Comments
land protocols.
Marine Parks
Act and
Regulation
2004
Marine Parks
Marine Park Permit
For temporary and permanent works within the
Moreton Bay Marine Park including the
construction of the Saltwater Creek bridge,
geotechnical investigations and the Gynther
Road Culverts.
Nature
Conservation
Act 1992
Least Concern
Plants
Clearing of Least Concern
plants
Clearing of least concern plants is exempt under
the Department of Transport and Main Roads
Protected Plant Exemption under Section 89 of
the Nature Conservation Act 1992 and Section
41 (1)(a)(ii) of the Nature Conservation
(Protected Plants) Conservation Plan 2000.
Works will need to comply with the
requirements.
Protected
Plants
Permit to Clear protected
plants
Pre-clearing surveys were undertaken, with no
protected plants requiring permitting identified
within the clearing footprint.
Revocation of
a conservation
park (Hays
Inlet)
Revocation of a
conservation parkMemorandum of
understanding
DTMR currently has a written agreement (MoU)
from NPRSR for works to commence while the
revocation process is completed. This is required
for Rothwell access and bridge over Anzac
Avenue.
Species
Management
Program
Species Management
Program Crinia tinnula
(Wallum Froglet)
-D
TI
rR
de
un
DTMR has a Species Management Program for
tampering with animal breeding places under
the Nature Conservation Act 1992 which applies
during clearing and construction works. This
excludes animals listed as special least concern
species and colonial breeders. This exemption
does not apply to areas protected under the
nature Conservation Act such as the Hays Inlet
Conservation Area. Further detail is in Chapter
8.
Clearing of non-juvenile
koala habitat trees
A Koala habitat offset plan is required. Any
unavoidable clearing of non-juvenile Koala
habitat trees (NJKHTs) as part of the project is
required to be offset in accordance with the
Offsets for Net Gain of Koala Habitat in South
East Queensland Policy (2010) at a ratio of five
new Koala habitat trees for every one NJKHT
removed or an equivalent cash contribution.
The Department of Transport and Main Roads is
progressing the offset plan, which will involve
the implementation of direct offsets. A Draft
Koala Action Plan (DTMR, 2012) has been
lea
se
d
Koala SPRP
Memorandum
of Agreement
2010
A Species Management Program for the wallum
froglet has been prepared and endorsed by the
Queensland Government, for implementation
on this project, to comply with the requirements
of the Nature Conservation (Wildlife Regulation)
2006. This program does not apply to areas
protected under the Nature Conservation Act
such as the Hays Inlet Conservation Area.
Further detail is provided in Chapter 8.
Species management
program for Least
Concern Species
(Excluding Special Least
Concern species and
colonial breeders)
exemption
Re
Koala State
Planning
Regulatory
Provision
TM
R
Type
Type
Aspect
Relevant activities
Comments
prepared. Further detail is discussed in Chapter
8.
Land Protection
(Pest and Stock
Route
Management)
Act 2002
Declared
Weeds and
pest animals
Weed and pest animal
management during
construction
Construction works will be required to comply
with the Land Protection (Stock Route and Pest
3
Management Act) 2002 for management of
declared pests occurring in the project area.
Requirements under this act are discussed in
Chapter 7 of this EAR, and incorporated into the
construction environmental management plan.
Table 3: Areas subject to specific permits and approvals
X
X
X
Yebri Creek
Marine
Park
R
Waterway
Barrier
Works
Heritage
Place
RPP
Soil
disposal
X
X
X
X
X
X
un
X
lea
se
d
X
de
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Re
Freshwater
Creek
Saltwater
Creek- Main
alignment
Kippa-Ring/
Gynther Road
Saltwater
Creek - Anzac
Road Bridge
Marine
Plants
TM
Quarry
Material
Allocation
-D
Prescribed
Tidal Works
TI
Existing rail
line, EMR
listed
properties
North Pine
River
North Pine
River
Underbore
Wyllie Park
Coastal
Management
District
rR
Location
3
The Biosecurity Act 2014 was introduced at the time of writing, however most of the provisions are yet to
commence.
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
Assessment Approach
3. ASSESSMENT APPROACH
The objective of this EAR is to identify and assess all potential environmental impacts of the MBR
Project; and ensure that adverse impacts are avoided, minimised or sufficiently mitigated. Direct,
indirect and cumulative impacts are examined and addressed. Recommendations for planning and
design are documented in the EAR. Ultimately, the findings of this EAR inform the Construction EMP
for the project, and will be implemented on the ground as the project progresses.
The methodology adopted for this EAR is summarised in Table 4.
Table 4: Assessment Methodology
Activities

Describe existing environmental conditions, including the location of sensitive
receptors, protected areas, sensitive habitat and existing threatening
processes. The existing environmental conditions have been compiled with
reference to existing reporting and permit applications listed in Appendix C.
Impact Assessment
lea
se
d
un
Review of
Environmental
Factors

Re

Summarise
findings
R
de

TM

Review all available previously prepared reports and studies relevant to
the Terms of Reference for the project.
Evaluate the suitability of reports prepared by others to inform the
EAR, and subsequent environmental management requirements.
Review the permits and permit applications prepared for the project.
Liaise with design and construction personnel for the project.
Review current State Planning Policy and SARA mapped published by
the Queensland Government.
Review other known databases, maps and references relevant to the
project.
Review the project footprint, current at the time of writing.
Identify any issues requiring further investigation, in accordance with
the requirements of the Terms of Reference.
-D

TI
Background review
and gap analysis of
previous studies
rR
Step
Describe the impacts and potential impacts generated by the project
(including indirect and cumulative impacts), based on the review of
existing information.
Identify environmental management and mitigation measures,
including those also proposed and committed to from previous
investigations, and any additional controls to address these impacts in
accordance with the Terms of Reference or statutory obligations.
Assess impacts, with consideration of risk and residual impacts, and
provide recommendations for addressing residual impacts.
Document the key issues and management measures and clearly identify
requirements for the design and construction phases of the project.
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
Assessment Approach
TI
-D
TM
R
The following criteria have been used to assess the significance of impacts associated with the
project.
Very high/Extreme: These impacts are considered critical to the decision making process.
They tend to be permanent, or irreversible, or otherwise long term, and can occur over large
scale areas. Environmental receptors are extremely sensitive, and/or the impacts are of
national significance.
High: these impacts are of importance in the decision making process. They tend to be
permanent, or otherwise long to medium term, and can occur over large or medium scale
areas. Environmental receptors are high to moderately sensitive, and/or the impacts are of
State significance.
Moderate/Medium: these impacts are relevant to decision making, particularly for
determination of environmental management requirements. These impacts tend to range
from long to short term, and occur over medium scale areas or focused within a localised
area. Environmental receptors are moderately sensitive, and/or the impacts are of regional
or local significance.
Minor/Low: these impacts are recognisable, but acceptable within the decision making
process. They are still important in the determination of environmental management
requirements. These impacts tend to be short term, or temporary and at the local scale.
Negligible: Minimal change to the existing situation. This could include for example impacts
which are beneath levels of detection, impacts that are within the normal bounds of
variation or impacts that are within the margin of forecasting error.
rR
Any beneficial impacts as a result of the project such as the creation/establishment of new habitat
(e.g. re-vegetation or habitat creation), can be assessed as beneficial outcomes of the project.
Low
Highly Unlikely/
Rare
Low
Unlikely
un
Negligible
Medium
High
Very High
Low
Low
Medium
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
Possible
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Likely
Medium
Medium
High
High
lea
se
d
Likelihood
Significance
Re
Impact Risk
de
The framework applied to determine impact risk is illustrated in Table 5.
Table 5: Impact significance / risk framework
Assessment Approach
3.1.1. Consultation
The Project has been the subject of multiple stages of stakeholder engagement and community
consultation, by the Department of Transport and Main Roads, as described in Table 6.
Table 6: Consultation Undertaken during previous phases
Activity
Description
November 2010 –
February 2011
Stakeholder
engagement
Stakeholders included:
Queensland Conservation Council
SEQ Catchments
Wildlife Preservation Society QLD
Pine Rivers Catchment Association
Redcliffe Environmental Forum
Chelsea Street Bushcare
Koala Organisations including:
- Moreton Bay Koala Rescue
- Pine Rivers Koala Care
- Koala Action Pine Rivers
Griffith University Environmental Futures
Centre
and Road Ecology Unit
Elected Representatives
Local businesses and residents
Gubbi Gubbi Elders
Local community groups
Government agencies (Local, State, Federal)
20 & 28 November 2010
Open Days and
Displays
The Lakes College, John Oxley Community Centre,
Redcliffe Library, Peninsula Fair Shopping Centre,
North Lakes Library
Project Change
Report
Summary of Consultation activities and community
submissions
Project
Newsletter
55000 households in proximity to project alignment
Individual Stakeholder letters
Stakeholder
meetings
Meeting with key koala and environment groups to
provide an update on the project with a focus on
koala management
lea
se
d
4 December 2010, 10, 12,
17, 19 February 2011
February 2011
Re
Mid November 2012
October 2013
November 2013
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
Timing
Consultation on
design
requirements

Stakeholder briefings (federal, state and
local government elected representatives)
Public displays (Peninsula Fair Shopping
Centre, Westfield North Lakes, John Oxley
Community Hall, Rothwell Community Hall)
Static displays (Kallangur Library, Redcliffe
Library, North Lakes Library)
Newsletter (15,000 delivered to residents
and businesses adjacent to the project
Assessment Approach
Timing
Activity
Description
corridor)
Ongoing
Bi-monthly
meetings
Environmental stakeholder meetings
Ongoing
E-news
approximately 1900 subscribers to the project
emailing list who receive regular updates
TI
-D
TM
R
The following regulatory consultation has occurred as part of statutory approvals processes:
Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (DSDIP), 28 August 2013;
Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sports and Racing (DNPRSR) (Marine Parks), 6
September 2013 and ongoing during permit submission;
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) (Coastal), 16 September 2013
and ongoing during permit submission;
Moreton Bay Regional Council (MBRC), 3 October 2013 and 23 October 2013;
Maritime Safety Queensland (MSQ), 1 October 2013;
Department of Agricultural, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), 26 September 2013; and
DEHP (Queensland Heritage), 24 October 2013.
rR
The Department of Transport and Main Roads has continued to issue construction updates to local
communities and on the project website.
un
3.1.2. Limitations of the EAR
de
No specific consultation or community consultation activities were undertaken during the
preparation of this EAR.
lea
se
d
This EAR has been prepared in response to the Terms of Reference issued by the Department of
Transport and Main Roads in February 2014. Whilst SMEC has taken care in the preparation of this
EAR, it does not accept any liability or responsibility whatsoever in respect of:
Any use of this report by any third party;
Any third party whose interests may be affected arising out of or in connection with this
document, including any decision made or action taken by the client or proponent.
Re
This EAR draws upon a variety of studies undertaken by others. Whilst a review of the suitability and
reliability of the information presented in reports by others has been undertaken as part of our
assessment, SMEC takes no responsibility for the content or conclusions of these reports by others.
The review for suitability and reliability has been undertaken with consideration of the legislative
context, industry standards and currency of documentation. Where gaps or deficiencies in reporting
or information supplied were identified, SMEC undertook further research and investigation to
identify suitable alternative documentation or guidance. Each chapter provides commentary on the
suitability of documents sourced or provided, and indicates where further research or analysis was
conducted as part of the EAR.
While every care is taken to ensure the accuracy of data presented in maps and figures, SMEC makes
no representations or warranties about its accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability for any
particular purpose and disclaims all responsibility and all liability (including without limitation,
liability in negligence) for all expenses, losses, damages (including indirect or consequential damage)
and costs which might be incurred as a result of the data being inaccurate or incomplete in any way
and for any reason.
Assessment Approach
This is an environmental assessment report and not an environmental design report and as such,
does not evaluate detailed design elements, and focuses on the provision of recommendations and
management measures applicable to design and construction.
3.1.3. Structure of the EAR
The assessment of each environmental factor is provided in the following format:
Methodology of assessment for each environmental factor assessed;
Review of environmental factors on site and impact upon by the site or that impact on the
site;
An analysis of potential impacts and outcomes; and
Recommended mitigation strategies for design, construction and operation stages.
Re
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
Sources and reference documents are referred to throughout this EAR, with a detailed reference list
provided at the end of this document.
Planning and Land Use
4. PLANNING AND LAND USE
4.1.Introduction
This Chapter provides a review of the planning and land use context of the project. A discussion of
project need, benefits and history of its planning is included in Chapter 1 of this EAR. Environmental
permits and approvals are discussed in Chapter 2.
4.2.Assessment Method
TI
-D
TM
R
The assessment method adopted for this chapter has included the review of:
The Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and Regulation;
The Moreton Bay Regional Council Temporary Local Planning Instrument TLPI 02/13 Moreton
Bay Rail Link and Moreton Bay Rail Link Overlay Code;
Property details and tenure provided by DTMR;
Aerial photography;
Land use and planning chapter of the Final Impact Assessment Study Report (GHD, 2003);
Land use and planning chapter of the Environmental Assessment Report (Salini Bielby 2013);
The South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009; and
Connecting SEQ 2031 (TransLink, 2013).
rR
The documents listed above were considered appropriate and suitable for use in this EAR.
de
4.3.Existing Factors
4.3.1. Strategic and Statutory Context
lea
se
d
un
The Moreton Bay Rail project is identified in Connecting SEQ 2031 as a transit corridor (rail), as
shown in Figure 4. Express rail services (all stations between Kippa-Ring to Strathpine and then
express to Brisbane) will link with bus services provided an improved public transport level of service
and frequency between the urban centres of the Moreton Bay Region. Strategic road and active
transport network upgrades and enhancements are also proposed across the region.
The project is located predominantly within the urban footprint, as mapped in the SEQ Regional Plan,
which is currently under review. Extensive urban development has occurred in the vicinity of the
project area over the past decade, particularly in the North Lakes, Griffin and Mango Hill areas.
Re
There are no Priority Development Areas (PDAs) in the vicinity of the project footprint, as defined by
the Economic Development Act 2012, therefore future urban development in the vicinity of the
corridor will be regulated by Moreton Bay Regional Council.
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
Planning and Land Use
4.3.3. Parkland and Open Space
The project footprint is uncleared in many places and in some locations acts as a vegetated buffer to
residential communities. Several local parklands are encountered along the project footprint,
including:
Leis Park, along the southern bank of North Pine River;
Wyllie Park, along the northern bank of North Pine River;
Pam Gorring Park, north of the Dohles Rocks Road crossing;
Reg Crouch Park, and Wagner Park, along the tributary of Freshwater Creek;
Jean Hooper Recreation area, on Freshwater Creek Road; and
Chelsea Street Reserve, at Kippa-Ring.
R
A number of other small reserves and parkland areas are located adjacent to the project footprint.
TM
Conservation areas in the vicinity include the Moreton Bay Marine Park, Hays Inlet Conservation
Parks (1 and 2).
-D
4.3.4. Future Land Use
TI
Future land use around the corridor will be guided initially by the Temporary Local Planning
Instrument and Overlay Code, and ultimately by the forthcoming Moreton Bay Regional Council
Planning Scheme. Transit oriented development will be encouraged in the vicinity of stations.
rR
The Capestone master planned development is located adjacent to the Mango Hill East station,
between Kinsellas Road and Anzac Avenue. Future stages of the development are located on the
south east of the rail corridor, with an extension to Capestone Boulevard bridging the rail corridor.
de
4.3.5. Tenure
lea
se
d
un
The project area originally traversed freehold, leasehold, reserve and unallocated State land, in
private, council and State ownership. A significant proportion of the corridor has been reserved for
rail corridor since the 1980s. As the design process has progressed, the Department of Transport and
Main Roads has been acquiring the corridor, in preparation for the construction of the project.
4.4.Potential Impacts and Benefits
Re
As the project footprint was broadly defined and protected from development over the past 30
years, land use impacts associated with the project are generally limited to the following:
Partial loss of some parkland areas and recreational reserves;
Loss of bushland buffers, which may provide some amenity to local residents; and
Introduction of transport infrastructure through residential areas.
Benefits of the project are described in Chapter 1, but can be distilled into the following:
Improved accessibility to public transport from a previously under-serviced part of South
East Queensland; and
Opportunities to introduce transit oriented development in and around station precincts,
taking advantage of increased accessibility to public transport and co-location of services.
The integration of the project footprint and project intentions into land use planning at both the
state and local level has led to the majority of land use impacts being mitigated though previous
stages and earlier project decisions.
Water Quality and Hydrology
5. WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY
5.1.Introduction
The project area has been the subject of numerous investigations, with several relevant only to
specific sections of the project, such as Dohles Rocks Road, or Lawnton to Petrie. This section
provides a summary of the information relevant to the values and quality of surface and ground
waters within the project area.
5.2.Assessment Methodology
Re
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
The following database tools, legislation, reports and investigations have been reviewed to inform
the preparation of this chapter:
Acid Sulphate Soil Assessment. Groundwater Conditions – Saltwater Creek to Kippa-Ring
(Golder Associates, 2014c);
Environmental Assessment Report (Salini Bielby, 2013);
Design Report – Hydrology/Hydraulics (AECOM Aurecon, 2013a);
Moreton Bay Rail Link - Monthly Water Quality Monitoring Reports (AWC, 2012);
Moreton Bay Rail Link Project - Water Quality Monitoring Services (SMEC, 2012b);
Moreton Bay Rail Link – Final Report (AWC, 2013);
Dohles Rock Road - Environmental Approvals Report (AECOM, 2011e);
Petrie to Kippa-Ring Public Transport Corridor Study. Final Impact Assessment Study Report
(GHD, 2003);
Petrie to Redcliffe Multimodal Corridor Project – Natural Environment (Maunsell, 2008a);
Moreton Bay Rail Link: Monthly Water Quality Monitoring Reports (AWC, 2012-2013)
Department of Sustainable Development, Infrastructure and Planning (DSDIP) SARA
mapping;
Healthy Waterways mapping and Report Card (Healthy Waterways, 2013);
The Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (EHP, 2009);
The Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (ANZECC
2000);
The Stream Health Manual – Pine Rivers Shire Council (May 2004);
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999;
Environmental Protection Act 1994;
Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009 (EPP Water);
The State Planning Policy and the superseded State Planning Policy for Healthy Waters (SPP
4/10);
Pine Rivers Catchment Management Strategy (PRCA, 2002)
Pine Rivers and Redcliffe Creeks Environmental values and water quality objectives: Basin No.
142 (part), including Hays Inlet and all tributaries of the North Pine and South Pine Rivers
(July 2010);
Wallum Froglet Species Management Program (DTMR, 2012c); and
Water Resource (Moreton) Plan 2007.
A number of guidelines and reference documents were referred to supplement the project specific
reports supplied. These were considered suitable for the purpose of preparation of this EAR.
The following permits and approvals documentation were also reviewed during the preparation of
the EAR:
Marine Park Permit, for works within the Moreton Bay Marine Park;
Yebri Creek: Waterway Barrier Works; Riverine Protection Permit;
Saltwater Creek: Waterway Barrier Works; Prescribed Tidal Works and works within a Coastal
Management District; Marine Plants removal, destruction, or damage; and
North Pine River: Waterway Barrier Works; Prescribed Tidal Works and works within a
Coastal Management District; Marine Plants removal, destruction, or damage.
5.2.1. Field Surveys
TM
R
The project has been the subject of two surface water quality field assessments, of varying duration
and scope since 1996, and an assessment groundwater conditions. Surface water quality monitoring
has been undertaken at strategic points within creeks and waterways along the project area, with the
intent of collecting and collating baseline water quality data to develop an understanding of existing
water quality. Table 7 provides an overview of the investigations completed to date.
Surface water quality monitoring of waterways was undertaken within
and adjacent to the project area to establish baseline water quality data.
Monitoring was undertaken in accordance with the Australian Standard
for Water Quality Sampling (AS/NZS 5667.1:1998) and the 2009 DEHP
Monitoring and Sampling Manual.
Specific Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) were applied to the relevant
Environmental Values (EVs) pertinent to each respective waterway,
within the project area. These EVs and associated WQOs are defined in
‘Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009– Pine Rivers and Redcliffe
Creeks Environmental Values and Water Quality Objectives, Basin No.142
(part), including Hays Inlet and all tributaries of the North Pine and South
Pine rivers’ (EPP Water) (DEHP, 2010).
Site Locations
The following nine sampling and monitoring sites were established
within/adjacent to the project area, and utilised intermittently during the
monitoring period. Refer to the Final Water Quality Report (AWC, 2013)
for the list of months each site was monitored:
de
rR
TI
April 2012
May 2012 August 2013
un
AWC
Moreton Bay
Rail Link:
Monthly Water
Quality
Monitoring
Reports
Methods Undertaken
Baseline Monitoring
lea
se
d
SMEC (2012b)
Moreton Bay
Rail Link
Project: Water
Quality
Monitoring
Services
Date/s
February 2012 –
Re
Report
-D
The Healthy Waterways’ assessment of the Pine Rivers Catchment, in which the project is located, is
also discussed below.
Table 7: Field Studies Overview

Freshwater Creek #1, near the end of Grace Court, Mango Hill;

Freshwater Creek #2, located in forested wetland accessed from
Pelican Cl, Mango Hill;

Gynther Road, access to Saltwater Creek estuary;

Mango Hill Lake, adjacent Topaz Drive, Mango Hill;

Hercules Road Channel, accessed via the end of Hercules Road,
Kippa-Ring;

Saltwater Creek: Kinsella’s, accessed via Capestone Boulevard,
Mango Hill;

Bremner Road Channel, near the end of Bremner Road,
Rothwell;

Yebri Creek, accessed via Amcor Paper Mill, Petrie; and

Black Duck Creek, accessed off Brays Road, Mango Hill.
Monitoring, Sampling and Analysis

In-situ water quality loggers, programmed to record data every
hour, were fixed horizontally within the water column and
recorded Temperature, pH, Conductivity and Turbidity;

Logger data and water samples were collected monthly. Water
quality loggers were recalibrated and re-programmed to record
data for the following month; and

Water samples were laboratory analysed for the following
parameters across the entire sampling period:
-
Nitrogen (Ammonia, NOx, Organic, Total);
-
Phosphorus (Filterable Reactive, Total); and
-
Metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn, Hg).
TM
R
pH, TSS, Turbidity, DO, Conductivity;
-D
The following parameters were only analysed from February
2012 to September 2012 due to nil detections in all site apart
from Black Duck Creek and Freshwater Creek #2. Analysis was
continued at these two sites until June 2013:
Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH C10-C36 & BTEX-TPHC6C9);
-
Total Suspended Solids (TSS); and
-
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs).
TI
-
rR

-
de
June 1996 –
May 2012
un
Moreton Bay
Regional
Council
Data was assessed and reported monthly against established WQOs
taken from the EPP (Water). A six (6) month and final report were also
provided.
As part of a larger monitoring program, MBRC collected water quality
samples from six (6) sites within the project area; four (4) within
Freshwater Creek, and two (2) within Saltwater Creek.
Sampling was approximately undertaken bi-annually at the Freshwater
Creek sites from 1996 to 2012 and quarterly at the Saltwater Creek sites
from 2009 to 2012.
In-situ and laboratory analysis of the following parameters was
undertaken:
Re
lea
se
d
Water Quality
Monitoring
Healthy
Waterways
2013 Report
Card ResultsMoreton Bay
Catchments
2000 - 2013

TN, NH4, NOx, Dissolved Organic Nitrogen (DON) and Organic
Nitrogen;

TP, PO4 and Dissolved Organic Phosphorus;

Dissolved Oxygen (% and mg/L);

E.Coli;

pH, Temperature, Salinity and Conductivity; and
Turbidity and Conductivity.
Sampling of water quality has been undertaken on a monthly basis for all
estuarine sites in the healthy waterways group. The following parameters
are monitored and provide indicators of ecosystem health:

Total nitrogen;

Chlorophyll a;

Turbidity;

Total phosphorus; and

Dissolved oxygen.
Additional monitoring which provides indicators of biological health
include:
April 2014
Seagrass distribution;

Nutrient plots;

d N mapping; and
15
Riparian assessment.
Groundwater assessment was undertaken to assist in the development of
appropriate acid sulphate soils management measures for excavations
within the Saltwater to Kippa-Ring section of the MBR Project.
Scope of works comprised:
Installation of six groundwater wells – targeting proposed
culverts and surface drains in identified ASS areas;

Installation of three piezometers in existing surface waters
(Saltwater Creek and existing drains near the proposed rail
yards);

Monitoring of groundwater and surface water level fluctuations
using data loggers;

Sampling and analysis of groundwater for ASS indicator
parameters;

Analysis of groundwater logging, sampling and analysis results;
and

Completion of a report describing results of the works
undertaken and providing a summary of groundwater
conditions at the site.
TM
R

Re
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
Groundwater
Conditions –
Saltwater Creek
to Kippa-Ring
-D
Golder
Associates
(2014c)

R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
Pine Catchment Freshwaters
No Data
C
C
C
D
C
C
D+
D+
CCBC
B-
-D
TM
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
R
Table 8: Healthy Waterways Score Cards Summary for Freshwaters, 2000-2013
rR
TI
The 2013 score card indicates that the freshwater results have improved since 2012, for all
indicators, particularly nutrient cycling. The major anthropogenic influence on the catchment is
residential development. This will continue in the coming years, as development progresses in North
Lakes and Mango Hill to the north of the project area.
lea
se
d
un
de
The Water Resource (Moreton) Plan 2007 recognises the Pine Rivers catchment as a sub-catchment
of the Moreton Resource Area. The Pine Rivers catchment receives a great deal of interest from the
local community and local government authorities in the area due to its link to important areas of
Moreton Bay (AECOM, 2011e). The Pine Rivers Catchment Association (PRCA) is a community-based
environment group formed to promote action within the community and through interested sectors
to achieve sustainable, responsible and productive management of the Pine Rivers Catchment, both
now and in the future.
Re
In 2002 the PRCA published the Pine Rivers Catchment Management Strategy. The strategy is not a
regulatory document, but provides a broad assessment of the priority land and water issues in the
catchment and recommends actions to address them. Major issues identified for the catchment are:
Water quality;
Water conservation;
Soil erosion;
Vegetation protection and weed management;
Agricultural management;
Extractive industry;
Land-use management;
Fishing & fish habitat; and
Feral animals.
Current programs run by the PRCA are targeted at: South Pine River Restoration, Riparian
Management Incentive Program, Cats Claw Creeper Control Program and Horse Land Management
Education Program.
5.3.1.1.
North Pine River sub-catchment
The North Pine River sub-catchment is the largest sub-catchment within the Pine Rivers catchment
with an approximate area of 517km2 (Wetlandinfo 2013). North Pine River is impounded twice to
form Lake Samsonvale and Lake Kurwongbah which separate the catchment into the upper reaches,
and mid-lower reaches (Healthy Waterways 2013).
The upper reach of the catchment is undeveloped and comprised of Brisbane Forest Park and
Bunyaville State Forest. The mid reaches are comprised of rural-residential areas whilst the lower
reaches, where the project area intersects the sub- catchment, is heavily urbanised and is influenced
by urban and industrial development. The lower reaches of the catchment include North Pine River,
Yebri Creek and their tributaries, as shown in Figure 7.
R
Yebri Creek originates south of Narangba Road between the North Coast Railway and Lake
Kurwongbah, flowing in a south-easterly direction until it drains into the North Pine River to the east
of the Amcor site.
-D
TM
This localised area of the sub-catchment has been heavily modified and urban development has
resulted in significant vegetation loss and subsequent increase in urban stormwater discharge.
However, significant segments of vegetation have been retained such as sections downstream of
Anzac Avenue dedicated to parklands, and the northern extents of the Amcor site (GHD 2003).
rR
TI
5.3.1.2.
Hays Inlet sub-catchment
Freshwater Creek, the Freshwater Creek tributary4, Black Duck Creek, and Saltwater Creek all drain
into Hays Inlet, which as part of Moreton Bay. These are shown in Figure 7.
lea
se
d
un
de
Moreton Bay is a Ramsar site, and wetland of international importance protected under the EPBC
Act. Ramsar wetlands are sites that are recognised under the Convention on Wetlands of
International Importance (Ramsar Convention) as being of international significance in terms of
ecology, botany, zoology, limnology or hydrology. The wetland area extends along Hays
Inlet/Saltwater Creek to the point where it is crossed by Anzac Avenue. In relation to Moreton Bay,
and the declared Ramsar wetland area, Hays Inlet represents 0.01% of the area. The proposed area is
located within a small part of the upper reaches of Hays Inlet, which is on the margins of the
Moreton Bay Ramsar wetland (Maunsell, 2008).
Waterways within the Hays Inlet sub-catchment are largely influenced by the surrounding urban
development as urban stormwater is channelled through them into Hays Inlet (AECOM 2011b).
Re
Freshwater Creek
Freshwater Creek has a catchment area of 25.5km2, originating near the North Coast Railway and
draining in an easterly direction into Hays Inlet (GHD 2003). Freshwater Creek and its tributary, Black
Duck Creek are characterised by the influence of urban and industrial development. Both creeks
receive direct urban stormwater, and act as sinks for detrital matter, sediments and the range of
contaminants that may be associated with urban activity.
Saltwater Creek
Saltwater Creek contains both fresh and salt water environs and has a catchment area of 54.8km2.
The catchment rises from the eastern side of the North Coast Railway and drains in a south-easterly
direction into Hays Inlet (GHD 2003). Current land use in the catchment is predominantly rural and
rural residential and proposed future urban development in the Mango Hill area on both sides of
Anzac Avenue will cause the majority of land to become residential or commercial. The catchment is
characterised by the influence of urban and rural development. Urban stormwater drains into
Saltwater Creek which receives the range of contaminants associated with urban and rural activities.
4
The Tributary of Freshwater Creek has been assessed as not a waterway for the purpose of Waterway Barrier
Works
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re
5.3.2. Tidal Inundation
DEHP Coastal Hazard Area mapping was reviewed to determine project areas that are considered to
be vulnerable to tidal inundation. This mapping displays areas projected to be temporarily inundated
as a result of storm tide events by the year 2100. It shows two risk areas: high risk areas where
inundation would be greater than 1m in depth, and moderate risk area where inundation will be less
than 1m. North Pine River (medium and high storm tide), Freshwater Creek (medium storm tide) and
the eastern-most extent of the alignment from Black Duck Creek medium and high storm tide) are all
projected to be affected by 2100. It is important that design and construction do not adversely
impact on this projection, by enhancing the possibility of inundation prior to 2100. This aspect is
discussed further in Chapter 12.
Re
lea
se
d
un
de
rR
TI
-D
TM
R
Areas considered to present inundation risk are identified in along with the extent of the coastal
management district.
R
TM
-D
TI
rR
de
un
lea
se
d
Re