Wetland Management Plan - Sunshine Coast University Hospital PPP Prepared By: Biosis on behalf of Lend Lease - Lendlease
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Wetland Management Plan
Sunshine Coast University Hospital PPP
Prepared By: Biosis on behalf of Lend Lease
Aconex Document Ref: LLC-MT-PMP-STD-1003006-PDF
Rev. D - November 2012
1Sunshine Coast University Hospital PPP
Wetland Management Plan
Prepared by Biosis on behalf of Lend Lease
Revision Date Changes/Purpose By
A 21/08/2012 For coordination / Review Biosis / Jeremy Mansfield
Amended to reflect access issues to adjoining
B 22/10/2012 Biosis/Jeremy Mansfield
wetland areas
C 05/11/2012 Amended following project team review Biosis/Jeremy Mansfield
D 08/11/2012 Amended following project team review Biosis/Jeremy Mansfield
Mark Buckle 08/11/2012
Approved by:
Lend Lease Signature Date
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 2TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................................................................................4
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................6
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................................................8
2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................................................................8
2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT...........................................................................................................................................8
2.3 PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT...........................................................................................................................................9
2.4 TIMING OF WMP ...............................................................................................................................................................9
3. WETLAND VALUES AND FUNCTIONS...........................................................................................................................10
3.1 OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................................................................10
3.2 SCUH SITE WETLAND VALUES .....................................................................................................................................11
3.3 WETLAND VALUES WITHIN 100M OF THE SCUH SITE ...............................................................................................14
4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT .........................................................................................................................................................19
4.1 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ....................................................................................................................................................19
4.2 LIKELIHOOD OF INDIRECT IMPACTS ...........................................................................................................................21
5. MANAGEMENT OF IMPACTS .........................................................................................................................................23
5.1 DIRECT IMPACT MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................................................................23
5.2 INDIRECT IMPACT MANAGEMENT ...............................................................................................................................24
6. MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE ...............................................................................................................................26
6.1 REVIEW OF ELEMENT SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS ...........................................................................................26
6.2 SITE AUDITS AND TARGETED SURVEYS ....................................................................................................................26
6.3 VISUAL ASSESSMENT OF ADJOINING WETLAND VALUES .......................................................................................27
6.4 MONITORING PROGRAM ..............................................................................................................................................27
7. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................................................29
8. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................................30
FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................................................................31
APPENDIX A ..............................................................................................................................................................................34
APPENDIX B ..............................................................................................................................................................................37
APPENDIX C ..............................................................................................................................................................................42
APPENDIX D ..............................................................................................................................................................................44
APPENDIX E ...............................................................................................................................................................................46
APPENDIX F ...............................................................................................................................................................................48
APPENDIX G ..............................................................................................................................................................................50
APPENDIX H ..............................................................................................................................................................................54
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 3EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The new $1.8 billion Sunshine Coast University Hospital (SCUH) is being delivered using a Public
Private Partnership (PPP) model. A commitment has been made that the project will achieve a
Green Star rating under the Green Building Council of Australia's (GBCA) Green Star Healthcare
v1 rating tool.
The SCUH site is located within 100m of wetlands of high ecological value and as such, the project
can not fully comply with the GBCA's Eco-Conditional Requirement. However, alternative
measures have been proposed and accepted by the GBCA as providing adequate protection to
wetlands of high ecological value within 100m of the site. These measures include, but are not
limited to the preparation of:
• specific plans addressing issues such as surface and ground water quality, acid sulphate
soils and lighting; and
• a Wetland Management Plan (WMP) in accordance with the GBCA's Eco-Conditional
Requirement.
This WMP is therefore a critical component of the project's submission to achieve a Green Star
rating. In accordance with the GBCA's Eco-Conditional Requirement, this WMP will have a
minimum life of five years and will be displayed on a the project's website for a minimum two-year
period (commencing prior to construction).
The wetland values within and adjacent to the SCUH site can be summarised as follows.
1. The eastern portion of the site supports patches of degraded, ephemeral wetland habitat
that are currently inhabited by common frog species that typically use disturbed areas for
breeding purposes. These wetlands have relatively low value given their current condition
and lack of connectivity.
2. There is a small wetland to the south of the site that has developed within a borrow-pit
used to fill the adjoining areas for development purposes. This wetland has high ecological
value owing to the variety of habitats provided including fringing Paperbark forest that is
mapped as remnant Endangered vegetation and potential habitat for three threatened frog
species.
3. To the west of the site, there are extensive tracts of Paperbark forest that eventually
connect with Mooloolah River National Park to the north. These forested wetlands are of
high ecological value owing to their complexity, connectivity and potential to provide habitat
for three threatened frog species.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 44. To the east of the site is a lake system, Lake Kawana, that has been constructed in order
to source fill, manage storm water from adjoining development and aesthetics. This
wetland is considered to have relatively low ecological value given the low diversity of
habitats provided and modified/developed nature of surrounding areas.
With regard to the above wetland values, the SCUH project will involve further filling of the site and
hence will have a direct impact on the internal wetlands of low ecological value. Direct impacts to
local frog populations will be minimised through installing exclusion barriers to prevent further
movement of frogs into the site and relocating individuals that currently inhabit the site. The
inclusion of vegetated swales in the SCUH's storm water management system has the potential to
provide some compensatory frog habitat during the operational phases of the development. This
WMP provides a monitoring program designed to gauge the effectiveness of the exclusion barrier
during the construction phase of works and whether compensatory habitat is being used by frogs
during the operational phases of the SCUH project.
The potential exists for the SCUH project to have an adverse impact on adjoining high ecological
value wetlands through indirect processes such as decline water quality (surface and ground),
erosion of beds and banks of wetlands, light spill and introduction of weeds species. All of these
processes will be managed internally through a number of element specific management plans
that have been prepared by suitably qualified professionals to achieve at a minimum
environmental best practice. This WMP provides a framework for reviewing and monitoring these
plans in an ecological context, conducting site audits and visually assessing nearby wetlands for
adverse changes in physical condition.
The combination of element specific management plans and the provisions of this WMP will act to
manage processes internal to the SCUH site (e.g. surface and groundwater quality, lighting,
waste) with the aim of minimising adverse impacts on adjoining wetlands of high ecological value.
As such, the purpose and intent of the GBCA's Eco-Conditional Requirement in how it relates to
wetlands, is satisfied.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 51. INTRODUCTION
Lend Lease, as a member of the Exemplar Health Consortium, are working with Queensland
Health in delivering the new $1.8 billion Sunshine Coast University Hospital (SCUH), which is
being delivered using a Public Private Partnership (PPP) model. It is intended that the project will
achieve a Green Star rating under the Green Building Council of Australia's (GBCA) Green Star
Healthcare v1 rating tool.
Previous environmental assessments have indicated that the SCUH site occurs within 100m of
wetlands that have high ecological value. As such, the project is not able to fully comply with the
GBCA's Eco-Conditional Requirement in how it relates to high ecological value wetlands.
However, the GBCA has confirmed that the project is able to satisfy the purpose and intent of the
Eco-Conditional Requirement through alternative measures. These measures include, but are not
limited to the preparation and implementation of a number of management plans, as well as a
Wetland Management Plan that accords with the Eco-Conditional Requirement Wetland
Management Plan specifications. A copy of GBCA's advice regarding eligibility of the SCUH
project is provided as Appendix A.
This WMP provides the following:
• in Section 2.0, a description of the project;
• in Section 3.0, the wetland values within and adjacent to the SCUH site;
• in Section 4.0 an assessment of the potential adverse impacts on wetland values and
functions associated with the SCUH development;
• in Section 5.0, the manner in which impacts on wetland values and functions will be
managed;
• in Section 6.0, a monitoring and maintenance program designed to gauge the success of
the proposed management measures; and
• in Section 7.0, adaptive management procedures.
In accordance with the GBCA's requirements, this WMP will be displayed on the project's
website prior to construction works commencing and for a period of two years thereafter. In
this regard, the Enabling/Investigation works are not related to actual construction works
and thus the WMP will uploaded for public display prior to the commencement of bulk
earthworks on the SCUH site. This WMP is a living document that will be subject to
continual improvement over the duration of the SCUH project. All further revisions of this
WMP will also be made available on the SCUH website.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 6This WMP has been prepared by an appropriately qualified ecologist as demonstrated by the Curriculum Vitae provided as Appendix B. P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 7
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Sunshine Coast University Hospital (SCUH) will be a tertiary level teaching hospital providing
a comprehensive range of acute services, including tertiary rehabilitation and mental health. The
SCUH will be a wholly new build facility and will open in late 2016 with at least 450 operational
beds, ramping up to 738 operational beds by 2021.
2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
The SCUH site is a vacant property formally described as Lot 5 on SP201545, within Birtinya on
Queensland's Sunshine Coast. The SCUH site is located within a broader master planned
community that will incorporate a variety of residential and commercial land uses. The site locality
is provided as Figure 1, and with reference to this figure, the SCUH site is bordered to the:
• north by the a construction site associated with the establishment of a private hospital;
• west by Kawana Way and extensive tracks of intact native vegetation;
• east by a construction site and Lake Kawana; and
• south by the currently under construction South Street and a small parcel of Council owned
land that supports intact native vegetation and an open waterbody.
The site and surrounding lands have been subject to vegetation clearance in the past and have
been filled and maintained in preparation for future urban development. At present the site is in a
highly modified state, does not support any woody vegetation and has relatively low ecological
value.
2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The SCUH project will involve further modification of the site’s physicality to establish:
• the main hospital building and a skills, academic and research centre;
• two multi-level above-ground car parks;
• a mental health facility;
• a 6,800m2 facilities management centre and central energy plant;
• child day-care facility parklands; and
• supporting infrastructure such as roads and utilities.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 8Upon completion, the stormwater runoff from the site will be directed towards the east into Lake
Kawana through a constructed stormwater drainage system. The internal stormwater management
systems will incorporate Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) elements, such as vegetated
swales. In high rainfall events, there may be some discharge of runoff to the south and west of the
site along Kawana Way. However, it is important to note that the majority of runoff will be directed
into Lake Kawana.
2.3 PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT
The development of the SCUH will take place in an orderly manner over a number of phases as
detailed below.
1. Enabling/Investigation works, late 2012 – early 2014 – detailed design of SCUH
development, preparation of required management plans, technical investigations
regarding geotechnical and groundwater issues.
2. Construction, late 2012 – late 2014 – piling, major earthworks and excavation, installation
of civil infrastructure.
3. Establishment, early 2014 to 2016 – establishment of buildings and facades, services
and fit out.
4. Operation, 2016 onwards – occupation and use of the Sunshine Coast University
Hospital.
2.4 TIMING OF WMP
This WMP will have an operational life of five years spanning the construction, establishment and
one year into the operational phases of the SCUH project. In accordance with the Eco-Conditional
Requirement, this WMP will be publicly displayed on the SCUH website prior to the
commencement of the construction phase of the project and will remain on display for two years
(24 months). Timing of the WMP in relation to the phases of the SCUH development is illustrated
below.
Design Construction 2012-2014 Establishment 2014-2016 Operation 2016 +
Preparation
and Implementation of WMP management
Refinement measures
of WMP
Two year WMP Public Display Period
Minimum 5 year life of WMP
Timing of WMP in relation to phases of development
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 93. WETLAND VALUES AND FUNCTIONS
3.1 OVERVIEW
The SCUH site is located within a larger master-planned development and has been subject to
historic vegetation clearance and filling. Nonetheless, the SCUH site is located within 100m of
natural and constructed wetland systems. It is important to note that the GBCA have adopted the
following wetland definitions.
1. Queensland Environment Protection Agency (2005) - Wetlands are areas of permanent or
periodic/intermittent inundation, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt,
including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed 6 metres.
To be a wetland, the area must have one or more of the following attributes:
• the land supports, at least periodically, plants or animals that are adapted to and
dependent on living in wet conditions for at least part of their life cycle;
• the substratum is predominantly undrained soils that are saturated, flooded or
ponded long enough to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper layers; or
• the substratum is not soil and is saturated with water, or covered by water, at
some time.
2. New South Wales Wetland Policy (1996) – areas that are wet for long enough periods
that the plants and animals living in or near them are adapted to, and often dependent on,
wet conditions for at least part of their life cycle.
A desktop investigation of the wetland ecosystems within the locality was completed based on
analysis of aerial photography and mapping available from the Queensland Department of
Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP). Based on the results of this investigation, wetland
values within 100m of the SCUH site can be summarised as follows.
1. Vegetation to the north, west and south of the SCUH site is identified on the Vegetation
Management Act Regional Ecosystem and Remnant Vegetation Map V6.1 (refer Figure 2)
as supporting remnant Endangered vegetation consisting of:
• RE 12.3.5 (95%), a palustrine wetland community; and
• RE 12.3.1 (5%), a riverine wetland or fringing riverine wetland community.
2. This remnant Endangered vegetation is also identified as supporting Essential Habitat for
three amphibians listed as Vulnerable under the provisions of the Nature Conservation Act
1992, namely the Wallum Sedge Frog Litoria olongburensis, Wallum Froglet Crinia tinnula
and Wallum Rocket Frog Litoria freycineti, collectively known as 'Acid Frogs' (refer Figure 2).
3. Areas of remnant Endangered vegetation to the north, west and south of the SCUH site
have also been identified as Referable Wetlands and Areas of High Ecological Significance
(refer Appendix C). In addition, the site itself has been identified as supporting Referable
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 10Wetlands and Areas of High Ecological Significance (refer Appendix D). However, given the
history of vegetation clearance and landform modification, the identification of Referable
Wetlands and Area of High Ecological Significance within the SCUH site is not accurate
reflection of the exiting values. DEHP has acknowledged that there are inaccuracies in the
mapping for the SCUH site and surrounds that may be addressed in the next mapping
update (refer Appendix E).
4. The eastern boundary of the site also adjoins a constructed wetland system, Lake Kawana.
A reconnaissance survey of the SCUH site and surrounds was completed on the 13th August 2012
in order to:
• assess the current location and extent of wetland systems within and adjacent to the site;
• undertake a preliminary evaluation of the values and functions of wetlands within and
adjacent to the site; and
• verify the accuracy or otherwise of the formally recognised values of wetlands within and
adjacent to the site.
A targeted frog survey of the SCUH site and surrounds was undertaken between the 3rd – 4th of
October 2012 in order to:
• assess the current location, extent and condition of frog breeding habitat within the SCUH
site;
• verify the presence/absence of four threatened frog species (L. olongburensis, L. freycineti,
and C. tinnula) within the SCUH site; and
• verify which species of frogs are using wetlands within 100m of the SCUH site.
Detailed results of the frog survey are provided in separate report (Biosis 2012) that will also be
posted on the project website. It should be noted upfront, that no threatened frog species were
recorded within or adjacent to the SCUH site during the surveys.
Owing to site access constraints, all detailed surveys have been restricted to the SCUH site
itself. Surveys of adjoining wetland areas to the west, south and east have been limited to
visual observations and in the case of the frog surveys, aural detection of frog calls from
nearby publicly accessible land.
3.2 SCUH SITE WETLAND VALUES
The SCUH site is a relatively flat, cleared parcel of land that is subject to regular slashing of
existing herbaceous vegetation (refer Plate 1). During the surveys patches of plant species that
are typically found in wetland environments were recorded growing within the site. Species
recorded include Woolly Frogsmouth Philydrum lanuginosum, Common Reed Phragmites australis
and River Club Rush Schoenoplectus validus. Occurrences of these plants were typically
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 11associated with depressions and slightly lower lying areas in the eastern portion of the site, as well
ruts left by slashing machinery (refer Plate 2).
It is likely that these plants have been transported onto the site as part of the fill material and are
currently surviving in areas where pooling of water occurs following periods of high rainfall.
During the frog survey a number of individuals of Striped Rocket Frog Litoria nasuta and Striped
Marsh Frog Limnodynastes peronii were recorded within lower-lying areas with wetland vegetation.
It is likely these species are persisting within the site under mulch piles and/or within the top soil,
waiting for an opportunity the breed in pooling water following periods of high rainfall. Neither
species is listed as threatened under State or Commonwealth legislation and are known to inhabit
disturbed sites with ephemeral breeding habitat.
Plate 1. SCUH site’s current condition (note woody vegetation in background is associated with
the southern and western wetlands)
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 12Plate 2 – Degraded ephemeral wetland area within eastern portion of the SCUH site. As discussed in Section 3.1, the identification of Referable Wetlands and Areas of High Ecological Significance within the site is an inaccurate representation of the site's wetland values and functions, particularly in comparison to other wetlands in the area (refer Section 3.3 below). With reference to the 'Queensland Wetland Definition and Delineation Guideline - Part A: A guide to existing wetland definitions and the application of the Queensland Wetlands Program definition', the existing lower-lying areas of the SCUH site are not considered to support a functioning wetland ecosystem of any tangible value. It is likely that the SCUH site previously supported a palustrine wetland system similar to vegetation to the west and south. Given the history of modification to the SCUH site and surrounds, the current wetlands within the site have developed opportunistically most likely as a result of the re-use of top soil across the site following vegetation clearance and filling. P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 13
3.3 WETLAND VALUES WITHIN 100M OF THE SCUH SITE
There are three wetlands within 100m of the site, namely:
• Lake Kawana to the east;
• a small wetland to the south; and
• extensive tracts of Paperbark vegetation to the west.
Descriptions of the values and functions of each of these wetlands are provided below.
Lake Kawana
Lake Kawana has been sequentially constructed over the life of the master-planned community for
the purposes of extracting fill, stormwater management and aesthetics. The wetland is a large
open waterbody, surrounded by existing residential estates and associated open space and land
ear-marked for urban development. A concrete platform extends along the majority of the edges of
the lake. The only sections of the lake edge that support submerged vegetation (e.g. grasses and
reeds) are where this platform has not been constructed (refer Plate 3). While the water within the
lake is quite clear, little to no signs of aquatic life were observed in the lake during the site
inspection. Similarly, no birds were observed using the lake and there was no evidence (i.e.
droppings, nests etc) of their recent inhabitation.
This wetland has relatively low ecological value owing to the built nature of the surrounding
environments, exposure and the absence of a diverse range of habitats.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 14Plate 3. Lake Kawana Southern wetland In contrast to Lake Kawana, the wetland to the south of the site is more natural in form and character. However, it was apparently constructed as a source of fill material some years ago. A band of relatively intact Broad-leaved Paperbark Melaleuca quinquenervia dominated forest surrounds the northern and eastern edges of the wetland providing it with shelter and a buffer to adjoining cleared areas. In addition to the Paperbark forest this wetland offers a diversity of habitat types in the form of patches of submerged reeds, floating vegetation (i.e. waterlillies) and a variable substrate (refer Plate 4). A number of bird species were observed utilizing this wetland during the site inspection including, Black Swan Cygnus atratus, Pacific Black Duck Anas superciliosa, Dusky Moorhen Gallinula tenebrosa and Honeyeaters. No frog species were heard calling from this wetland during the frog survey. P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 15
Plate 4. Diversity of vegetation and habitat associated with the southern wetland. The Paperbark forest has been identified as supporting remnant Endangered vegetation that provides Essential Habitat to three acid frog species (refer Section 3.1). Observations made during the site inspection found that this mapping is an accurate reflection of the wetland’s values and functions. Given the modified, urban nature of the general area, this wetland is considered to have high ecological value in that it provides valuable stepping stone habitat to highly mobile species such as birds and bats during broader movements throughout the locality. The western edge of the wetland adjoins Kawana Way and appears to receive run off from the roadway. At present, the land between the wetland and Kawana Way has low groundcover, possibly due to recent disturbance and there was some evidence of erosion and movement of sediment downslope into the wetland (refer Plate 5). However, there was no visual evidence of a decline in water quality within the wetland at the time of the site inspection. P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 16
Plate 5. Exposed nature of land adjoining western banks of southern wetland. Western wetland There are extensive tracts of Paperbark forest to the west of Kawana Way. This vegetation is currently mapped as supporting remnant Endangered vegetation, that is dominated by a palustrine (forested) wetland Regional Ecosystem (RE 12.3.5). This community is relatively intact and diverse with connectivity to the Mooloolah River wetlands which are listed in the Directory of Important Wetlands for SE QLD. As such, this wetland vegetation has the highest ecological value of all the wetlands identified within 100m of the SCUH site. No frog species were heard calling from these forested wetland areas during the frog survey. However a number of Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog Litoria fallax, were heard calling from the extension an open waterbody that appears to connect underneath Kawana Way to the southern wetland. It is likely that this forested wetland community provides ephemeral breeding habitat during periods of high rainfall that would be suitable for the threatened Acid Frog species. P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 17
Plate 6. Forested wetlands to the west P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 18
4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT
4.1 POTENTIAL IMPACTS
As detailed in Section 3.2, the eastern portion of the site does support some areas of very low-
quality, ephemeral wetland habitat. The SCUH project will have direct impact on these areas in the
form of removal of wetland habitat during the bulk earthworks proposed for the site. However, it is
not considered that the removal of these areas will represent a tangible loss of wetland values in
the locality.
The potential does exist for the SCUH project to have an impact on the values and functions of
wetlands with high ecological value identified within 100m of the site, namely the southern wetland
and forested wetlands to the west, as well as Lake Kawana to the east. The main risks to these
wetlands and their values are through indirect impacts associated with the construction,
establishment and operation of the SCUH.
Based on the construction timeframes and end use of the site, the impacts to wetland values and
functions that have been identified as most relevant to the SCUH project are:
• decline in water quality;
• decline in physical integrity of wetlands;
• decline in groundwater quality;
• light pollution;
• introduction of weeds.
The relevance of each of these potential impacts to the SCUH development is discussed briefly
below.
Decline in water quality
Poor urban stormwater quality contributes to significant water quality decline within receiving
waterbodies. Without improved management, urban development is likely to lead to increased
stormwater pollutant loads of sediment, nitrogen and phosphorus (DERM 2010). While there are
many potential causes of water contamination, high concentrations of pollutants in stormwater are
often from sediment from land development sites. Furthermore, more than 85 per cent of sediment
that leaves an urban development site does so during the construction phase.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 19There are a number of potential sources of water quality decline associated with the SCUH project,
including:
• movement of sediment from the site during construction phase;
• disturbance to Acid Sulphate Soils (ASS) during the construction phase of the
development;
• movement of sediment and other contaminants during the establishment and operational
phase of the development; and
• litter and other gross pollutants throughout the project life.
Decline of physical integrity of wetlands
Development of the SCUH will result in changes to the physical aspects of the site such as
landform grading and levels, extent of impervious areas and the manner in which runoff is
conveyed from the site (i.e. through constructed drainage systems).
Consequences of physical changes to a development site may result in damage to the beds and
banks of receiving waterbodies such as Lake Kawana, through increased flood volumes, peak
discharges and velocities (DERM 2010).
Groundwater quality
Preliminary investigations have indicated that groundwater is present at depths of between 1.1m
and 3.3m across the site (Project Services 2008). During construction it may be necessary to
dewater or permanently lower the site’s water table. Dewatering impacts include oxidising
conditions leading to the contamination of groundwater and the percolation of surface water
through ASS soils into aquifers (Project Services 2008).
Light pollution
The SCUH will result in the establishment of permanent buildings, walkways and internal roads
that will require adequate lighting. Artificial lighting has the potential to alter the quality and
useability of adjoining wetland habitats through (Rich & Longcore 2006):
• interrupting of animal behaviour (e.g. attraction or avoidance to the light);
• exposure to increased levels of predation risks of nocturnal native species;
• increased disorientation, potentially resulting in harm and or death associated with impact
with structures; and
• alteration in location and availability of insects as food resources (i.e. lights attract insects.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 20Generally the species most likely to be impacted by artificial lights are mammals and migrating
birds. Of most concern are the nocturnal mammal species which forage and move about mostly
during the night, which is generally devoid of bright or focused light sources, especially sources
low to the ground. Species which rely on concealment to reduce predation risk during nocturnal
foraging can be severely affected by artificial lighting (Rich & Longcore 2006). Extra lighting is
known to benefit some bats, as the increased lighting attracts insects (Outen 2003). Attraction of
insects to artificial light sources has in some cases increased bat activity due to increased prey
numbers. While this may not necessarily have a negative impact on bats, it should be noted that
this would be an altered behaviour. Opportunity for owls which prey on bats may also be
increased.
Night-length can be very important for birds, as it can determine the onset of the breeding season
and migration. Artificial lighting can induce hormonal, physiological and behavioural changes that
initiate breeding in birds (Farner 1964; Lofts and Merton 1968). There is little evidence of direct
light attraction or repulsion in reptiles, although geckos will feed on insects attracted by light. Some
frogs avoid light while others are attracted to light. This is generally an issue where amphibians sit
under street lamps and become traffic victims (Outen 2003).
Introduction of weeds
Introduced plants and weeds have the potential to degrade wetland ecosystems through
outcompeting native vegetation and reducing habitat quality for native fauna. The SCUH has the
potential to introduce weed species into adjacent wetlands through:
• propagules being carried on vehicles and shoes;
• use of inappropriate, invasive species in landscaping; and
• inappropriate disposal of green waste.
4.2 LIKELIHOOD OF INDIRECT IMPACTS
Not all of the potential adverse indirect impacts listed above are likely to occur at uniform
magnitude on a spatial and temporal scale. The potential for an impact to occur will be partially
dependent on the proximity of the wetland to the impact source as well as the site drainage during
each phase of development. By example, as the stormwater management system proposed for the
site will direct the majority of treated runoff into Lake Kawana, this waterbody will be most
vulnerable to a decline in water quality. Table 1 below, provides an assessment of the likelihood of
impacts associated with the SCUH development
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 21Table 1. Likelihood of potential impacts relative to each adjacent wetland.
Wetland
Potential Impact
Decline in physical
Decline in water quality Groundwater quality Light Weeds
integrity
Within dispersal
Will be the main receiving Will be the main receiving Will be the main receiving Adequate setback to
Lake Kawana distance of impact
waterbody for site runoff waterbody for site runoff waterbody for site runoff impact source
source
Within dispersal
Will receive some runoff Will receive some runoff Will receive some runoff Adequate setback to
Southern Wetland distance of impact
from site from site from site impact source
source
Within dispersal
Will receive minimal Will receive minimal runoff Will receive minimal runoff Adequate setback to
Western Wetland distance of impact
runoff from site from site from site impact source
source
High Moderate Low
225. MANAGEMENT OF IMPACTS
The overall objective of this WMP is to manage in situ sources of potential impacts in a manner
that minimises their potential to degrade the values and functions of adjoining wetland
ecosystems. The specific objectives of this WMP are to:
• address direct impacts associated with the SCUH development;
• identify potential sources for indirect impacts on wetland values associated with each stage
of the SCUH development;
• identify the primary means of managing indirect impacts on wetland values; and
• provide a monitoring program designed to gauge the success of proposed management
measures on wetland values and functions.
Education and communication regarding of the purpose and intent of this WMP is critical to the
success of the SCUH project minimising impacts on wetland values and functions. As such, the
following steps have been taken to ensure that the entire project team becomes familiar with the
WMP.
• The project specific induction includes information regarding the existence of the WMP and
the importance of protecting local wetland ecosystems.
• The Environment, Health and Safety Plan (EHS Plan) prepared for the project includes
wetland protection measures with reference to the WMP.
• The Project Ecologist has been involved in key meetings with the broader Project Team
and has been provided opportunity to inform the scope of works associated with the
preparation of each element specific management plan.
5.1 DIRECT IMPACT MANAGEMENT
The construction of the SCUH project will result in the unavoidable removal of degraded,
ephemeral wetland habitat within the eastern portion of the site. The greatest impact of the
removal of these wetland areas will be on the resident frog populations. It should be noted that
some compensatory habitat will be provided through the inclusion of vegetated swales during the
operational phase of development. In order to reduce impacts on these frog populations
recommendations have been provided in the Targeted Survey for Acid Frogs Report (Biosis 2012).
The salient points of these recommendations are:
• exclusion barriers will be installed prior to construction to reduce the movement of frog
species into the SCUH site;
• a relocation program will be undertaken prior to construction to remove as many of the
resident frogs from the SCUH site as possible;
23• the site shall be monitored for presence/absence of frog species for the duration of the
construction phase; and
• the Project Ecologist shall be involved in the plant species selection for vegetated WSUD
features included the SCUH's operational phase stormwater management system.
5.2 INDIRECT IMPACT MANAGEMENT
The management of the potential indirect impacts associated with the SCUH project will essentially
be managed through the project's EHS Plan and associated subset of element specific
management plans. This subset of element specific management plans will be prepared by
appropriately qualified professionals in accordance with best practice and legislative requirements
and as such, provide sound and rigorous means for managing potential indirect impacts on
adjacent wetlands. The following plans have been prepared for the project:
• Site Based Stormwater Management Plan (SBSMP);
• Groundwater Management Plan (GMP);
• Acid Sulphate Soils Management Plan (ASSMP);
• Environmental Management Plan (EMP); and
• Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP).
The potential sources of indirect impacts associated with the SCUH and corresponding proposed
management measures are detailed in Table 2 below.
It is not the intention of this WMP to provide a separate set of management measures relating to
each of the identified indirect impacts. Rather, it is intended that this WMP will:
• operate concurrently and be informed by each element specific management plan;
• provide a framework for assessing ecological impacts associated with the results of the
monitoring programs associated with each specific element management plan; and
• conduct a specific monitoring program aimed at assessing ecological impacts associated
with SCUH project.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 24Table 2. Potential impacts and element specific management plans for each phase of the SCUH development
Environment Management Measure
Impacts to wetland values
Construction Phase Establishment Phase Operation
Decline in water quality –
movement of sediment, contaminants and • Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Environmental Management
gross pollutants (including litter and • Environmental Management Plan • Environmental Management Plan Plan
hazardous substances)
Decline in physical integrity of wetland – • Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Stormwater Management Plan
concentration of flows, high flow rates at • Stormwater Management Plan • Stormwater Management Plan • Environmental Management
discharge points • Environmental Management Plan • Environmental Management Plan Plan
• Groundwater Management Plan
• Groundwater Management Plan • Environmental Management
Groundwater quality – • Acid Sulphate Soil Management
• Environmental Management Plan Plan
groundwater drawdown, acidification, Plan
• Environmental Management Plan
• Environmental Management Plan
• Environmental Management Plan
• Design – implementation of fauna • Environmental Management
Light Pollution • Inclusion of fauna-friendly lighting friendly lighting measures Plan
measures
• Environmental Management Plan
• Environmental Management
Weed Invasion • Environmental Management Plan • Landscape Plan – use of Plan
appropriate species
Notes:
• The management plans included in Table 2 have been prepared and will be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the overarching EHS Plan.
• Involvement of the Project Ecologist during the design phase will be critical in managing light pollution and weed invasion during all stages of the development.
• Recommendations for reducing light impacts on fauna are provided in Appendix F.
256. MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE
A number of element specific management plans have been prepared and include their own
individual monitoring programs, as such this WMP will provide a framework for monitoring the
success of these plans in minimising and managing indirect impacts on adjoining wetlands. The
monitoring program will consist of the following three elements:
• review and interpretation of element specific management plans;
• site audits and targeted surveys; and
• visual assessment of adjoining wetland habitat values.
Delivery of the monitoring program provided herein will be responsibility of the Project Ecologist.
6.1 REVIEW OF ELEMENT SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS
Minimisation of indirect impacts on adjoining wetlands will be strongly tied to the effectiveness of
the various specific management plans that are to be prepared. It is therefore essential that the
implementation of these plans is monitored and interpreted in terms of potential impacts on
wetland values and assessments. This will be achieved via the following.
• The Project Ecologist will work closely with the Project Environmental Consultant
throughout the life of element specific management plans and/or this WMP.
• The Project Ecologist and Project Environmental Consultant shall develop appropriate
trigger points in for the implementation of corrective actions in relation to environmental
being monitored and managed within the SCUH site.
• The Project Ecologist shall have access to all data collected during monitoring events
specified within each of the element specific management plans.
Where monitoring data indicate there is the potential for the project to have an adverse impact on
adjoining wetlands, the Project Ecologist shall work with the Project Environmental Consultant to
develop appropriate corrective actions.
6.2 SITE AUDITS AND TARGETED SURVEYS
The Project Ecologist shall conduct audits and targeted surveys across the site during the all
phases of development in order to:
• to ensure that the management plans have been implemented and management measures
are being maintained and monitored in accordance with the plans;
26• assess whether frog and other fauna species are moving into and utilising the site;
• assess whether lighting is having an influence on local fauna populations and their
behavior; and
• identify any source populations of weed species within the site.
Where adverse ecological impacts are recorded on site (e.g. frogs recorded within the site), the
Project Ecologist shall work with the broader project team to develop and implement appropriate
corrective actions.
A preliminary site inspection check list has been prepared and is provided as Appendix G.
6.3 VISUAL ASSESSMENT OF ADJOINING WETLAND VALUES
Impacts on wetland values and functions adjacent to the SCHU site will also be assessed through
visually monitoring changes in the physical attributes of adjoining wetlands over time. Baseline
studies will focus on assessing the following attributes:
• integrity of beds and banks of the wetland;
• cover and condition of wetland vegetation;
• location and extent of weed infestations; and
• visual signs of water contamination – i.e. oil and grease, litter, evidence of ASS leachate
Where adverse changes in any of the above attributes are detected the Project Ecologist shall take
photos and work closely with the Project Environmental Consultant to determine whether the
observed change has occurred in response to construction, establishment or operational activities
occurring within the SCUH site and appropriate corrective actions.
A preliminary wetland visual checklist has been prepared and is provided as Appendix H.
6.4 MONITORING PROGRAM
The monitoring program will occur for the life of this WMP as detailed in Table 4. At each
monitoring event a report will be compiled and issued to the GBCA for review and approval.
Monitoring reports shall also be posted on the project website.
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 27Table 4. Proposed monitoring schedule and responsible parties.
Minimum Monitoring /Reporting Frequency
Responsible
Element
Party Construction Establishment Operation*
2012-2014 2014-2016 2016 -
• Monthly
• Monthly
• After significant
Surface Water Environmental • After significant rainfall To be specified
rainfall event (as in Operational
Quality Consultant event (as defined
defined within the EMP
within the EHS Plan
EHS Plan and
and SBSMP)
SBSMP)
• Monthly
• Monthly
• After significant
• After significant rain To be specified
Ground Water Environmental rain events After
events After significant in Operational
Quality Consultant significant rainfall
rainfall event (as EMP
event (as defined
defined within the EHS
within the EHS
Plan and GMP)
Plan and GMP)
Acid Sulphate Geotechnical
As specified in ASSMP As specified in ASSMP N/A
Soils Engineer
Wetland Management
Review and • Quarterly • 6 monthly
interpretation of Annual
specific element Project Ecologist • After any • After any
management environmental environmental
plans incidents incidents
• Quarterly
Site audits and
Project Ecologist • After wetland fauna • 6 monthly Annual
targeted surveys sightings within the
site
Visual • Quarterly • 6 monthly
assessment of
Project Ecologist • After any • After any Annual
adjoining wetland environmental environmental
values incidents incidents
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 287. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT An adaptive management approach is to be employed in respect of the works forming part of this WMP. An adaptive management approach involves an integrated process of monitoring, reviewing and then responding to the health and condition of the adjacent wetlands to identify any alterations to the design and maintenance of works that may be required to ensure the objectives of this WMP are achieved. For example, the monitoring program should be flexible and respond to the on-ground issues that are experienced during each phase of development. As such, if additional monitoring is required than appropriate steps shall be undertaken to modify the monitoring program so as to ensure that it addresses relevant issues within appropriate time-frames. It is important to note that any changes should comply with the objectives of this WMP and any licensing or approval conditions. Negotiation with relevant stakeholders will be undertaken should a deviation from the specifications of this WMP be required. An Adaptive Management Statement (or similar) will be prepared and signed by all parties prior to implementation of any adaptive management actions. P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 29
8. REFERENCES Biosis Pty Ltd (2012) Targeted Surveys for Acid Frogs. Report to Lend Lease. Department of Environment and Resource Management 2010. Urban Stormwater Quality Planning Guidelines. Farner DS 1964. The photoperiodic control of reproductive cycles in birds. American Science 52, 137-156. Lofts C, Merton D 1968. Photoperiodic and physiological adaptations regulating avian breeding cycles and their ecological significance. Journal of the Zoological Society of London 155, 327- 394. Outen AR 2003. The ecological effects of road lighting. In 'Wildlife and Roads: The Ecological Impact'. (Eds B Sherwood, D Cutler, and J Burton) pp. 133-155. (Imperial College Press: London). Project Services 2008. Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Proposed Ministerial Designation Birtinya, Sunshine Coast Lot 5 SP201545. Queensland Government Department of Public Works. Rich, C & Longcore, T. 2006. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Introduction. Island Press, Washington. P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 30
FIGURES
FIGURE 1 – LOCALITY PLAN
FIGURE 2 – WETLAND VALUES WITHIN 100M OF THE SITE
P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Plan\Report\Wetland Management Plan\14780.SCUH Wetland
Management Plan.FINAL.081112.docx 31Weipa
Burketown
w ay
to r
Mo Mackay
ne
s hi
Sun
Brisbane
Ballina
Nicklin Way
d
ba Roa
r a Mooloola
lou n d
Ca
Bud
erim
St
re
et
et
Ca
y Stre
lou
nd
ra
Roa d
Cooro
Legend
Caloundra
SCUH Site
Acknowledgement: State of Queensland (2010)
Figure 1: Location of the SCUH Site - Coloundra,
Queensland 0 400 800 1,200 1,600
Biosis Pty Ltd Matter: 14780 Metres
Ballarat, Brisbane, Canberra, Melbourne, Date: 26 October 2012, Checked By: , Drawn By: jshepherd
Sydney, Wangarratta & Wollongong Location: P:\14700s\14780 - SCUH Wetland Management Scale 1:40,000 @ A4, GDA 1994 MGA Zone 55Legend
100m Buffer
12.3.5/12.3.1 ay
W SCHU Site
a
an
w
Ka Cadastre
Roundabout
Vegetation Management Act
Vegetation Management Act
Essential Habitat
Remnant vegetation containing
endangered regional
ecosystems
12.3.5/12.3.1 Remnant vegetation containing
of concern regional ecosystems
La
ke Remnant vegetation that is a
Ka
wa least concern reginoal
na
Bo ecosystem
ul
ev
a rd
12.3.5/12.3.1 Note: Regional ecosystem linework reproduced
at a scale greater than 1:100,000, except in
designated areas, should be used as a guide
only. The positional accuracy of Regional
Ecosystem (RE) data mapped at a scale of
12.3.1 1:100,000 is +/-100 metres. The map scale of
1:50,000 applies to part of Southeastern
Queensland and map amendments areas.
12.3.5/12.3.1
ay
na W
Kaw a
12.3.2
Figure 2: Wetland values
within 100m of the SCUH
Site
12.3.5/12.3.1 0 50 100 150 200 250
Metres
Scale: 1:5,000 @ A3
Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 56
Biosis Pty Ltd
Ballarat, Brisbane, Canberra, Melbourne,
Sydney,Wangaratta & Wollongong
Acknowledgements: Topo (c) State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2010 M a tter: 14780
Veg (c) tate of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2012 Da te: 26 O ctob er 20 12,
Ch eck ed b y: , D ra w n by: js hep herd
Imagery (c) Nearmap 2012 Location :P:\14700s\1 4780 - SC U H Wetlan d M an a gem ent P lan \M a pp in g\
14780_F2_VegYou can also read
