Council archive · source document
Appendix 6 - Ground Water Response · MCU19/0117
Attached to the e-mail MCU19/0117 - Response to Information Request - Visitor Accommodation Type 3 – Rural (Guest House and Private Lagoon).
Groundwater Dependant Ecology Preliminary Impact Assessment v1 NCES REF: J000538 90 Beach Road, Noosa North Shore 4 ANTICIPATED WAVE POOL DISCHARGE IMPACTS No information has been provided to NCES regarding the proposed water quality of the overflow waters to be discharged from the wave pool holding tanks. It is unknown whether the wave pool will host natural freshwater or whether it will host ionised water from salt or chlorine additives. The TOD Water Management Plan presented with the application proposes that the discharge waters will be treated to remove either salt or chlorine additives but offers no further details regarding treatment methods and final water chemistry. To avoid potential impact to the underlying groundwater and adjacent NP groundwater dependant ecosystems, it will be imperative that the discharge waters are treated to a standard which replicates natural rainfall water chemistry, or very close to same (i.e. freshwater). It is envisaged the wave pool water will need to meet the QLD Water Quality Guidelines and or ANZECC Water Quality Guidelines for recreational use for freshwater lakes hence will be of a reasonable freshwater quality standard. Nonetheless the waters may require a degree of treatment to control bacterial and fungal contaminants and this is normally achieved in pools via chlorine or salt dosing. Aerators are typically employed in freshwater lakes and lagoons to maintain suitable dissolved oxygen levels hence limit algal blooms and water quality deterioration. Sustained release of salinized (from salt or chlorine additives) discharge water would represent potential to influence local water chemistry which in turn may impact the composition and abundance of local groundwater organisms as well as floras dependent upon the groundwater. Given the sandy soils beneath the site the release of salinized discharge water may bear little influence on the underlying upper soil structure itself but may impact the deeper underlying sandy clay horizon from approximately 1.6m depth. The proposed overflow dispersal method of direct soil infiltration from the holding tanks would be expected to result in negligible surface run-off and upper soil profile through flow toward the wetland given the inherently high permeability of the in-situ sandy soils present on Lot 500. Direct vertical infiltration would be expected until approximately 1.6m depth upon interception of the sandy clay horizon. The overflow infiltration may then be expected to be redirected down slope toward the wetland as a source of groundwater recharge, as a result of the influence of the underlying sandy clay horizon. Given the prevalence of dry open forest floristics (i.e. RE 12.9-10.4 – refer Section 3.4.1) in the far east of Lot 500 it can be inferred that the semi-impermeable layer at 1.6m depth is of insufficient influence to foster the development of an overlying GDE. Consequently, the wave pool over flow discharge would not be expected to significantly influence the existing dry open forest floristics within Lot 500 on its migratory pathway toward the underlying groundwater table. Assuming the discharge water quality reflects natural rainfall water chemistry, or very close to it, then the only perceivable impact to the adjacent groundwater dependant ecosystem would relate to an increase in groundwater recharge volume on the fringe of the NP interface with the site. The mostly likely case where such recharge may influence the overlaying vegetation would be where a localised concentrated plume of throughflow intercepts the underlying groundwater table on the fringe of the NP and subsequently raises the groundwater level beneath the vegetation for a temporary period of time. Over time such impacts may influence the floristic composition of the overlying vegetation, facilitating habitat conditions suited to more moisture tolerant species (i.e. wet heath as compared to dry heath). Given the sheer size of the local alluvial plain hence high capacity for through flow / recharge dissipation across a broad groundwater table, and the in-situ wetland flora’s evolution in association with a naturally fluctuating groundwater table over thousands of years, it is considered unlikely that the minor number of overflow discharge days proposed in combination with the volumes proposed, would tangibly influence the sustainability of the existing groundwater dependant ecosystem and its constituents in the adjacent NP. 9 2020
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalUsed in these records
Appendix 6 - Ground Water Response.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 7.2 MB (large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.