Enclosure 3b- CMD SPP Module 10

Response column key:
	Achieved
P/S	Performance solution
N/A	Not applicable

Response column key:
	Achieved
P/S	Performance solution
N/A	Not applicable
10.1	Tidal works, or development in the coastal management district state code
The following table provides an assessment of how the proposal meets the performance outcomes of the Relevant State Planning Policy Modules

Table 10.1.1: All development
Performance outcomes	Acceptable outcomes	Response	Comment
PO1 Development in a coastal hazard area is compatible with the level of severity of the coastal hazard.	AO1.1 Development is located outside a high coastal hazard area unless it is: coastal-dependent development, or compatible with inundation due to its nature or function, or temporary, readily relocatable, or able to be abandoned, or essential community service infrastructure, or small- to-medium scale tourist development, or redevelopment within an existing built-up urban area, or is redevelopment of built structures that cannot be relocated or abandoned. And		The proposal is for installation of Oyster Reef Restoration Units to facilitate natural restoration of oyster reefs which depend on particular coastal processes to function. The Oyster Reef Restoration Units have been designed and certified by a coastal Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland to be compatible with inundation due to its nature or function.
	AO1.2 Development referred to in AO1.1(6) avoids being located within a high coastal hazard area, or where this is not practicable, minimises the exposure of people and permanent structures to coastal hazard impacts.		na
PO2 Development siting, layout and access in a coastal hazard area responds to potential inundation due to a defined storm tide event and minimises associated risks to personal safety and property.	AO2.1 Development within a coastal hazard area is located, designed, constructed and operated to maintain or enhance the community’s resilience to a defined storm tide event by limiting the exposure of people and structures to associated impacts. And		The location and design of the Oyster Reef Restoration Units has been certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland to meet all relevant aspects of Schedule 4A of the Coastal Protection and Management Act for safety. This included ensuring that the structures will not dislodge and affect stormwater outlets. For the purpose of the applicant not wasting money on structures that will wash away, the RPEQ was also engaged to check the location and design of the Oyster Reef Restoration Units will not dislodge in up to 50year peak flood velocity events, which is consistent with the requirements of Schedule 4A of the Coastal Protection and Management Act..
	AO2.2 Development mitigates any residual impacts from storm tide inundation in a coastal hazard area including by ensuring: habitable rooms of built structures are located above the defined storm tide event level and any additional freeboard level that would ordinarily apply in a flood prone area under a relevant planning scheme standard, or a safe refuge is available for people within the premises during a defined storm tide event, or at least one evacuation route remains passable for emergency evacuations during a defined storm tide event, including consideration of the capacity of the route to support the evacuation of the entire local population within a reasonably short timeframe (for example, 12 hours). And		na
	AO2.3 Development within a coastal hazard area is located, designed and constructed to ensure exposed structures can sustain flooding from a defined storm tide event. And		The location and design of the Oyster Reef Restoration Units has been certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland to meet all relevant aspects of Schedule 4A of the Coastal Protection and Management Act for safety and resilience in a coastal environment. This included ensuring that the structures will not dislodge and affect stormwater outlets. For the purpose of the applicant not wasting money on structures that will wash away, the RPEQ was also engaged to checked the location and design of Oyster Reef Restoration Units will not dislodge in up to 50year peak flood velocity events.
	AO2.4 Essential community service infrastructure is: located so that it is not inundated by a recommended storm tide event specified for that infrastructure, or located and designed to ensure any components of the infrastructure that are likely to fail to function or may result in contamination when inundated by a storm tide (for example, electrical switch gear and motors, water supply pipeline air valves) are: located above the peak water level for a recommended storm tide event, or designed and constructed to exclude storm tide intrusions or infiltration (including by being located in the ground), or able to temporarily stop functioning during a recommended storm tide event without causing significant adverse impacts to the infrastructure or the community. And		na
	AO2.5 Emergency services infrastructure and emergency shelters, police facilities, and hospitals and associated facilities have an emergency rescue area above the peak water level for a recommended storm tide event.		na
PO3 Development directly, indirectly and cumulatively avoids an unacceptable increase in the severity of the coastal hazard, and does not significantly increase the potential for damage on the premises or to other premises.	AO3.1 Development avoids increasing the number of premises from which people would need to be evacuated to prevent death or injury from a defined storm tide event.		The proposal does not increase number of premises that people would need to be evacuated from. The location and design of the Oyster Reef Restoration Units has been certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland to meet all relevant aspects of Schedule 4A of the Coastal Protection and Management Act for safety. This included ensuring that the structures will not dislodge and affect stormwater outlets. For the purpose of the applicant not wasting money on structures that will wash away, the RPEQ was also engaged to check the location and design of Oyster Reef Restoration Units will not dislodge in up to 50year peak flood velocity events.
PO4 Development avoids the release of hazardous materials as a result of a natural hazard event. Editor’s note: Applications should: assess the risk of storm tide inundation releasing or otherwise exposing hazardous materials, including appropriate emergency planning and contingency measures. applications are to be supported by a report certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ) that demonstrates this performance outcome will be achieved.	AO4.1 Development that involves the manufacture or storage of hazardous materials in bulk are designed to: prevent the intrusion of waters from a defined storm tide event into structures or facilities containing the hazardous materials, or ensure hazardous materials remain secured despite inundation, including secure from the effects of hydrodynamic forcing associated with wave action or flowing water.		na
PO5 Natural processes and the protective function of landforms and vegetation are maintained in coastal hazard areas.	AO5.1 Development in an erosion prone area within the coastal management district: maintains vegetation on coastal landforms where its removal or damage may: destabilise the area and increase the potential for erosion, or interrupt natural sediment trapping processes or dune or land building processes maintains sediment volumes of dunes and near-shore coastal landforms, or where a reduction in sediment volumes cannot be avoided, increased risks to development from coastal erosion are mitigated by location, design, construction and operating standards minimises the need for erosion control structures or riverbank hardening through location, design and construction standards maintains physical coastal processes outside the development footprint for the development, including longshore transport of sediment along the coast reduces the risk of shoreline erosion for areas adjacent to the development footprint unless the development is an erosion control structure reduces the risk of shoreline erosion for areas adjacent to the development footprint to the maximum extent feasible in the case of erosion control structures. And		The proposal is to restore Oyster Reef Restoration Units to restore natural oyster recruitment processes in the Noosa River. There is potential for localised restoratoion of natural sand movement processes around the reefs as a result. An RPEQ has been engaged to check that that that impacts from and to coastal processes within the Noosa System are acceptable. This excerpt of the RPEQ response Schedule 4A of the Coastal Protection Act is relevant to this PO5: “Similar units have historically been utilised to provide protection to areas subject to wave erosion. As such, these units may result in accretion of the adjacent foreshore although it is expected that tidal and flood flows are dominant in most locations. No modelling has been undertaken, however it is expected that impacts would be relatively low given the location close to the bank and the relatively small footprint of the works. The units are angled to the peak flood velocity to reduce impacts and oriented to deflect ebb tide and peak flood flows toward the channel (rather than toward the bank) to avoid concentrating flows which might result in erosion of the riverbank. Localised build-up & scour is expected however the proposed works are flexible and able to accommodate minor changes. The majority of the sites appear relatively stable with no sand ripples although aerial photography indicates that they can be subject to change. Significant sedimentation to the point of burial is not expected. Sites 9 & 10 could potentially experience the greatest changes, particularly in the event of re-opening of the channel along the western bank.(i.e. This sentence from the RPEQ does not infer that sites 9 and 10 would impact the western bank, rather that sites 9 & 10 could be affected by other works to open the western bank..) The works incorporate quarterly monitoring for the first 3 years and if any erosion or excessive accretion are observed these can be evaluated and the Oyster Reef Restoration Units are required by the conditions of the Resource Allocation Authority to can be modified, or removed if necessary. “
	AO5.2 Development in a storm tide inundation area is located, designed, constructed and operated to: maintain dune crest heights, or where a reduction in crest heights cannot be avoided, mitigate risks to development from wave overtopping and storm tide inundation maintain or enhance coastal ecosystems and natural features, such as mangroves and coastal wetlands, between the development and tidal waters, where the coastal ecosystems and natural features protect or buffer communities and infrastructure from sea-level rise and impacts from storm tide inundation. And		The proposal is restoring a degraded coastal ecosystem feature by facilitating natural recovery processes therefore enhancing the estuary’s natural ecosystem processes.
	AO5.3 Redevelopment of built structures in the erosion prone area within a coastal management district: avoids intensifying the use of the premises, or demonstrates that any intensification of use will not result in an increase in the need for erosion control structures or riverbank hardening. And		na
	AO5.4 Development that is coastal protection work involves, in order of priority: beach nourishment undertaken in accordance with a program of beach nourishment works that source sediment of a suitable quality and type from outside the active beach system, or the construction of an erosion control structure, where it is demonstrated that installing an erosion control structure is the only feasible option for protecting permanent structures from coastal erosion and those structures cannot be abandoned or relocated in the event of coastal erosion occurring. Editor’s note: Applications for coastal protection work should be supported by a report certified by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ) that demonstrates how the engineering solution sought by the work will be achieved. Editor’s note: Applications for erosion control structures should demonstrate the consideration of beach nourishment techniques, and include a statement of why nourishment (in whole or part) has not been adopted as the preferred means of controlling the erosion risk. And		na
	AO5.5 Development involving reclamation: does not alter, or otherwise minimises impacts on, the physical characteristics of a waterway or the seabed near the reclamation, including flow regimes, hydrodynamic forces, tidal water and riverbank stability is located outside the active sediment transport area, or otherwise maintains sediment transport processes as close as possible to their natural state ensures activities associated with the operation of the development maintain the structure and condition of vegetation communities and avoid wind and water run-off erosion. Editor’s note: Applications for reclamation should be supported by a report certified by an RPEQ that demonstrates how the engineering solutions sought by the work will be achieved		This application does not involve reclamation. This excerpt of the RPEQ response Schedule 4A of the Coastal Protection and Management Act describes how the intent of AO5.5 is achieved: “Similar units have historically been utilised to provide protection to areas subject to wave erosion. As such, these units may result in accretion of the adjacent foreshore although it is expected that tidal and flood flows are dominant in most locations. No modelling has been undertaken, however it is expected that impacts would be relatively low given the location close to the bank and the relatively small footprint of the works. The units are angled to the peak flood velocity to reduce impacts and oriented to deflect ebb tide and peak flood flows toward the channel (rather than toward the bank) to avoid concentrating flows which might result in erosion of the riverbank. Localised build-up & scour is expected however the proposed works are flexible and able to accommodate minor changes. The majority of the sites appear relatively stable with no sand ripples although aerial photography indicates that they can be subject to change. Significant sedimentation to the point of burial is not expected. Sites 9 & 10 could potentially experience the greatest changes, particularly in the event of re-opening of the channel along the western bank. The works incorporate quarterly monitoring for the first 3 years and if any erosion or excessive accretion are observed these can be evaluated and the Oyster Reef Restoration Units can be modified, relocated or removed if necessary. “
PO6 Erosion prone areas in a coastal management district are maintained as development free buffers, or where permanent buildings or structures exist, coastal erosion risks are avoided or mitigated.	AO6.1 Development locates built structures outside the part of the coastal management district that is the erosion prone area unless the development is listed under AO1.1 (1) – (4). And		The intent of the objective for PO6 is to avoid or mitigate coastal erosion risks. The proposal is to restore Oyster Reef Restoration Units that naturally occur historically in the Noosa River system, therefore restoration does not increase the coastal erosion risk beyond what should naturally occur in the system. Additionally, the RPEQ has stated the below in their response to Schedule 4Aof the Coastal Protection and Management Act which demonstrates that any risks can be suitably mitigated: “Similar units have historically been utilised to provide protection to areas subject to wave erosion. As such, these units may result in accretion of the adjacent foreshore although it is expected that tidal and flood flows are dominant in most locations. No modelling has been undertaken, however it is expected that impacts would be relatively low given the location close to the bank and the relatively small footprint of the works. The units are angled to the peak flood velocity to reduce impacts and oriented to deflect ebb tide and peak flood flows toward the channel (rather than toward the bank) to avoid concentrating flows which might result in erosion of the riverbank. Localised build-up & scour is expected however the proposed works are flexible and able to accommodate minor changes. The majority of the sites appear relatively stable with no sand ripples although aerial photography indicates that they can be subject to change. Significant sedimentation to the point of burial is not expected. Sites 9 & 10 could potentially experience the greatest changes, particularly in the event of re-opening of the channel along the western bank.(i.e. This sentence from the RPEQ does not infer that sites 9 and 10 would impact the western bank, rather that sites 9 & 10 could be affected by other works to open the western bank..) The works incorporate quarterly monitoring for the first 3 years and if any erosion or excessive accretion are observed these can be evaluated.” Additionally,the Oyster Reef Restoration Units are required by the conditions of the Resource Allocation Authority to can be modified, or removed if defined performance objectives that include impacts on  surrounding environments are detected. “
	AO6.2 Small to medium scale tourist development is located outside the erosion prone area unless it is redevelopment. And		
	AO6.3 Coastal-dependent development: locates, designs and constructs relevant buildings or structures to withstand coastal erosion impacts, including by use of appropriate foundations, or installs and maintains coastal protection works to mitigate adverse impacts to people and permanent structures from coastal erosion at the location. And		
	AO6.4 Development that is temporary, readily relocatable or able to be abandoned, or essential community service infrastructure: locates built structures landward of an applicable coastal building line, or where there is no coastal building line, locates habitable built structures landward of the alignment of adjacent habitable buildings, or locates lifesaver towers or beach access infrastructure to minimise its impacts on physical coastal processes, or where it is demonstrated that (1) or (2) is not reasonable and (3) does not apply: locates built structures as far landward as practicable uses layout design to minimise the footprint of the development that remains within the erosion prone area. And		
	AO6.5 Redevelopment of existing built structures not referred to in AO6.4, and excluding marine development: relocates built structures outside that part of the erosion prone area that is within the coastal management district, or relocates built structures as far landward as practicable, and landward of an applicable coastal building line, or where there is no coastal building line: relocates built structures landward of the alignment of adjacent habitable buildings, or uses layout design to minimise the footprint of the development that remains within the erosion prone area, or provides sufficient space seaward of the development within the premises to allow for the construction of erosion control structures. And		
	AO6.6 Redevelopment of built structures in the erosion prone area within a coastal management district, which results in an intensification of use, mitigates the erosion threat to the development, having regard to: design and construction standards installing and maintaining on-site erosion control structures within the premises if the development is not intended to be temporary.		
PO7 Development avoids or minimises adverse impacts on coastal resources and their values, to the maximum extent reasonable.	AO7.1 Coastal protection work that is in the form of beach nourishment uses methods of placement suitable for the location that do not interfere with the long-term use of the locality of, or natural values within or neighbouring, the proposed placement site. And		na
	AO7.2 Marine development is located and designed to expand on or redevelop existing marine infrastructure unless it is demonstrated that it is not practicable to co-locate the development with existing marine infrastructure. And		na
	AO7.3 Marine development: relies on a natural channel of a depth adequate for the intended vessels, or where there are no feasible alternative locations for the facility in the local area that do not require dredging for navigation channel purposes, development is located, designed and operated to minimise the need for capital and maintenance dredging for navigation channel purposes. And		na
	AO7.4 Development minimises dredging or the disposal of material in coastal waters during key biological events (such as fish aggregations or spawning) for species found in the area. And		The development will not involve dredging, but will be installed as per conditions applied by Fisheries to manage impacts on fisheries.
	AO7.5 Measures are to be incorporated as part of siting and design of the development to protect and retain identified ecological values and underlying ecosystem processes within or adjacent to the development site to the greatest extent practicable. This includes: maintaining or restoring vegetated buffers between development and coastal waters to the extent practicable, unless the development is within ports or airports, or is marine development maintaining or enhancing the connectivity of ecosystems in consideration of the cumulative effect of the development in addition to existing developed areas retaining coastal wetlands, seagrass beds and other locally important feeding, nesting or breeding sites for native wildlife. And		The Oyster Reef Restoration Units are proposed to be located in areas that have sandy substrate only and so will not impact seagrass beds. The reefs will also be located outside important feeding, nesting and breeding sites for migratory birds. It is expected that the project will enhance connectivity of the mosaic of habitats within the estuary through the restoration of a lost habitat type. We expect this will support the restoration of natural functions within the estuary.
	AO7.6 Measures are incorporated as part of siting and design of the development to maintain or enhance water quality to achieve the environmental values and water quality objectives outlined in the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009. And		Dense aggregations of shellfish including oysters, have been reported to improve water quality, stabilise sediment and increase biodiversity and productivity in the system.  They are part of several community and local government lead initiatives to improve the environmental values of the estuary as a whole.
	AO7.7 Development avoids the disturbance of acid sulphate soils, or where it is demonstrated that this is not possible, the disturbance of acid sulphate soils is carefully managed to minimise and mitigate the adverse effects of the disturbance on coastal resources.		The Oyster Reef Restoration Units will be placed on top of existing substrate with wooden stakes driven in to hold the Units in place. There will be no excavation of Acid Sulfate Soil as part of this proposal.
PO8 Coastal protection work is undertaken only as a last resort where erosion presents an imminent threat to public safety or permanent structures. Editor’s note: Applications for coastal protection work must be supported by a report certified by an RPEQ that demonstrates how the engineering solution sought by the work will be achieved.	AO8.1 Coastal protection work is only undertaken to protect existing permanent structures from imminent adverse coastal erosion impacts, and the structures cannot reasonably be relocated or abandoned. And		The purpose of the project is to assist restoration of a fish habitat type and is not considered coastal protection works.
	AO8.2 Coastal protection work to protect private structures is undertaken on private land to the maximum extent reasonable. And		not applicable
	AO8.3 Coastal protection work does not increase the coastal hazard risk for adjacent areas or properties.		not applicable
PO9 Development avoids adverse impacts on matters of state environmental significance, or where this is not reasonably possible, impacts are minimised and an environmental offset is provided for any significant residual impacts to matters of state environmental significance that are prescribed environmental matters.	AO9.1 Development: is set back from matters of state environmental significance avoids interrupting, interfering or otherwise adversely impacting underlying natural ecosystem components or processes and interactions that affect or maintain the matters of state environmental significance, such as water quality, hydrology, geomorphology and biological processes, or incorporates measures as part of its location and design to protect and retain matters of state environmental significance and underlying ecosystem processes within and adjacent to the development site to the greatest extent practicable. Editor’s note: Applications for development should identify any threatened species or their habitats, or threatened ecosystems that may be affected by the proposal. In particular, applications should identify and describe how the development avoids adverse impacts on any critical life stage ecological processes within or adjacent to the development area. And		The Oyster Reef Restoration Units are proposed in areas mapped as containing Matters of State Environmental Significance for High Ecological Value Waters (all sites) and High Ecological Significance Wetlands. The reason behind this designation is due to the presence of the Declared Fish Habitat Area. The Department of Forestry and Fisheries hold jurisdiction for management of the Declared Fish Habitat Area and have issued a resource Allocation Authority in accordance with the Fisheries Act, which confirms that the proposed activity to restore the natural processes for oyster recruitment is in fact a prescribed development purpose permitted to occur in the Declared Fish Habitat Area. The project is intended to restore the natural processes for Oyster Reefs that were historically removed from Noosa River by anthropogenic processes to re-establish. The letter from Ecological Service Professionals details the historical extent of the natural oyster reefs in Noosa River and details that the restoration project will not cause substitution of any habitat type that naturally existed there prior to human impacts.  The proposed project is designed to restore the diversity of fish habitats towards thier historical state and improve the biodiversity and productivity of the estuary (based on successful restoration of oyster reefs elsewhere in the world).  The project will therefore contribute to increasing the habitat diversity within the Declared Fish Habitat Area, thereby enhancing the value of the High Ecological Significance Waters and Wetlands in Noosa River. The Units shall be monitored quarterly for at least 3 years and are designed to be removable where adverse impacts occur. The performance outcomes to detail situations where removal will occur is detailed in the Restoration Plan provided as Enclosure 5 with this development application. This requirement for removal of the Oyster Reef Restoration Units where adverse impacts occur is also a condition of the Resource Allocation Authority issued by the Department of Forestry and Fisheries.
	AO9.2 Where impacts cannot be reasonably avoided or minimised, an environmental offset is provided for any significant residual impact on matters of state environmental significance that are prescribed environmental matters caused by the development. Editor’s note: Applications for development should identify anticipated losses, and outline what actions are proposed to be undertaken to offset the loss in accordance with the Significant Residual Impact Guideline and the relevant Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy.		The proposed development is designed to enhance the ecological value of the estuary by restoring a fish habitat type that has historically occurred in the system. The project itself is offsetting past losses of the habitat type in the Noosa River.
PO10 Development maintains or enhances general public access to or along the foreshore, unless this is contrary to the protection of coastal resources or public safety.	AO10.1	Development adjacent to state coastal land or tidal water: demonstrates that restrictions to public access are necessary for: the safe or secure operation of development, or the maintenance of coastal landforms and coastal habitat separates residential, tourist and retail development from tidal water with public areas or public access facilities, or maintains existing public access (including public access infrastructure that is in the public interest) through the site to the foreshore for: pedestrians, via access points including approved walking tracks, boardwalks and viewing platforms, or vehicles, via access points including approved roads or tracks. And		The locations for the Oyster Restoration Units have been positioned away from areas commonly used for public access to the river along the foreshore. The locations of the proposed Oyster Reef Restoration Units do not interfere with any existing formalised public accesses to the Noosa River.
	AO10.2 Development adjacent to state coastal land, including land under tidal water: is located and designed to: allow safe and unimpeded access to, over, under or around built structures located on, over or along the foreshore ensure emergency vehicles can access the area near the development, or minimises and offsets any loss of access to and along the foreshore within two kilometres of the existing access points, and the access is located and designed to be consistent with (1)(a) and (b). And		The footprint at each site is 12m2 (15 sites x 12m2 = 180m2) so is sufficiently small to not prevent public access either to the foreshore from the water or along the foreshore. Public access will be managed around the footprint of the Oyster Reef Restoration Units using signage to advise of the oyster reef restoration units, prevent unintended walking on or driving over. The signage will advise the public that they can give comments to Noosa Shire Council regarding the oyster reef restoration units. Conditions of the Resource Allocation Authority and associated Restoration Plan require removal of the oyster reef restoration units where significant impacts on community use of the area are evident.   .
	AO10.3 Any parts of private development that extend over tidal water are to be designed, constructed and used for marine access purposes only.		This is not a private development.
PO11 Private marine development avoids structures attaching to, or extending across, non-tidal state coastal land abutting tidal waters.	AO11.1 Private marine development and other structures such as decks or boardwalks for private use do not attach to, or extend across state coastal land that is situated above the high water mark. Editor’s note: For occupation permits or allocations of State land, refer to the Land Act 1994.		This is not a private development.
PO12 Further development of artificial waterways avoids or minimises adverse impacts on coastal resources and their values, and does not contribute to: an increase in the risk of flooding or erosion degradation of water quality degradation and loss of matters of state environmental significance (including, but not limited to, coastal wetlands, fish habitat areas and migratory species habitat).	AO12.1 The design, construction and operation of artificial tidal waterways maintains the tidal prism volume of the natural waterway to which it is connected. And		This proposed development is not an artificial waterway.
	AO12.2 The design, construction and operation of artificial tidal waterways does not increase risk from flooding. And		not applicable
	AO12.3 The design, construction and operation of an artificial waterway in connection with the reconfiguration of a lot ensures: water inlet and outlets structures are of sufficient capacity to maintain the water quality within the waterway water discharged from the artificial waterway protects the environmental values and water quality objectives of the receiving waters dredged material is not disposed of in tidal water beyond the artificial waterway unless there is a beneficial reuse, e.g. beach nourishment. Editor’s note: For more information on environmental values and water quality objectives see schedule 1 of the Environment Protection (Water) Policy 2009. And		not applicable
	AO12.4 The location of the artificial waterways avoids matters of state environmental significance, or does not result in any significant adverse impact on matters of state environmental significance.		not applicable
PO13 Development does not involve reclamation of land below tidal water, other than for the purposes of: coastal-dependent development, public marine development or community infrastructure strategic ports, boat harbours or strategic airports and aviation facilities, in accordance with a statutory land use plan, where there is a demonstrated net benefit for the state or region and no feasible alternative exists coastal protection work or work necessary to protect coastal resources or physical coastal processes.	No acceptable outcome is prescribed.		Oyster reefs historically occurred in the estuary, but were dredged to functional extinction in the early 1900’s.The purpose of this project is to restore the natural processes for oyster reef development above Lowest Astronomical Tide.  The project is designed to be an environmental asset for the community and does not involve reclamation of land.
Table 10.1.2: Operational work
Performance outcomes	Acceptable outcomes	Response	Comment
PO1 Tidal works that is private marine development does not result in adverse impacts to tidal land. Editor’s note: In addressing this performance outcome, the applicant should comply with the performance criteria and acceptable standards set out in the Operational Policy Building and engineering standards for tidal works, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, 2013. Editor’s note: Applications should be supported by a report certified by an RPEQ to demonstrate compliance with this performance outcome.	AO1.1 The location and design of tidal works that is private marine development: is on private land abutting tidal water and used for property access purposes occupies the minimum area reasonably required for its designed purpose is not to be roofed or otherwise covered does not require the construction of coastal protection works, shoreline or riverbank hardening or dredging for marine access does not adversely impact on public safety or public access and use of the foreshore.		na
PO2 Development does not result in the disposal of material dredged from an artificial waterway into coastal waters, with the exception of: reclamation works, or coastal protection works, or the maintenance of an existing artificial waterway and the at-sea disposal of material that has previously been approved for the waterway.	AO2.1 The design and construction of the artificial waterway includes onsite provisions for drying, re-handling and disposal of dredge material on site to facilitate the timely disposal to land or re-use.		Development does not result in the disposal of material dredged from an artificial waterway into coastal waters
PO3 The design and construction of an artificial waterway maintains coastal landforms.	AO3.1 The design and construction of the artificial waterway provides for sand bypassing where this is necessary to prevent erosion of adjacent coasts and minimise sedimentation of the waterway. And		The proposed development is not an artificial waterway.
	AO3.2 Clean sand accumulating within an artificial waterway is returned to the active beach system, in preference to disposal on land.		na
PO4 Development that involves dredging includes and complies with a management plan that demonstrates how environmental impacts will be managed and mitigated, and how the requirements of the National assessment guidelines for dredging, Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2009, will be met.	AO4.1 A management plan for the development: directs the operation of the development identifies disposal methods and disposal sites for the removed material for the construction and operational phases of the development outlines how any adverse effects from extraction activities on sediment transport processes or adjacent coastal landforms will be mitigated or otherwise remediated by suitably planned and implemented beach nourishment and rehabilitation works. Editor’s note: The suitability of the dredged sediment for ocean disposal is to follow the assessment of potential contaminants under the National assessment guidelines for dredging, Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2009. And		The proposed development does not involve dredging
	AO4.2 For land based disposal of dredged material, any area used for storing, dewatering, drying or rehandling dredged material as outlined in the dredge management plan is: of sufficient size for the projected volume of dredged material from relevant capital or maintenance dredging protected from future development that would compromise the use of the area for its intended purpose of material storage and dewatering. And		na
	AO4.3 For at-sea disposal of suitable dredged material, the dredge management plan specifies that material is placed at a dredged material disposal site only if it is demonstrated that it is not feasible to: dispose of the material above the high water mark, if the material is from maintenance works for an existing artificial waterway for which at-sea disposal was previously approved, or keep the dredged material within the active sediment transport system for the locality, or use the material for beach nourishment or another beneficial purpose. And		na
	AO4.4 For at-sea disposal of dredged material where the marine spoil disposal site is a retentive (i.e. non-dispersive) site, the disposal site identified in the dredge management plan has the capacity to hold and retain the material within its boundaries during construction and operation of the development. Editor’s note: The use of dredged material for a beneficial purpose could include development of port or other marine facilities, use for construction or industrial purposes, or use to create or modify land or waters for an approved environmental outcome (such as creation of a bird roosting site). Further information about beneficial uses is contained in the National assessment guidelines for dredging, Australian Government Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2009		na
Within a strategic environmental area: riparian and wildlife corridor functions
PO5 Natural regeneration of any cleared or work area is facilitated wherever possible.	AO5.1 There is no impediments to the natural regeneration of native plant species in the area of clearing and works following completion of works.		The proposal is to restore natural regeneration of an area that has previously been degraded by human processes and therefore the entire intention of the project is consistent woith this performance outcome. The works will involve placement of Oyster Reef Restoration Units on top of bare substrate by hand and will not create residual impacts during installation. The works will be monitored quarterly for at least 3 years following completion of works to ensure natural processes are not impeded.
Within a strategic environmental area: hydrological processes
PO6 Development avoids or minimises impacts on natural drainage lines or flow paths, during both construction and operation.	No acceptable outcome is prescribed.		The proposed Oyster Reef Restoration Units are all located within the intertidal zone. Each reef is more than 60m from stormwater outfalls into the Noosa River. The RPEQ has stated the below in their response to Schedule 4Aof the Coastal Act which demonstrates that any risks can be suitably mitigated: “Similar units have historically been utilised to provide protection to areas subject to wave erosion. As such, these units may result in accretion of the adjacent foreshore although it is expected that tidal and flood flows are dominant in most locations. No modelling has been undertaken, however it is expected that impacts would be relatively low given the location close to the bank and the relatively small footprint of the works. The units are angled to the peak flood velocity to reduce impacts and oriented to deflect ebb tide and peak flood flows toward the channel (rather than toward the bank) to avoid concentrating flows which might result in erosion of the riverbank. Localised build-up & scour is expected however the proposed works are flexible and able to accommodate minor changes. The majority of the sites appear relatively stable with no sand ripples although aerial photography indicates that they can be subject to change. Significant sedimentation to the point of burial is not expected. Sites 9 & 10 could potentially experience the greatest changes, particularly in the event of re-opening of the channel along the western bank. The works incorporate quarterly monitoring for the first 3 years and if any erosion or excessive accretion are observed these can be evaluated and the reef units can be modified, removed if necessary. “
Within a strategic environmental area: water quality
PO7 Development avoids or minimises any adverse impacts on environmental values and water quality objectives for receiving waters (surface and groundwater) from pollutants on site or leaving a site located in a strategic environmental area.	AO7.1 Development demonstrates best practice environmental management to meet relevant environmental values and water quality objectives of the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009. Or		Due to their natural filtering abilities for sediments and nutrients, the introduction of substrate to facilitate natural Oyster Reef Restoration Units throughout water bodies is an emerging practice to assist with improvement of water quality in natural systems The project therefore clearly achieves PO7.
	AO7.2 All stormwater, wastewater, discharges and overflows leaving the site are: treated to the quality of the receiving waters prior to discharge, or reclaimed or re-used such that there is no export of pollutants to receiving waters.		

Table 10.1.3: Reconfiguring a lot
Performance outcomes	Acceptable outcomes	Response	Comment
PO1 Erosion prone areas in a coastal management district are maintained as development free buffers, or where permanent buildings or structures exist, coastal erosion risks are avoided or mitigated.	AO1.1 Land within the erosion prone area is surrendered to the State and dedicated as a reserve for beach protection, coastal management or environmental purposes, unless: the development is in a port or is for coastal-dependent development, or the surrender of the land will not enhance coastal management outcomes, for example, because there is already substantial development seaward of the lot. Editor’s note: Land surrendered to the State for public use under AO1.1 is to be: placed in a State land reserve for beach protection and coastal management purposes under the Land Act 1994, with local government as trustee, or managed for beach protection and coastal management purposes under another management regime to the satisfaction of the chief executive administering the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and Land Act 1994, if it is demonstrated that AO1.1(1) cannot be reasonably achieved. The Land Act 1994 also includes provisions for voluntary land surrender for freehold land to the satisfaction of the chief executive administering the Land Act.		The proposed development does not require reconfiguring of a lot.
PO2 Development maintains or enhances general public access to or along the foreshore, unless this is contrary to the protection of coastal resources or public safety.	AO2.1 Reconfiguring a lot that abuts the foreshore or tidal waters is designed to enhance public access if it involves the creation of 10 or more lots or the opening of a new road, unless it is for coastal-dependent development.		na
PO3 Development in connection with a canal enhances public access to coastal waters.	AO3.1 The canal avoids intersecting with land or tidal land where the passage, use or movement of vessels in water could be restricted by the registered proprietor of the land. And		na
	AO3.2 The area of the canal relating to the development is surrendered to the State as a public waterway. And		na
	AO3.3 The plans of subdivision for the canal are consistent with Requirements for plans of subdivision of an artificial waterway, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, 2013.		na