Council archive · source document
Change to Existing Approval - OPW11/0116.01
Very large file (40.8 MB): the whole original can take several minutes to open, especially on a phone. Text is quick to read.
@
l ~i~i,:~iin \\ I \\ 6 .0\
ISunShineCoast
Council Request
2011/12 Regional Strategy and Planning
to Change Existing Approval and/or Extension to Relevant Period _
ALL questions MUST be completed unless the form indicates
otherwise.
This form must be submitted to Council accompanied
by the applicable fee.
Attach extra pages if there is insufficient
space on the form.
tf Council was the Assessment
.
Manager for the existing approval, and the approval was issued by the Court,
(a)a request to change the development approval and/or conditions is made to the Court; and
(b)a request to extend the relevant period for the approval is made to Council.
All terms used on the form have the
meaning given in the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 or the Sustainable
2009.
~Ull n~me -:-:-_ individual or com~any. .5un..Sh\ne:... CCts-\- c~)’..)(’\(,!_.~\
_
Contact
_~am~ for company ’:
-
C~(,--":tt
Postal
addr~s~ Po ~r- ::~::-k-,.,
’ .. C~~’\.s.+c,.t
~k~’\C0e.."V\""_FJ)
..~uburb "-’\c::x.:~ <""\5>c::c~c..h... State
C\? l.,.j’J Postcode 4-2- i
~.usinessp’hone (C?})S~.4:. t:5{,~f NH phone 049-:1106 ~P::f: e..S
.
,~?bil~ QUq>b4I:fY 83
.~~~il ~~?~_~_:;s._ i c~/..(!i)_ C QCl. ~~J~"!! ~ te_fV1 \t, CJ;:;v..’\.. p,L.I...._ F~x Ltf-().)
;
.
~)
_
_ss’::37-chH_.{
2. Details of existing approval’
,
’Type of approval (please tick ALL applicable categories) ’Which entity issued approval?
;t2l( Development Permit J3 Sunshine Coast Council
o Preliminary Approval -,.., ro.
",ntih
>r
a/ease specify
,0 Compliance Permit
Material Change of Use Development Counter
o Reconfiguring a Lot
~ Operational Works
t’i’11:!’;:~ 09 MAY 2012
o Building Works ). .
l
o Plumbing or Drainage Works
o Compliance Certificate Maroochydore
)?i Environmentally Relevant Activity
Applicationnu_~?e.r/c~~~?!1 r~!er~nc.e OP’v~ \~ /Q\\ ~ _..
’
Date issued ,;2’-1. II. Zoi
!
Is the approval for a mobile and ’
temporary ERA? No 0 Yes -
complete be/ow
Insert the name of each local govemment area in which tile
mobile and temporary ERA is proposed to
-
’.
operate/operating
(, 10
IBOX: ...2..0..~q1:......(9. ..juAc
Privacy
Council will use any personal information provided for the
intended purpose only and for remaining in contact with
authorised to collect this information in accordance with the Local you. Council is
Government Act 2009 and other Local Government Acts. Your
personal information is only accessed by persons authorised to do so. Your
personal information is dealt ’^~th in accordance with
council’s privacy policy.
-_sunshlneco.a.st..qld.gov.au I mIli!@stJOShiner.."ast.qld.gov.BU I T 07 5475 7272 F 07547577.77
I..ockBd BBQ n SunSl Coerit Mail Cenlllt Old -4560 I ABN 37 876 973 913
CaIoundra ~1 Ornrah AYtlnue Calouocta Old 4551
I lIIa.roochydonl offtCtll 11-13 Ocean Street Maroochydont Old <4558
Nlunbour offlI;e enr Currie and Bury Straet.e Nambour Qld 4Sf3O
I Tewantln ofl’Ice 9 Pelican Sb’eet Tewantin Old 4565
1 of 4 201 ’!112 Regional Strategy and
Planning Request to Change Existing Approval and/or Extension.to Relevant Period FM401
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 51 pages
Page 2
3. Nature of request (please tick ALL applicable categories)
)& To change the development )To change the development i
0 To extend the relevant period
.
approval conditions before lapsing
Please attach documentation outlining the detail of and the reasons and justification for the requested change or ,
:extension.
4. Location ofthe premises
.
.
Unit No. : Street No Street ~k.,~ D(lYe....
NB’ j..JCvts In No::>SCf I<ivu ’
71’1;.5 .s ---the.
-
.
,QtiJ0LL.’"f )
D .
tf.d-:at (.g ,..
.1
5. Concurrance Agencies
lo No
.
Was there one or more concurrence agencies involved in the original approval?
,
.
~;~~~~~~w
: ~t~"::: -;;d;;’~3i2~’fth~ s’~;;;~;bi~F;;;;;~gA~ 2 9’h~ -p;;;~~ ;:;:;~k~g the req~;; ’i~’;~Quiredtc;’9i~;’~’~~py~f’lhi~-;:~~~st to ’~II
:
concurrence agencies.
~ji"’ Ag. h’c~b 10 .(/.,~;,:::.~;:~ ;~::;.;,}~.:>{;.:";’:;r:.I>:/:.:~,~’,:’i~"::~f~~,i.:"~ ;.:.>:>~’-: .:’,,;(l?ai;
: P ..9 ~’~\:;:’~,);3:i]:s,:~/j;:’);:~: :
D.Er<~1. !.~-fe.d ..
,!/.:.’~’..,f. 9.t:2. .....
,7J(: >! . ..--~..-
,;
_..__..-._..._.._.-......
...1
MSWT......... _. _ _. ._..~.__.~._~.___. _.. ..._... h......_......_ .._... .___. ...’,._’~
II
...._~.._.... .~..._..........
6. Pre-request response notice
Has a pre-re,quest response been given by a relevant entity (e.g’, a concurrence agency)for this request?
.. . ..... ... ... .- _. ............ .... .._._.. .
-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~\/~~(~~~; ’." ..;;_~~~;;;;.~:~-_.’d~)/~ ..,D es
If yes, pteas atfch a copy of the notice. .
U
7. Owner’s consent
Is the owner’s consent required for this request?
:~!’J.’?__
o Yes- complete either Table A or Table B below
... .’ ....._. ..-... ..
Note -
If more than one owner of the land all owners’ details are required
. ...-- .. .... . ......_. ...__... ..- .... ,._..
’
i’’?~if~?;’:;:~
’
~;;;’"’"’n"’r’""’"<~,J~,_..
’!f:i ,’;1",>.,-9.W""" nt ’-mY
~
P. _..!t~rH..,m,,;,..
" .
.~, ."
Date
Owner’s name/s
.
: ~;OWi~i:
:t ti^~~1:’1t_.~<’:;...,~~..~.,..::r1,~ l
r ~ldd>iin J rm).~~~f.!:,:;,i’;
1iijs~ -,.,,-r._~.. ,,~.tr,,’_t~....~ ’’’’_’ .,...’-’....-~
IM/e, the above-mentioned ownerls of the land, consent
to the making of this request.
Owner’s name/s
o The owner’s written consent is attached.
Signature/s
2 of 4 2011/12 Regional Strategy and Planning Request to Change Existing Approval and/or Extension to Relevant Period FM401
Page 3
NOTES: For question 7
Under section 371 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, if the
person making the request is not the owner of the land to which the
approval relates, the request must be accompanied by the owner’s consent.
However, owner’s consent is not required if the approval:
relates to land the was acquisition land to which section 263(2Xd)of the Sustainable
Planning Act 2009 applied when the
application for the approval was made; or
is for building work or operational work ior the
supply of community infrastructure on land designated for the community
infrastructure: or
the consent of the owner would not be required under section
263(1) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 if a development
application were made for the requested change,
Also, owner’s consent is not required if the Assessment Manager is satisfied that:
the number of owners of the land make it impractical to obtain owners’
consent, and the requested change does not materially
affect the owners’ land; or
having regard to the nature of the proposed change, the owner has unreasonably withheld consent and the requested change
does not
ma~er!aIlY,<lff:c~ theov.mer’s land.
8. Does the request involve a State resource
prescribed under the SustainablePlanning Regulation 2009,
Schedule 14?
o No
fSl’Yes -
complete below details
Nature of State owned resource:
Nature of Evidence required:
’j?r ~id~~~~;i~ lo~~t~~-;f entitl~~~~t t;, th~ resource
.._....~._....- ._-
o Evidence the chief executive has agreed to the request
.._.._----, _._._....-..._-- ....._-_...--_.._.._-.-
-""’_’_--’ _’_-’_’-
-
. _. .. ~
: Attach a copy of the evidence required above
_’
"--"’---"’--""-’-’~’---_..__._..,~._..- _. ....__..__.... .._~._......
r -- -.. .._... ’-’
NOTES: For question 8
Section 370(3) and (4)of the Sustainable
Planning Act 2009 requires that if an application for the development approval were made at
:the time of making this request and evidence under section 264(1) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 would be
required to support
the application, this request must be
’
accompanied by the written agreement of the chief executive from whom evidence would be
required under section 264(1 ),
,
Section 264 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009
provides that if a development involves a Slate resource, a regulation may require
:the application to be supported by certain evidence prescribed under
regulation, Schedule 14 of the Sustainable Planning Regulation
20,09 pr~s~ri~~s_th~_~t_a~::_r_~?_~c..~~ for whi9h :~~d:~~_e ~s_::9,~ired to be given, and the :_v!9.~r:c~_re.quired, t?,~U?port the
appli~ti?n
9. Declaration of applicant
_
INVe, the applicant, ecl that the above infonnnation is correct in all
respects, at the time of lodgement of this
application with th e Coa egional Council. Should any of the details given in relation to this application be
changed in the fut pplic t shall advise the Sunshine Coast Regional Council in writing prior to any such change
being implemente
Signature/s D’t’
a, I>"/ It.
3 of 4 2011/12 Regional Strategy and
Planning Request to Change Existing Approval andlor Extension to Relevant Period FM401
Page 4
OFFICE USE ONLY
Application no. ,~.~.l:’0.t paid Date paid Receipt no. Initial :Date stamp
.,,-,-_..._--_....-_.._ ..
.’-- . _, ’-’-_’-- _._-_....-._. ._- -., ._.
Receiving Officer
I ,5 03C D )(j0
6,t.. L {: C) J()8 .
7ft:} Dr
Ca\/ t ::r’ .’
_
N is SHAvJ.
Payment options .
In person Customer service centres: 8.30 am to 4,30 pm Monday to Friday (excludes pUblic holidays).
By mail Cheque or money order to be made payable to: Sunshine Coast Regional Council.
o Cheque 0 Money order 0 Mastercard 0Visa
Card number Expiry date Amount $
Name on card Signature of cardholder
Phone Is a receipt required? 0 Yes 0 No
4014 2011/12 Regional Strategy and Planning Request to Change Existing Approval and/or Extension to Relevant Period FM401
Page 5
International
1& Coastal
Management
eco-engineered coastal solutions
4th May, 2012
Sunshine Coast Regional Council
Locked Bag 72
Sunshine Coast Mail Centre
Queensland 4560
ATT: Mark Lewis
RE: NOOSA RIVER SPIT [Lot 114 on MCH8391071 EROSION PROTECTION WORKS
AMENDMENT TO PERMIT OPW11/0116
Dear Sir / Madam,
Works have commenced on the above works, however the pr gre f the works is such that we would like to amend the
above permit to allow for an extension to relevant timefram an<Nlso Ilow for a change to the construction materials for
a section of the works. (.)&V.
&/t
Preliminary discussions have been held with DERM & EEDI regarding th~~ed
c es and they are generally
supportive however we do not have formal acceptan e from either agency as y lf./~fIJ1fl re t for comment regarding the
.
’(
proposed change has been requested. /} C
fi~~;OV-7t41r
As Sunshine Coast Regional Council was the
.
.
IDAS application to amend the permit assSn~se
Revised drawings (including the proposed change to the
Oel]
works)~ O’O~ ’.
.
’
. Revised concept environment management plans (highlighting the cha ~pacts and m nagement for the
revised construction method)
. Justification for the requested amendments
With regards to any required fee with respect to the amendment, please be advised that as the Council is the applicant, it is
preferable for this to be billed direct to the job number. The relevant job number is 13030.0000.
If you need any further information regarding the project, please let me know.
Regards,
Ji
Bobbie Corbett
Senior Coastal Engineer
..
International Coastal Management PTYlTO (lCM) >t.
"’’’’’ 50 / G Arm. SYC Marina. Main Beach. Old. 421 Z Australia
"’"’ PO Box 306 Main Beach LPO. Main Beach. Old. 4217. Australia
lfifPHON’ +61 75564 0564 ~ +61 755329147
~ WYWI.coastalmanagement.com au
Page 6
^
I
1111111 Integrated Development Assessment System template .
_:
I
Request to change an existing approval template
(SustainablePfanning Act 2009 version 1.1 effective March 1010)
This template may be used for giving a written notice asking the responsible entity to make a permissible change to a
development approval under section 369 of the Sustainable PlanningAct 2009 (SPA). It should be noted that if the
responsible entity for the request has a form for the request, the request must made using that form.
This template must be lodged with the following entity (the responsible entity) as applicable:
if the change is to a condition imposed by a Minister under chapter 6, part 11, division 1 of SPA the template must be
lodged with the Minister that imposed the condition
if the approval was given by a Minister under chapter 6, part 11, division 2 of SPA the template must be lodged with
the Ministerthat gave the approval
if the change is to a condition of the approval imposed by a concurrence agency the tem plate must be lodged with the
concurrence agency
. if the approval was given by the Planning and Environment Court the template must be lodged with the Planning and
Environment Court
. in all other cases the template must be lodged with the assessment manager for the original development application.
Attach extra pages if there is insufficient space on this template. Terms used in this template having the meaning given in
the Sustainable PlanningAct 2009.
11.Who is making the request7
Name/s (individual or company name in full) c.,<>S+ C_QJ..f\C \
For companies, contact name ~n~t<.
~ Co
Ru1
Postal address
l:a;::Xi>= 6cld. Coo~r !.r;l17
Contact phone number 1(01)SSb (fa~by
Mobile number (non-mandatory) I 04-0J 101olJ1+ <63
Fax number (non-mandatory)
I (Oc)$’5:3:8 t4:J
e.mail address (non-mandatory)
@ 4Y’SI-
I~ k IVJ lVLa"
aruct. (.oM g
Department of Infrastructure and Planning Qplan ..
",’\J Queensland
\
L\" Government
Page 7
.1..
ODD
2. What alre the ,details of the existing approval sought to be changed?
Type of approval Identification number Date decision notice Name of entity that issued the approval or
or negotiated imposed the condition sought to be changed
decision notice
issued
Development OpvJ II JOIl fa c2Q. II. .2011 DERtv\ I DEED\ / MSQ.
permit
0 Preliminary
approval
3. Is the approvat for a mobile and temporary environmentally relevant activity (ERA)?
gr No
o Yes-complete table A and then go to question 5
Table A-name of each local government area in which the mobile and temporary ERA is proposed to operate/ is operating
4. location of the premises (complete table B and/or table C as applicable. Identify each lot in a separate row)
Table B-street address/lot for the premises or street address/lot on plan for the land adjoining or adjacent to the
premises
o street address/lot on the plan
l2S street address/lot on plan for the land adjoining or adjacent to the premises (appropriate for development in
water e.g. jetty, pontoon)
Street address lot on plan description local government area
(e.g. Logan, Cairns)
Unit Street Street name and official suburb/ Post. Lot no. Plan type
no. no. locality name code and plan no.
NooSa I< Spif IILJ.. Met! SArt5h if1e_" &Ufo
11’[14 <<.d-e- f3olf’C/) B3Gf/07
Dn’ve"/ !vbos,< !lea_d~
2 Request to change an existing approval template
Version 1.1 March 2010
Page 8
DDD
Table C-premises coordinates (appropriat.e fOT development in remote areas, over part of a lot or in water e.g. channel
dredging in Moreton Bay)
Coordinates lone Datum Local government
(note:place each set of coordinates in a separate row) refer’ence area (if applicable)
Easting Northing Latitude Longitude
D GDA94
D WGS84
D Other
15. Details of the proposed change
of/ached.
IA5
6. Is owner’s consent required for this request? (refer to notes at the end of this form for more information)
~ No
o Yes-complete either table D or table E as applicable
Table D
Name of owner of the land
I, the above.mentioned owner of the land, consent to the making of this request.
Signature of owner of the land
Date
Table E
Name of owner of the land
I
D The owner’s written consent is attached
3 Request to change an existing approval template
Version 1 1 March 2010
Page 9
ODD
7- Does the irequest involve a state resource prescribed under the SustaInable Planning Regulation 2009. schedule
14? (e.g.the application involves state land, or taking quarry materials. Refer to the notes at the end of this form for more
i nformati 0n)
D No
IRI Yes-the written agreement of the chief executive from whom evidence wou Id need to be obtained
under the Sustainable PlanningAct 2009. section 254(1) must be attached.
8. Has a pre.request response notice been given for this request?
~ No
D Yes-a copy of the pre.request response notice must be attached to this request
9. Is a copy of this request required to be given to another entity under section 372 of the Sustainable PlanningAct
2009? (refer to notes at the end of this form for more information)
D No
~ Yes-complete Table F
Table F
A copy of this request has been provided to the entities identified below (provide details for each entity given a copy of the
request and the date the copy was given)
~ Assessment manager for the
original application
~(/’f:h Ire.- Cf
Rt;;,blc&. 6’ot raC; I.
D Concurrence agencies for the
original application
D Any other entity prescribed by
a regulation
10. Provide details of any other supporting information attached to this request
Jwsftf!,’adio,.,
I ~:se.d C cepf
&>>se_q, d..v-~t..J; S,
’GMP
Notes for completing this template
. This template is not an approved form under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009. The entity responsible for deciding the
request may have their own form for the purpose of making a written request to change an existing development approval.
A change to an existing development approval may involve:
o a change to an approval given by the assessment manager
o a change to a condition imposed by a concurrence agency
o a change to an approval given by the Minister under a Ministerial call in
o a change to a condition imposed by the Minister under a Ministerial direction
o a change to an approval given by the Planning and Environment Court
4 Request to change an existing approva/templale
Version 1 1 March 2010
Page 10
.~
DDD
Question 6:
Under section 371 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, if the person making the request is not the owner of the land to
which the approval relates, the request must be accompanied by the owner’s consent.
.However, owner’s consent is not required if the approval:
o relates to land that was acquisition land to which section 263(2)(d) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 applied
when the application for the approval was made
o is for building work or operational work for the supply of community infrastructure on land designated for the
<community infrastructure, or
o the consent of the owner would not be required under section 263(1) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 if a
development application were made for the requested change
Also, owners’ consent is not required if the responsible entity is satisfied that:
o the number of owners of the land make it impracticable to obtain owners’ consent, and the requested change does
not materially affect the owners’ land, or
o having regard to the nature of the proposed change, the owner has unreasonably withheld consent and the
requested change does not materially affect the owner’s land.
Question 7:
Section 370(3) and (4)of the Sust?inable Planning Act 2009 requires that if an application for the development approval
were made at the time of making this request and evidence under section 264(1) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009
would be required to support the application, this request must be accompanied by the written agreement of the chief
executive from whom evidence would be required under section 264(1). (Section 264 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009
provides that if a development involves a State resource, a regulation may require the application to be supported by
certain evidence prescribed under the regulation. Schedule 14 of the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 prescribes the
State resources for which evidence is required to be given, and the evidence required, to support the application.)
Question 9:
Section 372 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 requires that a copy of the request be given to:
o the assessment manager for the original application, if the request is made to a concurrence agency, the Minister, or
the court
o any concurrence agencies for the original application, if the request is made to the assessment manager for the
original application, the Minister or the court
o any other entity prescribed by a regulation.
However, a copy of the request is not required to be given to an entity that has given a pre-request response notice for the
request.
OFFICE USE ONLY
Date received Reference numbers
5 Request to c/1ange an eXisting approval template
Version 1.1 March 2010
Page 11
Noosa River Spit Erosion Protection [OPW11/0116]
Porposed Permit Amendments
PROPOSED CHANGE 1 :EXTENSION OF TIME
. DEEDI Operational Works (Interference with Marine Plants / Waterway Barrier) Permit Condition 6 amended from
"Due to the migration and spawning activities of commercially and recreationally important species of fish
within the area, dredging works must not be undertaken:
during the months ofJune and July; and
during the two days prior, the days of. and the two days after the new and full moons in the month ofAugust,"
to read
"Due to the migration and spawning activities of commercially and recreationally important species of fish
within the area, dredging works must not be undertaken:
"
during the two days prior, the days of. and the two days after the new and full moons in the month ofAugust.
. DERM Operational Works Permit SPCC01881911 Condition A 1 amended from
"This development permit authorizes the Stage 7 works for a period of 72 months from date of approval that is
for erosion protection works within Noosa River on USL adjacent to Lot 774 on Plan MCH839707 indicated in
Table 7, Plans and Documents"
to read
"", for a period of 24 months from date of approval ","
. DERM ERA 161(b) Permit SPCE01881811 Condition A1 amended from
"This development permit authorizes ERA 76 7(b)dredging for a period of 72 months, from the date of
approval ","
to read
"
’"
for a period of 24 months from date of approval","
PROPOSED CHANGE 2 :DESIGN AMENDMENT
Change to all permits to reflect amended design drawings [listed below] that incorporate the proposed rock wall
component at the end of Noosa R Spit and corresponding revised Concept Environment Management Plan
[Revision C),
NRS-001 rev C NRS-016 [new drawing]
NRS-002 rev C NRS-017 [new drawing]
NRS-003 rev B NRS-008 rev C
NRS-004 rev B NRS-009 rev B
NRS-015 [new drawing] NRS-010 rev C
NRS-006 rev B NRS-011 rev B
NRS-007 rev B NRS-012 rev C
Page 12
DRAWING REGISTER
International 01.05.2012 REVC
NRS-001 lONG-TERM STRATEGY
Coastal NRS-002
NRS-003
PROPOSED STAGE 1 WORKS
SUBMERGED CLOSURE LAYOUT
NRS-004 SUBMERGED CLOSURE TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
Management NRS-015
NRS-006
WALL AND GROYNE LAYOUT
GROYNE TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
NRS-007 WALL TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
OFFICE 50/ G Arm, SYC Marina, Main Beach, 4217, QlD, Australia
NRS-016 WALL CROSS SECTIONS (A&B)
POST PO Box 306, Main Beach lPO, Main Beach QlD, 4217, Australia NRS-017 WALL CROSS SECTIONS (C&D)
TELEPHONE -+B1 755640564 FAX -+B1 755329147 NRS-008 DREDGE AREA LAYOUT
WEBSITE www.coastalmanagement.com.au NRS-009 DREDGE AREA TYPICAL PROFILE
NRS-010 NOURISHMENT TYPICAL PROFILE
NOOSA RIVER SPIT NRS-011
NRS-012
NOTES
VEGETATION
EROSION PROTECTION WORKS
Page 13
l..c ’.Il!!:;
~ ~:-,:-"
:~’- ^,..~;~
!
-~,\, r r,
1’.;1
II
~;
~
..1
"
~.
;~~~{;:, ’1 -
f-I i’
,.
~k~-
~’"
lj~~~.
,j ..i..
1;’
;],10 .f~.(’,",:
~{J,_.."FJ’: ~,
,-,
~;
~r;, ~l
"
r Retain existing rock wall [maintain I
....~ ,-, ._. rt;’ upgrade)
:, ~,--It~I~’ Submerged Curved channel "Closure"
\..’J ~!_. l
enclosing lagoon
Wall at end of Noosa River Spit
:~ Groyne I Training Wall
J~:_ ’~ 2 short groynes
Dredging for interim navigation
Foreshore nourishment
Removal of dead trees (marine plants)
as required
.~ ,
Monitoring program
Maintenance of all structures
For details of strategy, refer ICM report
", "Option Review Noosa River Spit’
-
;’i"
For proposed works [Stage 1), see NRS-002
No works wtthin Noosa River Fish Habitat
Area.
:;, ..~. :
I
A Coastal Management District has not been
,’~_i tj.~~
<
.., .f .A~: ’t
t’ declared for this area. The Erosion Prone
(’ ~t
,; J Area is the full width of the Spit
.
.,
"
1",(: Submergec;l
, II ’t~. Aerial photo from Google [June 2008).
",::11 - ;-.~.
’-~r:.. r:=. Channel configurations have altered.
t’...~--,,:r~_
~ If (’~l
,,:fl
"J "
~_. ’i,’" t’:-
l ~’1 4 ,Y’
In,:"",
1;;.
.
I, i~
\ ..:l! ?"’;.:/".,,
.
. L
’!S’_ I,’
’ffl:;(’1.,.<,I’~,fi
"’’1;!>i~.,_",*"",,, I
Management
OFACE 50 IG Arm. SYC Malna, MaIn Be 4217, at 0,Auslralta
eoST PO Box n,Miln Bea::.h LPO, Man Be hClD. 4217. Au9raha
TElEPHOOE ,,’/~ FIIX ’<blillll41
~ft’wtMSI.1.l1.1nagerrllMl;;;mal
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
f"
c
o ~
~ ~
-
I’
o
Ii)
Page 14
7081900
-t-
I
7081800
NOTES
1. Proposed Stage 1 Works:
. Retain existing rock wall [maintain I
upgrade]
4~ .
.
Widening of existing footpath for
construction access
Northern section of submerged
channel closure
T .
.
.
.
Wall at end of Noosa River Spit
Groyne /Training Wall
Dredging for interim navigation
Removal of dead trees (marine plants)
as required
7081700
. Foreshore nourishment
. Monitoring programme
Existing footpath [brown line] clearing
required & to be widened for
2. Hydrographic survey by SC RC on 23rd
November 2010.
construction access [dashed red line]
3. Works to be undertaken in accordance with
"Noosa River Spit Concept Environment
Submerged channel closure to Management Pian" prepared by ICM.
limit channel migration [see
drawing -003 & -004 for details] 4. Drawings to be read in conjunction with
Notes on drawing NRS-011.
May be extended I
7081600
’
along proposed alignment
~ ’/ J
"
I f
~
~>’
,I
Groyne I Training Wall to limit
/-:
I channel migration [see drawing
-015 & -006 for details)
"
,
k ~,1
._,..- -
-::-::::::- --
I
I /
’-
--
:$
...._
_--::---- ’>.
....
7081500
~ - .....__
-:-.’""..=:.--~
Structure Crest
Structure Toe
(-’:"<<#~.~.~ ;’~.’J
Sand Filled Geotextile Container Dredge Area
Wall [see drawing -015 &-007 for
details Nourishment Area
RP Boundary
1
1
7081400
,
I
~
Lot 114
MCH839107
International
’-
RP Boundary
I ~ Coastal
Management
()fACE 50 IG AmI SYC Man... Man Be""4217. a.o. _ia
7081300
’,- t ’
1 P
ffi:
wn
POIloxJE, ManB_LPO,Mar>B, a.o,4217,""’’’’’’
PHONE -061 ,_ FAX -061’;oJ’B141
_C08S1am"_""’C..,
PROJECT NAME
I NOOSA RIVER SPIT
I
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
’" <D m o ~ N
r-- r-- <Xl <Xl <Xl
t; o o o o o
’" ’" ’" ’" ’" ’"
Page 15
Existing Footpath
r.~\
-N-
,:J
Excavation not
to Jndermine
existing rock wall
7081700
1. Container layout indicative only.
2. Works to merge wrth existing rock wall.
Rock to be placed as required to
connect the two structures smoothly.
Works to be in accordance wrth
separate rock wall appro\(aL
3. Closure centreline as per table below.
/
/
Stage 1 -
Submerged Closure
"/
/ Crest Centreline
/ Point Easting Northing
/
/ 508059.9 7081711.1
C,
/
C, 508058.5 7081691.6
/ /
/ C3 508054.9 7081672.1
/
/ / C. 508049.0 7081653.0
/
/
C. 508040.4 7081634.9
/ /
C. 508038.3 7081630.6
/
>.
C, 508027.8 7081613.6
/\/ \.. C. 508016.7 7081596.9
\.( ~ C. 508004.2 7081581.3
C,o 507990.5 7081566.7
/ /
C11 507975.8 7081553.1
/ 7081540.5
/
C12 507960.3
507944.0 7081528.9
/
/ C13
/ 7081517.9
C,. 507927.3
Closure may be v /
/
C,. 507910.2 7081507.5
extended along design / .,
/
/ c,. 507892.9 7081497.5
alignment if ).. C,7 507888.7 7081495.2
507890.6 7081484.0
desired/required ’,-< ). / C,.
/ /
’’v /
/ ,
/
/
/
/
/ / 4. Refer to addrtional drawings
7081600
’L" I I
Jootpath /
/
/ Typical x-section
Nourishment
NRS-004
NRS-010
/
-,/ ~
Notes NRS-Ol1
. --- - -
.--+--
~1 l LEGEND
Sand-filled geotextile
"
I mega-container
/ Nourishment Area
"
/
C9 I RP Boundary
\
,
op of Bank
"
I / I
G~O
I / I
2"
j I
<
f I
,
International
\’
\ Coastal
Management
OFACE 5:J IG Am\ SYCMir>na. ....nBea;I\ 4217, CW,Ausltalia
P po Box 3::6, MalnBe LPO. Moo Be QO,4217,Australia
~ Existing Footpath
iREPHONE <6’1_ FAX <6’/~’41
~VNlWcoasIakn;mgemert,Cau
-----
PRO.ECTN E
7081500 NOOSA RIVER SPIT
+
-
CRA’MNG nTLE
SUBMERGED CLOSURE LAYOUT
o
o
o
co
o
L()
Page 16
Crest height such that structure is partially
emergent on very low tides only.
Extent of works to be restricted to limits
shown on drawings. Container configuration
West side: East side: to achieve design may vary.
Backfill to levels No Backfill required
Profile based on survey by SCRC on 23rd
as per NRS-003 November 2010.
<t Excavation
4.1. Baiters may be formed by an equivalent
================_==~t~================= box cut.
Expected volume to be disturbed
[closure]: 5950m’. May vary with
-------------------~~~----------- seabed changes.
Material is clean sand suitable for beach
LAT nourishment.
4.4. Excavated material may be used for
. construction [filling containers]
. backfilling adjacent to structure
. foreshore nourishment.
Anticipated excavated profile 2
[may vary) 5. Optional additional tube may be placed as
part of initial works or placed [if required] in
-
RL -5.80m AHD response to monitoring.
Optional 1 m geotextile tube 1.7m
1mL Refer to add~ional drawings
Plan layout
Notes
NRS-003
NRS-Oll
with flap [if required)
West side:
Backfill to levels
as per NRS-003
<t Nourished Profile
-==========~~================
------------~-----------------
-----~~~----------------
LAT
Excavated slope such that
existing rock wall not to be
undermined
Optional 1 m geotextile tube
_/ Geotextile flap
with flap [if required) International
[fJ Coastal
Management
OfFICE 00I G hm.SYC Malna, Mao1 Be.,~ 4217. OLD....,."".
"P o Box:il:l, Man Beo:h lPO.Main BeOlO. 4:l11. Ausral’il
iREPHONE ..ti1/~ FAX.obl (~14(
~WflWC08SIaknanagemenl au
PRQ.EcrNME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
ORA’MNG TItlE
SUBMERGED CLOSURE
TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
Page 17
’" -1.0 ----------,
/
\~~ -2,0
?
\
\
-\,0
~~~
/-/’
)
"-
’/
/
V-IO o
/j
( /
/
/.’
_.----//
-1,0
CONTAINER LAYOUT INDICATIVE
ONLY.
CENTRELlNE OF CREST AS PER
TABLE BELOW
Stage 1 -
Groyne and Wall
Crest Centre line
Point Easting Northing
G, 507685.8 7081499.4
G2 507679.0 7081491.3
GJ 507591.6 7081384.8
3. ROCKWALL TO FOLLOW TOP OF
BANK.
~ p --?
/’ ---
4. REPLACES DRAWING NRS-005
)/\ ",
l’ _/
/
-\,0
5. REFER TO ADDITIONAL DRAWINGS
TYPICAL X-SECTION
(GROYNE)
NRS-006
TYPICAL X-SECTION NRS-007
~o ---
(WALL)
CROSS SECTION A & B NRS-0016
CROSS SECTION C & D NRS-0017
NOURISHMENT NRS-010
y. 6.
NOTES
RETURN TO BE EXTENDED AS
NRS-011
~
l
7.
REQUIRED BY ONGOING EROSION.
HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY
UNDERTAKEN BY GPS HYDRO ON
28TH JANUARY 2012.
PROPOSED
ROCK WALL
~ Mangroves
- RP boundary
-
Top of Bank
International
~ Coastal
Management
S’---- J
’-,
"-
OfFICE 5QIG "’"SYCMna, Marl Bea::l\4217. QO,""’rala
\ P po Box.ib. MaIn BerlI LPO,Man BeClD. 4L1/, AlBraha
iR’EPHONE -061 f~ FAX ..til/!b.W141
~WffWcoasIarn;r aJ
, "
TOE TO LINK WITH WALL RETURN
~o "
PRo.ECf NAME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
) \-" \, (FOLLOW NATURAL PROFILE. NO EXCAVATION)
\ "..:.
CRA’MNGnTlE
Rock Wall
’’’-,
" Layout
\ \
\ ,
\._ "
7.5 15
Page 18
Crest height such that structure is fully
emergent. May experience some
overtopping during significant flood events
[particularly with high levels of surge and/or
waves].
2. Extent of works to be restricted to limits
shown on drawings. Container
configuration to achieve design may vary.
Profile based on survey by SCRC on 23rd
November 2010.
4. Excavation
4.1. Baiters may be formed by an
equivalent box cut.
4.2. Expected volume to be disturbed [wall
ct. & groyne]: 17,600mJ. May vary with
East side: West side: seabed changes.
4.3. Surface sediments are clean sand
No Backfill required Backfill to RL -3m AHD [min)
suitable for beach nourishment.
4.4. Material below RL -4.5m AHD may
contain acid sulphates.
NOT to be placed above LAT.
RL +1.5m AHD
To be used for.
o construction [filling containers]
_________________________HM o backfilling
-------------------------MH~
--------------- -------------------------
AHD 5. Optional additional container may be placed
MLWS as part of initial works or placed [if required]
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
in response to monitoring.
NSL
6. Refer to additional drawings
Plan layout NRS-005
Notes NRS-011
Anticipated excavated
Geotextile flap
profile [may vary)
Up to RL -5.90m AHD as required
-
_j1m 16.8m 1m~ Optional 1 m geotextile tube
with flap [if required)
International
~ Coastal
Management
OFFICE 5J1 G """SiC........ Man _ 4217, OlD,""’rilla
P o Box:il>, MaIn BedllPO.Mail Be OlD. 4111. AtB~1a
iPHONE 4:)1 (~ FAX .ob"1/tblS141
WijSiT’EWNWCOarn~ aJ
PRO-ECT NAME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
GROYNE TYPICAL
X-SECTION
Page 19
Crest height such that structure is level with
NSL (or as close as practicable). Will be
overtopped on high tides.
Extent of works to be restricted to limits
shown on drawings. Container configuration
to achieve design may vary.
For excavation notes, see drawing NRS-{)06.
4. Optional additional container may be placed
as part of initial works or placed [if required]
Backfill to RL -3m AHD [min] in response to monitoring.
5. Refer to add~ional drawings
Plan layout NRS-{)05
Top of bank Anticipated excavated profile Notes NRS-{)11
[may vary]
NSL [varies]
_______________________________HM
---------- -------------------------------MH~
------------------------------
-AHD
-------------------------------ML~
-------------------------------LM
Geotextile underlayer
~~~~~\;.~~:~..~~
~~.~~~~
Geotextile flap
14.0m
Optional 1 m geotextile tube with flap
[if required]
International
Coastal
Management
~50 IG Arm. SYC Manr MaIn Be h, 4217, OLD, /lJJstraha
f:Qg, poeox:m, ManBe LPO. Man Bea::h OLD, 42t7,Ausaralla
~< ll_ m.t)11~41
~.".".coastam;ngemen:_com_aJ
PRO..ECT NAME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
Page 20
CREST OF ROCK TO TRANSITION FROM
RL 1.5M (A-A)TO TOP OF BANK (B-B)
ADJACENT CREST CONTAINER
RL +1.5m
_
_~
~ HM
--===-~==========================~~=====================
AHD
MLWS 1.1 FLOOD TIDAL CURRENT 2.5m/s
1.2 SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT
0.75m
1.3 WILL BE OVERTOPPED IN KING
TI DES OR FLOOD EVENTS
UNDER ADJACENT CREST CONTAINER AND 1.4 FLEXIBLE TOE TO ALLOW
EROSION TO -6m AHD
OVERLAP WITH ADJACENT LOWER BAG
GEOTEXTILE FLAP 2.0 GEOTEXTILE UNDERLAY TO BE
ELCOMax 600R OR EQUIVALENT WITH
1 M LAPS. PREFABRICATED SECTIONS
PREFERRED.
3.0 TOLERANCES
3.1 EXCAVATION +/-200mm
3.2 ROCK FINISH LEVEL +/-300mm
3.3 BATTERS MAY BE FORMED BY
AN EQUIVALENT BOX CUT
ROCK SHALL BE SOUND IGNEOUS OR
METAMORPHIC ROCKS CLEAN AND
FREE OF TOPSOIL AND ANY ORGANIC
MATTER.
DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERS UNLESS
CROSS SECTION A-A SHOWN OTHERWISE
ROCKWALL DETAIL SAME AS CROSS
SECTION C-C.
IN THE EVENT OF SLUMPING ROCK
MAY NEED TO BE TOPPED UP AS
REQUIRED
BACKFILL MAY NEED TO BE
REINSTATED AFTER MAJOR EVENTS
TO ENSURE SAFE ACCESS
LEGEND
CREST OF ROCK TO TRANSITION FROM
r RL 1.5M (A-A)TO TOP OF BANK (B-B) GEOTEXTILE LAYER
/ ADJACENT CONTAINER PROFILE
HAT
-------~-------- MHWS
-------,------ AHD
----2----- MLWS
-------------------IXI---------------------
./’
./’
International
Coastal
Management
()fACE 50 IG AIm SYC ",,",no. Moon Bea:I\ 4217. Wl,AusOr.iI
P po Box 113. ManBea::h LPO,Mar1Bea::h<l.D. .(217, Alraba
iRfPHONE -.l/~ FAX 061 ftnW14f
~WKWCO<*nar-egemet1.Cau
PRO..ECTNAME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
Rock Wall
Cross Section
o 2 3 4 5m
CROSS SECTION B-B
___-__
1:100
Page 21
19.5 (MAX)
14.4
HAT
LEVEL WITH ADJACENT TOP OF BANK MHWS
~-------------------------------- ----------------------------
AHD
2 LAYERS
ARMOUR ROCK MLWS
=~o~ ===== ==== ==== = == =~========= == == ==========
-
~~~I~iT~E= 1.1
1.2
FLOOD TIDAL CURRENT 2.5m/s
SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT
0.75m
ARMOUR ROCK
1.3 WILL BE OVERTOPPED IN KING
050 = O.4m (min) TIDES OR FLOOD EVENTS
8.6
CORE ROCK
1.4 FLEXIBLE TOE TO ALLOW
050 = O.25m (min) EROSION TO -6m AHD
GEOTEXTILE UNDERLAY TO BE
GEOTEXTILE UNDERLAY ELCOMax 600R OR EQUIVALENT WITH
(SEE NOTES) 1 M LAPS. PREFABRICATED SECTIONS
PREFERRED.
MINIMUM CORE THICKNESS TOLERANCES
3.1 EXCAVATION +/-200mm
4.5 .1 3.2
3.3
ROCK FINISH LEVEL +/-300mm
BATTERS MAY BE FORMED BY
AN EQUIVALENT BOX CUT
4.0 ROCK SHALL BE SOUND IGNEOUS OR
METAMORPHIC ROCKS CLEAN AND
FREE OF TOPSOIL AND ANY ORGANIC
MATTER
CROSS SECTION C-C 5.0 DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERS UNLESS
SHOWN OTHERWISE
6.0 IN THE EVENT OF SLUMPING ROCK
MAY NEED TO BE TOPPED UP AS
REQUIRED
.0 BACKFILL MAY NEED TO BE
REINSTATED AFTER MAJOR EVENTS
TO ENSURE SAFE ACCESS
-
GEOTEXTILE LAYER
HAT
--
=========== ==== == === =======:::~~ ~.~ ~ -LEV~L~~H~~~~~~~~~~ ==== ======= == = === == ==~~S======== == ============
AHD
---------------- ------ --------- -
- --------
~-~~~T~O~P~;I~ ~v:
---
=~LArio~R~~~~ ====================L~=======================
050 = O.5m
)ffiin)
/
CORE ROCK TAPERS FROM RL -3 TO TOP OF BANK
O.25m (min) _I_
050 =
International
1~ Coastal
Managemoot
OFACE !Xl/G AmI SYC Man", Man Be"’" 4217. CLO,_~
POST POBoxDS,ManB_lPO,M",Be CLO,4217,""’’’’’;a
TELEPHONE <til/_ F <til/oo:l’l41
~w."II’coasfalmaragemeri. au
CROSS SECTION D-D PRO..ECTN E
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
(RETURN)
Rock Wall
Cross Section
o 2 3 4 5m
I
~______
1:100
Page 22
7081900
+ -I +- -- --
-i ---
i-- -- --
~ t -~-
fN",)_
I 1 1 I ~~
I I I I
I I I I
7081800 I I I I
-- -- - - _. _.
I I
Dredging for interim navigation access
I ONLY. No ongoing maintenance dredging.
I I 2. Dredging is to be entirely within water
allocation area [NRS-RE-001].Final location
I I I
& extent to be determined after pre-start
I survey to accommodate channel movement
prior to works.
I I I 3. Middle channel presently dominant. Aerial
photo [Feb 2011] overlay is approximate
7081700
only.
i-
t t--. -- -- ---- -
f- i- --.- --
I- 4. It is anticipated that dredging works will
include enhancement [widening &
I I ,
,
,
"
I deepening] of existing channel. May involve
enhancement or creation of secondary
channel to provide atternative access ~
.
,
required.
I I ;,
,..
,..~/,.
, ’.
’ ’.
"
I 5. Expected volume: < 20,OOOm3.
.,
"
.
"
1 I I I 6. Temporary navigation aids to be provided by
the Contractor throughout the works to the
’,’)., satisfaction of Regional Harbour Master.
\."~.-:
7081600
- ---
_L _._---
1_ L 1 ~:~/;, I 7. Permanent navigation aids to be installed as
requires by Regional Harbour Master.
I I I I 8. Refer to addrtional drawings
Dredge Area NRS.{)09.
I I I
I I I
LEGEND
I I Dredge Area
7081500
~ I--- RP Boundary
-t
-- -- -- --
I
I
I
7081400
-J L --+- - - -
I
1-- -L
I I Lot 114
I
MCH839107
I International
Coastal
Management
OFACE 50 I G Am\ SYC Maim. Man Bea:I\ 4217, CLD. """’~~
POST PO Box 3:6, MaIn Bee::h LPO,Mar1 Beach ClD.4217, Australia
7081300 tb, t~ <bl/~14f
~ .
_- -_.
~WtlWcoastama.comau
r PRO.ECT NAME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
DREDGE AREA LAYOUT
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"<t l{) ex> O’J 0 ...... N
"- "- "- "- ex> ex> ex>
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
l{) l{) l{) l{) l{) l{) l{)
Page 23
Final dredge profile to be determined after
Pre-Start survey.
Maximum dredge depth to be RL -3m AHD
to avoid acid sulphate materials.
Balters (1V:3H)may be formed by an
equivalent box cut.
Material is clean sand suitable for beach
nourishment.
Refer additional drawings
Centre line NRS-008
Dredged material may be used for.
construction [filling containers]
backfilling adjacent to structures
foreshore nourishment.
Existing Channel
_________________________________________________________________________________________HM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------MH~
_________________________________________________________________________________________AHD
_ _ _ _
_NSL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_MLWS
--------LAT
Possible dredge profile
[widening & deepening existing channel] LEGEND
Intemational
Coastal
Management
OFACE 5lIGAm\SVCManna,__4217.ClI.D.l’ustraia
P o Bcoc:lb, MalnBe lPO,Main BeOlD. 4211. hSraha
TElEPHONE -<11~ FPIX. ..ijl/~141
WEBSITE w*wcoastamaregemer1.;;;m.au
PRo..ECf NAME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
Page 24
1. Estimated volume for foreshore nourishment
-9,OOOm’.
Q) Q)
2. All material placed on the foreshore to be
E E
c clean sand suitable for nourishment.
c
,!2l .!2l
~ ~ 3. Adjacent to groyne, profile to widen such that
f-- CJ) new HAT alignment to be in accordance with
<l: S drawing NRS.{)05.
I I
’0 ~
Q)
.r: Ol
(/) .~
.;::
::l ii
o ’x
Z w
,
I I
rsm1m;,ll
i Lowest of I
Reprofile to top of bank as required.
Design nourished ! RL 1,06m AHD
I
profile~ i or top of bank I
-=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~~=~=~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~=:~:~~~~~==~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]:
NSL[varies] 1~’
,
International
~
OfFICE
Coastal
Management
50/Gh11\ SYC M na, Marl 8each,4217,(lj),"""mi,
POsf"Po Sox::u" MaIn Be LPO,Mall Bea::ha.O, 4211,Au!lralla
’i PHONE <61 ,_ F <611’:/:illJ141
’HEBSITE YNIW coasamamgemeri C;;au
PRO.ECT NME
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
NOURISHMENT
TYPICAL PROFILE
Page 25
NOTES
1 . Design conditions
1.1. Tides [OTtide tables, Noosa Head]
AHD LAT
HAT +1.06m +2.18m
Sand-filled Geotextile Containers
MHWS +O.62m +1.74m Finished dimensions
AHD +O.OOm +1.12m
[Filled above water level]
MLWS -O.80m +O.32m
LAT -1.12m +O.OOm
1.2. Flood [Noosa River Flood Study, John Wilson & Partners, 1995]
50yr ARI 1 .44mAHD 3.8m
entrance scour O.5m
I I NOTES
Nominal Diameter = 3.0m
T1 ~I1.3m
(
1.3. Currents [GCCM numerical model]
Volume = 81 m3
Max spring tide 1 -1.5m/s.
Velocities expected to vary in response to prevailing channel configurations and location within
the estuary.
1.4. Waves
Hs 1 m [nominal] 4m
Potential wave conditions at the foreshore are expected to vary in
response to prevailing channel configurations.
2. Materials -
Geotextile and Sand-filled Geotextile Mega-Containers
Nominal Diameter = 3.4m
Volume = 103m3 C T2 ~l5m
2.1. Containers to be fabricated using ELCOMax 1209RP geotextile (or equivalent). Expected lifetime
25 years.
2.2. Container length to be 20m [may be altered if necessary or preferred by contractor].
2.3. Containers to have suitably spaced filling ports [MIN 3 preferred] with "screw & glue" closure types.
5m
2.4. Geotextile underlay to be ELCOMax 600R (or equivalent)
2.5. Geotextile flaps, where required, are to be of sufficient size to provide a 30m x 6m flap. Flaps are to
2.6.
be fabricated using ELCOMax 600R (or equivalent). Flaps are to be adequately secured (e.g.
stiched) to the bottom of the container.
If flaps cannot be fabricated, may be replaced with separate geotextile fabric with 1 m laps.
Nominal Diameter = 4.2m
Volume = 183m3 ( JI20m
T3
3. Filling of Containers
3.1. Excavation tolerances 6m
Vertical +/- O.2m
3.2. Containers to be filled in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications using either jetpump, dredge
3.3.
3.4.
or suitable alternative.
Design filled container dimensions as shown.
Finished container tolerances
Horizontal +1- 1.0m from design alignment [containers to be well butted together]
Nominal Diameter = 4.6m
Volume = 224m3 ( j}2m
T4
LEGEND
Vertical +/- O.5m at any single point
+/- O.3m averaged over 10m
4. Maintenance
4.1. Nominated geotextile is more robust than the standard geotextile, however may be subject to Sand-filled Geotextile Containers
Finished dimensions
damage from vandalism, vessel impact, anchors etc. 6m
4.2. Structures to be inspected periodically and after all major events. [Filled below water level]
4.3. Any minor damage is to be repaired as soon as practicable.
4.4. Any major damage or deflation and the container is to be replaced.
5.
4.5.
4.6.
If damage is an ongoing concern, consideration may need to be given to armouring the structures
[e.g. with rock].
Scour may require topping up with additional containers or placing of rock in scour holes
Monitoring
Nominal Diameter = 4.6m
C T4
J}6m International
5.1. The natural system is highly variable. 6m
Coastal
Monitoring is to be undertaken in accordance with ICM Report
"Option Review Noosa River Spit" to determine the performance and impacts of the works.
-
Management
5.2. Works may be modified or removed if monitoring indicates that this is necessary. ~5:JIGA-T!\SfCr.mn._Beo:!\4217.OLD.""’rala
5.3. Implementation of later stages of the works to be undertaken as required. Flap Detail
T4
}6m .EQ2!. PO Box.Jh, MalnBe LPO, Marc Beach 01..0, 421/, Australia
TELEPHONE <b1 f_
~wwwcoastamaregemer1
PROJECT NAt’
DRAWNG TIlLE
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
NOTES
F/’O(
au
<61 f;oJ:14f
Page 26
r.~\
-N-
~/’
I
I
I
+ ~
-
t-
--t- --+ - - ---- ---
Extenlof live marine
I I
plants below HAT to
be removed
1. Vegetation survey by SCRC on 23rd
November 201 O.
(approx) 2. Removal of dead trees to be undertaken in
l
accordance w~h the Construction
I’ Management Plan.
Structure Footprint
3. Area of dead trees to be removed -7700m’
Area of live marine plants to be removed
t (clearing track) -275m’.
Area of terrestrial plants to be removed
(clearing track) - 10m’.
+ ~-- .......- - ~--- l- +_. --
I 4. Track widening to be undertaken in such a
way to minimise the impact and provide
I adequate access for construction equipment.
1 ’\
,
~
I
vegetation to be
5. Rock wall return
Adjacent mangroves not to be distu rbed.
Minor clearing associated w~h construction
cleared (separate of retum involves primarily the removal of
I
grasses.
-t: -
lapprOVal)
----
t ~-~~
~
S!mctu",Foolp""! ----
[ .~
--1
~ ’"’- "
t- Nourishment
r’ Top of Bank
LEGEND
Dead trees to be removed
t Live marine plants to
be removed (below HAT)
t-
Terrestrial plants to
be removed
I
I
I
" +
Lot 114
Extent of Dead
MCH839107
to be removed
Q_ Mangroves
\) Not to be disturbed
Intemational
I Coastal
"
Management
...-,
’"
I OfF1CE 5O/GA"n\SVCManna,Mail_4217.OLD......"’.
~~~~~:,.I=LPO.~:B:;~~:.
WffiSITE
PRo..ECT NAI
WWWcoaslaknanagernetiCau
r<Akl
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
L() (() CO (J) o ..-
I"- I"- I"- I"- CO CO
o o o o o o
L() L() 1.0 L() L() L()
Page 27
International
Coastal eoo-engineered coastal solutions
Management
CONCEPT ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN
REV C
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
EROSION PROTECTION WORKS
prepared for
SUNSHINE COAST REGIONAL
COUNCil
by
INTERNATIONAl
COASTAL MANAGEMENT
International Coastal Management PlY LTO (lCM) r_l;" ~"
~50 I G Arm, SYC Marina. Main Beach. Old. 421Z Australia
"’" PO Box 306. Main Beach LPG. Main Beach. Old. 421Z Australia :’"’:":.. ....~ ~-
m,_ +61755640564 f!! +61755329147
w{"’" www.coaslalmanagemen1.com.au
~ ....._
J’ .,.
Page 28
International
Coastal eco-engineered coastal solutions
Management
Document Control Sheet
Prepared by: Andrew Brown
Title: Coastal Engineer
Company: Intemational Coastal Management
Final Review: Bobbie Corbett
Title: Senior Coastal Engineer
Company: Intemational Coastal Management
Approved for release: Bobbie Corbett
Title: Senior Coastal Engineer
Company: Intemational Coastal Management
Version History
Version No. Date Chan~ed by Nature of Amendment
Rev A 5.4.11 Bobbie Corbett Acid sulphate revised.
Marine plants revised
Rev B 15.4.11 Bobbie Corbett Report name and minor working revisions
Rev C 1.5.12 Andrew Brown Amendments due to design and methodology
changes
This document has been produced by Intemational Coastal Management Pty Ltd (ICM)in accordance with the terms and
limitations of the brief by SCRC. In preparing this report, ICM has used information provided by the Client and others
identified herein. ICM does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of
any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document. This document is not to be used without the express
approval of SCRC.
,
-....,_
"
International Coastal Management PlY LID (leM) L-;. ,
~50 /G Arm. SYC Marina. Main Beach. Old. 4217 Australia ..
::_.-
’!!! PO Box 306. Main Beach LPG. Main Beach. Old. 4217. Australia
’1
m._ +6175564 0564 ~ +61 755329147 ,
~ I. ’,1
- WWN.coastalmanagement.com.au
..
Page 29
International
Coastal eco-engineered ooastal solutions
Management
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. SITE LOCATION .......................................................................................................................................................1
2. INTENT OF CONCEPT CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN..............................................................................2
3. DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE OF WORKS.............................................................................................................2
4. RELEVANT APPROVALS.........................................................................................................................................3
5. CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................4
5.1 Equipment 4
5.2 Methodology for Dredging I Nourishment 4
5.3 Methodology for Filling Containers 4
5.4 Methodology for Constructing Rock Wall 4
6. SUMMARY OF KEY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ......................................................................................................5
6.1 Water Quality 5
6.2 Noise 5
6.3 Flora 5
6.4 Acid Sulphate 8
6.5 Cultural Heritage 9
6.6 Waste Management 9
6.7 Air Quality Management 9
6.8 Social 9
6.9 Flammable and Combustible Materials 9
6.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 9
7. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MONITORING REQUIREMENTS.....................................................................l0
8. CONTINGENCY PLANS & EMERGENCY PROCEDURES.......................................................................................10
,
, .....
L
.r+’J
International Coastal Management PlY LTD (ICM) e’
,
!!fB 50 I G Arm. SYC Marina. Main Beach. Old. 4217 Australia
!lIE PO Box 306. Main Beach LPO. Main Beach. Old. 4217 Australia ’
>;~!-, ;1"’...
III
~
mE_ +61 75564 0564 ~ +61755329147 :.,.. .( "’f~.,... .~
.
4 ~ -1-’ .
WI"’" W\oWI.coastalmanagemenl.com.au
~
Page 30
1. SITE LOCATION The site is located within the Noosa River entrance [Figure 1] adjacent to the Noosa River Spit. The works are located outside the Noosa River Fish Habitat Area [Figure 2]. There is a tidal range of approx 2m [aTtide tables]. The site is protected from ocean swell and seas by Noosa Spit and shoals within the entrance. Spring tidal velocities within the southem channel can be up to 1.5m/s, although this may change with channel configuration. The channels and shoal configuration is highly variable.
Page 31
2. INTENT OF CONCEPT CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
This Concept Construction Management Plan is intended to provide an indication of how works may be undertaken by the
contractor, likely environmental impacts and intended control measures.
The contractor is to prepare a final construction management plan prior to commencing works. The contractors
methodology, plant, equipment, scheduling etc may vary from that indicated here. Any changes to the intended methodology
that may increase the impact of the works is not to be implemented without further discussion with DERM.
3. DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE OF WORKS
With the exception of those areas already protected by rock works, Noosa River Spit is currently experiencing erosion along
its full length, including the southern end of the Noosa River Spit. While this is reducing amenity along what was once a
popular recreational beach, there is also the potential for continued erosion to breach the Noosa River Spit, which could have
very serious impacts.
A number of options were considered [ICM 2010 report). The preferred option includes [Figure 3):
.
Submerged curved "closure" [sand-filled geotextile mega-containers) designed to create an enclosed, stable
beach and lagoon area
.
Dredging for interim navigation and associated foreshore nourishment
.
Training wall [sand-filled geotextile mega-containers) to provide a control point for the southem channel
. Wall [sand-filled geotextile mega-containers) to prevent erosion along southern end of the Noosa River Spit
. Two groynes [2.5m3sand-filled geotextile containers) to stabilize the upstream beach
Figure 3: Proposed Strategy
2
Page 32
A staged approach of construction is being adopted and this construction plan is relevant only for Stage 1 of the works
[Figure 4). Stage 1 includes:
. Retain existing rock wall [maintain / upgrade as required)
.
Submerged channel closure [partial)
. Wall at end of Noosa River Spit
.
Groyne / Training Wall
.
Dredging for navigation (location to be detennined)
. Foreshore nourishment
. Removal of dead trees (marine plants) as required
.
Widening of access track
The submerged channel closure and groyne are to be constructed using sand-filled geotextile mega-containers.
The wall has been modified from the original design and is to be constructed of a combination of sand-filled geotextile mega-
containers and rock.
4. RELEVANT APPROVALS
The following approvals have been attained:
o Resource Entitlement ref: 2010/009024
o Development Approval ref: OPW 11/0116
o Prescribed tidal works ref: SPCC01881911
o Interfering wtth Marine Plants:2011 080083
o ERA 16 1(b) ref: SPCE01881811
o Registration Certificate ENRE02969911
o Clearing (Nature Conservation Act) ref: WICL09310811
3
Page 33
5. CONSTRUCTION
There are a number of ways in which these works could be achieved and the final methodology is at the discretion of the
contractor.
5.1 Equipment
It is anticipated that the works (depending on the methodology) may require the use the following major equipment:
. 6" or greater cutter suction dredger and pipeline
. Jet pump (suspended or hopper-fed)
.
Barge
. Support vessels
. Excavator
. Bobcat
5.2 Methodology for Dredging I Nourishment
The dredge area is to be located accurately using DGPS or suitable altemative. Dredging is to be undertaken slowly to
minimise turbidity. Dredging is to be undertaken in such a way that it does not block navigation once a suitable channel is
established.
Nourishment is to be achieved generally by relocating the pipeline periodically within the deposition area. Small earthmoving
equipment may be used to redistribute material on the visible beach to achieve final nourished profiles. This may be more
difficult to achieve given the presence of significant dead tree material on the foreshore. As the slopes are the same as
existing, final profiling below low tide will likely be achieved by tidal velocities.
5.3 Methodology for Filling Containers
Filling sand-filled geotextile containers can be undertaken in a number of ways. The simplest methodology includes the
following
1. Dredge along the structure alignment to achieve the design depth
2. Roll out empty container
3. Secure in location with anchor blocks
4. Fill container using dredge (while excavating for the next container, per step 1)
5. Seal trunks
There are a number of potential variations to this generic methodology. These include:
. Excavation for containers may source nourishment and container fill may be sourced from the dredging of channel.
. Containers may be filled using a jet-pump suspended from a barge-mounted excavator.
. Containers may be filled from an onshore stockpile using a hopper-fed jet pump.
. Material may be double handled in some cases.
. A frame may be used to secure the container instead of anchor blocks.
It is noted that the works will require the use of divers.
Works will be tide and weather dependent.
5.4 Methodology for Constructing Rock Wall
The general methodology for construction of the rock wall at the end on of the Noosa Spit is as follows:
. Rock will be delivered to site by body trucks via Hasting Street and access track direct to Dog Beach.
. Transported by suitable truck along nourished beach to the end of the Noosa River Spit.
. Rocks will then be placed to achieve approximate profile using tipping barge.
. The excavator will be used to ensure proper profile and interlocking of armour rock. Note: no need to clear access
track for construction; access via backfill along back of structure
4
Page 34
6. SUMMARY OF KEY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
The works are adjacent to (but not within) the Noosa River Fish Habitat Area. The areas to be dredged are not within a
Marine Park.
The following outlines potential impacts of the works. Works are to be undertaken in such a way that impacts are minimized
wherever possible. Monitoring to ensure that any impacts are within acceptable levels is detailed below.
6.1 Water Quality
The dredge will operate in such a way to minimise turbidity during dredging operations.
To ensure that water quality [pH,DO, Turbidtty] remains within acceptable limits, visual monitoring of the plume is to be
undertaken as well as any required water quality testing in accordance with ERA requirements. Visual observations for oil,
grease, floating scum and litter is to be carried out on a regular basis.
I Change to rock will reduce excavation volume and turbidity concerns in this high flow area.
6.2 Noise
The works are separated from the businesses and resorts on Hastings St by at least 620m of well-developed vegetation. It is
not anticipated that works will cause an issue in this area. The dredging, submerged closure and training wall! groyne, the
plant will be over 400m from the residences of Noosa Sound and separated by 60m of well-vegetated area on Noosa River
Spit. When undertaking the wall at the end of Noosa River Spit, the works will be within 350m of the residences on Quamby
Place (Noosa Sound) and noise could potentially be an issue, particularly outside of normal working hours.
The Contractor shall take all reasonable precautions (e.g. the use of mufflers) and undertake works in such a way as to
minimize the potential for noise nuisance to residences and businesses and meet the requirements of the ERA conditions.
Given the nature of the work and the environment, there will be a need to work in conjunction with the tides and so works
may need to be undertaken outside of normal working hours. There is no restriction on working hours provided that the
required noise limits are met.
An aural inspection is to be undertaken daily and if any issues are identified or complaints are made regarding noise levels,
noise monitoring compared to nominated levels is to be undertaken if works are to continue in this area.
Change to rock will reduce potential noise impacts due to utilization of smaller plant over a shorter period of time with lower
likelihood of operating outside standard working hours.
6.3 Flora
Due to the mobility of the channels and shoals and the high erosion rate, the area is characterized by a clean sandy seabed
(Figure 5). There are no seagrass beds present within the footprint of the proposed works.
5
Page 35
’~~""
l
~..
-=~~,
-
’_’--
’’’’’’It’’’.,.
t:~.;~~~~~ -~. -,
.:..~ ~ ~
._
_’. 4ti.;~ ~a~
,,"_’
’J
j-~--- ’.,,~r,~.L’ ....
:..
_.~
.
.~.
_-
~:~, .
’~.~;~-:
The only mangroves within proximity of the works are at the south-eastern end of the wall at the end of the Noosa River Spit
(Figure 6). The wall terminates adjacent to the mangroves, but works are to be undertaken in such a way that no mangroves
are to be interfered with as part of the works.
Due to the high rate of erosion there are a number of large dead trees along the length of the foreshore (Figure 7). These
are typically well-established trees. The number of trees is unknown, but they cover an area of approximately 7700m2.
These trees are classified as marine plants as they are within the tidal zone. It will be necessary to remove these trees to
allow for construction.
Where excavation is taking place, the full tree should be removed [although this may need to be done progressively during
excavation] to prevent blockages of the dredge pipeline and ensure that organics are not used to fill the container or sharp
sections remain where they could potentially resuk in damage to the containers. In other areas [i.e. where nourishment is
taking place or within work areas], trees may be trimmed at the required depth [approx O.3m below surface], sufficient to
allow for access without damage to equipment.
6
Page 36
,-
l ~~.-
,~~ ~I,-’:,Al-~~::;:~_ _:~~;
C." _.
-c-~~-:. L...,r’
r....~~.--
"
-
~".
-~-"
’-.--
~
::; .......:.~
Figure 7 Dead trees along the length of the foreshore
The amended rock design incorporates a short retum which has been relocated to avoid impact on mangroves which are
now close to the works as a result of erosion and to minimise impact on other existing vegetation. The area of impact is
approximately 10m2 and within this area are grasses and small shrubs (Figure 8).
Figure 8 Grass and small shrubs to be cleared at rock return
There is a reasonable access path to site from the carpark. Part of the works will include slight widening of this track as
required to allow access for construction equipment. Given the low-lying nature of the track, the majortty of the trees will be
classified as marine plants, however a small number adjacent to the carpark are above HAT and are not marine plants.
Figure 9:Existing path to site
Page 37
Arborists have advised that the following methodology would be most beneficial and is to be followed as much as
practicable:
. Removal of branches >6" diameter and placement within Noosa Spit and Noosa Woods (above HAT)as fauna
habitat
.
Heavy trimming of remaining trees, stockpiling and mulching. Mulch to be utilised for rehabilitation along access
track and site perimeter.
. Removal of remainder of tree litter unsuitable for mulching for disposal at an appropriate location ashore.
Removal of trees and mulching to be undertaken by separate, experienced contractors prior to commencement of other
works.
An offset programme has been developed to compensate for the loss of habitat as a result of the works and this is provided
as a separate report.
6.4 Acid Sulphate
Sediment testing was undertaken on 4th and 5th January 2011 by Coffey Geotechnics. The sediment is fine-medium grained
sand w~h low (<5%)fines content.
While the surface sediments are clean sand suitable for nourishment, acid sulphate soils (both AASS and PASS)were
identified within some of the deeper areas. Below is the table from the Coffey Report.
The dredging for interim navigation and excavation for the construction of the submerged closure does not disturb acid
sulphate soils.
Dredging / excavation for the wall and training wall / groyne at the end of Noosa River Spit does disturb some acid sulphates
below RL-4.75m AHD for sand-filled geotextile container placement. As such, all material dredged / excavated from below
RL-4.5m AHD is to be placed below LAT (i.e. used for filling deeper containers or as backfill adjacent to the toe).
I Rock wall construction will not disturb ASS or PASS materials.
Component of Works Depth Liming Rates (kg/m3),
Above RL -4.75 metres AHD Nil
Wall! Groyne 8
Below RL -4.75 metres AHD
(S1 -
S4)
Below RL -5.5 metres AHD
50
around S4
Above RL -6.45 metres AHD Nfl
Submerged Closure
(S5 87)
-
Below RL -6.45 metres AHD 50
Dredging
Above RL -3.25 metres AHD Nil
(S8-814)
Note.’ No disturbance is expected for the Submerged Closure area below RL -6.45 metres AHO or within the
Dredging area below RL -3.25 metres AHO.
8
Page 38
6.5 Cultural Heritage
The Noosa River Spit was artificially reclaimed in 1978 and there has been significant dredging within the river over recent
years. There are no identified areas or items of cultural significance within the proposed area of the works, although a
cultural study can be undertaken if required.
If any potentially culturally significant items are found, the contractor will cease works immediately and advise the
Superintendent. The Superintendent will notify the traditional owners to seek their advice before works in that area can
continue.
6.6 Waste Management
The sandy material from dredging I excavation will be used for filling containers, backfilling and foreshore nourishment within
the vicinity of the works. The sediment type is very consistent across the footprint of the works and is suitable for this
purpose.
Other wastes (rubbish etc) may be temporarily stored on site if adequately contained. The Contractor is responsible for
ensuring that all waste is disposed of at suitable onshore facilities. Every effort is to be made to ensure that litter and other
debris does not enter the waters. Any material or objects dropped onto the bed are to be recovered. Visual monitoring is to
be undertaken.
The seabed is to be checked prior to completion of the works. All waste materials (including anchor blocks and ropes used
during construction) are to be removed and not buried or left on the seabed.
The contractor is to implement an oil spill management plan.
It is not anticipated that any regulated waste will be generated as part of the works.
6.7 Air Quality Management
Air emissions from plant and equipment are to be monitored visually to ensure air quality is acceptable throughout the works.
Exhaust is to be within the specifications of the equipment and all required maintenance is to be undertaken.
6.8 Social
Any complaints are to be investigated and responded to in a prompt manner. The Superintendent is to be notified of any
complaints as soon as practicable. A suitable complaint register is to be kept.
6.9 Flammable and Combustible Materials
A list of all flammable and combustible materials, chemicals or any other potentially hazardous substances is to be noted on
the MSDS register.
6.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
All machinery is to be regularly maintained and operated in accordance with specifications to minimise possible greenhouse
gas emissions.
9
Page 39
7. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monitoring requirements are to be as below, in addition to any ERA Licence requirements.
Issue Monitorin~ FrequencylTimin~ Performance Criteria Responsi bi lity
Water Quality Visual Inspection Daily during dredging No visible turbidity Contractor
hours plume from dredging
>200m from the
dredge site.
No visible oil, grease,
floating scum or litter
Noise Aural inspection of Weekly during Noise levels in Contractor
equipment for dredging accordance with
excessive noise. equipment
specification.
Investigation of noise As required in Complaints responded Contractor
complaints response to any noise to within 24 hours
complaints
Air Quality Visual inspection for Daily during dredging No excess machinery Contractor
excess machinery hours exhaust
exhaust emissions
Waste Management Visual inspection of Daily during dredging No uncontained litter Contractor
site for floating debris hours waste
for barge/dredge
8. CONTINGENCY PLANS & EMERGENCY PROCEDURES
Should any non-confirming results be observed or recorded, works are to suspended immediately and the Superintendent is
to be notified. A procedure for non-conformance is prepared for each Project. This procedure incorporates:
Work Instructions issued
Non Conformance Report Form
Reporting Procedure
Corrective Action
A number of specific detailed contingency plans are to be prepared and include an oil spill management plan and a waste
management plan.
10
Page 40
International
~ Coastal
Management
eco-engineered coastal solutions
JUSTIFICATION OF PROPOSED
PERMIT AMENDMENTS
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
EROSION PROTECTION WORKS
International Coastal Management Pl’I LTO (lCM) -;;:
..,., 50 I G Arm, SYC Marina. Main Beach. Old. 421Z Australia ..
": I"
"!’!! PO Box 306. Main Beach LPG. Main Beach. Old. 421Z Australia ’I
m,,,,"’" +61 75564 0564 ~ +61755329147
"""’"
\WMI.coastalmanagemenl.com.au
Page 41
International
~ Coastal
Management
eoo-engineered coaslal solutions
JUSTIFICATION OF PROPOSED
PERMIT AMENDMENTS
NOOSA RIVER SPIT
EROSION PROTECTION WORKS
prepared for
SUNSHINE COAST REGIONAL
COUNCil
by
INTERNATIONAl
COASTAL MANAGEMENT
International Coastal Management PTY LTO (leM) _, ,.
Of’" 50 I G Arm, SYC Marina. Main Beach. ald. 421 Z Australia
PO$1 PO Box 306. Main Beach LPG. Main Beach. ald. 4217 Australia ~
’:~~..-
mr""", +61 75564 0564 ~ +61755329147
.
t"
.....1 WIM’iI.coastalmanagement.com.au
Page 42
International
~ Coastal
Management
eoo-engineered coastal solutions
Document Control Sheet
Prepared by: Andrew Brown
Title: Coastal Engineer
Company: Intemational Coastal Management
Approved for release: Bobbie Corbett
Title: Senior Coastal Engineer
Company: Intemational Coastal Management
Version History
Version No. Date ChanQed by Nature of Amendment
This document has been produced by Intemational Coastal Management Pty Ltd (ICM)in accordance with the terms and
limitations of the brief by Sunshine Coast Regional Council. In preparing this report, ICM has used information provided by
the Client and others identified herein. ICM does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any
third party arising out of any use or reliance by any third party on the content of this document. This document is not to be
used without the express approval of Sunshine Coast Regional Council.
International Coastal Management PlY LID (lCM) ,.
!ill! 50/ G Arm. SYC Marina. Main Beach. Old. 421Z Australia
!!!!! PO Box 306. Main Beach LPO. Main Beach. Old. 421Z Australia
"""",", +61 75564 0564 ~ +61 755329147
~
"’’’’’’’
W’Mv.coastalmanagement.com.au
I ...
Page 43
1. Project Details
Noosa River Spit is currently experiencing erosion along its full length, including substantial erosion of the southem end of
the Noosa River Spit. Various options were investigations by ICM in the 2010 report "Option Review: Noosa River Spiro A
staged approach was recommended with Stage 1 of the recommended Noosa River Spit Erosion Protection Works including
[Figure 1):
. Retain existing rock wall [maintain 1 upgrade as required)
.
Submerged channel closure [partial)
. Wall at end of Noosa River Spit
.
Groyne 1 Training Wall
.
Dredging for navigation (location to be determined)
. Foreshore nourishment
. Removal of dead trees (marine plants) as required
.
Widening of access track
’. .~ :/. . . . . . l
I
’.L~.
~
.,"
l ."
,,’
.
"
.E
r
;r’.:.
(."
In July 2011, the following approvals were attained for these works:
o Resource Entitlement ref: 20101009024
o Development Approval ref: OPW11/0116
o Prescribed tidal works ref: SPCC01881911
o Interfering with Marine Plants:2011 080083
o ERA 16 1(b) ref: SPCE01881811
o Registration Certificate ENRE02969911
o Clearing (Nature Conservation Act) ref: WICL09310811
Page 44
2. Progress of Works
The Noosa River Spit Erosion Protection project commenced in August 2011, immediately after the DEEDI dredging
exclusion period. Unfortunately, while clearing of the dead trees along the foreshore was essentially completed ready for
works to commence, technical difficulties encountered with dredging resulted in the need to retender the project to an
altemate contractor. Works were restricted by availability of suitable contractors and Hall Contracting did not commence
works on site until late January (primarily due to a last-minute emergency request that the dredger continue works at
Mooloolaba entrance to ensure safe navigation in this location). Despite a contract period of 20 weeks, Halls had anticipated
that the works could be completed prior to the 1 st June (the start of the DEEDI dredging exclusion period). Unfortunately,
since the works were being undertaken in summer rather than the more desirable winter months, the project has been
delayed by extended periods of heavy rains which have resulted in high turbidity and inadequate visibility for divers to safely
continue works.
Early productivities were lower than anticipated due to timber blockages, operational methodologies adopted by the
contractor and poor weather conditions. Recent changes to operational methodology has resulted in significant
improvements to productivity.
At this stage, regardless of recent improvements in productivity, progress on the project is such that it is very unlikely that the
works can be completed prior to the DEEDI 1st June deadline.
3. Proposed Permit Amendments
Suspending works on 1st June for two months introduces significant extra costs for Sunshine Coast Regional Council in
terms of re-establishment / downtime during this period as well as the loss of state funding if the works are not complete prior
to 30th June. Preliminary indications are that these costs could be of the order of $600,000 to the project. It is also possible
that the dredger may commence other projects during this period, in which case availability to return to the site could be
restricted. As a resu~, altemate scenarios have been considered to mitigate these costs / risks.
Taken into consideration during this process was advice from the contractor regarding the remaining works. Specifically,
while they believe that the wall at the end of Noosa River Spit could potentially be constructed as designed and approved,
they have a few concerns with regards to risk of construction of this portion of the works. Primarily, these concems include:
.
Higher volume of timber closer to the bank will likely result in increased number of blockages (and delays).
.
Higher currents may result in flatter batter slopes, which increases the risk of undermining of vegetation (including
mangroves).
.
Higher currents introduces greater operational difficulty in laying out and filling containers.
To complete the works, the following scenario is considered to be the best option:
. Extend available time for the works
o Restrictions for dredging on DEED I permit may be amended so that works can continue without undue
impact on fish breeding / spawning.
o Extend DERM permits so that works can be completed regardless of future delays.
. Amend design to incorporate a section of rock wall at the end of Noosa R Spit (reducing contractor concerns which
could result in further delays to works and enabling construction to proceed in two locations concurrently,
enhancing the programme).
The contractor estimates that the works could successfully be completed by the end of June with the incorporation of the
rock component of the works. This incoroporates some float associated with standard matinenance and delays due to minor
blockages, however there is always the possibility of further unforeseen and controllable delays (e.g. a single high-rainfall
event creating a 1-2 week period where works cannot be undertaken, similar to that experienced at the end of February). As
such, allowance should to be made that works may not be complete until late July.
2
Page 45
Preliminary discussions were held with both DERM & DEEDI and the feedback indicated that they were willing to consider
these changes. As such, the following amendments to the permits are requested:
PROPOSED CHANGE 1 : EXTENSION OF TIME
. DEED I Operational Works (Interference with Marine Plants / Waterway Barrier) Permit Condition 6 amended from
"Due to the migration and spawning activities of commercially and recreationally important species of fish
within the area, dredging works must not be undertaken:
during the months of June and July; and
"
during the two days prior, the days of, and the two days after the new and full moons in the month ofAugust.
to read
"Due to the migration and spawning activities of commercially and recreationally important species of fish
within the area, dredging works must not be undertaken:
"
during the two days prior, the days of, and the two days after the new and full moons in the month ofAugust.
. DERM Operational Works Permit SPCC01881911 Condition A 1 amended from
"This development permit authorizes the Stage 1 works for a period of 12 months from date of approval that is
for erosion protection works within Noosa River on USL adjacent to Lot 114 on Plan MCH839107 indicated in
Table 1. Plans and Documents"
to read
"... for a period of 24 months from date of approval..."
. DERM ERA 161(b)Permit SPCE01881811 Condition A 1 amended from
"This development permit authorizes ERA 16 1(b) dredging for a period of 12 months, from the date of
approval..."
to read
"
...
for a period of 24 months from date of approval..."
PROPOSED CHANGE 2 :DESIGN AMENDMENT
.
Change to all permits to reflect amended design drawings [listed below] that incorporate the proposed rock wall
component at the end of Noosa R Spit and corresponding revised Concept Environment Management Plan
[Revision C].
NRS-001 rev C NRS-016 [new drawing]
NRS-002 rev C NRS-017 [new drawing]
NRS-003 rev B NRS-008 rev C
NRS-004 rev B NRS-009 rev B
NRS-015 [new drawing] NRS-010 rev C
NRS-006 rev B NRS-011 rev B
NRS-007 rev B NRS-012 rev C
3
Page 46
PROPOSED CHANGE 1: EXTENSION OF TIME
It is noted that with the present programme, the permits presently would require works to be suspended on 1st June and
recommence restricted operations in August. This is primarily to minimise any potential impacts of the works on fish
migration and spawning within the Noosa River Estuary.
The potential impacts of the works on fish migration and spawning are primarily related to vibration and turbidity. Review of
this impact in the light of the present channel configuration reveals that:
. The north channel [within the protected Noosa River Fish Habitat Area) is presently open [Figure 2). This
effectively provides an alternate, unimpacted fish access to the Noosa River estuary that is some distance from the
proposed works. As such, the impact of any vibration or turbidity resulting from works undertaken during June and
July will be substantially reduced given the overall improved accessibility of the estuary to fish.
. Closure of the southern channel (by construction of the submerged closure and the training wall / groyne) is
effectively resulting in retention of the turbid plume within the southern channel [Figure 3) during lower tides. This
would result in minimal impact of turbidity during any dredging for beach nourishment. During dredging for
container filling, it is expected that the majority of the sediment is retained within the container and the turbid plume
would also be reduced.
. Volume of dredging required within high current areas at the end of Noosa River Spit is substantially reduced by
the proposed change to a rock profile and this will substantially reduce expected turbidity within the main channel.
It is further expected that dredging of these areas will be completed prior to the sensitive June -
July period.
. Volume of dredging required in deeper areas (with finer material more likely to cause turbidity issues) is
substantially reduced by the proposed chang to a rock profile and this will substantially redue expected turbidity
within the main channel. It is further expected that dredging of these areas will be completed prior to the sensitive
June July period.
-
Figure 2: North Channel Providese alternate access away from the works
Page 47
The DERM timeframe was primarily to ensure that construction proceeded while the river configuration was similar to that
during the design phases given the dominance of the middle channel and the link of the closure with the existing shoal. The
river configuration remains very similar and there seems to be no obvious sources of concern with extending the timeframe
to allow for completion of the works given the reason for the delay.
3
Page 48
PROPOSED CHANGE 2: DESIGN AMENDMENT
The ICM Report (2010) reviewed the advantages and disadvantages of the two preferred construction materials for the
works [Table 1].
Table 1 Ad vanta es & d.
Isadvanta es 0f rock & sand fll
-
I ed eotextl1e containers [Extract from ICM ,
2010)
Sand-filled Geotextile Containers Rock
Advantages Advantages
. Stable with suitable container sizes . Stable with adequate rock sizes
. Can be designed to allow for scour . Can be designed to allow for scour
. Flexible to accommodate additional scour if necessary . Flexible to accommodate additional scour if
.
Easily removed /modified /extended if necessary necessary. Easily topped up.
. Uses local materials [noneed to import materials] .
Easily extended
. Uses floating plant [noaccess issues] . Robust [nopotential for damage]
.
User-friendly . Voids may create habitat
. Substrate may provide
. Cost
Disadvantages Disadvantages
. Vulnerable to damage from vandalism /vessel impact .
Import of materials required
even with robust RPgeotextile. Higher maintenance. . If importing by truck, need for clearing and traffic
.
Replacement cost [25yearlifetime] issues along Hastings St
. Less user-friendly
. Cost
. More difficult to remove
Wtth regards to the preliminary design of the wall component at the end of Noosa River Spit, ICM (2010)concluded that:
"It was originally preferred to construct [the wall at the end of Noosa River Spit] using rock due to
concerns regarding the potential for damage. During stakeholder consultation, it becoame evident that
there were concerns regarding the use of rock, the difficulty of removal and the visual impact. At this
stage, the preferred option is the sand-filled mega-container wall, although if maintenance becomes an
ongoing issues, consideration may be given to rock armouring."
As such, the detailed design and approvals obtained for the works were for a sand-filled mega-container structure [Figure 4
& Figure 5].
Page 49
r~
/
Figure 3: Approved Wall and Groyne Layout [Annotated version of NRS-005]
B.cld’lo Rl .3m AHD IfTWII
Arlllpal~ excavated pmhle
Top of bank
{rNly"8f)i
_______________________________AAT
-------------------------------~m
-------------------------------~o
==============================~~S
phon.11m geoteJCll~ lube with flap
lilttqwedl
Figure 4: Approved Wall Typical X-Section [NRS-007]
Further review of the preferred construction materials has revealed the following:
. The concems expressed by the contractor [see section 3] potentially reflect some additional disadvantages for use
of sand-filled geotextile contianers in this location.
. Access along the nourished beach eliminates the need for clearing for access to the end of the Noosa River Spit.
. Discussion with Hastings St Association has resulted in an acceptable delivery timeframe (with deliveries being
restricted to 9am 4pm Mon Sat). It is expected that deliveries will be limited to a 2-3 week period.
- -
. There is limited usage of the foreshore in this location given the proximity of the main channel so being user-
friendly is less critical in this location.
. The higher cost is offset by potential costs of re-establishment.
While removal of rock is not as simple as sand-filled containers, it can be achieved in the event that this is required
[although it is the intent that the works remain to protect Noosa R Spit in the long term).
After further review of the above and discussion with relevant agencies and stakeholders, it is proposed that a section of the
wall which is closest to the bank and exposed to the highest currents be constructed using rock [Figure 6 & Figure 7). A
revised construction methodology is included in the Concept Environment Management Plan [rev C].
b
Page 50
195 (MAl()
SmtahlP. gt"u\u~r
:~~~~~~~J~"_~=====,=~~==================~========:
-
~ ~~ ~
.("~. ~~%~=- --~:::~~& ~[=========:=::====~====
CORI ROCK
r ARMOUR ROCK
0"..0.411’(111") 8.~
O$
-
(/ ]!)III (1Il1nl
NSL
4.5
Figure 6: Proposed Rock Wall Cross Section
A review of original risk assessment has been undertaken to highlight any changes in the expected impacts associated with
the works.
Uncertainty
The proposed change to rock along a section of the structure will not substantially impact on the level of uncertainty and
monitoring is still required.
Variability in shoreline response
No change to expected variability along Dog Beach.
Channel Evolution I River Processes
The impacts of the proposed structure on river flows and river I shoreline evolution is expected to be equivalent to the
existing approved mega-container profile. While there is higher friction associated with permeable structures, previous
changes to these factors as part of the modelling did not reveal any significant impacts. As such, the increase in wall
permeability is not expected to have a noticeable change on river flows or channel evolution.
6
Page 51
Impacts on Shoals
No change expected.
Erosion of Mangroves
While the rock wall is expected to successfully prevent further erosion along its length, natural erosion of the adjacent
mangroves has been substantial to date and while the proposed works may help to stabilise a more shorward alignment of
mangroves in the longer term, ongoing erosion remains expected in the short term regardless of the change to rock and
should not automatically be considered to be a result of the construction of the works without further investigation. As
erosion occurs, a step in the shoreline will develop and works may need to be extended or modified in response to
monitoring. Extension of the works in response to ongoing erosion or modification of the structure will likely be simpler, more
responsive to actual conditions and lower impact with a rock profile than would have been the case with mega-containers.
Flooding
No change expected.
Flushing
No change expected.
Swimmer safety near submerged closure
No change expected.
Navigation
Toe depth is adequate to maintain existing channel depths so that access and navigational safety is not compromised.
Tolerances are such that as-constructed levels will not be higher than -2.7m AHD. As the channel deepens adjacent to the
wall, undermining will result in reforming of the flexible toe and a corresponding lowering of the levels of the toe.
Vandalism I Vessel impact with the structure
Rock is not vulnerable to damage from vandalism or vessel impact.
Structural aspects
Design of the rock wall profile has been undertaken to ensure that the protection provided is equivalent to the level of
protection and impacts provided by the approved mega container profile, including:
. Rock sizes to withstand expected 100yr ARI wave and current conditions (2.5m/s current and 0.75m waves).
. Flexible toe can withstand deepening of the channel to -6m AHD (with further rock top-up possible if required).
. Depth of rock at the crest can withstand some loss of backfill as a result of overtopping during high tides I flood
events (with further backfill or rock top-up post-flood possible if required).
Visual Impact
As the crest remains level with adjacent top of bank, the visual impact is expected to be minimimsed. The dark colour of the
rock is expected to stand out less than the sandy coloured mega-containers.
Acid Sulphates
The depth of the toe for the rock profile has been limited to a depth of -4.5m AHD with required tolerances giving an absolute
maximum dredge depth of -4.7m AHD. This eliminates the expected disturbance of material which is potentially contains
ASS I PASS along this section of the structure since soil testing only revealed PASS material below -4.75m AHD. There is
also a substantial reduction in the overall volume of disturbance required [Figure 8].
Page 52
Reduced disturbance of
material more likely to
contain ASS I PASS
Figure 7: Excavation Profiles. approved and proposed
Impacts on Marine Flora
There has been significant erosion of the end of Noosa River Spit since original design based on 2009 survey. As such, the
nearest mangroves which could be affected are now in a different location compared to the original design. In response, the
wall has been shortened slightly and the wall retum has been relocated to ensure that these mangroves are not impacted.
The relocation of the wall return will result in minor additional impact on marine vegetation (predominantly grasses and
shrubs) [Figure 9].
Figure 8: Grass and small shrubs to be cleared at rock return
Impacts on Marine Fauna
A rock wall provides a different substrate and more complex habitat (with nooks and crannies for fish to hide in) compared
with sand.filled geotextile containers. As such, the combination of the two materials is expected to enhance I support a
greater diversity of marine life compared to sand.filled geotextile containers alone.
The change to rock will substantially reduce the anticipated programme of works and do not require use of a dredger (with
associated vibration and turbidity). As a result, the change to rock will reduce any potential for impacts on fish migration and
spawning.
8
Used in these records
Change to Existing Approval - OPW11/0116.01Related documentApplication case desk ↗
Change to Existing Approval - OPW11/0116.01Related documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 40.8 MB (very large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take a few minutes. On mobile data, it is best to wait for Wi-Fi.