Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 44

Environmental Impact

Assessment
Gold Coast Commonwealth Games Athletes Village

Workshop Group 1.5


Sophia Cassimatis - s2842743
Brendan Ferris - s2835927
Lauren Fisher - s2749953
Kelly Hart - s2841430
Josh Milne - s2843943
Jace Rossington - s2861193

Executive Summary
This Environmental Impact Assessment Report has been prepared for the proposed
2018 Commonwealth Games Athletes Village (CGV). The project site is located at 1
Parklands Drive Southport, QLD 4216 and is situated near Griffith University and the
Gold Coast University Hospital. The CGV will house 6,500 athletes and staff from over 70
competing nations during the Commonwealth Games. The CGV will then be transformed
into the residential component of the newly formed Health and Knowledge Precinct.
The project will be broken down into four main phases; early works, construction,
games phase and legacy phase. During each of these phases numerous main activities
will be completed, all of which are available in EFCs Scoping Report.

The Commonwealth Games Village (CGV) will be governed by Economic Development


Queensland as a priority development area (PDA). The project was assessed against
other legislation such as the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Act (EPBC) and State Development and Public Work Organisation Act (SDPWOA)
however; due to the uniqueness of the project these Acts were no longer relevant. It was
noted that under EDQ legislation no formal EIA is required, though it was recommended
that one be undertaken due to significance of the project and its concrete deadline.

Evaluation tables were used to assess potential environmental and social impacts of the
CGV. The impacts were assessed in a total of four separate areas; magnitude, temporal,
ecological and social. The major impacts that were identified are; Habitat loss, socioeconomic, noise pollution, air pollution, erosion and water pollution. The minor impacts
that were identified are; Pests, cultural impact, waste and visual amenity. The full
results of the scoping study can be accessed in the Appendix.

The majority of major impacts did not require prediction modelling as the intensity and
magnitude was known. However, modelling was required for traffic congestion and
noise pollution as the extent of these impacts are much harder to predict. Successful
case studies and policies as well as relevant literature were used to identify mitigation
and monitoring strategies for all major and minor impacts. More in depth information
regarding major and minor impacts can be found in the relevant sections of the report.

Several stakeholders were identified for the CGV project, such as the Griffith University,
Gold Coast University Hospital, Queensland Government, residents, athletes and
community groups. Each stakeholder will be consulted using various communication
protocols such as industry meetings, private meetings and focus groups. A full list of
stakeholders and types of engagements can be found in the relevant section of this
report.

Three types of project alternatives were put forward for consideration; no alternative,
change of location and design alternative. However, EFC highly recommends that only
design alternatives should be implemented due to the socio-economic importance that
the CGV has within the local community and the remainder of the Gold Coast.

Based on the findings of the EIA process EFC recommends the project be approved,
provided the mitigation measures are adhered to and the monitoring of these measures
are implemented. The main reasons for this decision is that the major impacts from the
activities of the project are not too severe or irredeemable and the socio-economic role
that the CGV will play within Gold Coast and the local community.

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2
List of Figures and Tables............................................................................................................. 6
List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... 6
1.

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7

2.

Background Section ............................................................................................................... 7

2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.

Project Outline.............................................................................................................................. 7
Project Location ........................................................................................................................... 8
Screening Summary .................................................................................................................... 9
Scoping Summary ...................................................................................................................... 10

3. Major Impact: Habitat Loss ................................................................................................... 10


3.1. Baseline Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 10
3.2. Prediction Method........................................................................................................................... 11
3.3. Predicted Impacts............................................................................................................................ 11
3.4. Mitigation and Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 13

4. Major Impact: Socio-Economic............................................................................................. 14


4.1. Baseline Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 14
4.2. Prediction Method ........................................................................................................................... 15
4.3. Predicted Impacts............................................................................................................................ 15
4.4. Mitigation and Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 16

5. Major Impact: Noise Pollution............................................................................................. 18


5.1. Baseline Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 18
5.2. Prediction Methods......................................................................................................................... 18
5.3. Predicted Impacts............................................................................................................................ 18
5.4. Mitigation and Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 19

6. Major Impact: Air Pollution .................................................................................................. 20


6.1. Baseline Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 20
6.2. Prediction Method ........................................................................................................................... 20
6.3. Predicted Impacts............................................................................................................................ 20
6.4. Mitigation and Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 21

7. Major Impact: Erosion............................................................................................................. 22


7.1. Baseline Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 22
7.2. Prediction Method ........................................................................................................................... 23
7.3. Predicted Impacts............................................................................................................................ 23
7.4. Mitigation and Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 24

8. Major Impact: Water Pollution ............................................................................................ 25


8.1. Baseline Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 25
8.2. Prediction Method........................................................................................................................... 26
8.3. Predicted Impacts............................................................................................................................ 26
8.4. Mitigation and Monitoring ........................................................................................................... 27

9. Minor Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 28


9.1. Minor Impact: Pests ........................................................................................................................ 28
9.1.1. Baseline Conditions................................................................................................................................ 28
9.1.2. Mitigation and Monitoring .................................................................................................................. 28
9.2. Minor Impact: Visual Amenity .................................................................................................... 28
9.2.1. Baseline Conditions................................................................................................................................ 28
9.2.2. Mitigation and Monitoring .................................................................................................................. 28
9.3. Minor Impact: Waste ...................................................................................................................... 28

9.3.1. Baseline Conditions................................................................................................................................ 28


9.3.2. Prediction Method .................................................................................................................................. 29
9.3.3. Mitigation and Monitoring .................................................................................................................. 29
9.4. Minor Impact: Cultural Impact ................................................................................................... 29
9.4.1. Baseline Conditions................................................................................................................................ 29
9.4.2. Prediction Method .................................................................................................................................. 29
9.4.3. Mitigation and Monitoring .................................................................................................................. 30

10. Evaluation Table..................................................................................................................... 30


11. Public Involvement ............................................................................................................... 31
12. Project Alternatives .............................................................................................................. 33
13. Recommendation ................................................................................................................... 34
List of References .......................................................................................................................... 35
Appendix A: Scoping Matrix and Evaluation Tables ......................................................... 40

List of Figures and Tables


Figure 1. Location of proposed Commonwealth Games Village .................................................. 9
Figure 2. Original regional ecosystem condition. ............................................................................ 11
Figure 3. Current regional ecosystem condition.............................................................................. 12
Figure 4. Land uses surrounding the CGV site .................................................................................. 14
Figure 5. Unstable soils overlay map.................................................................................................... 22
Figure 6. Map showing subject site in relation to problem drainage areas .......................... 25
Figure 7. Stakeholder concept map....................................................................................................... 32

Table 1. Lot details of project site. ........................................................................................................... 8


Table 2. Major and minor impact of CGV ............................................................................................ 10
Table 3. Project Alternative table .......................................................................................................... 33
Table 4. Predicted Impacts of Gold Coast Commonwealth Games Village............................. 41
Table 5. Predicted impacts after mitigation strategies are put in place ................................. 42
Table 6. Key for scoping matrix and evaluation table.................................................................... 43

List of Abbreviations
ABS

Australian Bureau of Statistics

AFL

Australian Football League

CBD

Central Business District

CGV

Commonwealth Games Village

DTMR

Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads

EDQ

Economic Development Queensland

EIA

Environmental Impact Assessment

EPA

Environmental Protection Agency

EPBC

Environmental Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act

EFC

Environment First Consultancy

GCCC

Gold Coast City Council

GLA

Greater London Authority

Ha

Hectare

IAPPA

International Association for Public Participation Australasia

KDO

Kowloon Development Office

PDA

Priority Development Area

SDPOWA

State Development & Public Works Organisation

SPA

Sustainable Planning Act

1. Introduction
Environment First Consultancy (EFC) has prepared this Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) report of the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games Village. The
report includes the screening of relevant EIA legislation as well as the scoping
evaluation of the major and minor environmental and social impacts caused by the
activities throughout the life of the proposed development. Mitigation measures are
then advised for each major and minor impact to reduce potential severity of these
impacts. Based on these mitigation measures predictions are made and new values are
assigned to each impact using an evaluation table. Advice on stakeholder interactions
and public involvement in the EIA process is also presented. Finally, project alternatives
are offered with recommendations on the best options for the project with a final
decision on project approval.

2. Background Section
The following background section is a summary of the EFCs Scoping Report. The
section will outline the project, identify the location of the project and summarise the
findings from respective screening and scoping studies. For more detailed information
on any part of the background section, refer to the Scoping Report.

2.1.

Project Outline

The Commonwealth Games Village (CGV) will house 6,500 athletes and staff from over
70 competing nations. The project includes 1,253 townhouse and apartment style
dwellings as well as various mixed use developments and a substantial open
recreational space (Queensland Government 2014 B). After the Commonwealth Games,
the project will enter a legacy phase where the Village will be transformed into the
residential component of the newly formed Health and Knowledge Precinct
(Queensland Government 2014 A; Queensland Government 2013 B).

The project will be broken down in four main phases; early works, construction, Games
phase and legacy phase. There are numerous main activities that will be completed
during each stage such as the demolition of existing buildings, bulk earth works and the
upgrading of Smith Street Motorway. For a full list of activities that will occur in each
stage, please refer to EFCs scoping report (Environment First Consultancy 2014).

2.2.

Project Location

As shown in Figure 1, the CGV is located on the Northern end of the Gold Coast,
approximately 3.6km from the Southport CBD and 8.1km from Surfers Paradise. The
Gold Coast University Hospital and Griffith University neighbour the site with the
Southport Sharks AFL club situated nearby. The lot details of the site are displayed in
Table 1.
Table 1. Lot details of project site.

Property Address

1 Parklands Drive, Southport QLD 4215

Coordinates

-27.961721, 153.387772

Lot Number

Property Number

SP267761

Parish

Nerang (Division 6)

Size of Lot

293,400m2 (29.3Ha)

Figure 1. Location of proposed Commonwealth Games Village

2.3.

Screening Summary

The proposed CGV project will be governed by Economic Development Queensland


(EDQ) legislation as a Priority Development Area (PDA). To be considered a PDA
specific triggers had to be met, including; supporting economic growth, need for
accelerated development, intended for special purposes, and unlocks government
owned land (Queensland Government 2014 C; Queensland Government 2014 E).

The project was assessed against other legislation such as the Environmental Protection
and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) and State Development and Public Work
Organisation Act (SDPWOA) however; due to the uniqueness of the project these Acts
were no longer relevant. It was noted that under EDQ legislation no formal EIA is
required, though it was recommended that one be undertaken due to significance of the
project and its concrete deadline (Queensland Government 2014 C).

2.4.

Scoping Summary

A scoping matrix was used to assess potential environmental and social impacts of the
CGV. A 500m radius around the boundary of the site was included in the scoping study
to make sure the magnitude and intensity of each impact was properly assessed. As
seen in Table 4 of Appendix A, the impacts were assessed in a total of four separate
areas; magnitude, temporal, ecological and social and given a score ranging from
minimal (1) to catastrophic (5). Finally the mean rating of each impact was calculated to
identify the major and minor impacts of the CGV (see Table 2).
Table 2. Major and minor impact of CGV

Major Impact

Minor Impact

Habitat loss

Pest

Socio-economics

Cultural impact

Noise pollution

Waste

Air pollution

Visual amenity

Erosion
Water pollution

An impact was deemed major if its overall rating was above moderate (3) or that the
majority of scores were rated as moderate (3) over all areas of the matrix (E.g. Noise
and air pollution). To be considered a minor impact, the overall score of the impact had
to be rated as minimal (1) or minor (2).

3. Major Impact: Habitat Loss


3.1. Baseline Conditions
The CGV site is a brownfield site with pre-existing remnant vegetation of scattered
natives which mostly occurs along the property boundary. There are multiple remnant
patches of the endangered regional ecosystem Blackbutt Forest (Eucalyptus pilularis) in
the Southern area of the scoping radius. Several critical species have also been listed in
the surrounding area such as the Green Thighed Frog, Wallum Frog and the Swift Parrot
(Queensland Government 2014 C).

10

3.2. Prediction Method


Remnant regional ecosystem mapping was used to predict the impact of habitat loss. A
list of all species within the area was also obtained to identify what fauna and flora
species were present, in particular endangered species (Queensland Government 2014
C). There is uncertainty with the species data as it covers a larger area then the scoping
radius, therefore it is not certain if the endangered species are present within the area
surrounding the project site. However, as there is a relatively small population of
endangered species, it must be assumed that they are present and would be greatly
affected by the project.

3.3. Predicted Impacts


A-Loss of endangered regional ecosystem
The CGV site sits on top of what used to all be blackbutt forest (see Figure 2). In
contrast, the current area of remnant forest within the 500m scoping radius is very
small (Figure 3). Due to the upgrade of the Smith Street Motorway, it is predicted that
the majority of patches A, B and C will be affected resulting in an estimated loss of
10,000m2 of remnant vegetation (Queensland Government 2014 C).

Figure 2. Original regional ecosystem condition (Modified Queensland Government 2014 C).

11

Figure 3. Current regional ecosystem condition (Modified Queensland Government 2014 C).

B-Endangerment of species
During the early works phase of the project, trees will be removed as part of the
upgrade of Smith Street Motorway. Fauna species will be endangered by heavy
machinery as well as falling debris. Increased danger may also occur with fleeing
animals moving onto roads and being hit by oncoming traffic.
C- Loss of nesting and other "protective" habitats
The clearing of vegetation will result in a substantial loss of nest and "protective"
habitats. This negatively impacts fauna such as birds, possums and gliders as they use
hollows in trees for protection and raising their young. Other protective habitats such as
fallen trees and burrows, which provide small fauna protection from predation and
weather, will also be lost.
D-Negative effects on endangered species
Loss of habitat within the surrounding ecosystem could result in negative impacts such
as loss of food, breeding success and loss in local population. The koala will be majorly
affected with loss of trees resulting in loss of food and range (Queensland Government
2014 C). The Swift Parrot, which comes North in the winter from Tasmania, may also
become locally extinct if its habitat becomes too small forcing the parrot to choose a
more suitable habitat to migrate to (Queensland Government 2014 C).

12

3.4. Mitigation and Monitoring


A-Loss of endangered regional ecosystem
Due to the compulsory upgrade of Smith Street Motorway, there is no feasible method
to prevent any negative impact on the blackbutt forest. The only way to minimise the
loss of the blackbutt forest within the area is limiting the removal of the species where
possible. Another alternative is through offsetting the damage by investing in larger
areas of equal or better blackbutt forest communities and turning them into protected
land (Planit Consulting 2013).
B-Endangerment of species
Before the clearing of vegetation commences, wildlife spotter catcher should sweep the
area for any fauna species in particular the koala and the other endangered species. The
wildlife should then be relocated away from the project site to a more safe and suitable
habitat. This process should routinely happen throughout the early works and
construction phase to reduce wildlife casualties (Kowloon Development Office 2001).
C-Loss of nesting and other "protective" habitats
To minimise the loss of nesting and other "protective" habitats all effort should be taken
to preserve hollow bearing trees where possible. Limiting the removal of other
protective habitats such as fallen trees and burrows should also be considered to
prevent habitat loss (Queensland Government 2014 D).
D-Negative effects on endangered species
The use of wildlife spotter catchers should again be applied to minimise the impact on
endangered species. To thoroughly protect endangered species like the koala, it is also
recommended that exclusion fences be implemented between remnant bushland and
Smith Street Motorway to prevent collisions (Queensland Government 2014 D).

13

4. Major Impact: Socio-Economic


4.1. Baseline Conditions
Population
The current population for Southport is 54,282 people, with a gender split of 51.5%
female and 48.5% male. Research has also shown that Southport is a family orientated
suburb with over 64% of the dwellings being occupied by families. Southport is also a
car dependent suburb with 86% of the population owning at least one motor vehicle
(Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2013).
Land use
As illustrated in Figure 4, there are several existing land uses that surround the CGV
site, these include; public and private open space, residential choice, community
purposes and fringe business. The dwelling structure within Southport is predominately
made up of detached dwellings (51.2%) followed by units/apartments (29.8%) being
the second most common dwelling form (ABS 2013).

Figure 4. Land uses surrounding the CGV site (Modified GCCC 2008).

14

Economic structure
Southport is considered as the central business district of the Gold Coast with its main
industries being health, retail and commercial as well as government administration.
Southport has the largest share of office space within the Gold Coast (149,240 m2) and
has 4,926 registered businesses, which will continue to grow as the suburb is
redeveloped (Queensland Government 2014 A). According to the ABS (2013), health
care and social assistance is the biggest employer within Southport (14.4%) followed
closely by accommodation (13.3%) and retail trade (12.3%).

4.2. Prediction Method


As the CGV is a relatively small site (29.3Ha), prediction models were not warranted for
the majority of socio-economic impacts. For example, degradation of roads and loss of
amenity could be successfully mitigated, as the location, scale and magnitude of these
impacts were easier to predict. To provide guidance on different mitigation methods,
various case studies were used such as the Morisset road upgrade in Canberra and the
Gateway upgrade in Brisbane. Relevant scientific literature including Sweet (2014) and
Trzciski et al. (2013) was also referred to.

A prediction model was required for traffic congestion as this impact was much harder
to identify its scale and magnitude. Both macro and microcomputer simulation models
were used such as TRANSYT and AIMSUN to accurately predict travel patterns and
driver behaviour (Australian Road Research Board 2009). The results were then used to
identify the travel cost and business cost of traffic congestion and how it would
ultimately affect economic productivity (Weisbrod et al. 2003). Scientific literature was
then used to help formulate successful mitigation strategies.

4.3. Predicted Impacts


A-Traffic congestion
The large amount of traffic on Smith Street Motorway (61,000 motorists daily) and
constant site traffic from the development will put significant pressure on the
motorway (Queensland Government 2013 B). Combining this pressure with the
upgrading of Smith Street Motorway will result in increased traffic congestion. As
highlighted in Table 4 in Appendix A, the increased congestion will make work trips
longer for commuters; therefore reducing productivity which can potentially harm the
local economy (Sweet 2014). During the operational phase, the surrounding roadways

15

will continue to experience traffic delays, as more motorists will want to take advantage
of the upgraded infrastructure; however the impact is not predicted to be as significant.
B-Degradation of existing roadways
There will be a substantial amount of heavy machinery transported in and out of the
development during the early works and construction phase. The existing road surface
(in particular Parklands Drive) will not be able to sustain the physical pressure of the
heavy machinery, which will result in numerous cracks and potholes appearing
(Trzciski et al. 2013). As the roadways surrounding the CGV are constantly used by
motorists, it is imperative that the infrastructure is upgraded to handle this pressure.
C-Employment
The development of the CGV will mean a substantial increase in employment within the
Southport area. Overall there will be more than 1,500 jobs created, predominately
during the construction phase where there will be a high need for skilled tradespeople
(Queensland Government 2014 B). Furthermore, employment within the local
community will also increase from the additional spending that is associated with the
development.
D-Housing
After the completion of the Commonwealth Games, the CGV will be transformed into the
residential component of the Health and Knowledge Precinct. The majority of the units
and townhouses will be used as affordable housing options for the local community, in
particular Griffith University students. The mixed-use development will include various
retail shops that will be used by residents, Griffith University and the Gold Coast
University Hospital (Queensland Government 2014 B).

4.4. Mitigation and Monitoring


A-Traffic congestion
Mitigation strategies for the upgrading of Smith Street Motorway should be
implemented first as the majority of the congestion will occur during the early works
and construction phase. Firstly, night works should be utilised by the Department of
Transport and Main Roads (DTMR) as there is usually less traffic on the motorway at
nighttime. This will help to reduce traffic disruption during peak traffic times (ACT
Government 2010; Queensland Government 2013 C). Secondly, notification of the road

16

works should be provided to the public one month in advance so motorists will know to
use alternative routes when possible. This should be combined with public transport
campaign to help reduce the number of motor vehicles on the Smith Street Motorway
during the upgrade (ACT Government 2010). Finally, left hand turn slip lanes should be
employed at all signalised T intersections surrounding the CGV to help reduce traffic
build up (Queensland Government 2013 A).
B-Degradation of existing roadways
Access roads for the CGV (in particular Parklands Drive) should be upgraded so the
infrastructure can handle the physical pressure of heavy machinery being transported
in and out of the development (Queensland Government 2013 A; Queensland
Government 2013 C). The upgrade should commence from the outset as the heavy
machinery will predominately be used during the early works and construction phases.
To prevent further traffic disruption, the access roads should be upgraded before road
works on Smith Street Motorway commence.
C-Employment
Potential equity issues may occur within the local community as the CGV will
predominately employ skilled tradespeople. However, the CGV will provide an
economic boost to the local community throughout all stages of development, which
will help to alleviate this issue. Community focus groups should be implemented at six
monthly intervals throughout the project so that the local community can voice their
concern if they believe there is an equity issue.
D-Housing
Possible equity issues may again occur in the allocation of the affordable housing.
University students and people associated with the Gold Coast University Hospital
would have priority in the allocation of units and townhouses. However, there will be a
designated amount of housing available for the remainder of the public. Community
consultation groups should be set up prior to the legacy phase so that public interest
can be monitored and the allocation of the affordable housing can be altered if
necessary.

17

5. Major Impact: Noise Pollution


5.1. Baseline Conditions
Current noise disturbances are generated mainly from the constant traffic on Smith
Street Motorway. The site is also in a noise sensitive area due to the close proximity to
the Gold Coast University Hospital.

5.2. Prediction Methods


A prediction model was required for noise pollution as this impact is harder to identify
it scale and magnitude. SoundPLAN environmental software modeling was used to
accurately determine the impacts associated with noise pollution. This software offers a
flexible range of noise evaluation modules including noise calculations of all possible
contributors (SoundPLAN 2014). The results from the model were then used to identify
how significant the noise would impact the surrounding areas.

5.3. Predicted Impacts


A-Machinery noise
Heavy earth moving equipment can move from location to location and is likely to vary
considerably in its intensity throughout a workday. Some equipment that is likely to be
used includes; excavators, bulldozers, loaders, jackhammers and petrol generators. The
impacts of loud equipment will predominantly be felt during the early works and
construction phase and is a concern for the sensitivity of the residents at the Gold Coast
University Hospital.
B-Traffic noise
There is predicted to be a significant increase in traffic noise from the upgrade of Smith
Street Motorway. There are 61,000 motorists that utilise the Motorway daily and the
closure of lanes for the upgrade will cause backed up traffic, which results in vehicles
idling for longer periods. This will also include additional large trucks that are required
during the early works and construction phase. Griffith University, local residents and
Gold Coast University Hospital will be the most affected by the increased traffic noise
due to their close proximity to the project site.

18

C-Excessive hours of operation


Excessive hours of operation during the early works and construction phase of the
project can have negative health effects on the people who surround the site. This will
particularly impact the sensitive patients of the Gold Coast University Hospital, as well
as surrounding residents and Griffith University.

5.4. Mitigation and Monitoring


A-Machinery noise
Old and unmaintained equipment can be a primary cause of noise disturbances;
however this can be limited by substituting the existing equipment with quieter
equipment, or by keeping them well maintained. New equipment can still cause
excessive amounts of noise, though it can be significantly reduced by erecting
temporary barriers (Standlee 2014). This should be undertaken prior to the
construction phase with a focus on the Western boundary, as this is the most sensitive
area. The workers exposure to the loud machinery is also important; to limit this impact
earplugs are to be used to control exposure to noisy equipment and work area.
B-Traffic noise
Implementing management strategies for reducing traffic and areas to be less congested
can mitigate traffic noise that is increased during the upgrade of Smith Street Motorway
(Kim et al. 2013). This can be mitigated through undertaking road works at nighttime
where there is minimal traffic. If night works were undertaken this would free up lanes
during peak hours and therefore traffic would flow at a better rate.
C-Excessive hours of operation
There is currently a Gold Coast City Council local law regarding the limitation of hours
of building and construction work (GCCC Local Law No.23, Limitation of hours of
building and construction work). The objective of this law is to regulate the hours
during which building work or construction work can be carried out. It also protects the
public health and safety and convenience of the public by eliminating or reducing
nuisances including excessive noise (GCCC n.d.). Therefore by implementing this law,
the construction working hours would be 6:30am 6:30pm.

19

In addition to these mitigation measures it is also advised to inform the local residents,
Gold Coast University Hospital and Griffith University of the operation hours including
what noisy activities will be undertaken and when. Public information signs should also
be displayed with details on who to contact if there are any excessive disturbances. This
can reduce hostility towards the project and gives the opportunity to address the
concerns of the local people.

6. Major Impact: Air Pollution


6.1. Baseline Conditions
The CGV site is currently exposed to vehicle emissions generated from constant traffic
on the Smith Street Motorway and Parklands Drive. The pollution levels are expected to
increase once the early works and construction phases of the project commence.

6.2. Prediction Method


Air pollution from the project site will not necessarily be of high impact, however as in
the scoping matrix (Appendix A, Table 4) it is deemed consistent throughout all the four
phases of the CGV project and therefore it is considered to be significant. Modeling
software can be implemented to control this impact, however, this is not necessary as
the scale and magnitude is known and the predicted impacts can be effectively
controlled through various mitigation measures depending on the duration and
frequency of the pollutant (New South Wales Government 2013).

6.3. Predicted Impacts


A-Dust dispersal
Dust will be the most common pollutant that will be evident during the early works and
construction phase. Dust pollution is the release of fine dirt particles into the
atmosphere which become suspended in the air (Greater London Authority (GLA)
2006). Dust pollution is caused by the clearing of vegetation and top soil, exposing fine
dust particles below. As trucks and other heavy machinery move around the site they
disturb the dust particles releasing them into the air. Dust pollution is a serious health
hazard as it inflicts severe harm to our respiratory system (GLA 2006). While the dust
pollution levels on site and off site should be relatively minor, those who suffer from
conditions such as asthma could still be at risk.

20

B-Motor vehicle emissions


During the construction phase of the development a number of trucks and heavy
machinery will be used. These vehicles produce vast quantities of carbon emissions
which are harmful to both humans and the environment (GLA 2006).
C-Chemical pollution
During the construction and legacy phase a number of industrial chemicals will be used
in construction and maintenance. These can include things such as spray painting, weed
spraying and the use of other industrial aerosols. Some chemicals used such as spray
paint can cause neural debilitation, while chemicals such as weed poison are toxic to
humans and a countless number of flora and fauna (McCall 2011). The use of aerosols
on construction sites poses a risk to nearby residents as they can be very easily carried
by the wind. This means that areas that are downwind from the direction of prevailing
wind are at risk to varying levels of chemical pollution.

6.4. Mitigation and Monitoring


A-Dust Dispersal
A number of methods can be utilised to minimise the release of dust particles into the
air during the early works and construction phase. The use of water systems to wet soils
and other particles on site will make sure that these sediments are not dispersed into
the atmosphere. To control dust from on-site traffic movement, the use of water-based
surfactants will cause the agglomeration of dust, making it more difficult to become
windborne (GLA 2006). Another simple method would be washing vehicles as they
leave the site to minimise dust dispersal outside of the project site.
Other effective mitigation techniques would be; reducing the height of stockpiles,
implementing wind barriers and covering transported material and waste. Using these
mitigation techniques in conjunction with the techniques outlined above will further
decrease the impact of air pollution created during the earth works and construction
phase.

21

B-Motor vehicle emissions


The use of electric or gas powered machinery instead of diesel and petrol powered
machinery will significantly reduce on-site carbon emissions. As this method is not
always feasible, EFC recommends that limiting idling time of heavy machinery will also
help to reduce emissions.
C-Chemical pollution
Weather conditions must be considered whilst undertaking chemical spraying activities
such as spray painting and weed control spraying. Strong wind can make the harmful
chemicals windborne which can potentially result in health hazards for surrounding
residents. Wind barriers should be implemented when chemical spraying to further
mitigate the issue (McCall 2011).

7. Major Impact: Erosion


7.1. Baseline Conditions
The existing conditions suggest the soils are not unstable throughout the site, with a
very low risk of potential land slip. Figure 5 highlights areas of unstable soils and areas
of potential land slip hazards (GCCC 2009).

Figure 5. Unstable soils overlay map (Modified GCCC 2009).

22

The terrain slopes North-West towards a large watercourse situated at the Northern
part of the site. The site has a low risk of flooding; however in general the site is situated
at a lower elevation to the surrounding landscape (Figure 6). The main site has no major
bushland however, the north and south-east of the site contains blackbutt forest (Figure
3).

7.2. Prediction Method


Although the baseline conditions of the site suggest the soils are not unstable, care and
consideration of soil conditions needs to be taken into account when large machinery
and other equipment are used on sloped areas on-site. There is no need to model the
impacts using modeling software, however the implementation of practical control
measures during the construction phase will minimise the impact from potential
erosion activities. As a guide in determining mitigation methods for erosion control
previous EIA's were consulted including other consultancy agencies (VDM 2012)
involved in projects where erosion was a major impact. The erosion and sediment
control field guide was also consulted for information on appropriate erosion control
measures (Witheridge 2012).

The construction of infrastructure and the upgrade of roads both on-site and within the
boundaries of the project, i.e. Smith Street Motorway, will require bulk earthworks to
remove and relocate large quantities of soil and the clearing of existing vegetation. The
early works and construction phase covers a period from mid-2013 to late 2017 and its
extent will reach the majority of the 29.3Ha, including the area of Smith Street
Motorway upgrade. It is expected the majority of the earthworks will be situated toward
the Eastern side of the site due to the descending terrain along with the construction of
the main access road into the CGV.

7.3. Predicted Impacts


A-Soil instability
There is a mid/high potential for erosion, sedimentation and/or soil instability as a
result of the works on the Smith Street Motorway upgrade. The disturbance to the
blackbutt bushland, opposite the entrance to the CGV will require large sections of
habitat clearing. The removal of trees and the destruction of root systems could cause
instability within the soil creating a potential for erosion in those areas.

23

B-Silt build up
There is a mid / high potential for erosion on-site from the Eastern entrance towards
the West and North due to the high level of earthworks situated in that area of the site.
These sections of the site slope downward away from the entrance, toward a large
watercourse potentially increasing silt and sediment build up. This has the potential to
impact any aquatic species within the watercourse.

As a result of the activities that will take place during the early works and construction
phases the potential for soil erosion as an impact on the CGV site is considered major.
Soil erosion and sedimentation is predicted to be an issue through those phases and
although in some instances the impact has a low rating, it is its' repeatable presence on
the prediction matrix which gives it a major value and a high consideration for
mitigation measures.

7.4. Mitigation and Monitoring


A-Soil instability
Control measures should be implemented through the erection of erosion barriers,
sediment traps and silt fences to reduce erosion effects. Vegetation clearing should be
kept to the minimum practical allowance to preserve soil integrity and reduce the risk of
erosion. To reduce impact of soil erosion on bare areas (particularly on sloped areas),
replanting appropriate vegetation, mulching and/or hydro seeding both during and
after the early works and construction phase should be undertaken to minimise the
period where the soil has been left exposed (VDM 2012).
B-Silt build up
Stockpiled topsoil should not be exposed or in a position where it has the potential to
collapse or move. Stockpiles should be of minimal size and major construction activities
should be scheduled during dry periods (if applicable) to reduce the chance of erosion
and potential sediment run-off (Witheridge 20012).
Monitoring of these measures needs to be conducted monthly by appropriate
authorities along with employer/employee responsibility to implement the control
measures. The developer and contractors must adhere to the guidelines of the EDQ
legislation regarding soil erosion and sediment control.

24

8. Major Impact: Water Pollution


8.1. Baseline Conditions
Storm water drainage issues
As shown in Figure 6, there is an issue with storm water pooling at the North-East side
of the CGV site. In the event of an intense rain system poor drainage leads to storm
water pooling which creates prefect medium for water pollution, erosion and leads to
greater risk of flood (GCCC 2014).

Figure 6. Map showing subject site in relation to problem drainage areas (Modified from GCCC 2008).

Low-Medium risk of flooding


The topography of the CGV site has also created some risks for water pollution. The
slope of the block pushes the majority of water run-off down towards the North-East
corner of the site. As a result of this channeling there is a significant risk of flooding to
this section of the site (GCCC 2014).

25

8.2. Prediction Method


No prediction modelling was needed for water pollution as its location, scale and
magnitude was known through the use of the scoping matrix (Table 4, Appendix A).
Water pollution has high levels of spatial and environmental impacts; however it has
low levels of social impacts. These predicted impacts would all be reduced through the
use of various mitigation techniques (Harden et al. 2010; KDO 2001). Uncertainty
within the prediction method was recognised as the rankings placed within the scoping
matrix are quite subjective.

8.3. Predicted Impacts


A-Habitat degradation in watercourse
During the construction phase of the development a number of established trees and
plants are cleared; increasing the level of sediments that are pushed into water bodies
nearby. Like terrestrial flora, aquatic flora also relies strongly on a good mix of nutrients
and sunlight for growth. When sediments are released into a nearby water body they
block out a majority of the sunlight which degrades marine habitats from a ground up
perspective (Bondar-Nowakowska & Hacho 2014).
B-Reduced aquatic flora & fauna biodiversity
As habitats continue to degrade only the most resilient species of flora and fauna have
the ability to survive the conditions. While this does not necessarily mean that the more
vulnerable species die out, this is most often the case. As water pollution continues,
more and more niche species start to disappear or move away from that section of the
water body. Water pollution selectively removes the vulnerable species of flora and
fauna, leading to a habitat with reduced biodiversity (Erftemeijer et al. 2012).
C-Creek bank erosion
Clearing of vegetation near the edges of water bodies reduces the strength of creek
banks as the roots that used to hold the soil and dirt together are no longer there. When
a rain event occurs and culminates in a creek or river, the increased water flow puts a
considerable amount of stress on the creek banks. The weakened sections of the creek
bank where vegetation clearing has occurred quite often become eroded and lead to
sedimentation and sometimes even drastic changes in the watercourse (Harden et al.
2010).

26

8.4. Mitigation and Monitoring


A-Habitat degradation in water course
Mitigation of habitat degradation can come in the form of prevention or mitigation. As
sedimentation is the main form of water pollution for this type of development; all
forms of mitigation aim to tackle sedimentation. To combat the effects of sedimentation
creek bank covers can be used (Kowloon Development Office (KDO) 2001). These are
simply material covers that can be placed over sections of loose soil or recently cleared
land to reduce sediment levels. Sedimentation can also be monitored using a turbidity
measurement device; this effectively represents the water clarity and levels of
sediments in the water (KDO 2001).
B-Reduced aquatic flora & fauna biodiversity
There are a number of soft measures available to mitigate the effects of biodiversity
loss. The first method is monitoring the health of the ecosystem through water testing
and species counts. These would be undertaken monthly by environmental auditors as
changes in diversity occur fast. Once drops in diversity have been detected, mitigation
becomes much more difficult. Collection and separation of vulnerable species then
becomes the best option; this is where vulnerable species are collected, separated from
other species and held until water conditions at the site improve. The best mitigation
method however, is stopping the pollution at the source using silt fences and sediment
traps (KDO 2001).
C-Creek bank erosion
Creek bank erosion occurs when stability and strength in a creek bank are so low that
they fall into the creek. Mitigating bank erosion relies heavily on strengthening the soils
around the water body. The planting of deep rooting vegetation near creek banks helps
to strengthen the soil and reduce creek bank erosion (Harden et al. 2010). Alternatively
rocks can be placed in front of the bank; this increases the strength and reduces the
direct impact of water on the creek bank.

27

9. Minor Impacts
9.1. Minor Impact: Pests
9.1.1. Baseline Conditions
Pests are predicted to be evident during the Games and Legacy Phase where uncollected
rubbish could result in an increase in pest species such as rodents, wild dogs and
rabbits.
9.1.2. Mitigation and Monitoring
In order to mitigate or monitor this impact, site hygiene will be of great use as leaving
food scraps and an accumulation of damaged building materials can attract these pest
species. As this impact is considered to be of minimal concern the use of pest
monitoring or other programs are not deemed necessary.

9.2. Minor Impact: Visual Amenity


9.2.1. Baseline Conditions
The visual amenity of the project site along with the baseline conditions is a minor
impact due to the CGV being situated on a brownfield site. The site was predominately
covered by the built environment such as the indoor sporting centre and harness racing
track; however there was native vegetation along the South-Eastern part of the site.
9.2.2. Mitigation and Monitoring
The clearing of existing vegetation is the main aspect that will affect the visual amenity
of the site. However once the project is completed, there will be a significant amount of
open green space and landscaping which will mitigate this minor problem (Queensland
Government 2014 B).

9.3. Minor Impact: Waste


9.3.1. Baseline Conditions
Waste is classified as any hazardous or non-hazardous solid waste generated by
activities, particularly during the construction phase (Queensland Government 2014 D).
The site contains existing infrastructure as well as no significant flora and fauna, which
would trigger the federal EPBC Act. Due to these conditions the generation of waste
materials throughout the lifetime of the project classifies hazardous waste as a minor
impact.

28

9.3.2. Prediction Method


Based on existing information of all potential waste producing activities, the intensity
and the significance of the impact is known and can be accounted for. Computer
modeling is unnecessary providing the assigned mitigation methods are employed
throughout the lifetime of the project. During the Legacy phase some uncertainty does
exist for the prediction of waste impacts, however based on the existing conditions of
the site along with general waste management practices i.e. garbage collection
employed on the Gold Coast, these impacts can be classified as low.
9.3.3. Mitigation and Monitoring
The predicted impacts outlined above can be reduced effectively through various
mitigation strategies. For example, the amount of vegetation waste can be limited
through reusing the waste for mulching during the re-vegetation stage. Building waste
can be also be reduced through recycling and correct disposal of leftover construction
materials using appropriately placed covered bins. Finally, hazardous waste should be
stored, transported, and used in accordance with the relevant legislation and disposed
of using licensed transporters.

9.4. Minor Impact: Cultural Impact


9.4.1. Baseline Conditions
The previous Parklands site has cultural significance with various community groups
within the Gold Coast region. Existing infrastructure such as the harness racing track
and indoor sports centre was frequently used by the local community, whilst the
surrounding blackbutt vegetation was valued by local environmental groups. The site
itself was also culturally significant as it was used for major leisure events such as the
Gold Coast Show and the Big Day Out.
9.4.2. Prediction Method
Specific computer generated modeling is not required for this impact, however
comparison of similar projects can be made and predictions based on those outcomes
are assessed. Using previous project information (e.g. 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth
Games), the negative cultural impact significance for this site is classified as low.

29

9.4.3. Mitigation and Monitoring


To prevent or minimise potential community backlash it is appropriate to provide the
community with up-to-date information regarding the project and developments. This
means allowing community input and inclusion in the decision making process. Regular
public meetings should be scheduled during each stage of the project and all
information regarding the CGV should be readily available to the community via
websites, booklets and phone in all relevant languages.

10. Evaluation Table


In light of the mitigation strategies discussed previously in this report, all major and
minor impacts listed in the scoping matrix were reassessed in a new table (Appendix A,
Table 5). The table estimates the changes in scale and magnitude of each impact, after
the mitigation strategies would have been implemented. Published evaluation tables
were consulted to during the process to make sure the predictions were as accurate as
possible (ACT Planning & Land Authority n.d.).

After mitigation strategies were put in place, most of the major impacts declined in scale
and magnitude (Appendix A, Table 5). This resulted in socio-economic, noise pollution,
air pollution, erosion and water pollution all down grading from a major impact to a
minor impact. Habitat loss is much harder to effectively mitigate unless the
development is redesigned or moved to another location. The mitigation strategies
suggested for habitat loss would reduce the problem, however it would still remain a
major impact. Therefore for this project to be approved, the impact on habitat loss must
be regularly monitored and taken into consideration in all design aspects of the CGV.

30

11. Public Involvement


Figure 7 below displays EFC's stakeholder engagement plan for Gold Coast's CGV. The
concept map below shows each of the stakeholders involved, as well as the
developmental impact and communication protocols. The stakeholders influenced by
this development include; Griffith University, Gold Coast University Hospital, state and
local government, developers, residents, shop owners, contractors, athletes and
community groups (E.g. Gold Coast Harness Racing Club, Gold Coast Greyhound Racing
Club, Parklands Indoor Sports Centre).

The impacts associated with the development range in varying degree from one
stakeholder to another; this means that the method for addressing these issues also
varies greatly between each stakeholder (IAPPA 2014). As a result, four different
communication protocols are used to address each stakeholder group, they include;
private meetings, focus groups, community meetings, and industry briefings. Private
meetings and community meetings will occur at the beginning and end of development
to ensure early concerns are addressed. Any concerns or issues that arise during
development can be addressed through progress meetings which will occur every six
months.

Other communication tools such as industry briefings and focus groups will meet on
separate time frames. Industry briefings will be held once at the beginning to select
correct developer/s and contractors to carry out the CGV project. Focus groups will be
formed at the beginning of the development and consulted once every three months.
These communication protocols will be the primary tool in notifying, informing,
consulting and involving stakeholders (IAPPA 2014). Beyond this other methods for
engagement will include, mail pamphlets, call centres and newsletters.

31

Focus Group

Private Meeting

Griffith University

G. C. Uni Hospital

Increased Traffic
Increased Noise

Private Meeting
Government

Increased Traffic
Increased Noise
Road congestion

Shop Owners

Increased Traffic
Increased Noise
Reduced
Business due to
road
construction and
congestion
Lowering of
company
aesthetics from
nearby air
pollution

Has Commercial
interest in
development

Developers

Has interest as
development has to
conform to building
codes

Residents
(Current + Future)

STAKEHOLDERS

Community
Meeting
Figure 7. Stakeholder concept map.
Competing
Contractors

Controls Building
Codes
Has Commercial
Interest

Industry Briefing

Increased Traffic
Increased Noise
Increased air and
water pollution
Cumulative effects
could lead to
devaluation of
land packages in
the area

Community
Meeting
Athletes

Increased Noise
Increased Air
pollution

Community Groups

Increased traffic
Air pollution

32

Industry Briefing
Figure 8. Stakeholder concept map.

Focus Group

Community
Meeting

12. Project Alternatives


A summary of project alternatives for the CGV has been provided in (Table 3.).
Three types of alternatives have been listed for consideration (no
alternative/change of location/design alternative) as well as the expected
outcome if that specific alternative was adopted. EFC has only put forward the
most effective design alternatives; however other alternatives are displayed in
the mitigation section of each major impact chapter.
Table 3. Project Alternative table

No project alternative

Change of location

Design alternative: Construct


majority of removable dwellings off
site

Design alternative: Implement


swales around water course

Design alternative: Replant


vegetation around endangered
ecosystem

Design alternative: Noise barriers

33

Minimal environmental impact due to the


development being located on a brownfield
site.
The CGV is an integral part of the Health and
Knowledge Precinct as it will be the main
residential component.
CVG is part of the strategic vision to
redevelop Southport into a business and
tourist hot spot.
The CVG could be moved closer to other
games facilities, in particular sporting
facilities. However as stated previously, this
would have a negative impact on the
Southport area.
Constructing the removable dwellings off site
will reduce the environmental impact during
the construction phase as less heavy
machinery is needed.
The use of swales around the watercourse
will prevent pollutants entering the
waterway which flows into a RAMSAR
conservation wetland.
Replanting endangered blackbutt
immediately after early works phase will
help to reduce environmental impact as well
as limiting habitat fragmentation.
The use of noise barriers during the early
works and construction phase will
significantly reduce noise pollution which
would affect sensitive areas such as the Gold
Coast Hospital.

After assessing all possible alternatives, EFC recommends that only design
alternatives should be implemented. A major reason for this decision is the
socio-economic importance that the CGV has within the local community as well
as the remainder of the Gold Coast. Furthermore the CGV is an integral part of a
new strategic vision for the Southport area and without it, the proposed Health
and Knowledge Precinct could not be established.

13. Recommendation
Based on the findings of the EIA process, EFC recommends that the project gains
approval provided the mitigation measures are adhered to and the monitoring of
these measures be implemented. The major impacts from the activities of the
project are not too severe or irredeemable and the application of the mitigation
measures will assist in reducing the environmental and social impacts of the
project. The project itself will stimulate economic growth in Queensland and the
Gold Coast and ultimately the Games themselves will have a positive effect on the
Gold Coast economically. For the site itself, the construction of the Games Village
will be an integral part of the Health and Knowledge Precinct, therefore
important for the local community of Southport.

34

List of References
ACT Government 2010, Morisset Road upgrade and extension: Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (online), Available:
<http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/26863/Appendi
x_K_-_Risk_Assessment_Table.pdf> (3 October 2014).
ACT Planning and Land Authority n.d. Preparation for an application for scoping
(online), Available:
<www.actpla.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf.../Application_for_scoping.pdf>
(15 October 2014).
Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013, 2011 Quick Census Stats (online), Available:
<http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/20
11/quickstat/SED30075?opendocument&navpos=220 > (8 October 2014).
Australian Road Research Board 2009, Traffic modelling techniques (online),
Available:
<http://www.arrb.com.au/admin/file/content2/c7/msim_ns1371_Pnote_2_j
ul09.pdf> (2 October 2014).
Bondar-Nowakowska, E. & Hacho, J. 2014, The risk as a measure of ecological safety
in watercourses, Journal of Water and Land Development, vol. 20, no. 1, pp.
310-315.
Environment First Consultancy 2014, 2018 Commonwealth Games Athletes Village
Scoping Report.
Environmental Protection Mid-Suffolk District Council 2014, Noise from construction
sites (online),
Available:http://www.midsuffolk.gov.uk/environment/environmentalprotection/neighbour-problems-concerning-noise-or-

pollution/noise-

nuisance/noise-from-construction-sites/ (20 October 2014).

35

Erftemeijer, P., Riegl, B., Hoeksema, B., Todd, P. 2012, 'Environmental impacts of
dredging and other sediment disturbances on corals: A review', Marine
Pollution Bulletin, vol. 64, pp. 1737-1765.
Gold Coast City Council 2009, Domain Map Southport (online), Available:
<http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/gcplanningscheme_1111/maps_
domain.html> (28 August 2014).
Gold Coast City Council 2014, Planning and Development Online (online), Available:
<http://pdonline.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/masterview/modules/propertymaster
/default.aspx?page=wrapper&key=332555 > (27 September 2014).
Greater London Authority 2006, 'The control of dust and emissions from
construction and demolition- Best Practice Guide', Greater London Authority
& London Councils (online), Available:<
http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/archives/mayor-environmentair_quality-docs-construction-dust-bpg.pdf> (24 October 2014).
Harden, C.P., Chartrand, K.J. & Henry, E. 2010, Temporal Variability of Bank Erosion
in East Tennessee Headwater Streams, Southeastern Geographer, vol. 50,
no. 4, pp. 484-502.
International Association for Public Participation Australasia 2014, Public
Participation Spectrum (online), Available:
<http://www.iap2.org.au/resources/iap2s-public-participation-spectrum >
(26 October 2014).
Kim, J., Cohn, L. & Shu, N. 2013, Effects of median barriers on highway noise levels,
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, vol. 133, no. 5, pp. 35883595.

36

Kowloon Development Office 2001, 'Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the


Revised Scheme of South East Kowloon Development', Territory
Development Department (online),
Available:<http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia/register/report/
eiareport/eia_0592001/ema4-8.pdf (23 October 2014).
McCall, M. 2011, Environmental, health and safety issues: Nanoparticles in the real
world, Nature Nanotechnology, vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 613-614.
New South Wales Government 2013, Local government air quality toolkit,
Environmental Protection Agency (online), Available:
<http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/air/mod3p3construc0
7268.pdf> (20 August 2014).
Planit Consulting 2013, Baseline Terrestrial Flora and Fauna Assessment- Roadway
upgrade Maleny-Kenilworth Road Conondale (online), Available:<
file:///C:/Users/kellster/Downloads/Appendix%205%20-%20Part%201%20Terrestrial%20Flora%20&%20Fauna%20Assessment.pdf> (25 October 2014).
Queensland Government 2013 A, Gold Coast Parklands redevelopment: Traffic
impact assessment, Department of Economic Development Queensland
(online), Available:
<http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/resources/plan/pda/traffic-impactassessment.pdf> (3 October 2014).
Queensland Government 2013 B, Smith Street Motorway and Olsen Avenue
interchange upgrade, Department of Transport and Main Roads (online),
Available: <http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/S/Smith-StreetMotorway-and-Olsen-Avenue-interchange-upgrade.aspx> (2 October 2014).
Queensland Government 2013 C, Gateway upgrade, Department of State
Development, Infrastructure and Planning (online), Available: <
http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/gatewayupgrade.html> (2 October 2014).

37

Queensland Government 2014 A, Southport PDA, Department of State


Development, Infrastructure and Planning (online), Available:
<http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/infrastructure-and-planning/southport.html >
(12 October 2014).
Queensland Government 2014 B, Parklands, State Development and Public Works
Organisation Act, Department of State Development, Infrastructure and
Planning (online), Available: <http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/infrastructureand-planning/parklands.html> (20 August 2014).
Queensland Government 2014 C, Request a map of Biodiversity Status or Broad
Vegetation Group (online),
Available:<https://environment.ehp.qld.gov.au/map-request/re-broad-veggroup>(20 October 2014).
Queensland Government 2014 D, 'Environmental Impact Statement -Landsborough
to Nambour Rail Project', Department of Transport and Main Roads (online),
Available:<http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/L/Landsborough-toNambour-Rail-Corridor-Study.aspx> (20 October 2014).
Sky Handling Partners 2012, EIA &MP Construction of Cargo Storage
Wharehouse at Freetown International Airport, Lungi (online),
Available:<http://www.miga.org/documents/EIA_Study_Cargo_Storage_F
acility.pdf (24 October 2014).
SoundPLAN 2014, SoundPLAN noise modelling software (online), Available:
<http://soundplan.com.au/ > (28 October 2014).
Standlee, K.G. 2014, Mitigation of construction noise at operating hospital and
university facilities, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, vol. 135,
no. 4, pp. 2246-2246.
Sweet, M. 2014, Traffic congestion's economic impacts: Evidence from US
Metropolitan Regions, Urban Studies, vol. 51, no. 10, pp. 2088-2110.

38

Trzciski, G., Sieniawski, W. & Moskalik, T. 2013, Effects of timber loads on gross
vehicle weight, Forestry, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 159-167.
VDM Consulting 2012, Erosion and sediment control plan (online), Available:
<http://www.oresome.com.au/attachments/23._DW100086C0302EIAMs001
7_Appendix_4.8_Erosion_and_Sediment_Control_Plan

_0001_B.pdf > (19

October 2014).
Weisbrod, G., Vary, D. & Treyz, G. 2003, Measuring the economic cost of urban
traffic congestion to business, Journal of Transportation Research Board
(online), Available:<http://www.edrgroup.com/pdf/weisbrodcongestiontrr2003.pdf> (19 October 2014).
Witheridge, B. 2012. 'Erosion and Sediment Control A Field Guide for Construction
Site Managers'. Catchments & Creeks Pty Ltd., Brisbane, Queensland,
Available: <http://www.catchmentsandcreeks.com.au/docs/Erosion-andSediment-Control-A-Field-Guide-for-Construction-Site- Managers-screen.pdf
(21 October 2014).

39

Appendix A: Scoping Matrix and Evaluation Tables

40

Table4.PredictedImpactsofGoldCoastCommonwealthGamesVillage
Activity

Phase

Impacts

Magnitude
Spatial

Ecological

Demolition of existing buildings


increased

Early works

Increased air pollution from the materials and carbon emissions from machinery

Number of
people
2

Removal of hazardous waste

Early works

Noise pollution from machinery


Air pollution from the hazardous waste
Health & safety of humans from harmful toxicants

3
2
1

2
2
4

1
1
1

1
1
1

Clearing of existing vegetation

Early works

Habitat loss of endangered ecosystem on the eastern boundary


Erosion from destruction of root systems of existing trees
Noise pollution from machinery
Air pollution from carbon emissions of machinery to demolish vegetation

3
2
3
4

4
4
2
3

5
4
2
3

Bulk earth works

Early works

Upgrading of Smith Street Motorway

Early Works

Loss of visual amenity


Earthworks decreases stability of soil
Noise pollution from machinery
Air pollution from carbon emissions from machinery
Degradation of access roads
Earth works decreases stability of soil

1
2
3
3
3
2

1
3
2
3
3
3

Air pollution from carbon emissions from machinery


Economics from disruption of traffic along Smith Street Motorway & Olsen
Avenue
Habitat loss from clearing vegetation

3
4

Intensity

Values

Social

Sensitivity

Heritage

Overall

Political

Mean

Economic

14

4
1
1

1
1
1

1
1
1

1
1
1

14
10
11

2
1
1

5
4
1
1

1
1
4
1

5
3
1
1

5
1
1
1

2
1
1
1

30
20
15
15

4
3
2
2

1
4
2
3
2
3

1
4
1
1
3
4

3
1
4
1
4
1

5
2
1
1
1
2

4
1
1
1
2
2

3
1
1
1
5
1

19
18
15
14
23
18

2
2
2
2
3
2

4
1

3
1

1
1

1
4

1
1

1
4

1
5

15
21

2
3

28

3
2
2

3
2
4

3
4
5

1
3
5

1
1
1

1
1
5

1
1
5

1
1
2

14
15
29

2
2
4

12

Construction of trunk infrastructure &


connection to existing infrastructure

Early Works

Division of cement slabs and footings

Construction
phase
Construction
phase

Air pollution from carbon emissions from machinery


Soil degradation decreases the stability of soil
Habitat loss from excavating on the endangered ecosystem on the eastern side
of the boundary
Destruction of habitat due to more cement slabs and pathways

Noise pollution from machinery


Air pollution from construction machinery
Water pollution from run-off on the north to eastern side

2
3
4

2
3
4

1
1
4

4
1
1

1
1
1

1
1
3

1
1
2

15
15
23

2
2
3

Construction
phase
Construction
phase

Noise pollution from construction machinery

14

Noise pollution from construction machinery

13

Air pollution from construction machinery

15

Development of recreational parklands and


gardens

Construction
phase

Habitat disruption from landscaping

14

Games phase

Destabilizing the soil from replacing the old turf.


Noise disruption from upkeep

Maintenance of parklands and buildings

2
1

3
1

2
1

1
2

1
1

1
1

1
1

12
10

2
1

Vehicular movement

Games phase

Noise disruption of vehicles

12

Air pollution of vehicles from carbon emissions

14

Noise disruption
Habitat degradation from littering
Noise pollution from rubbish collection trucks
Air pollution from rubbish collection trucks

1
1
3
3

2
3
2
3

1
2
1
1

2
1
3
1

1
1
1
1

1
3
1
1

1
1
1
1

10
14
14
14

1
2
2
2

Increased pest species due to uncollected rubbish build-up


Noise pollution from machinery
Air pollution from machinery

2
2
3

3
2
3

3
1
1

1
4
1

1
1
1

3
1
1

1
1
1

18
15
15

2
2
2

Construction of permanent buildings


Townhouses & apartments
Commercial, recreational & mixed use
buildings
Assembly of removal dwellings
Construction of civic areas and sculptures

Non vehicular movement


Pedestrians & cyclists
Collection and removal of rubbish

Games phase
Games phase

Post games road works

Legacy phase

Post game landscaping and pubic round


finishes

Legacy phase

Noise pollution from machinery

14

Habitat degradation from truck movement

13

Reconfiguring and repairing apartments and


townhouses

Legacy phase

Noise pollution from machinery


Air pollution from machinery

3
4

2
3

2
3

1
1

2
1

1
1

1
1

1
1

13
15

2
2

Increasing housing affordability for local community

21

Noise pollution from machinery


Air pollution from machinery

3
4

2
3

2
3

1
1

2
1

1
1

1
1

1
1

13
15

2
2

Disassembling dwellings and structure

41

Legacy phase

Table5.Predictedimpactsaftermitigationstrategiesareputinplace
Activity

Demolition of existing buildings


increased
Removal of hazardous waste
Clearing of existing vegetation

Bulk earth works

Phase

Early works
Early works
Early works

Early works

Upgrading of Smith Street Motorway

Construction of trunk infrastructure &


connection to existing infrastructure

Division of cement slabs and footings


Construction of permanent buildings
Townhouses & apartments
Commercial, recreational & mixed use
buildings
Assembly of removal dwellings
Construction of civic areas and sculptures

Early Works

Early Works

Construction
phase
Construction
phase

Construction
phase
Construction
phase

Impacts

Increased air pollution from the materials and carbon emissions from machinery
Noise pollution from machinery
Air pollution from waste
Health & safety of humans from harmful toxicants
Habitat loss of endangered ecosystem on the eastern boundary
Erosion from destruction of root systems of existing trees
Noise pollution from machinery
Air pollution from carbon emissions of machinery to demolish vegetation

Loss of visual amenity


Earthworks decreases stability of soil
Noise pollution from machinery
Air pollution from carbon emissions from machinery
Degradation of access roads
Earth works decreases stability of soil
Air pollution from carbon emissions from machinery
Economics from disruption of traffic along Smith Street Motorway & Olsen
Avenue
Habitat loss from clearing vegetation
Air pollution from carbon emissions from machinery
Soil degradation decreases the stability of soil
Habitat loss from excavating on the endangered ecosystem on the eastern
side of the boundary
Destruction of habitat due to more cement slabs and pathways

Magnitude
Spatial
Intensity

Values

Ecological
Sensitivity

Social
Number of
people

Overall
Heritage

Political

Mean

Economic

14

12

11

22

17

13

11

18

14

11

11

22

15

11

19

28

11

12

29

12

13

Noise pollution from machinery


Air pollution from construction machinery
Water pollution from run-off on the north to eastern side

11

19

Noise pollution from construction machinery

14

Noise pollution from construction machinery

12

Air pollution from construction machinery


Habitat disruption from landscaping

11

12

11

10

Development of recreational parklands and


gardens

Construction
phase

Maintenance of parklands and buildings

Games phase

Destabilizing the soil from replacing the old turf.


Noise disruption from upkeep

Vehicular movement

Games phase

Noise disruption of vehicles

12

11

10

12

13

13

11

12

11

12

Habitat degradation from truck movement

13

Noise pollution from machinery


Air pollution from machinery

12

11

Increasing housing affordability for local community

16

Noise pollution from machinery


Air pollution from machinery

12

11

Non vehicular movement


Pedestrians & cyclist
Collection and removal of rubbish

Games phase
Games phase

Post games road works

Legacy phase

Post game landscaping and pubic round


finishes

Legacy phase

Reconfiguring and repairing apartments


and townhouses

Legacy phase

Disassembling dwellings and structure

42

Legacy phase

Air pollution of vehicles from carbon emissions


Noise disruption
Habitat degradation from littering
Noise pollution from rubbish collection trucks
Air pollution from rubbish collection trucks
Increased pest species due to uncollected rubbish build-up
Noise pollution from machinery
Air pollution from machinery
Noise pollution from machinery

Table 6. Key for scoping matrix and evaluation table.

Minimal
1
Magnitude

Minor
2
Spatial
Intensity

Temporal

Duration
Timing

Ecological

Values

Sensitivity
Social

Number
of people
Heritage
Political
Economic

Magnitude

Spatial
Intensity

Temporal

Duration
Timing

Ecological

Values

Sensitivity
Social

Number
of people
Heritage
Political
Economic

43

Moderate
3

Major
4

Catastrophic
5

The area over which the impact will occur, from square meters to
square kilometers
The level of impact within the spatial area, from minor disruption
to total destruction. A low intensity impact over a large area
could be worse than a high intensity impact in a small area,
depending on upon other elements.
The length of time of the impact, from a single event to
a permanent change.
Short term events may create significant impacts if they occur
often. They may also coincide with particularly sensitive times in
the receiving environment such as breeding cycles.
The quality of the receiving environment, generally identified
through the declaration of conservation areas, identification of
protected species and other features of natural conservation
value.
The capacity of the receiving environment to regenerate or adapt
to the impact (resilience). The sensitivity of an environment to a
potential impact will require informed judgment.
The number of people directly or indirectly affected through lost
opportunities for enjoyment or other values such as equity or
existence values.
The impact on known or possible items of heritage or cultural
value.
The measure of the likely political implications or level of
community interest.
The financial cost of the impact through lost productivity or the
cost of remediation.
The area over which the impact will occur, from square meters to
square kilometers
The level of impact within the spatial area, from minor disruption
to total destruction. A low intensity impact over a large area
could be worse than a high intensity impact in a small area,
depending on upon other elements.
The length of time of the impact, from a single event to
a permanent change.
Short term events may create significant impacts if they occur
often. They may also coincide with particularly sensitive times in
the receiving environment such as breeding cycles.
The quality of the receiving environment, generally identified
through the declaration of conservation areas, identification of
protected species and other features of natural conservation
value.
The capacity of the receiving environment to regenerate or adapt
to the impact (resilience). The sensitivity of an environment to a
potential impact will require informed judgment.
The number of people directly or indirectly affected through lost
opportunities for enjoyment or other values such as equity or
existence values.
The impact on known or possible items of heritage or cultural
value.
The measure of the likely political implications or level of
community interest.
The financial cost of the impact through lost productivity or the
cost of remediation.

44