Save Ralphs Bay
SAVE Ralphs Bay and Birds Tasmania representatives will be available at Parliament lawns at 11.30am today to highlight some of the deficiencies in the Walker Corporation’s Draft Integrated Impact Statement for its proposed ‘Lauderdale Quay’ canal estate development.

“The Walker Corporation’s canal estate proposal is fundamentally, fatally flawed” says Dr. Eric Woehler, Chair of Birds Tasmania.

Submission after submission on the RPDC website reveals that international experts and Tasmanian government departments hold very similar concerns to those raised by the wider community. A total of 547 submissions were
received by the RPDC.

“Birds Tasmania and Save Ralphs Bay Inc. have worked hard for more than 5 years to show the folly of this proposal to excavate the sandflats of the Ralphs Bay Conservation Area in order to build a housing subdivision in the
sea”, says SRB spokesperson Jane MacDonald.

“Our arguments against this destructive proposal have always been well grounded, as confirmed by hard hitting submissions from around Australia and the world.”

Download pdf at: www.saveralphsbay.org/pdf/SRBMedia14April09.pdf

— Save Ralphs Bay Inc. : www.SaveRalphsBay.org —

…

RPDC NO CHOICE BUT TO REJECT WALKER PROPOSAL ON BASIS OF SCIENCE
While Bartlett Government Negotiates Sale of Conservation Area – Leading Coastal Experts Cite Bitter Canal Estate Experience Interstate
Cassy O’Connor MP
Greens Environment & Coastal Policy spokesperson
Tuesday, 14 April 2009

www.tas.greens.org.au

The Tasmanian Greens today released testimony from two leading, national experts in coastal processes and management who make it clear the Resource Planning and Development Commission must adopt the Precautionary Principle and reject the Walker Corporation Project of State Significance (PoSS).

Greens’ Environment and Coastal Policy Spokesperson, Cassy O’Connor MP, said the Walker Corporation proposal, detailed in part in its Draft Integrated Impact Statement (DIIS), has been exposed by 95% of 547 respondents to the RPDC, as a comprehensive triple bottom line failure.

Ms O’Connor also distributed copies of the Whole of Government response to the DIIS which reveals that not only has the potentially devastating ecological and social impact of the proposal been significantly downplayed by the proponent, but also confirms that the Bartlett Government is currently in negotiations with Walker Corporation over a Development Agreement on the future sale of the Ralphs Bay Conservation Area.[1]

“Despite the Tasmanian Labor Government’s deplorable failure to do the right thing at any point in this saga, the community has made its views plain over the past five years, and now the science is well and truly in. The RPDC must abide by its sustainability objectives and obligation to apply the Precautionary Principle and reject the Walker plan.

“Not only do a number of submissions from highly respected sources demonstrate this proposal would be an ecological disaster for the River Derwent, shorebirds and threatened species, it has been exposed by the independent expert commissioned by the Tasmanian Greens as fundamentally flawed in its response to rising sea levels and lacking key information on sediment build up and transport.

“Professor Rodger Tomlinson BEng, PhD, FIEAust, CPEng, NPER is the Director, Griffith Centre for Coastal Management and; Coastal Program Leader, Griffith Climate Response. He bases his comments on 30 years experience in coastal processes, engineering, research and management. Professor Tomlinson possesses a comprehensive knowledge of canal estate developments interstate.

In his representation to the RPDC on behalf of the Greens (full text attached), Professor Tomlinson asserts that:

“In a number of locations in the DIIS the average projected rise in mean sea level over the planning life-span of the development has been justified and has been set to be 0.5m. This results, for example, in a reclamation level of 2.5m AHD.

“The latest climate science estimates for sea level rise are given in the Climate Change Issues report and the current research and researchers, such as John Hunter from the Antarctic CRC, are appropriately referred to in that report. The general consensus of the current climate change research is that the upper limit of projected sea level rise will be closer to 1 m (0.89m in the latest CSIRO interpretation of IPCC reports). However, CSIRO also identify that based on the last 10 years or of satellite altimetry data, the actual sea level off eastern Australia is rising a rate above the upper limit scenarios et by the IPCC. Despite this, the work presented in the DIIS argues from a number of perspectives that a lower value of 0.5m should be adopted for this development.

“Another area of concern is the issue of deposition rates. The analysis undertaken examines the likely deposition of suspended material brought into the development from catchment run-off. The resulting estimated for siltation are quite low, and lead to the conclusion the in DIIS that maintenance dredging will only be required every 50 years or so.

“There appears to be no examination of the issue of re-distribution of existing sediments under the post-development hydrodynamic regime, nor the possibility of channel bank slumping or boatwash induces redistribution of sediment in the waterways.

“However, should more frequent dredging be required then re-mobilisation of nutrient rich sediment will be an issue. A major canal estate at Mooloolabah in Queensland – originally constructed in quiet backwaters off the Moololah River some decades ago, now requires constant dredging on a cycle of approximately every 3 years. This is primarily due to slumping of the banks – exacerbated by boatwash.

“A significant deficiency in the (DIIS) Coastal Processes Investigations is the lack of examination of the impact of boating activities.

“Given that the design level for the revetment walls for the residential areas has been set at 1.25m AHD, there is also concern over the impact of significant overtopping during extreme water level events.

“In this context, the Lauderdale Quay development does not address the Precautionary Principle.

“The suggestion in the DIIS that revetments can be raised in the event of higher sea levels being manifested in the short term, is seen as a somewhat trivial response to a global threat.

“The concept of new development (constructed at inadequate levels) seems to not only go against the Precautionary Principle (requiring future rehabilitation at community expense) but also ignores the pressing need for climate change adaptation strategies to be developed and implemented for all coastal communities.”

In his brief representation to the RPDC, Professor Bruce Thom, from the Wentworth Group of Scientists, states:

“On behalf of the Australian Coastal Society, I would like to offer the view that where coastal developments impinge on areas of significant conservation value then the precautionary principle and other ESD principles, as defined in the Commonwealth EPBC Act, be taken into consideration.

“Furthermore, we would submit that the reasons for prohibiting canal estates in NSW and severely limiting future developments of this type in Queensland be examined by the Commission. This would offer information on why the precautionary (principle) should be given strong emphasis in any assessment of the Ralphs Bay proposal.”

——————————————————————————–

Attached:

1.Tasmanian Greens submission to the RPDC including Appendix I, Professor Tomlinson, April 2009.

NOTE: All submissions can be found on the RPDC website at: http://www.rpdc.tas.gov.au/poss/lauderdale_quay/whats_new

——————————————————————————–

[1] Whole of Government Response, p. 2