Brighton Transport Hub Development Application Report v5

BRIGHTON TRANSPORT HUB
Development Application
January 2009
Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources

CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
1.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 WHAT IS A HUB .................................................................................................... 1
1.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................. 2
1.4 THE PROPOSAL .................................................................................................... 2
1.5 LINKS WITH OTHER PROJECTS ................................................................................. 5
1.6 STATUTORY APPROVALS ........................................................................................ 6
1.7 THE APPLICANT.................................................................................................... 8
1.8 TITLE INFORMATION AND LAND OWNERS .................................................................. 9
1.9 CONSULTATION.................................................................................................... 9
2 ENVIRONMENTAL & HERITAGE VALUES - IMPACTS & MITIGATION ................. 11
2.1 FLORA .............................................................................................................. 11
2.2 FAUNA ............................................................................................................. 14
2.3 WATER COURSES................................................................................................ 15
2.4 EUROPEAN HERITAGE.......................................................................................... 16
2.5 ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE ......................................................................... 18
2.6 NOISE .............................................................................................................. 21
2.7 VISUAL AMENITY................................................................................................ 24
2.8 AGRICULTURAL LAND CAPABILITY .......................................................................... 27
2.9 DUST ............................................................................................................... 28
3 PLANNING SCHEME ASSESSMENT .................................................................. 30
3.1 STATUTORY REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 30
3.2 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................. 33
3.3 SUBDIVISION ..................................................................................................... 33
3.4 BRIGHTON PLANNING SCHEME 2000 OBJECTIVES .................................................... 34
3.4.1 Scheme Objectives - Industry .................................................................... 34
3.4.2 Scheme Objectives - Rural ......................................................................... 36
3.4.3 Scheme Objectives - Infrastructure ........................................................... 38
3.5 ZONE REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... 39
3.5.1 Industry zone ............................................................................................. 39
3.5.2 Rural zone ................................................................................................. 43
3.5.3 Infrastructure zone .................................................................................... 45
3.6 SCHEME OVERLAYS............................................................................................. 46
3.6.1 Environmental Buffer Overlay ................................................................... 46
3.6.2 Bridgewater Quarry Overlay ..................................................................... 50
3.7 SCHEME SCHEDULES ........................................................................................... 51
3.7.1 Schedule 1 – Off-street Parking – Car parking, access and loading.......... 51
3.7.2 Schedule 4 – Environmental Management Standards .............................. 52
4 PRINCIPLES AND SCHEME STANDARDS .......................................................... 52
4.1.1 Schedule 8 – Road Assets .......................................................................... 64
4.1.2 Schedule 9 – Heritage Schedule ................................................................ 68
4.1.3 Schedule 10 – Attenuation Distances........................................................ 70
5 STATE PLANNING OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES ................................................. 71
5.1 STATE POLICIES .................................................................................................. 71
5.1.1 State Coastal Policy 1996 .......................................................................... 71
5.1.2 State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2000 ......................... 72
5.1.3 State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 ................................... 72
5.1.4 NEPM’s ...................................................................................................... 73
5.1.5 Gas safety.................................................................................................. 73
6 CONLCUSION ................................................................................................. 74
7 APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 75
Report Prepared by:
Selena Dixon
Luke Newman
Pitt & Sherry
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
The Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources (DIER) is making an
application to develop the infrastructure elements of a $79 million transport hub in
the Brighton Municipality. The hub will function as the major southern intermodal
logistics centre providing modern facilities for a range of transport operators. The
proposed site for the hub is located west of and adjacent to, the existing Brighton
Industrial Estate.
Brighton has been identified as an appropriate location for the hub due to its close
proximity to road and rail infrastructure. The location boasts a well established but
fast developing industrial estate with effective environmental buffering that
provides long term protection from residential encroachment. This is a critical
advantage for industry in that it provides long-term security for companies who
make large investments in industrial infrastructure.
National demand forecasting anticipates a doubling of growth in freight
movements over the next 20 years. The proposed transport hub has been designed
to accommodate this growth with capacity to expand to meet longer term growth
projections.
Early design development has generated optimism within the community and an
expectation that economic and social benefits will accrue to the Municipality and
region more broadly. Furthermore, approval of the transport hub development
application will create new opportunities for associated industrial development to
establish on surrounding industrial land in coming years.
Early site assessment resulted in the identification of a range of important
botanical Aboriginal and European heritage values. Historically, these values have
been lost across the industrial estate as incremental development occurred.
However, the selection of this site for the transport hub has not only resulted in
the identification of a range of heritage and botanical values, but approval of this
development application will result in the protection and management of the
majority of these values for future generations.
1.2 What is a hub

A Transport Hub is an area of land primarily used for the transfer of goods and
materials between inter-regional road and rail freight transport and local/regional
transport systems. Transport hubs generally incorporate rail lines and an area of
hardstand that is used for loading and unloading of trains and trucks. They also
have areas of land and buildings for storing goods and materials during the process
of transportation and distribution.
The Brighton Transport Hub Project provides a rare opportunity to develop a fit for
purpose transport hub that will serve Tasmanians for generations. The current
transport facility at Macquarie Point has long been recognised as outmoded and
inefficient. The layout of the existing hub creates a bottleneck to productivity
1
improvements and the location of residential uses adjacent to the site threatens its
medium term operating capacity.
The rail line between the Bridgewater Bridge and Macquarie Point is the slowest
and most costly section of rail infrastructure and impacts negatively on many
hundreds of adjacent urban residences. The location is not suited to the overall
distribution tasks as it focuses heavy vehicle movements on the most congested
section of the Brooker Highway.
The Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources has considered
alternatives to Macquarie Point over recent years. In November 2006, the issue
was elevated when the Treasurer requested preliminary planning to assess the
implications of relocating the facilities from Macquarie Point to the Brighton area.
The development of a modern road-rail transport facility and freight distribution
hub on a greenfield site at Brighton will significantly improve the efficiency of
transport of goods into and out of southern Tasmania. It will provide economic
and environmental benefits through ease of transfer between road and rail, and as
a consequence encourage increased rail freight transport with a lowering of carbon
emissions.
1.3 Project objectives

The primary objectives for the project are:
• To develop contemporary ‘fit-for-purpose’ intermodal facilities in a new
location that will underpin sustained productivity improvements in transport
and encourage growth in rail and transport share; and
• To develop an effective long term transport hub for Southern Tasmania’s
road/rail and rail/road interregional freight.
1.4 The Proposal

The Brighton Transport Hub proposal comprises a number of physical
infrastructure elements that will facilitate a range of core intermodal activities. The
total investment required to complete the proposed works is estimated to be $79
million. In the future, this infrastructure will be complimented by a range of value
adding activities that will support the viability of the hub into the future.
The Brighton transport hub development application comprises the following
physical infrastructure elements described in the table overleaf. Each of the
elements is identified on the map on page 4 (see also accompanying design
drawings).
2
Element Description (all elements identified on map overleaf). Dwg No.
HB08001-
Bulk earth A level site of approximately 1200m long and 250m wide platform P79_A
works - will be created by lowering the ground level at the south of the site P80_A P81_A
by approximately 7m and filling the northern end of the site with up P82_A P83_A
Hub platform
to 8m of fill.
Northern rail 750m rail extending from 180m east of the existing Midland P79_A
access Highway to the point at which the rail branches out to form the hub
rail configuration.
Hub rail 2 x 1.3 – 1.6km turnout lengths of rail extend from branch out point P79_A
south along the eastern and western side of the hardstand. The
turnouts are located either side of the hardstand for the purpose of
loading and unloading.
An additional run-around line is located directly adjacent to the
eastern turnout line to facilitate wagon and locomotive movements.
Hardstand 50m x 800m heavy duty sealed pavement hardstand constructed P83_A
between turnout lines to accommodate 100 tonne axel loads.
Hardstand will be sufficient width to enable special purpose
equipment such as top lift fork trucks or reach stackers to load and
unload freight and transfer it to storage areas.
Car parking A large sealed area will be provided for vehicle parking at the P79_A
southern end of the site adjacent to the western turnout line.
Hub connector The Hub connector road comprises 2 x 3.5m running lanes with 2m P79_A
road sealed shoulders on either side. Auxiliary turning lanes at major
P83_A
access points will also be provided.
The Hub connector road extends from the proposed northern
roundabout on the existing Midland Highway to the existing
Glenstone Road connection to the south.
Water 2 x retention basins – 1 x 6ML and 1 x 12ML (inc DN600 Detention P94
Sensitive outflow pipes as per drawings).
P95
Urban Design
1 x bypass channel located along the existing Crooked Billet Creek
Stormwater alignment located northeast of the hardstand.
detention
2m vegetated swales to extend along the eastern and western sides
basins
of the levelled site include a drain at the western extent of the site.
Services Sewer – 225 UPVC to extend across the platform to agreed pump P88 P89
station location.
P90
Stormwater – DN750 & DN1200 pipe & as per design drawings.
Access Road Access road off hub connector at south to provide access to P79_A
adjacent properties and to facilitate future industrial development.
3
Map showing key infrastructure elements of Proposed Transport Hub.
4
Future Development
Additional facilities that will be required to establish a fully operational transport
hub will be proposed as separate development applications during 2009 - 2012. It
is expected that these facilities will include a cold store, offices, warehousing,
weighbridges, an engine and rolling stock maintenance facility and associated
minor works including fencing, lighting poles and signage.
Land adjacent to the hub will be available for value adding activities in the medium
to long term. Such activities might include:
• Additional warehousing and storage facilities;
• Container storage areas;
• Container wash, repair and preparation facilities;
• Additional truck parking and maintenance facilities; and
• Industry park.
The take up of these or other activities in the future will be a decision for the hub
manager based on commercial considerations.
1.5 Links with Other Projects

The southern region and in particular the Brighton Municipality, will be the
beneficiary of a significant transport investment program over coming years.
“The State Government has developed a comprehensive transport investment
program for Southern Tasmania. The investment program covers a 10 year period
and represents one of the biggest single improvements to land transport ever
undertaken in Tasmania”.
The Transport Investment Program document which lists planned infrastructure
investments is included as Appendix 1.
An important part of the Southern Transport Investment Program is the $164
million Brighton Bypass, which involves upgrading the Midland Highway by
constructing 9.5km dual carriage and associated structures from the East Derwent
Highway to Pontville. This project comprises six development applications (DAs),
five of which are currently before the Brighton Council. The final section of the
bypass will be submitted to The Southern Midlands Council in early 2009. The
following two DAs are directly linked to the Transport Hub proposal:
• East Derwent Highway to Brighton Industrial Estate (Brighton 1). This proposal
will facilitate improved access into the industrial estate and will connect to
Glenstone Road which links directly through to the southern end of the
transport hub; and
• Brighton Industrial Estate to north of “The Lodge” (Brighton 2). This proposal
will create an interchange that will allow traffic to exit the Midland Highway and
proceed west via a new roundabout to the northern end of the transport hub.
5
This proposal also includes a rail deviation that will improve the rail alignment
east of the existing Midland Highway.
1.6 Statutory Approvals

The proposal constitutes a Level 1 activity under Schedule 2 of the Environmental
Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 (EMPCA). As a Level 1 Activity, the
proposal does not require assessment under EMPCA but requires assessment
pursuant to the Land Use Planning and Approval Acts 1993 (LUPAA).
The project is located within three zones of the Brighton Planning Scheme 2000,
they are (refer to map on page 32, Section3.1):
• Industry zone;
• Rural zone; and
• Infrastructure zone
The proposed works are classified under two use and development categories;
‘Transport depot and distribution’ and ‘Utilities’. The status of the above uses is
considered in detail in Section 3. Suffice to say that there are a number of
discretions which means the application must be considered pursuant to Section
57 of LUPAA.
Additionally, the proposed works are also located either wholly or partly within the
following two overlays:
• the Environmental Buffer Overlay; and
• the Bridgewater Quarry Overlay.
The proposal must also meet the requirements of a number of scheme schedules.
These matters are considered throughout the report.
Other permits required

The proposal will also require permits under:
• The Threatened Species Protection Act 1995; and
• The Aboriginal Relics Act 1975;
This legislation is not directly relevant to this planning assessment. However,
application for associated permits will be made early in 2009 in anticipation of
commencement of works in April. It is understood that there may be other specific
legislative requirements necessary prior to the proposal proceeding.
6
Referrals required.
A number of Referrals are also required under various acts and Scheme provisions.
The following table details these requirements:
Referrals required
The road and rail access into the hub hardstand are located within the Bridgewater Quarry
Overlay, which triggers the following provision.
B & G Resources Brighton Planning Scheme 2000

(Boral Quarry) 7.9.2 Applications for use or development within the Bridgewater Quarry
Overlay shall be referred by Council to the quarry operator for
advice concerning the potential for conflict between the proposed
use or development and the quarry operations or associated
activities.
7.9.3 Council must not determine an application for use or development
within the Bridgewater Quarry Overlay until after the quarry
operator has supplied its advice, or until fourteen (14) days from
the date of referral, whichever occurs first.
The proposal involves the construction of the diversion of Crooked Billet Creek via a swale drain
around the Transport Hub site, one 6 Megalitre wetland dam and one 12 Megalitre stormwater
detention pond will be located along the Crooked Billet Creek drainage path which triggers the
following provision. The Dam Assessment Report is included as Appendix 2.
Assessment Water Management Act 1999

Committee for
Under The Water Management Act 1999 where a dam is not less than one
Dam Construction
Megalitre and/or is in a watercourse it must be assessed in accordance with
(ACDC)
this Act.
Section 165F of the Water Management Act 1999 provides for assessment
of dams where the dam works form part of an application under the Land
Use Planning Approvals Act 1993.
Under section 165F the Council must refer the application to the ACDC. The
ACDC may require the imposition on any Council approval or permit any
terms or conditions it considers necessary or desirable to ensure the safety
of the dam works. Council is required to include the ACDC terms and
conditions on the approval or permit.
Where a referral to the ACDC has been made under this section and the
referral would result in Council not being able to meet any statutory
restrictions as to time on the period within which the Council must consider
the application, those restrictions are suspended until such time as the
ACDC makes a final decision on the referral.
The proposal to construct road and rail infrastructure and to undertake earthworks to create a
large platform will involve traversing the gas pipeline and encroaching across gas pipeline
easements. Discussions are continuing with PowerCo in relation to managing the construction
and operational impacts.
7
PowerCo Gas Act 2000
Under Section 79G of the gas Act 2000 if an application is made for a permit
for a discretionary development wholly or partly within a pipeline planning
corridor Council must refer the application to the pipeline licensee. Council
must refer the application when notice of the application is issued under
section 57 of LUPAA.
The pipeline licensee has 14 days or further representation period allowed
under section 57(5) of LUPAA, to give the planning authority such advice on
the application as it thinks fit and in so doing may recommend that, if
granted, the permit should be made subject to safety conditions specified in
the advice.
If the pipeline licensee fails to give any such advice, Council may determine
the application without further reference to the pipeline licensee.
If the pipeline licensee gives advice:
(a) Council is to have regard to the advice in determining the
application; and
(b) the advice is taken to be a representation made under section
57(5) of LUPAA in relation to the application; and
(c) Council may, without limiting its discretion in the event it
approves the application but subject to point (d) below, grant the
permit subject to any safety condition recommended by the
pipeline licensee (with or without modification); and
(d) Council must not grant the permit subject to a condition that
conflicts with any condition contained in the safety and operating
plan applying to the affected pipeline.
1.7 The Applicant

The applicant is the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, Project
Director, David Spence.
The key contacts for enquiries relating to the project are as follows:
Name Position Contact Phone number

David Spence Project Director 6233 2089
David Conley Project Manager 6233 8870
Selena Dixon Senior Project Officer (Planning) 6233 3704 (contact person
for further information)
8
1.8 Title Information and Land owners
The relevant title information is contained in Appendix 3. The Crown, pursuant to
the Land Acquisition Act 1993, is acquiring the land required for the project.
The Title References are:
CT Volume 24898 / Folio 2

Owner: Katrina Drake-Mundy; John Peter Mundy; Rex John Mundy
Address: GPO Box 718, Hobart TAS 7001
Situation: Cobbs Hill Road, Bridgewater TAS 7030

Owner: Katrina Drake-Mundy; John Peter Mundy; Rex John Mundy
Address: GPO Box 718, Hobart TAS 7001
Situation: 20 Glenstone Road, Bridgewater TAS 7030

Owner: Jinju Liao
Address: C/- Mr Ben Swain, Murdoch Clarke, Barristers and Solicitors,
10 Victoria Street, Hobart TAS 7000
Situation: 155 Cobbs Hill Road, Bridgewater TAS 7030

Owner: Toll Properties Pty Ltd
Address: Level 8, 380 St Kilda Road, Melbourne VIC 3000
Situation: Midland Highway, Bridgewater TAS 7030
All affected land owners have been notified of the development application
pursuant to section 52 (1) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993. A
copy of the letter is contained in Appendix 4.
1.9 Consultation
A rigorous stakeholder engagement and consultation process has been adopted as
part of the Brighton Transport Hub Project. It has become apparent that this
development has attracted a broad level of support throughout the community.
Stakeholder engagement has been managed closely during the life of the Project,
commencing with initial, personally addressed information about the project from
the Project Director, plus regular face-to-face and telephone contact with key
stakeholders, namely potential Hub users, affected landowners, adjacent residents
and businesses within the Brighton Industrial Estate. Wherever possible, face-to-
face or telephone contact has been used.
A Stakeholder Management Plan has been developed and is regularly reviewed and
updated to ensure all current issues are captured and managed. A joint
9
Stakeholder Consultation Strategy across the Brighton Transport Projects has also
been developed and aims to provide a holistic, co-ordinated approach to
consultation planning and communication. This approach will assist in managing
emerging issues, keeping stakeholders informed, maintaining positive relationships
with stakeholders and achieving positive, proactive communication across both the
Hub and Brighton Bypass projects.
Information morning teas have been held at the Industrial Estate and joint public
displays have been held with the Bypass project at the Brighton Civic Centre. These
two forums have been valuable in providing face-to-face engagement and
consultation in particular with affected landowners and businesses.
Regular face-to-face consultation and communication has taken place with the
following key stakeholders:
• Affected landowners
• Adjacent property owners
• Tenants of the Industrial Estate
• Local businesses
• Brighton Council through the General Manager and Mayor
• Brighton Council staff regarding Development Application requirements
• Consultants and sub-consultants to the project
• Aboriginal Community
• Transport Industry representatives
• Jemena, PowerCo, Aurora and Transend Networks Pty Ltd
• Relevant State Government Agencies, including the Aboriginal Heritage
Office of the Department of the Environment, Parks, Heritage and the Arts
• The Commonwealth Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the
Arts.
10
2 ENVIRONMENTAL & HERITAGE VALUES - IMPACTS & MITIGATION
2.1 Flora
A series of three vegetation surveys undertaken in June, July and September 2008
identified the vegetation characteristics of the development site and adjoining
area.
Most of the site is characterised by paddocks of predominantly introduced pasture
species. A section of Bursaria spinosa (prickly box) low shrubland occupies the
northeastern corner of the proposed development area. The paddock in the
eastern extent has a cover of native grassland communities (including Lowland
Themada grassland on the Basalt knoll and Lowland grassland complex surrounding
the knoll) while the south eastern extent is mostly made up of rail yards and is
largely dominated by exotic species (North Barker 2008).
Four declared weeds under the Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999 were
recorded within the development site, specifically:
• Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus);
• African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum);
• Wild Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare); and
• Gorse (Ulex europaeus).
Gorse and Blackberry are listed as Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) under
the National Weed Strategy.
The Brighton Municipality has all four of these weed species under zone B of
Statutory Management Plans where the principle management objective is
containment rather than eradication.
Threatened Flora and Fauna
The vegetation and fauna habitat assessment (North Barker 2008) identified that
the majority of the site is made up of exotic pastures with sections of highly
modified remnant and degraded native grasslands.
The section of least degraded native grassland on the basalt knoll contains a
number of threatened grass species and other vascular species including the
greenhood orchid (Pterostylis ziegeleri) and grassland flaxlily (Dianella amoena).
Other threatened species occurrences are primarily scattered and isolated.
The site offers some habitat opportunities for the following native fauna species:
• The eastern barred bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) at the bushland pasture
interface;
• The swift parrot (Lathamus discolor) in the eighteen surrounding Eucalyptus
ovata trees;
• Casual/transient foraging habitat for a variety of species including wedge-
tailed eagle (Aquila audax fleayi), white-bellied sea-eagle (Haliaeetus
leucogaster), grey goshawk (Accipiter novaehollandiae), masked owl (Tyto
novaehollandiae castanops) and other transient bird species; and
11
• There is potential habitat on the basalt knoll and adjacent to the knoll near
Crooked Billet Creek for the tussock skink (Pseudemoia pagenstecheri).
Seven threatened vascular plant species were recorded during these surveys.
Three of these species are listed under the Environmental Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBCA) and six are listed under the Tasmanian
Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSPA).
EPBCA listed species

One species listed only under the EPBC Act was recorded:
• Carex tasmanica - Curly Sedge. Listed as Vulnerable under the EPBCA. Two
species are listed at both the State (TSPA) and national (EPBCA):
• Dianella amoena – Grassland Flaxlily. Listed as Endangered under the
EPBCA and Rare under the TSPA; and
• Pterostylis ziegeleri – Greenhood Orchid. Listed as Vulnerable under the
EPBCA and Vulnerable under the TSPA (status changed from Endangered in
late 2008).
TSPA listed Species

Four species are listed only under the Tasmanian TSPA:
• Austrostipa nodosa – Knotty Spear Grass. Listed as Rare under the TSPA.
• Austrostipa scabra – Rough Spear Grass. Listed as Rare under the TSPA.
• Isoetopsis graminifolia – Grass Cushions. Listed as Endangered under the
TSPA.
• Vittadinia muelleri – Narrow leaf New Holland Daisy. Listed as Rare under
the TSPA.
One threatened nonvascular plant species, the lichen Xanthoparmelia vicatierlla
listed as rare under the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995, was
recorded during site surveys (Kantvillas, 2008). The vegetation map on page 14
indicates the extent and location of vegetation across the site.
Status of flora and fauna permits

A referral for impacts on nationally listed threatened species was made to the
Australian Government (Commonwealth) in September. A determination stating
that the proposal is ‘Not a Controlled Action’ was made in December. A copy of
this determination is included as Appendix 5. No further assessment by the
Commonwealth is required.
A submission for the taking of State listed threatened species will not proceed until
after the summer survey.
12
Management (impact mitigation)
The mitigation measures are as follows:
1) Unaffected populations will be fenced prior to the commencement of
construction activities to prevent any impact. The fencing is partly in place and
will be completed prior to construction. It is expected that the fencing will
remain in place as required by a future management plan.
2) In order to minimise long-term indirect impacts on Pterostylis ziegeleri the road
and rail line will be constructed with adjacent storm water management drains,
orientated and designed with release points that will drain concentrated storm-
water collected from hard road and rail surfaces around the basalt knoll.
In addition there is a natural drainage line around the basalt knoll that prevents
overland flow from impacting on this orchid species.
As this species prefers well-drained sites, this mitigation measure will reduce
potential impacts on the species from significant increases in soil water
conditions.
This measure is permanent and will be put in place during construction.
3) During construction a range of measures will be put in place to mitigate against
direct and indirect impacts, specifically:
a) The Tender Specifications for construction of the site will deal with the
appropriate control measures for the treatment of weeds. The Tender
Specification will require a construction hygiene program to be developed
and implemented throughout the site. This program will ensure that all
machinery moving between any weed infestation areas and the remainder
of the site will be washed down at specific locations to ensure that no
weeds or propagules are transported throughout the site. Wash down sites
will be designed to filter and collect plant material and soil for disposal off
site in an approved landfill.
The four declared weeds will be managed in accordance with their
Statutory Weed Management Plans under the Tasmanian Weed
Management Act 1999. In accordance with the Zone B listing of these
species the weeds over the larger site will be managed for containment and
control rather than eradication. However, weeds within the Bulk Goods
and Container Intermodal Development Areas will be eradicated as hard
surfaces are constructed. The weed management will be included as a
component of the Environmental Management Element of the Contract
Management Plan. . Please see attached map ‘EPBC Referral Fencing and
Weeds’.
Spraying if determined as a necessary component of weed management
within the Contract Management Plan will be undertaken in accordance
with code of practice for ground spraying and the code of practise for
spraying in public places (see attached codes).
b) The development works will be undertaken in accordance with a soil and
water management plan to be prepared in accordance with the Soil and
13
Water Management Code of Practice for the Hobart Regional Councils. The
plan will prevent adverse impacts caused by increased water flows and
sediment transportation.
2.2 Fauna
There is some potential habitat for Tussock skinks at the north of the site, with
shelter provided in the form of surface rocks and tussock grasses along Crooked
Billet Creek. Although this creek extends across the proposed hub footprint, the
potential habitat has been identified in land that has been identified for
stormwater detention works. A detailed survey to establish whether this species is
present is currently underway. If skinks are located in proposed impact zones, a
strategy will be developed to manage this species in conjunction with the
Department of Primary Industries and Water (DPIW).
The area north of the existing industrial precinct appears to be suitable for the
Eastern barred bandicoot, however it is relatively common in Tasmania, and
consequently is unlisted on the Tasmanian Threatened Species Act 1995 despite
national listing of Vulnerable for Tasmania – it is classified as endangered for
mainland Australia (A North 2008). The more likely habitat for the bandicoot is
located east of the land that is the subject of the amendment.
The Vegetation Survey and Fauna Habitat Assessment report is attached as
Appendix 6.
Map below indicates the extent and location of vegetation across the site.
14
2.3 Water courses
The footprint of the transport road, rail and hardstand infrastructure is within the
Crooked Billet Creek catchment, which is part of the greater Bridgewater
catchment and the wider Derwent Estuary catchment. This catchment has been
largely modified since European settlement through the activities of agricultural,
industrial and urban development.
The water quality of Crooked Billet Creek is a function of its physical setting, as well
as historic and ongoing input of pollutants. These inputs can be broadly classified
as point sources and diffuse sources. Both diffuse and point source pollution can
be managed to protect the environmental values by development and
implementation of best practice environmental management, compliance with
approved codes of practice, the Brighton Planning Scheme 2000 (particularly the
Environmental Management Schedule) and emission limits set by the regulatory
authority (Brighton Council). These issues have been addressed in Sections 3 and 4
of this report.
Management
A detailed management approach to land disturbance in the Crooked Billet Creek
catchment is included as part of the Schedule 4 response in Section 3 p 54.
15
2.4 European Heritage
Historic Heritage Overview
Austral Archaeology PTY LTD undertook a detailed Historic Heritage assessment
across the preferred site in July 2008.
Whilst there were no places within or adjoining the study area included in National,
State or local Heritage lists or registers, the site was recognised as having a number
of sites worthy of further investigation. Relevant recording and documentation of
these sites will occur prior to construction.
The sites of interest are listed in the table below. The majority of recorded sites
that are not included in the table such as various stone mounds and boundary
fences are associated with transformation of the pre-European landscape into an
agrarian landscape marked by land clearance and enclosure. A map showing each
of these features is included overleaf and a description of all features is contained
in the full report included as Appendix 7.
Table: Historic Heritage sites requiring further investigation

Site Feature Description Further works required
Ref
22a Recently identified Material founds in close proximity suggest Detailed survey and excavation.
probable early mid 1800s occupation. Heritage Tasmania has
settlers hut and approved a Method Statement
Earlier occupation probable.
associated dump. which describes the proposed
Potentially a procurement site for investigation of the site.
Potentially, a very
Aboriginal glass artefacts. Archaeological works will
rare ‘Contact site’.
commence in January 2009.
11 Land grant boundary Original grant boundary between land Record and minimise impact if
grants of Reynolds and Cox remains possible.
discernable in the landscape, albeit by a
modern post and wire fence.
13 1810s - 1830s road Linear feature visible as a raised Will be partly impacted
formation with depressions either side.
Archaeological investigation of
Alignment is approx 4.5m wide and is
a cross section proposed.
discernable for approx 500m.
54 Early-mid Linear stone formation and stone mound Archaeological site

19thCentury hut suggests remains of hut. Dimensions investigations.
remains approx 7.5m x 3.6m. Indication of co-
Site has been surveyed and will
existence of Aboriginal and European
be protected/fenced prior to
cultural values.
investigation and site works.
55 Unidentified stone Small 1m x 500mm oval shaped ring of Will be investigated to

arrangement cobble-like fieldstones located close to a determine purpose of stone
fence line at the southern extent of the arrangement.
site.
16
Map of area with Heritage Features identified.
Management
Although there are no heritage listed places on the proposed transport hub site, a
number of archaeological investigations and recordings will be undertaken prior to
the commencement of construction. Each of the above features will be impacted
to some degree by the proposed development, so it is important to gain a
thorough understanding of the sites and their context within the broader
landscape.
The probable early settlers hut (Site 22a noted in the above table) is potentially a
very important site that was recently identified by archaeologists. More detailed
investigation of this site will be undertaken to determine the occupation history
and to enhance the interpretation of Aboriginal activity across the site. Heritage
Tasmania has approved a Method Statement and archaeological investigations will
commence in January.
It is expected that all of the sites noted above will have undergone appropriate
investigation and recording prior to construction.
17
2.5 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
Prior to European settlement, the Brighton area was occupied by the
Moomairremener Band of the Oyster Bay Tribe. Numerous Aboriginal sites occur
near the study area, particularly in the Jordan River valley which is well known for
its very rich Aboriginal heritage.
No registered sites existed across the site prior to the site selection process for the
transport hub, however cultural heritage assessments conducted by registered
heritage consultancy Steve Stanton Pty Ltd between June and July 2008, identified
three artefact scatters. These sites were subsequently registered with Aboriginal
Heritage Tasmania (AHT). The Brighton Transport Hub project team engaged
regularly with the Tasmanian Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (TALSC) and AHT
during this time to ensure that appropriate processes were followed and the best
possible outcome for the Aboriginal community could be achieved.
Two of the registered sites were within the boundary of the proposed
development and required further investigation. A permit to interfere with the
sites was issued by Minister O’Byrne in September 2008 to determine the extent of
the sites and to enable a more thorough interpretation of the Aboriginal values
across the proposed hub footprint.
A methodology to proceed with an archaeological investigation was then
developed by consultant archaeologists and AHT. Stage 1 commenced at the end of
October 2008 and was completed in mid November 2008 and Stage 2 is currently
underway. A brief summary of Stage 1 findings is listed below:
AREA A – southern extent of the hub site (see Map overleaf)

• Based on present information available, the site is likely to be assessed as being
of low to medium significance.
• Characterised by low density artefact scatter with little or no subsurface artefact

deposits, except western portion of site where localised deposits of moderate
density of artefacts identified.
• No major archaeological impediments to the proposed development of the hub

site in this area providing mitigation measures undertaken.
AREA B – northern extent of the hub site

• Likely to be assessed as being of high local and possibly regional significance.
• Comprises range of cultural features including moderate to high densities of

surface and sub-surface artefacts including shaped glass artefacts, stone
procurement sites and potential early European occupation site.
• Probable hut site and adjacent dump possibly the source of glass used for
artefact manufacture.
18
• This means that this site is potentially a rare ‘contact site’, of which there are only
two other known and recorded in Tasmania.
AREA C – area between north and south site

 Based on present information available, site likely to be assessed as being of low
to low medium significance.
 Moderate to high densities of artefacts identified on terraces either side of
Crooked Billet Creek with higher densities along western margins of hill south of
Crooked Billet Creek. This appears to be the main route taken by Aborigines
moving through the area.
 Remainder of Area C appears to be characterised by low to very low densities.
Management
In order to enable a thorough interpretation of the site and to answer a number of
important research questions, a second stage of archaeological investigations is
underway. These investigations will occur across the areas that have been
identified as higher sensitivity areas and will be completed by March 2009.
The results of this work will inform a voluntary Cultural Heritage Management Plan
which will identify the areas that will be protected and strategies to enable the
conservation of these areas into the future. The plan will also stipulate mitigation
measures for the areas that will be impacted by development.
It is expected that areas identified for future conservation will be fenced to avoid
impacts during construction. Engagement with the AHT and where possible, the
Aboriginal community will continue over the coming months so that a sound long
term management strategy is achieved for all interest groups.
It has become clear that the preferred site for the transport hub has pockets of
very significant Aboriginal values. The assessment process for the proposed
development has involved extensive site surveys and archaeological investigations.
Historically, smaller incremental development lacking similar methodical pre-
development site analysis has occurred across the Brighton area, resulting in lack
of identification and subsequent loss of these values. This project has facilitated
discovery of, and a level of interpretation of local Aboriginal activity that is
unknown in Tasmania today.
Knowledge gained from this process will contribute to a greater knowledge of
Tasmanian Aboriginal history associated with this region. Approval of the Brighton
Transport hub proposal will result in the loss of a portion of these values.
However, many of the more significant values will be retained and protected and
an historical story will emerge, while at the same time allowing a strategically
important development to proceed.
It is also important to recognise that these values extend well beyond the proposed
hub site, so alternative locations for the hub would impose similar challenges to
those faced on this site.
19
Map showing key Aboriginal heritage areas and sensitivity zones
AREA C AREA B
AREA A
20
2.6 Noise
An environmental noise assessment was undertaken for the proposed Brighton
Transport Hub in order to determine whether the expected noise generated from
the proposed development will meet:
(a) the “acceptable solution” noise limits established in the Brighton Planning
Scheme (2000); or
(b) “performance criteria” noise limits provided for by the Brighton Planning
Scheme (2000) should the acceptable solution not be achievable -
appropriate performance targets are the noise levels described in
Schedule 1 of the draft Tasmanian Environmental Protection Policy
(Noise).
The investigation involved:
 Measurement and analysis of background noise around the proposed transport
hub;
 Modelling of future noise for the situation upon opening (42,000 TEU 1) and the
anticipated noise levels with freight volumes at 100,000 TEU, which is the mid-
level growth possible future activity volume;
 Modelling future noise from the proposed access road that will service the
transport hub; and
 Modelling noise from the proposed rail line that will service the transport hub.
The Brighton Planning Scheme 2000 sets an “acceptable solution” for

developments to be the background noise level plus 5 dB(A) at the property
boundary.
The acceptable solution is a stringent requirement that is often unachievable for
developments such as freight depots, which can have significant and varying noise
emissions from traffic and freight movements. Where the acceptable solution
cannot be achieved, the planning scheme provides for a “performance criteria”
solution under which a development can demonstrate that its noise impact will not
unreasonably interfere with a person’s enjoyment of the environment.
The assessment of noise against the performance criteria considers the future
noise relative to the ambient noise (ambient noise being the general noise from all
noise sources including traffic).
Background noise and ambient noise are different, and should not be confused.
Measured daytime background noise in the project area varies between 30 dB(A)
and 61 dB(A) whilst the ambient noise levels are 20 to 30 dB(A) above this.
The performance criteria assessment can also be informed by specific noise
guidelines. The applicable guidelines are the acoustic environment guideline levels
in Schedule 1 of Tasmania’s Draft Noise Environmental Protection Policy (2006),
1
“Twenty foot equivalent unit”, a standard transport container
21
which are the noise levels that provide appropriate community amenity during
various periods: daytime, evening and night time.
The land surrounding the proposed development is subject to noise from the
existing industrial estate and the Midland Highway to the east. The land to the
north and west is currently zoned Rural and Industry respectively. The land directly
to the south is zoned Industry, followed by Rural Residential. Currently background
noise levels range from less than 30 db(A) to 61 dB(A). Current ambient noise
ranges from 37 to 71 dB(A).
Future noise emissions from the hub were modelled for a number of receptor sites
in the area surrounding the hub site. Modelling predictions were made for the
daytime, evening and night time periods.
For both the 42,000 and 100,000 TEU situations the noise levels from the proposed
transport hub considered on its own are lower than the current ambient noise
levels in all periods at all sites apart from three exceptions.
These sites BG7, BG18 and BG19 can be seen on the map overleaf. BG7 is a
reservoir and is located approximately 900m to the south west of the hub. At this
site the current ambient noise levels would be exceeded in the 100,000 TEU
situation during the day by 3 dB(A) and at night by 2 dB(A).
BG18 is located approximately 500 m to north and BG 19 is located approximately
800m southwest of the hub site. At these sites, the current ambient levels would
be exceeded in the 100,000 TEU situation at night by approximately 6 dB(A).
When the cumulative noise from the proposed transport hub is considered
together with the existing ambient noise the resultant ambient noise levels will
increase by more than 1 dB(A) at sites BG7, BG17, BG18, BG19 and BG20. The
increase at these sites is predicted to be up to 3 dB(A) for the 42,000 TEU situation
and up to 6 dB(A) for the 100,000 TEU situation. To most people, noise increases
of less than 1 dB(A) are unlikely to be perceptible. A 2 dB(A) increase may be just
perceptible to some people, while a 5 dB(A) increase would be perceptible but
unlikely to be annoying.
The modelling therefore predicts that the increase in ambient noise due to the
proposed transport hub will not result in ambient noise increases that are
considered to be annoying to the community. The performance criteria provisions
of the Brighton Planning Scheme 2000 are therefore considered to be satisfied.
It is expected that the risk of significant noise impacts on the surrounding
community would be further mitigated by the application of good environmental
practice, which would minimise noise emissions to the extent practicable through
appropriate onsite noise management measures.
Clause 11-2(A) of the draft Environmental Protection Policy (noise) states that new
transport infrastructure should be developed with a major criterion of minimising
the number of people exposed to noise levels that would prejudice environmental
values. With the transport hub at the existing railyards in Hobart approximately
4700 residential properties are located within 500m of the railyards site and 21
level crossings between Macquarie Point and the proposed facility at Brighton. By
removing the rail freight from Macquarie Point railyards there is a very significant
22
net reduction in people affected by rail noise along the existing rail line through the
suburbs of Hobart.
The full report is included as Appendix 8.
Map showing locations of noise monitoring locations
23
2.7 Visual Amenity
The subject site is adjacent to the existing Brighton Industrial estate, which is
located centrally within the Brighton Municipality about 27kms north of Hobart.
The Midland Highway, a Category I road, dissects the Brighton Industrial estate.
The visibility of the proposed transport hub development will limited due to the
elevated topography surrounding the majority of the site (see image on page 37).
Industrial estate tenants will experience the greatest change in visual amenity
however it would be expected that the presence of a transport hub in the
proposed location would meet expectations of occupants of the industrial estate;
especially given the existing Industry zoning.
A very small number of residents travelling along the western extent of Cobbs Hill
Road will experience a change from a largely rural landscape to the north to a more
industrial landscape. Given the existing and as yet undeveloped industry zoning
that makes up a large part of this landscape, future and incremental industrial
development would have occurred across this area over coming years resulting in a
reduction in rural amenity. Development of the proposed transport hub will mean
that a small number of Cobbs Hill Road residents will experience more rapid
landscape change than might otherwise occur.
Additionally, the proposed transport hub will be partially visible from a small
number of rural properties to the north. However, it is expected that much of the
activity on the hub site will be screened from these properties by existing
vegetation. Therefore the impact on visual amenity is not considered to be
significant.
The primary viewshed of the transport hub site for the majority of the community
is from the Midland Highway, therefore analysis was undertaken along this route to
quantify the impact on visual amenity. Three points along the section of the
highway that provided the maximum visual exposure to the hub site were selected
for viewshed analysis. It is important to note that this analysis was undertaken
from points on the New Brighton Bypass alignment rather than the existing
alignment in order to reflect the expected infrastructure layout at the time of
commencement of hub operations.
The viewshed analysis supports the proposition that the proposed hub site is well
screened from the Highway by the topography and existing industrial
development. Each of the viewshed images indicates that the hub platform will
not be visible from any of the three points on the Bypass alignment. Further, the
road and rail access that extends from the existing Midland Highway into the
northern end of the hub is largely out of view of vehicles moving along the new
bypass route.
Importantly, development does not extend above the 70m contour line and
therefore surrounding hills will remain undeveloped and the existing visual amenity
will be maintained.
It is expected that future industrial development proposed for the site would
generally be in keeping with the evolving character of the area. Development of
24
the proposed hub site will form the outer limit to the north, northeast and
northwest of the long term footprint of the industrial precinct.
Images below show viewshed from three points on the New Midland Highway alignment
25
Management
Where visual impacts do result from establishing the hub development in this
location it is expected that landscaping will minimise these effects. The land north
and northeast of the hub platform area has also been identified as having
significant vegetation and heritage values, so strategies to minimise the
disturbance of this area during construction will be utilised.
The indicative master plan below indicates the expected future footprint of
development and those areas that will remain vegetated for the long term.
Stormwater retention basins will be landscaped with local species determined by a
botanical consultant. Importantly, this land will remain undeveloped and
vegetated which will provide a natural buffer between
Disturbance areas across the site that are not the subject of further development
will be revegetated with indigenous plantings consistent with species listed in the
review of flora.
Indicative Brighton Transport Hub Master Plan
26
2.8 Agricultural Land Capability
A Land Capability and Agricultural Assessment has been undertaken across the site
and the land has been identified as a combination of class 4, 5s1 and 6s. There is no
class 1, 2 or 3 or prime agricultural land across the site. The class 4 land is located
on land that is currently undeveloped but zoned for industrial development.
The land that will accommodate the northern section of the hub has recently been
rezoned from Rural to Industry, which implies that there was little strategic merit in
maintaining the Rural zoning for rural uses. The land will provide far greater
benefits to the community as an extension of the existing industrial area.
The full report considered the merit of developing this land is contained in
Appendix 9. In summary the report found that:
• There was no prime agricultural land present in the study area;
• The Objectives and Principles of the PAL Policy can be adequately addressed
by the proposal, particularly with regard to the non-fettering of surrounding
agricultural land use;
• There should be minimal impact on surrounding agricultural activity
resulting from the proposal; and
• There is adequate separation, or means of control to protect adjacent land
use from fettering by the proposal.
Land capability plan
27
2.9 Dust
A number of sources of dust will arise during construction of the Transport Hub and
associated infrastructure. Control measures will be implemented at the design and
construction phases of the project and there will be an ongoing dust management
regime for exposed sections of the site when it is operational.
Dust Management measures will be implemented to ensure:
• Dust emissions from the site are minimised;
• Dust emissions are at or below appropriate criteria and do not cause
environmental problems; and
• There are no adverse impacts on adjoining properties, flora and vegetation
communities and waterways.
Dust management measures during design
Project design will provide for the revegetation of all exposed cut and fill batters to
the extent that the soil type supports vegetation. This will minimise dust emissions
and reduce potential for erosion due to rainfall. As a minimum, exposed batters
will be topsoiled and grassed with suitable species. Where required batter faces
will be conditioned as appropriate to improve vegetation uptake.
Management
Procedures and monitoring
The Contractor will prepare dust monitoring and control procedures as part of the
Construction Environmental Management Plan that will:
• Identify likely causes of dust;
• Identify prevailing weather and wind conditions;
• Monitor dust generating activities and ensure that any dust that is
generated is contained within the site and is not creating adverse impacts
within the site;
• Suppress dust to ensure that it does not create a nuisance or hazard to
adjoining properties, members of the public, site workers or site safety;
• Ensure that all site personnel understand the requirements for dust control
and minimisation through training, induction, monitoring and review; and
• Any complaints received will be registered and will trigger a review of the
dust management procedures.
Dust Generating Activities
The following activities are likely to generate dust during construction:
• Stripping of topsoil from the site prior to carrying out bulk earthworks;
• Bulk earthworks operations including excavation, hauling material in dump
trucks or scrapers, and compaction of material;
• Topsoil and earth stockpiles; and
• Placement of topsoil on finished embankment slopes.
28
Topsoil stripping
The material is predominantly heavy black dolerite derived clay. The nature of this
material implies that it is less likely to generate dust than lighter more friable soils.
Nevertheless, the following dust control measures will be necessary during this
activity:
• Water trucks will be used on a needs basis to spray water on operational
surfaces and excavation sites to suppress dust;
• A minimum clearing policy will also be adopted to ensure that vegetation is
only cleared when and where necessary;
• Where practicable topsoil will be directly transferred to exposed surfaces
that are to be revegetated; and
• Where direct transfer of topsoil is not possible it will be stockpiled and
stabilised.
Bulk Earthworks
Dust may be generated during the excavation operation by trucks hauling (both
from the material on the truck and the truck traversing haul roads). Dust control
measures will include:
• Watering of the excavated face as necessary;
• Watering of material once loaded into trucks; and
• Water trucks spraying haul roads.
Topsoil and earth stockpiles
• Stockpiles will be watered as necessary to suppress dust; and
• If necessary will be sprayed with suppressant such as hydromulch/sterile
rye corn if they are to be unused for a long period and dust is an ongoing
problem.
Placement of Topsoil on Finished Embankment Slopes
Where practicable this work will be done progressively as embankments are
completed. Subject to suitable seasonal conditions revegetation will also be carried
out progressively.
When seasonal conditions are not suitable for revegetation, water spraying will be
used to suppress dust and environmentally benign dust suppressant products may
be considered.
Auditing and review
Dust management procedures and outcomes will be subject to regular audit and
review to ensure that procedures are being followed and that they are effective.
Dust management during operation
A large amount of site activity will be carried out on sealed pavements. This is
particularly so for container loading and unloading operations. The intention is to
construct the working platform for the ultimate development in the first stage
works. This will result in an area of land of approximately 25Ha that may have a
29
formed earth surface. A further area of land may be excavated and formed to
facilitate the provision of services and future subdivision. These areas of land may
have natural gravel or rocky surfaces and may not of themselves generate much
dust. They may be occasionally used for container or vehicle storage.
Such areas will be assessed when they have been formed to determine their
potential to generate dust. They will also be regularly monitored to ensure that
they do not generate excessive dust.
Mitigation measures that will be considered to minimise dust include:
• Watering by fixed or movable sprayers;
• Environmentally benign dust suppressant products;
• Revegetation;
• Bituminuous seal; and
• Cover with a gravel layer that does not generate dust eg single size blue
metal.
3 PLANNING SCHEME ASSESSMENT

3.1 Statutory References
The project is located within three zones of the Brighton Planning Scheme 2000,
they are:
• Industry zone;
• Rural zone; and
• Infrastructure zone
The proposed works are classified under two use and development categories. The
following table describes each of the uses and the requirements under each of the
relevant zones (a description of infrastructure elements is included in Section 1).
The following assessment is based on a recent determination by the RPDC to
rezone part of the land from Rural to Industry zone.
30
Transport depot and distribution
Means use of land for distributing goods or passengers, or facilities to park and service vehicles.
Examples are airport, bus terminal, heliport, mail centre, railway station, road or rail freight
terminal, taxi depot and a wharf.
Works include
• The hub platform, which consists of hardstand and associated rail infrastructure.
Industry zone
Permitted
Utilities
Means use of land for:
a) telecommunications; or
b) transmitting gas, oil, or power; or
c) transport networks; or
d) collecting, treating, transmitting, storing or distributing water; or
e) collecting, treating or disposing of storm of floodwater, sewage, or sullage.
Examples are a gas, water or sewerage main; electrical substation; power line; pumping station;
retarding basin; road; railway line; sewage treatment plant; water storage dam; storm or flood
water drain and weir.
Works include
• The Hub connector road extending from the proposed northern roundabout on the
existing Midland Highway to the existing Glenstone Road connection to the south.
Railway line accessing the hub; and
• A 750m rail line extending from 180m east of the existing Midland Highway to the point
at which the rail branches out to form the hub rail configuration.
Industry zone Rural zone Infrastructure zone
Discretionary Discretionary Permitted

The works are proposed
wholly or partly within the
Bridgewater Quarry Overlay
The proposed works are contained within the Environmental Buffer Overlay and
partly within the Bridgewater Quarry Overlay and must also meet the requirements
of a number of scheme schedules. The above matters are considered throughout
the report.
31
Map showing proposed transport hub layout over zoning
Rural zone
Infrastructure zone
Industry zone
32
3.2 General considerations
In addition to the matters outlined above, Clause 3.3 of the Scheme specifies
criteria that must be taken into consideration prior to the determination of an
application. The following matters relevant to this application are listed in the
table below.
Criteria that must be taken into account (relevant to this application) Report Section
State Policies Section 4
Planning Scheme Objectives Section 3
Purpose of the Zone and all other provisions of the Scheme for the Section 3
development and use
The character of the locality, the existing and future amenities of the Section 2 & 3
neighbourhood and the effect of the development on the amenity of the area
The availability of existing public utility services Section 1
The provision of access, loading, parking and manoeuvring of vehicles Section 3
The existing character of the site and the buildings and vegetation thereon Section 2
The need to impose limits as to length of establishment of operation and the Section 3
periods within which the activities may only be carried out
The environmental effect of the development on any nearby land Section 2 & 3
The accessibility of the site, its relationship to major roads, the capacity of Section 3
existing streets and roads in the locality and the effect of the development on
such capacity
Whether native vegetation is to be or can be protected, planted or regenerated Section 2

through the proposed use or development
Effects of the proposal on natural habitats, wetlands, waterways or cultural Section 2 & 3
heritage values
Protection of landscape and visual aesthetics Section 2
Comments of any other Department or Authority (all referrals required) Section 1
Any representation received in relation to an application for which Section 57 of the Act applies
3.3 Subdivision
The subdivision requirements of the scheme are not applicable to the proposed
transport hub, infrastructure and associated land acquisitions. The road works will
require acquisition of land and title boundary adjustments under the Land
Acquisition Act 1993. Subdivision is not part of this application; sections of land are
being acquired, not subdivided.
33
There is no requirement for Local Government approval for the acquiring of land
under the Land Acquisition Act 1993. The Recorder of Titles approves any new titles
created without requiring Local Government approval.
Division 4 – Sealed plans of the Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act 1993 is not applicable. Clause 102 of that Act states:
102. Non-application of provisions to certain sales
The provisions of this Division do not apply to a subdivision of land only by
sale and conveyance, transfer or release to the Crown, the Commonwealth
or a statutory authority if acquisition by compulsory process is an
alternative means of obtaining the land sold
Therefore, where an acquiring authority is purchasing land (as detailed above) it is
not subdivision as per the Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous Provisions
Act) 1993 for the purposes of the planning scheme. This is the standard process for
the development of infrastructure applied by the DIER across the State.
3.4 Brighton Planning Scheme 2000 Objectives

The proposal is to seek approval for a transport hub, associated hardstand, rail and
road infrastructure adjacent to the existing Bridgewater Industrial Estate. The
proposed site for the hub extends through three zones; the Industry, Rural and
Infrastructure zones. Therefore, it will be necessary to address the objectives of
each of these zones.
A proposal to rezone a 32 hectare parcel of Rural land to Industry was recently
approved by the Resource Planning and Development Commission (RPDC). The
hub platform is located wholly within the revised Industry zone. Associated road
and rail infrastructure is located in Rural, Industry and Infrastructure zones and is
assessed accordingly.
3.4.1 Scheme Objectives - Industry

The main hub platform which will accommodate future industrial development and
a large section of the hub connector road are located within the Industry zone.
2.6 Scheme Objectives - Industry

The industrial objective of the Planning Scheme is:-
(a) To promote Brighton as an important regional industrial location.

(b) To provide a range of industrial lots and configurations to meet expected demand.
(c) To encourage the development of new and expanded industries on existing zoned
industrial land.
(d) To encourage new industrial development to take locational advantage of the transport
and distribution opportunities provided by the existing road and rail networks.
34
(e) To promote high quality development and environmental control.
(f) To protect industrial zoned land from being developed by inappropriate activities.
(g) The strategic approach to industrial development within the Municipality is to
encourage growth within the established industrial estate at Bridgewater given its
economic and transport advantages to the metropolitan area. This location is able to
accommodate a range of industrial uses including those of Level 2 activity in a manner that
is environmentally sound and utilises available infrastructure effectively.
(h) To ensure that industrial uses are protected by suitable buffers from incompatible uses
The announcement of the preferred location of the transport hub adjacent to the existing
industrial estate has generated significant interest from transport related industries. It
would be expected that this interest will translate into a strong desire to locate close to the
new hub so that complimentary firms can capitalise on the synergies provided by such a
facility.
The transport hub is one of a number of major transport infrastructure projects that are
currently proposed for the northern approaches to Hobart. The Brighton Transport Hub
and bypass projects will result in improved efficiency for land transport across the State.
The establishment of a transport hub at Brighton will also open up opportunities for
associated industries to locate in close proximity to the road and rail intermodal. This will
result in a renewed focus on Brighton as the Southern Tasmanian intermodal logistics
centre. Furthermore, the expansion and consolidation of industrial activity in this vicinity
will further reinforce the regional importance of the industrial precinct in the Brighton
Municipality.
The procurement of land for the transport hub creates additional capacity for associated
value adding activities. This development is expected to be attained in the medium to long
term. Of course this will be dependent on demand for such land. However, the land has the
potential to provide a wide range of lot sizes that will accommodate a wide range of
possible uses. Development of this land will be the subject of future development proposals
and is not included as part of this proposal.
The development of the hub will result in an increase in industrial land available for
development in the short to medium term. This will result in increased capacity to
generate further economic benefits for the Municipality and region.
The completed development will provide a fit for purpose transport intermodal that is sited
well within the Environmental Buffer Overlay, the purpose of which is to:
“identify areas where the use and development of land may be affected by
environmental constraints and to ensure that development is compatible with
identified environmental values”.
The buffer provides long term protection of industrial land uses from encroachment of
inappropriate and sensitive activities therefore avoiding potential for subsequent land use
conflicts. Residences to the north are located more than 500m from the northern end of
the development footprint of the hub. Environmental impacts that will result from
construction and operation are dealt with in more detail throughout the report.
35
It is clear that the establishment of the proposed transport hub is consistent with the
strategic approach to encourage growth within the Industrial estate and will further
reinforce the stated economic and transport advantages of the Brighton area. The
strategic transport advantages provided by direct access to a Category I road and rail
infrastructure provide a comparative advantage to firms in the Bridgewater Industrial
precinct. The proposal is therefore consistent with the objectives of the Industry zone.
3.4.2 Scheme Objectives - Rural

A portion of the northern section of the Hub connector road and rail access to the
hub, extend through the Rural zone.
2.4 Scheme Objectives - Rural

The rural objectives of the Planning Scheme are:-
(a) To promote rural pursuits as an integral part of the Municipality’s economic and
employment base.
(b) To ensure the higher quality agricultural land remains for agricultural production
(c) To promote agricultural activities that are compatible with the conservation of soil,
water and vegetation resources.
(d) To encourage protection of marginal agricultural land with landscape value from
undue development pressure.
(e) Recognition of land with higher productivity values interrelated to the recycling of
effluent as an initiative by council allows for more intensive forms of crop production to
be achieved. These areas have been identified as such and will continue to be reserved
and protected from encroachment of non-agricultural uses.
The northern section of the hub connector road and the rail access into the site are
located on land that is currently zoned Rural. This infrastructure will form a corridor
through land that will remain as Rural zoned land. This parcel of rural land will otherwise
remain undeveloped. Importantly, the majority of the existing rural values will be
retained as a result of the implementation of a Cultural Heritage Management Plan and a
Vegetation Management Plan. Moreover, it would be expected that a grazing regime will
continue which will further reinforce the rural objectives.
A Land Capability and Agricultural Assessment that was undertaken across the site and
the subject land has been identified as a combination of class 5s1 and 6s. This is
consistent with the proposed use of intermittent grazing. The full agricultural report is
contained in Appendix 9.
Landscape values
The proposed transport infrastructure development does not extend into the
surrounding foothills. This will result in the retention of much of the rural landscape
values above the road and rail infrastructure (see image below). As previously
mentioned, approximately 14Ha of land at the northeast of the site and below the
36
proposed road and rail corridor will remain undeveloped therefore retaining rural
landscape values.
At the completion of construction of the hub, substantial landscaping of indigenous
vegetation species across disturbed areas will ensure that the transition from industrial
activity to rural surrounds is as seamless as possible.
The image below indicates how high the development sits at the base of surrounding hills.
37
3.4.3 Scheme Objectives - Infrastructure
2.9 Scheme Objectives - Infrastructure

The infrastructure objectives of the Planning Scheme are:-
(a) To provide and maintain physical infrastructure in an operationally sound condition and
in accordance with all relevant environmental standards and codes.
(b) To provide services and infrastructure in the most cost effective manner in line with the
principles of sustainable practice.
A very short length of the rail line traverses the Infrastructure zone and a small portion of
the Hub connector road adjacent to the existing Midland Highway is located in the
Infrastructure zone as shown in the image below.
Road and rail are permitted in the Infrastructure zone. The location of these elements of
the transport hub development within the Infrastructure zone is consistent with the
scheme objectives.
38
3.5 Zone Requirements
3.5.1 Industry zone
Purpose
6.4.1 The purpose of the Industry Zone is:-
a) To allow for the development of industrial uses that could have major impact on other
land use activities and the local environment.
b) To provide long term security for the continuation of these industrial operations, with
protection of the Industrial Buffer Area.
c) To ensure appropriate and adequate treatment of all trade waste and emissions.
d) To allow for a range of smaller scale industrial uses which incorporate commercial
functions and seek to be located near major commercial centres.
e) To encourage the orderly and efficient take-up of industrial land.
‘Transport depot and distribution’ is permitted in the Industry zone and ‘Utilities’
(transport networks) is discretionary due to location within the Bridgwater Quarry
Overlay.
The proposed transport hub and the future development of the surrounding land will
significantly expand the availability of development ready land for industrial uses that may
have major land use and environmental impacts. Focusing development at this site, which
is located centrally within the Environmental Buffer Overlay (EBO), reduces the risk of
industrial activities locating to inappropriate and unprotected areas elsewhere.
The Industrial buffer area (EBO) provides long term security for the proposed transport
hub to expand transport activity sufficiently to meet the future Tasmanian freight task. No
other industrial area in the south provides this level of certainty in such a strategic
location.
The transport hub proposal has been designed to minimise the transfer of emissions from
the site. This issue has been addressed in Schedule 4 later in the report. Future
development within the hub footprint will be required to demonstrate capacity to meet
trade waste and emissions guidelines through future development applications.
Approval of the transport hub development will provide increased opportunities for the
establishment of a range of commercial activities, in particular, transport and storage
activities. Business locating in close proximity to the hub will benefit from the subsequent
economies of scale and flow-on effects that result from consolidation and growth of
commercial activities.
The development of the transport hub will be undertaken over a number of years which
will result in an orderly take up of industrial land.
39
Decision Guidelines:
6.4.2 In addition to matters listed in clause 3.3, Council must consider the
following matters:
(a) ability to comply with any recommended attenuation distances;

The proposed Brighton Transport Hub is not a sensitive use, nor is it a listed use in
Table s10.2 or S10.3 so this schedule does not apply to the development.
(b) ability to utilise existing infrastructure for waste emissions;

A 225 UPVC sewer pipe (see drawings P88 and P89) is proposed to skirt the proposed
hub platform and connect into a new sewer pump, the location of which is yet to be
determined by Council.
Existing sewer infrastructure will then be utilised to reach the appropriate treatment
facility. There is existing capacity within this infrastructure to accommodate future
hub development and associated needs.
(c) the interface with adjoining areas, especially the relationship with residential
areas;
The proposed transport hub is sited approximately 575 metres from the
Environmental Buffer Overlay at the nearest point. However, two sensitive uses are
located inside of the buffer which means the closest residence is 525 meters to the
north of the proposed hub site.
The proposed hub site is not adjacent to any residential or rural residential zoned
areas (see map on page 32). The site abuts several rural land parcels to the west and
north and a large parcel of industrial land to the south. It would be expected that this
privately owned industrial land will be developed in future years with a range of
industrial uses which will negate any emissions generated by an operational hub.
A rural residential area is located directly adjacent to this land but is over 500m from
the southern extent of the hub. The noise discussion in Section 2 and Appendix 8
address the affects of noise on adjoining sensitive land uses and establishes that
properties are not affected to the point where their enjoyment of the environment is
impacted.
(d) any natural and cultural values on or near the land;

The natural and cultural values are the subject of separate discussion in this report.
Suffice to say that there are considerable botanical values to the north east of the
hub site that will be protected from future development. While there are no
registered Historic Heritage sites across the hub footprint there is significant evidence
of early European settlement and associated agricultural activity across the site. In
early 2009 archaeological investigations will establish the values associated with 2
sites where hut remains are present. Once these sites have been recorded, the sites
will be lost as development proceeds. Importantly, the value in these sites is not in
the few remaining stone mounds that currently exist, but the contribution their
40
occupation history can make to a broader understanding of the historical landscape
and its inhabitants.
There are also significant Aboriginal heritage values across the site. These values are
also the subject of current detailed archaeological investigation (see Section 2). The
transport hub layout has been designed to minimise impact on these values as far as
practicable. Importantly, much of the high sensitivity areas will be protected and
managed under a voluntary cultural heritage management plan, which will be the
first of its kind in Tasmania.
(e) suitable landscape treatment for all site boundaries;
The development will not extend to the northern, western and eastern boundaries;
therefore there will be adequate space for appropriate landscape treatments. A
30m easement is located between the eastern boundary of the hub platform and the
existing industrial estate, which will provide some opportunities for landscaping. The
north and eastern boundaries will remain in Rural zoning and will be allowed to
naturally regenerate with local vegetation species. It is expected that the western
boundary will transition to the rural landscape with smaller commercial development
in the longer term.
The southern boundary abuts industrial zoned land which will be developed for such
purposes in the future. Even though there will be a continuation of industrial
development to the south in the longer term, where opportunities exist for
landscaping, appropriate plantings and siting of structures will occur.
Importantly, it is apparent from the viewshed analysis from the Midland Highway,
that substantial elements of the rural landscape north of the transport hub will be
retained (see images on pages 25, 26 & 37).
(f) adequate screening of outdoor storage from public places;
This proposal is for the hub connector road, rail and hardstand infrastructure.
Storage facilities will be located on site to accommodate much of the hub activity in
the future. These structures will be the subject of future development applications at
which time issues such as screening may be considered.
(g) the use of lighting
Lighting design has been based on the levels and parameters set out by Australian
Standard AS/NZS 1158.3.1 2005 Lighting for roads and public spaces. Although the
standard is not specifically designed for this process, the interaction between
pedestrian and vehicles would still apply. The primary objective of this standard is to
provide a safe environment for combined pedestrian and vehicles reduce the crime
and enhance the prestige of the area.
The lighting design has incorporated floodlights that reduce light spill to surrounding
areas. The report has demonstrated that there will be no impact on surrounding
residential areas. See Appendix 10 for lighting Design Report.
41
(h) stormwater discharge; and
The design drawings indicate the proposed method of dealing with stormwater
discharge and runoff from surrounding hills. The design incorporates water sensitive
urban design elements such as large swale drains and 2 detention basins that will
ensure that water leaving the site is not contaminated (refer to Schedule 4 discussion
on page 55)
(i) the environmental standards set down in Schedule 10.
The proposed Brighton Transport Hub is not a sensitive use, nor is it a listed use in
Table s10.2 or S10.3 so this schedule does not apply to the development.
All environmental standards have been addressed in the response to Schedule 4
provisions.
42
3.5.2 Rural zone
Purpose
6.4.1 The purpose of the Rural Zone is:-
a) To encourage an integrated approach to land management.
(b) To encourage development of new sustainable rural enterprises through value adding
to products at source.
(c) To encourage promotion of economic development compatible with rural activities and
land capability.
(d) To encourage improvement of existing agricultural techniques.
(e) To encourage protection and enhancement of the bio-diversity of the area.
(f) To ensure that subdivision promotes effective land management practices and
infrastructure provision.
The road and rail infrastructure that will provide access to the main hub area from the
north is located in a 30Ha parcel of Rural zoned land west of the Midland Highway (see
map below).
A previous discussion in relation the Rural zone
objectives has addressed many of the issues
relevant to the zone Purpose statements.
However, the following comments are
applicable to this section.
The Rural zoned land does not represent a

land holding of sufficient size to accommodate
an economically viable rural enterprise, so it is
futile to pursue a discussion in relation to new
rural enterprises. Suffice to say that the value
in the land is associated with the botanical
values across a large part of the site rather
than agricultural values. These values have
been considered in some detail in Section 2 - Flora.
Importantly, as a result of the transport hub development these values will be protected
from future development that might otherwise been lost as a result of approval of
incremental development. Although a transport corridor is proposed to extend through
this parcel of land, the alignment has been designed to skirt around the significant
botanical values.
Protection and enhancement of biodiversity values will occur through a formal mechanism
such as a management plan. An appropriate approach for future management will be
determined in conjunction with State Authorities over coming months. Further, the land
that DIER will be acquiring on this rural parcel will not be subdivided for future
development.
43
Relevant Decision Guidelines:
following matters:
(a) general issues relating to any catchment strategy, the State Policy on the
Protection of Agricultural Land 2000 and land capability.
The protection of Agricultural land Policy has been considered in Sections 2 and 4 of
this report. Appendix 9 contains the associated report.
(b) rural issues relating to the impact on the rural economy, the capacity of the land
to sustain a rural enterprise and the potential impact of future uses on surrounding
rural uses
Comment has been made previously in relation to the above, however the following
summary points are relevant:
• The amount of land proposed to be impacted is a narrow corridor through a
30Ha parcel of Rural zoned land which will not adversely affect the rural
economy;
• the Rural zoned land does not have the capacity under current conditions to
sustain a viable rural enterprise; and
• surrounding land is largely zoned Industry. Additional industrial uses will not
fetter what remains of rural activities such as light grazing.
(c) Environmental issues relating impacts on flora, character and heritage of

surrounding areas
Comments addressing environmental issues are included in Section 2 under specific
headings.
(d) Design and siting issues relating to design of proposed roads and their impact on
the landscape and traffic management.
Impacts relating to the siting of the Hub connector road have been discussed in
Section 2 & 3 under Visual Impact and Scheme Objectives respectfully. The location
of a transport corridor in the Rural zone has also been addressed in the Rural zone
objectives discussion.
Traffic management has been addressed as part Appendix 11 Traffic Impact
Assessment
Use and development standards

There are no structures proposed as part of this development application,
therefore setback and height provisions are not applicable.
44
3.5.3 Infrastructure zone
Purpose
6.4.1 The purpose of the Infrastructure Zone is:-
To recognise or provide for the use and development of land for specific purposes related
to activities undertaken for infrastructure services
‘Utilities’ (transport networks) is permitted.
A short section of the hub connector road is located in the Infrastructure zone
(approximately 150m from commencement). In addition, a short section of rail traverses
this zone in order to access the hub site(see image on page 38).
The purpose of the Infrastructure zone is specifically for the development of road and rail
infrastructure such as is proposed.
45
3.6 Scheme Overlays
3.6.1 Environmental Buffer Overlay
The purpose of the Environmental Buffer Overlay (EBO) is:
To identify areas where the use and development of land may be affected by
environmental constraints. To ensure that development is compatible with
identified environmental values.
The environmental buffer was established some decades ago to achieve two key
outcomes. Firstly, the buffer would guarantee that a substantial distance would be
maintained between industrial development and sensitive uses, and secondly, the
EBO would provide industries locating inside the buffer with confidence to invest
and operate without fear of unreasonable complaints from encroaching sensitive
uses.
The integrity of this buffer has been largely maintained, however it is clear that a
number of residences have established since the 1990s. Meeting the desired
environmental values for these residences and establishing appropriate industrial
development in the industrial estate is challenging and will be increasingly so as the
estate expands.

following matters:
(a) the nature of the environmental source for which an established Standard
Recommended Attenuation Distance (SRAD) has been provided.
(b) the distance of the application to the environmental source and the relationship to
the SRAD
Decision guidelines (a) and (b) refer to Standard Recommended Attenuation Distance
(SRAD) outlined in Schedule 10 in the Scheme. The proposed transport hub is not a
sensitive use , nor is it listed in Table S10.2 or S10.3 for the scheme, so these
guidelines do not apply when assessing the development application.
(c) any relevant considerations under the Environmental Management and Pollution
Control Act 1994 (EMPCA 1994);
As the transport hub is not a level 2 activity under schedule 2 of EMPCA 1994 it is not
necessary to notify the Department of Environment, Parks, Heritage and the Arts
(DEPHA). However, if DEPHA considers that an activity requires assessment by the
Board of Environmental Protection Authority, then the Director can require that the
planning authority refer the application to them.
(d) the potential environmental nuisances that may be a source of conflict if the
application were to be approved; and
46
Noise has the potential to be an environmental nuisance therefore it has been
considered in some detail in Appendix 8. A summary of potential impacts is included
in Section 2.
The noise modelling for the proposed transport hub predicts that the increase in
ambient noise will not result in ambient noise increases that would be considered to
be annoying to the community. The performance criteria of Schedule 4 of the
Brighton Planning Scheme are therefore satisfied.
(e) all industrial uses with the Industrial buffer must satisfy Australian Standard
AS1055 (Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise for noise and air
emissions at the boundary buffer
AS1055 also provides estimated average background levels for different areas
containing residences in Australia.
For areas with medium density transportation or some commerce or industry (R3)
these background noise levels are:
• Day – 50 dB(A);
• Evening – 45 dB(A); and
• Night – 40 dB(A).
Seven of the assessment sites are located within the overlay: BG6 and BG18 in the
north; BG5 to the west; BG4, BG14 and BG15 to the east; and BG20 to the south.
The 50 dB(A), 45 dB(A) and 40 dB(A) noise contours (for day, evening and night
periods respectively) were exported from SoundPLAN for comparison with the
boundary of the EBO.
The noise contours for the 42,000 TEU freight task normal case scenario with a slight
breeze are depicted in Figure 3.6.1 - a below.
The noise contours for the 100,000 TEU freight task normal case scenarios with a
slight breeze are depicted in Figure 3.6.1 - b below.
For the 42,000 TEU freight task the 50 dB(A), 45 dB(A) and 40 dB(A) noise contours lie
well within the overlay, as such condition of Provision 7.6.1 of the planning scheme is
for day, evening and night time noise levels is satisfied.
For the 100,000 TEU freight task the 50 dB(A) and 45 dB(A) contours lie well within
the Overlay. The 40 dB(A) contour extends slightly beyond the boundary of the
overlay to the north. The condition for the day and evening noise levels is satisfied.
The night time level is satisfied for all locations with the exception of the small area
to the north. In contrast to the 42,000 TEU situation, significant night time activity
has been assumed. The modelled night time noise levels may be in excess of the
actual noise levels that will be experienced.
The closest measurement location to this point is BG17. The current average noise
levels are already in excess of 40 dB(A) at this location.
It is clear that the proposal to construct the transport hub within the EBO is
appropriate.
47
This map depicts predicted noise levels (42,000 TEU – existing) and Environmental Buffer Overlay
48
This map depicts predicted noise levels (100,000 TEU – future) and Environmental Buffer Overlay
49
3.6.2 Bridgewater Quarry Overlay
The purpose of this overlay is:
(a) To protect the operations of the Bridgewater Quarry from
incompatible or conflicting use or development; and
(b) To ensure that new use or development in the vicinity of the
quarry is aware of the operations and potential impacts.
The northern and southern sections of the hub connector road and the northern
rail access which are classified as ‘Utilities’ are located inside the Bridgewater
Quarry overlay. Decision guidelines are addressed below:
Reference to the necessity for referral is addressed in Section 1.

following matters:
(a) the compatibility of the proposed use and development with the operation of the
Bridgewater Quarry
Given the sections of hub related infrastructure that are located within the overlay
are a very small, their construction and operation would be inconsequential in
relation to the operation of the Quarry.
(b) the distance of the proposal to the maximum permitted extent of quarry
operations
All hub operations apart from access and egress of vehicles to and from the hub site
will occur outside of the overlay. The road and rail sections referred to above are
more than 1.5km from the Quarry site.
(c) any relevant attenuation distance in Schedule 10; and
The afore mentioned road and rail infrastructure leading to the hub platform is not a
sensitive use, nor is it listed in Table S10.2 or S10.3 for the scheme, so these
guidelines do not apply when assessing the development application.
(d) the application of Australian Standard 1055 for noise and air emissions at the
buffer, or such standards and performance criteria as may be imposed through
statute or State Policy
N/A
50
3.7 Scheme Schedules
3.7.1 Schedule 1 – Off-street Parking – Car parking, access and
loading
Provision for adequate and safely sited car and truck parking will be an important
part of a fully operational transport hub.
Parking requirements for ‘transport depot and distribution’ are to be determined
by Council. Given this proposal is for road, rail and hardstand infrastructure only,
and not buildings that will accommodate employees or attract custom, it would be
expected that there will be no requirements for a specific number of parking
spaces at this stage of the development.
However, parking proposals will form part of subsequent development applications
for warehouses, offices and transport related activities. It would be expected that
parking requirements will be specified for each development at this stage.
The map below indicates the 0.7Ha area that will be set aside for car and truck
parking in the initial stage of operation. The layout is indicative only and will be
modified as industry input is considered and new buildings are proposed.
Image showing area allocated for vehicle parking in the initial stages of operation
51
3.7.2 Schedule 4 – Environmental Management Standards
4 Principles and Scheme Standards
Issue 1 – Environmental Impact
Objective:
To Protect the Environmental and Visual qualities of land units through ensuring that
buildings, structures and other works are located, constructed and subsequently
managed/maintained so as to minimise impact.
A1 Building and access roads are on sites with slopes of less than 1 in 5 (20%
grade).
Acceptable
solution
There are no buildings included in this proposal and the hub connector road is located on
land that is less than 20% grade. Therefore the development meets the acceptable solution.
Issue 2 – Visual amenity
Objective:
To ensure that development does not adversely impact on the visual amenity and landscape
qualities of the Municipality.
A2 Use or development within the Landscape and Skyline Conservation Zone

cannot be viewed from a public place.
Acceptable
solution
The proposed transport hub and associated infrastructure is not located in the Landscape
and Skyline Conservation Zone, therefore this Issue is not applicable.
Issue 3 – Natural hazards
Objective:
Areas Subject to hazard will be managed to minimise the need for remedial or engineering
works to protect property or human life.
A3 Use and development must:-

Acceptable (a) not have a floor area less than 300mm above the 1 in 100 year flood
solution level; [Amend. RZ 03/04B effective 6/12/04]
(b) be located further than 30m measured horizontally from the furthest
land-bound extent of the wetland to minimise the risk of disturbance and
shoreline recession; and
52
(c) be located further than 10m from the outer limit of a waterway to
avoid erosion.
This development proposal does not include the construction of any buildings; consequently
(a) is not applicable.
In addition, the development site is above the 50 metre contour and outside of the 1 in 100
year flood level some 30 metres above the expected flood level anticipated at the
intersection of Crooked Billet Creek and the Jordan River.
The development is located well outside the waterway overlay. Therefore the development
meets all the acceptable solutions.
Issue 4 - Utilities
Objective:
To ensure that all appropriate utilities shall be provided for proposed use or development.
A4 Effluent from any use or development is connected to the Council’s

reticulated sewer, or where a reticulated system is not available, an on-
Acceptable
site waste disposal system conforming to the Tasmanian Plumbing Code
solution
1994.
This stage of the development does not require effluent connections. However, the
development includes the provision of an access point to the reticulated sewer system
(shown on Plan HB08001-P88 and HB08001-P89).
There are two sewerage catchments, however this proposal is contained to the area that is
nominally 30Ha and is referred to as the main catchment. There is a potential future
development area to the south of approximately 12Ha.
A 225 UPVC sewer main is proposed for the main catchment and will be installed across the
site to a low point on the eastern corner of the site. This sewer main is sized to allow for
future development. A new sewerage pump station will be constructed on Council owned
land adjacent to Crooked Billet Creek (refer to dwg HB08001-P88 for location plan). The
pump station will then pump via a rising main into Council’s existing gravity system in
Crooked Billet Drive.
The pump station shall be constructed in accordance with the Tasmanian Sewerage Pumping
Station Environmental Guidelines 1999 and the WSA Sewerage Pumping Code of Australia.
Maximum Peak Wet Weather Flows (PWWF) from the development are expected to be in
the order of 5L/s for the initial stages of development with an increase to 30L/s possible for
the ultimate development including an allowance for some small wet industry. Average Dry
Weather Flows (ADWF) start at 0.8L/s for the initial development up to 5L/s for the full
development. There is an allowance for one small wet industry in this calculation.
The southern catchment would drain by gravity into Council’s system at Glenstone Road.
ADWF from this catchment could be in the order of 2L/s, with a PWWF of 12L/s.
Therefore the development meets the applicable acceptable solution.
53
A5 Use or development is connected to the Council’s reticulated water
supply, or where no reticulated supply is available, to a potable water
Acceptable
supply conforming to the Tasmanian Plumbing Code 1994. [Amend. RZ
solution
03/04A effective 6/12/04]
This stage of the development does not require a water supply connection. However, this
proposal includes the provision of an access point to the reticulated water system (shown on
Plan HB08001-P88).
Water for potable supply and fire fighting purposes will be taken from the Council main that
currently runs through the site (refer to dwg HB08001-P88 for location plan). Water shall
then be reticulated through the site to serve future development and fire fighting
requirements. A network of fire hydrants shall be constructed in accordance with TFS
guidelines.
There is sufficient head of water available at the site as the works are below the reservoir
level on the adjacent hills.
It is understood that Council’s infrastructure has a maximum capacity of around 40L/s. This
is more than adequate for the first stages of development. The fire fighting requirement for
future development will be largely dependant on the type of materials stored on site. It is
proposed that future development shall have to be managed to limit the fire fighting
demand to 40L/s. If this is not sufficient for a particular proposed development, then the
proponent shall have to provide additional storage for fire fighting purposes.
The peak hourly demand from the ultimate development of 42Ha is estimated at 20L/s. This
assumes no heavy water use as part of wet processing of goods.
Therefore the development meets the applicable acceptable solution.
Acceptable A6 Electrical and telecommunication reticulation associated with

solution subdivision within the Residential Zone is installed underground. [Amend.
RZ 03/04B effective 6/12/04
Not applicable.
Issue 5 - Avoiding discharge
Objective:
To maintain the physical and chemical quality of the Municipal’s waterways and wetlands at
level that will not affect their role as aquatic habitats, recreational assets, or sources of
supply for domestic, industrial or agricultural uses.
A7 Use or development does not include a point source discharge.

Acceptable
solution
The development has a point source for stormwater discharge and therefore does not meet
the acceptable solution A7 and will be considered under the performance criteria P7. Maps
HB08001-P94 and P95 depict the stormwater detention/retention basins and stormwater
outlet point.
54
P7 Development must demonstrate that appropriate methods of treatment
or management shall be implemented to ensure that new point sources
Performance
of discharge:-
Criteria
a) do not prejudice the achievement of water quality objectives;
The development meets all performance criteria.

The main objective of the policy is to maintain or enhance water quality.
The Jordan River between Pontville and Bridgewater has been subject to Major streamside
and in stream modification and is considered in poor condition (DPIWE 2003).
Water quality released from the site will be of a chemical standard acceptable for drinking
water. The water quality will also be below the trigger value for the protection of 95% of
species for freshwater environments.
Management of stormwater quality will be undertaken in accordance with current best
practice standards to control flow and to reduce turbidity and nutrients loads.
Water of this quality will contribute to the maintenance and enhancement of water quality
in the Jordan catchment.
The release of uncontaminated stormwater may additionally enhance overall water quality
in the down stream section of the river by providing an increase in overall volume and
regularisation of water flow into the lower Jordan catchment.
Discussion of Water Quality Data:
Limited data exists and few studies have been undertaken to accurately model and quantify
stormwater runoff from transport related activities. However, American Transport
Department studies have noted that the magnitude of constituents associated with highway
runoff is related to traffic volume U.S (cited in Sansalone et al 2005).
Kayhanian et al (2003) in a study of runoff from United States Highways found that highways
with vehicle movements of less than 30,000 vehicle movements per day had significantly less
concentrations of pollution in stormwater than those with high vehicle movements.
The current Macquarie Point rail yards site has less than 30,000 vehicle movements per day
with identified movements being in the range of 400-500 per day. This means that the
potential stormwater pollutant discharges can be considered in the context of Kayhanian’s
study of highways less than 30,000 vehicle movements per day.
Kayhanian’s study examined a range of metals, nutrients and other parameters. Metals
sampled include arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc and nutrients
include ammonia, nitrate and nitrite. Other parameters studied included oxygen demand,
pH, suspended solids, and turbidity.
Constituent (1) Recorded Drinking ANZECC Trigger value

average water protection of correction for
guidelines 95% species water hardness
trigger
pH 7 6.5-8.5 6.5-7.5*
Dissolved solids 297.2 80-500 (good) No data
Suspended solids 168 No data Use turbidity as
indicator
55
Turbidity (NTU) 567.2 5 2-25*(upland
rivers)*
Dissolved metals
No specific limits are differentiated
No specific limits are differentiated

between dissolved metal and total
between dissolved metal and total

Arsenic 0.0006
Cadmium No data
metals
metals
Chromium 0.0017
Copper 0.0065
Lead 0.0012
Nickel 0.0036
Zinc 0.0353
Total Metals
Arsenic 0.0006 0.007 0.0013 No correction
Cadmium 0.0002 0.002 0.0002 0.0014
Chromium 0.0055 0.05 0.001 0.0049
Copper 0.0094 1-2 0.0014 0.0073
Lead 0.0082 0.01 0.0034 0.040
Nickel 0.0086 0.2 0.011 0.057
Zinc 0.0634 3 0.008 0.041
Nutrients
Ammonium 2.3 0.5 0.9
Nitrate 0.6 50 No data
Nitrite No data 3 0.7
Total Phosphorus 0.2 No data 0.005
Fecal coliforms 3800 Not
detectable
MPN/100mL
Oil and Grease 2.5 No reliable

trigger values.
(1) all constituents are reported in mg/L unless otherwise specified.

*Value form South East Australia upland slightly disturbed river category.
Water Quality for Human Consumption:
The average total concentrations of metals and nutrients (with the exception of Ammonium
and fecal coliforms) from a highway of less than 30,000 vehicle movements a day has lower
concentrations than the acceptable values for both health and taste in the Tasmanian
Drinking Water Guidelines.
Within the nitrogen cycle (disregarding artificial process input), ammonium is sources from
animal secretion and organic decomposition. Fecal coliforms in stormwater are also usually
associated with the breakdown of animal secretions and plant material.
In the Kayhanian study the average ammonium levels exceeded the Australian Drinking
Water Quality Guidelines by 1.7mg/L. The high level in the report reflects the characteristics
of the transport uses and surrounding environment of the study and in this case does not
accurately reflect likely stormwater emissions.
The data from the Kayhanian study is from rural highways. Within the study urban highways
with greater than 30,000 vehicle movements per day had a lower Ammonia content at 1.0
mg/L. Considering that highways with vehicle movements in excess of 30,000 can have up to
56
four times higher mean concentrations of lesser traffic volumes (Wong et al 2000) it appears
likely that either surrounding land use or livestock transportation are the ammonium and
fecal coliform source.
Consequently, as the predominant use will be containerised material and does not include
provisions for livestock transportation it is likely that the actual values for these two
constituents will be significantly less.
The average turbidity reported in the study is also significantly higher than the accepted
drinking water standards. Turbidity and management to reduce turbidity is discussed in the
following section on best practice guidelines.
ANZECC Guidelines for the Protection of 95% of Species.
The trigger values for the protection of 95% of species is most commonly applied to slightly
or moderately disturbed and is designed to minimise the risk of causing additional impact on
aquatic species (beyond what is already occurring in the aquatic system). For ecosystems
that are highly disturbed it can be more appropriate to apply less stringent trigger values
(ANZECC 2000).
While the 3003 DPIWE State of the River Report for the Jordan River Catchment found that
the water quality in the Jordan river was significantly degraded, the protection of 95% of
species trigger value is being used as a precaution against further degradation.
The Jordan River has extremely hard water, which decreases the toxicity of metals (DPIWE
2003:49). The DPIWE State of the Rivers Report for the Jordan Catchment recorded water
hardness (CaCO3 mg/L) at a median of 290 mg/L throughout the catchment. At the nearest
site upstream and downstream of Crooked Billet Creek The median hardness was in the
range of high 300s and low 400s mg/L.
Taking a precautionary approach the ANZECC correction for water hardness has been
applied using the very hard classification of 180-240 mg/L.
With this correction applied the likely total metal concentrations in stormwater falls below
the trigger value for the protection of 95% of species with the exception to total chromium,
copper and zinc.
The values of total metals represent a combination of both dissolved metals and metals
attached to particulates in the stormwater. The values of dissolved metals in all cases fall
below the trigger value for the protection of 95% of species.
Attaining the protection of 95% of species is consequently dependent upon the control of
the total suspended solids that carry the component of available contaminates above the
95% trigger value.
Management of turbidity in accordance with best practice design will reduce the available
metal concentrations to below the protection of 95% of species trigger value.
Suspended solids are solid particles that are picked up and travel with water flow. The
suspended solids content of stormwater runoff is highest at the start of rainfall events and
declines exponentially with time over rain fall events (Sansalone et al 2005). This
phenomenon in rainfall runoff is termed the first flush. Control of suspended solids
consequently focuses on managing particulates carried within flow of the first flush event.
Turbidity is used within the ANZECC guidelines as an indicator of total suspended solids. The
values reported in the Kayhanian study are disproportionately high when considered against
high Urban traffic volumes that have an average turbidity of less than 4 times the rural road
values. This means that the likely source of turbidity is from surrounding land use influences
or rural road specific uses and that the reported turbidity values are not reliable.
57
In the absence of reliable data, the management of turbidity and nutrients (see discussions
above) has been designed in accordance with the current best practice standards.
Current Best Practice Guidelines.
The current best practice guidelines are the Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD)
Engineering Procedures: Stormwater for Southern Tasmania 2006 produced by the Derwent
Estuary Program (2006).
These guidelines recommend pollutant reductions of 45% for Nitrogen and Phosphorus and
an 80% reduction of Total Suspended Solids for the protection of receiving waters.
Site specific modelling for the reduction of suspended solids, total nitrogen and total
phosphorus using the Model for Urban Stormwater Improvement Conceptualisation (MUSIC)
was used to appropriately size the design of the stormwater treatment train.
Petroleum type products sourced from transport vehicles is the most likely pollutant type to
enter the stormwater system. The ANCECC guidelines note that as hydrocarbons are not
homogenous substances it is difficult to derive guidelines. Consequently, no current
standard for release of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with relevant trigger values only being
determined for the more volatile hydrocarbon constituents and soluble fractions.
The closest relevant guideline is the Tasmanian emission limits for Total Hydrocarbons from
sewerage treatment plants into the Freshwater environment. This standard is set at 2-
10mg/L.
It is anticipated that the likely total hydrocarbon runoff will be significantly less that the 2.5
mg/L found in Kayhanian’s study in line with the lower traffic volumes. This expectation is
based on the strong linear correlation that the study found between vehicle movements per
day and total hydrocarbons.
The export of hydrocarbons to stormwater is incidental to the vehicle use and in accordance
with the recommendations of Wong et al the combination of natural vegetation filtering
from the grass swales and wetland system proposed is more appropriate for the
management of the diffuse hydrocarbon source.
This treatment by capture and biological breakdown of hydrocarbons will further reduce the
level of hydrocarbons entering the waterway so that there is minimal risk of an
environmental nuisance or harm occurring.
b) do not give rise to pollution within the terms of the Groundwater Act
1985, beyond the boundary of any attenuation zone set in accordance
with Clause 25 of the Policy; [Amend. RZ 03/04A effective 6/12/04]
The Groundwater Act 1985 was repealed with the enactment of the Water Management Act
1999. The Water Management Act 1999 contains no definition of pollution in regard to
either surface or groundwater. The most relevant applicable definition of pollution is the
definition contained within the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994
(EMPCA).
Under EMPCA a pollutant is a substance that causes environmental harm. Material
environmental harm (the least serious category) occurs where:
(i) it consists of an environmental nuisance of a high impact or on a wide scale; or
(ii) it involves an actual adverse effect on the health or safety of human beings that is not
negligible; or
(iii) it involves an actual adverse effect on the environment that is not negligible; or
58
(iv) it results in actual loss or property damage of an amount, or amounts in aggregate,
exceeding the threshold amount.
The intent of performance criteria 7 (b) is to prevent pollution to groundwater and
subsequent environmental harm.
The stormwater from the site will be treated in accordance with current best practice
standards. The retention basins have been designed in accordance with the relevant
standards to minimise flow of water through the basins walls and foundation.
Potential discharge of stormwater to groundwater exists after the stormwater has been
discharged to the creek and its subsequent flow into the Jordan River.
While there is a potential for the stormwater to enter the groundwater system, the likely
dissolved constituent concentrations are lower than the acceptable limits and trigger values
for the protection of human health and aquatic species. Please refer to performance criteria
7 (a) for a discussion on likely constituent concentrations.
No groundwater attenuation zones have been set in accordance with clause 25 of the Policy
for this development or type of development.
c) are reduced to the maximum extent that is reasonable and practical

having regard to best practice environmental management using
accepted modern technologies;
The treatment train for stormwater has been developed in accordance with the Derwent
Estuary Programs environmental best practice guidelines for water sensitive urban design.
The treatment train has been designed to achieve the following targets:
• Manage water flow through Crooked Billet Creek in a 1 in 100 year rainfall event
that does not exceed the capacity of the existing Crooked Billet Creek Rail and
Midland Highway culverts;
• Reduce the total suspended solids, total nitrogen and total phosphorus components
of stormwater by 80%, 45% and 45% percent respectively;
• Meet site constraints aimed at minimising impacts on Aboriginal heritage values,
threatened flora and fauna values, the existing gas pipeline corridor and gas
infrastructure and existing Council services; and
• Comply with Water Management (Safety of Dams) Regulations 2003.
Pipe/Swale Design
All Stormwater pipes and swales have a minimum slope of 1 in 200 or 0.5% to ensure
cleaning of sediments in the pipe can occur.
The local pipes that drain the hardstand area are sized for the 10 year Average Recurrence
Interval (ARI) rainfall event. The drainage of the hardstand area for more severe rainfall
events will be achieved with over land flow into the swales.
All pipes collecting hardstand areas shall be required to have oil and grease separators.
The swales are sized to ensure they have sufficient capacity to account for the 1in100 year
rainfall event. The swale has been broken into 3 sections to minimise its depth while
maintaining minimum grade. The low points in the swales are drained through pits and
pipes sized for the 10 year ARI rainfall event allowing for the swale to act as part of the
detention system for the 1in100 year event. To ensure the swale does not overflow a
weir/pit arrangement will be required that will drain to additional downstream detention
59
basins.
Detention Pond Design
The detention ponds are required to detain the rest of the 100 year ARI peak rainfall event
and delay the peak flows such that the capacity of the existing pipes in Crooked Billet Creek
is not exceeded.
The detention ponds are to be located downstream of the wetland structure and within the
boundary of the Crooked Billet Creek water course.
Wetland Design
The pipes that drain the swale for the 10 year ARI storm event will flow into the wetland so
that base flows and the “first flush” is treated.
The wetland size is to sufficient to ensure that WSUD treatment targets are achieved.
Future Development
There is an area to the west of the Hub site that has been earmarked for future development
by DIER and stormwater pipes need to be installed under the Hub platform so that this area
can drain to Crooked Billet Creek. The area of the future development is 25ha. It is assumed
that should this area be developed further that it will require its own detention and
treatment facility.
d) meet emission limit guidelines:-

(i) published by the Board in accordance with Clause 18 of the policy, or
(ii) where emission limit guidelines have not been published, as set by
the Board in accordance with Clause 19 Policy; and [Amend. RZ 03/04A
effective 6/12/04]
No emission limit guidelines have been produced in accordance with Clause 18 of the State
Policy on Water Quality Management 1999 for Transport Depots.
Clause 19 of the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1999 States provides for the
Board of the Environmental Protection Agency to set emission limits where the release of a
pollutant may cause an environmental nuisance, material environmental harm or serious
environmental harm.
Under EMPCA the least serious of these considerations is an environmental nuisance.
EMPCA defines and environmental nuisance as:
(a) the emission of a pollutant that unreasonably interferes with, or is likely to
unreasonably interfere with, a person's enjoyment of the environment; and
(b) any emission specified in an environmental protection policy to be an environmental
nuisance.
No Tasmanian environmental protection policy exists in reference to water quality.
As discussed in Performance Criteria 7 (a) the discharge water quality does not constitute an
environmental nuisance, material environmental harm or serious environmental harm.
e) minimise the total number of discharge points and where practical and
appropriate direct wastes to existing wastewater treatment systems with
existing treatment capacity.
There is no current stormwater treatment system in the vicinity. The current stormwater
60
discharge for the surrounding industrial estate is directly into Crooked Billet Creek and
utilises natural filtration.
The proposal provides one discharge point for stormwater that has the capacity to manage
stormwater volumes from both the Transport Hub site and also future development of
industrial zoned land within the Transport Hubs larger footprint area.
This stage of the development is not proposing activities that will produce wastes
appropriate to be directed to the reticulated sewer system.
A8 Use or development does not include emissions from diffuse sources such
as stormwater or urban runoff into a waterway or the coastal zone of a
Acceptable
quality likely to be defined as a pollutant.
solution
Potential diffuse sources of stormwater runoff are limited to access roads and rail into the
Transport Hub. These access routes are typically over 100 metres away from the nearest
waterway. Between the rail and road accesses and any watercourse either swale drains or
existing pasture vegetation will act to filter particulates and minimise sediment
transportation.
The natural filtration of particulates means that the likely emissions will achieve a water
quality that will not cause any detrimental human or environmental effects and
consequently is very unlikely to be defined as a pollutant. The likely constituents form the
road and rail runoff is described fully in performance criteria 7 (a).
Therefore the development meets the acceptable solution.
Issue 6 – Potential nuisance generators
Objective:
To ensure that environmental nuisance is carefully managed.
A9 Noise levels from activities or equipment related to the proposed use or

development must not, at any time, exceed 5dB(A) above the
Acceptable
background noise level when measured at the boundary with another
Solution
property.
The predicted noise levels from the proposed transport hub exceed the A9 requirement of
5dB(A) in a small number of locations, therefore the proposal will be considered under the
performance criteria.
P9 Development must demonstrate that noise levels from activities or

equipment related to the proposed use or development will not cause an
Performance
environmental nuisance under the provisions of the Environmental
Criteria
Management and Pollution Control Act 1994.
Noise levels generated by the transport hub operations have been considered in detail in the
Brighton Transport Hub noise assessment report in Appendix 8. A report summary is also
included in Section 2, page 21 of this report.
61
The report has demonstrated that the operation of the transport hub will not cause an
environmental nuisance under the provisions of the Environmental Management and
Pollution Control Act 1994. Therefore the proposal meets the Performance Criteria.
A10 No emissions from activities or equipment related to the proposed use or

development, including odours and vibration, can be detected by a
Acceptable
person at the boundary with another property.
solution
Localised emissions related to transport hub operations are not expected to extend beyond
the boundaries of adjacent properties. Therefore the development meets the acceptable
solution.
A11 The hours of operations where delivery of goods or use of machinery is

proposed shall be:
Acceptable
Solution Monday – Friday 7AM to 6PM
Saturday 8AM to 6PM
Sunday and gazetted
public holidays 10AM to 6PM
Construction - All construction activities will occur during the hours specified within the
hours stipulated in A11. Therefore the proposal to construct the hub meets the acceptable
solution.
Operation of the transport hub will be required to operate outside of the hours proposed in
A11. It will therefore be considered under this performance Criteria.
P11 Development must demonstrate that the hours available for

loading/unloading of goods or operation of machinery must not result in
Performance
an environmental nuisance.
Criteria
Operation - The proposed transport hub will operate 24 hours per day with the bulk of the
activity occurring between 6:00am and 10:00pm.
Under the current freight task, train activity is restricted between approximately 6:00am and
8:00pm however this level of activity is expected to increase as the freight task grows.
Trucks will be accessing the site 24 hours a day.
The noise assessment has demonstrated that activity on the hub site during the above hours
of operation will not result in environmental nuisance. Therefore it is proposed that the
development meets the performance criteria.
62
Issue 7 – Soil and water management
Objective:
To ensure that effective soil and water management is addressed prior to site disturbance
occurring.
A12 Site disturbance does not exceed 250m2 or where site disturbance will
exceed 250m2, a development application is submitted with an
Acceptable
accompanying Soil and Water Management Plan (SWMP) complying with
solution
HMCA requirements. [Amend. RZ 03/04B effective 6/12/04
The development does not meet the acceptable solution as the area of disturbance is over
250m2 and a SWMP is provided with the Development Application. Therefore the proposal
will be assessed under the performance criteria.
P12 Development shall not result in the transport of pollutants off-site which
have the potential to cause environmental nuisance or material or
Performance
serious environmental harm. [Amend. RZ 03/04B effective 6/12/04
criteria
A Soil and Water Management Plan complying with the requirements of the HMCA will be
developed by the Construction contractor and approved by Brighton Council prior to the
commencement of works.
All water runoff during construction shall be trapped and diverted to a sedimentation basin
for removal of gross pollutants and suspended solids prior to release to Crooked Billet Creek.
A catch drain will be constructed around the top side of the hub site and piped through the
hub site back to Crooked Billet Creek to divert the natural flow of the creek around the site.
The site will be re-vegetated following construction.
The application of mitigation strategies within the plan will not result in the transport of
pollutants that have the potential to cause environmental harm or nuisance off site as they
have been developed in accordance with the HMCA.
Therefore the development meets the performance criteria.
References
Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) & Agricultural and resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand
(ARMCANZ) (2000) National Water Quality Management Strategy: Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality Volume 2 Aquatic
Ecosystems – Rationale and Background Information.
Derwent Estuary Program (2006) Water sensitive urban design : engineering procedures for stormwater management in southern Tasmania. Sate of Tasmania, Hobart.
DPIWE (2003) State of the River Report for the Jordan River Catchment. Water Assessment and Planning Branch, Department of Primary Industries Water and
Environment, Hobart. Technical Report No. WAP 03/10
Kayhanian K., Sing A., Suverkropp C., Borroum S. (2003) “Impact of Annual Average Daily Traffic on Highway Runoff Pollutant Concentrations’ Journal of Environmental
engineering 129 (9) 957-990.
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) & Natural resources Management Ministerial Council (NRMMC) (2004) National Water Quality Management
Strategy: Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 6. Australian Government.
Sansalone J. J., Hird J. P., Cartledge F. K., and Tittlebaum M. E. (2005) ‘Event-Based Stormwater Quality and Quantity Loading form Elevated Urban Infrastructure
Affected by Transportation’ Water Environmental Research: Jul/Aug 77(4):348-365.
Wong. T., Breen. P., & Lloyd. S. (2000) Water Sensitive Road Design – Design Options For Improving Stormwater Quality Of Road Runoff. Technical report, Report 00/1
August. Melbourne. Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology.
63
4.1.1 Schedule 8 – Road Assets
Issue 1 – Access sight distances
Objective:
To ensure that adequate sight distance is provided in relation to the speed of through traffic.
A1 Access to, or new junction with, Category I-VI roads and State roads must
meet the standards set out in Figure S8.1.
Acceptable
solution
The Brighton Transport Hub proposes one new road connection and one new junction.
The hub connector road at the north of the site will connect 70m south of the proposed
roundabout on the existing Midland Highway. This roundabout is part of the Brighton 2
Development Application currently being considered by Council. Issues relating to the changes
in traffic movements along the Midland Highway are further considered in the Traffic Impact
Assessment included as Appendix 11. The Midland Highway will not be a Category 1 road
when the new interchange is functional.
The one junction is proposed on the local road network at the intersection of Glenstone Road
and Strong Street and a private access. The Transport Hub road will replace the private access
at this junction.
The road design complies with all appropriate Australian Standards, AustRoads Guidelines and
DIER General and Standard Specifications.
Please refer to the Traffic Impact Assessment accompanying this application for further
information.
The development meets the acceptable solution.
Issue 2 – Number of Access and Junctions on Category I-IV Roads
Objective:
To ensure that the performance and safety of roads is not reduced by the number of vehicle
entry points.
A1 There is to be no access onto, or junction with, a Category I, II or III road

outside an area subject to a general Urban Speed Limit.
Acceptable
Solution
Because the hub connector road at the north of the site will connect 70m south of the proposed
roundabout on the existing Category 1 Midland Highway, and that the Highway will remain as a
Category 1 road until approximately 2012, this Objective will be considered under the
Performance Criteria.
64
P1 The applicant demonstrates that:
Performance (iii) access onto an alternative road is impracticable; and
Criteria
(iv) there is a compelling need for the use or development to be located on
the site for environmental, economic, social, transport or other reason; and
(v) the use or development meets the relevant standards of this schedule;
and
(vi) a TIA demonstrates that the measures to be undertaken will maintain the
safety and efficiency of the road.
(iii) There is no practical alternative access on to a category IV-VI road for northern access to the
Transport Hub site.
(iv) The purpose of the project is to develop a new road and rail transport hub that will provide
major benefits to the State through improved freight productivity, rail efficiency and reduced
travel times to northern ports.
The location of the transport hub with a direct access onto the Midland Highway Category I road
(short term) and access to the new bypass (in the long term) is an integral component of
achieving improved transport productivities and efficiencies.
(v) The design of the road and junctions accords with all appropriate Australian standards,
AustRoads Guidelines and DIER General and Standard Specifications.
(vi) The Traffic Impact Assessment identifies that the Brighton Bypass will reduce congestion and
improve safety conditions and issues while allowing for the increase in traffic movements
generated by the transport Hub.
Please refer to the attached Traffic Impact Assessment included as Appendix 11 for further
information. The Traffic Impact Assessment identifies that the Brighton Bypass will reduce
congestion and improve safety conditions and issues while allowing for the increase in traffic
movements generated by the transport Hub.
Please refer to the attached Traffic Impact Assessment accompanying this application for further
information.
A2 For Category I, II and III Roads within an area subject to a General Urban
Speed Limit there is to be a maximum of one direct access per property,
Acceptable
providing both entry and exit, or two direct accesses providing separate
Solution
entry and exit.
Not applicable.
A3 Outside an area subject to a General Urban Speed Limit, and where access is
onto, or the junction is with, a Category IV-VI Road a maximum of one direct
Acceptable
access (or junction) per property, providing both entry and exit, or two direct
Solution
accesses providing separate entry and exit, will be permitted providing that
any access (junction) will be located etc;
Not applicable
65
A4 A4(a) For Category IV, V and VI Roads within an area subject to a General
Urban Speed Limit there is to be a maximum of one direct access per
Acceptable
property, providing both entry and exit, or two direct accesses providing
Solution
separate entry and exit.
A4(b) Accesses will be located not less than 9m from the junction with a
Category I – III Road.
The existing property access from Glenstone Drive to CT 130201/1 and 24898/2 will be relocated
to the western extent of the Hub Connector road. The current access to the gas off-take and
regulation station at CT137124/5 will remain unchanged. No further property accesses are
proposed as part of this application.
The development meets the acceptable solution.
Issue 3 – Deficient Junctions
Objective:
To ensure that there is no further decline in the safety of a deficient road junction.
A1 Where a TIA demonstrates that a use or development serviced by a side

road from a deficient junction will not create a material change in the
Acceptable
Annual Average Daily traffic (AADT) on the side road at the deficient
solution
junction. [Amend. RZ 03/04A effective 6/12/04]
The Crooked Billet Drive/Midland Highway junction will have increased Annual Average Daily
Traffic as a result of the Transport Hub development. Therefore the development does not
meet A1 and must be considered under the performance criteria.
P1 The TIA demonstrates that the above Objective will be achieved, provided
that where it is required that any roadworks be undertaken by, or at the
Performance
cost of, the applicant, these roadworks will be completed prior to any
criteria
other part of the permit becoming effective.
The deficient Crooked Billet Drive/Midland Highway junction will be upgraded as part of the
Brighton Bypass development. This upgrade will result in the improvement of safety at this
junction.
Please refer to the attached Traffic Impact Assessment included as Appendix 11 which will
demonstrate capacity to meet the performance criteria.
Issue 4 – Future Road
Objective:
To ensure that use or development on or near land designated for a Future Road will not
unduly impede the development or use of that road.
66
A1 No use or development is to occur on, or within 50m of the boundary, of
land designated in the Planning Scheme area as a Future Road. [Amend. RZ
Acceptable
03/04A effective 6/12/04]
solution
No use or development occurs within 50m of the future road area except for road connection
and rail realignment that is required by the proposed Brighton Bypass development therefore
the proposal meets the acceptable solution.
Issue 5 – Setbacks and building structures
No buildings or structures are proposed as a component of this development application.
Issue 6 – Use or development on roads that is nor primarily related to their use or
development as roads.
No use or development is proposed on a road that is not primarily related to use or

development as a road.
Issue 7 – Design Matters
Objective – That all necessary roadworks are undertaken to standards required by the Road
Authority.
A1 Any access and any new junction complies with the Austroads Standards
(excepting those relating to sight distances) with respect to accesses and
Acceptable
junctions. [Amend. RZ 03/04A effective 6/12/04]
solution
The proposed access to existing roads complies with all relevant AustRoad guidelines and DIER
general and standard specifications.
A2 Where compliance with any Standard requires any roadworks on a

Category I, II or III Road those roadworks will be completed prior to any
Acceptable
other part of the permit becoming effective.
solution
Improvements to the deficient Crooked Billet Drive junction and traffic management measures
in accordance with the appropriate standards at this junction will be undertaken prior to the
commencement of other works.
A3 Compliance with any roadworks required by the Road Authority as a result

of its consideration of a TIA if the use or development:
Acceptable
solution (i) requires or includes a new access onto or a new junction with, Category
I, II or III road; or
67
(ii) a TIA shows that it is likely to cause a material change on the road to
which the access connects.
The applicant is the Road Authority for category I, II and III roads and all roadworks comply
with DIER general and standard specifications.
4.1.2 Schedule 9 – Heritage Schedule

Introduction
Consistent with the known and rich heritage of the Brighton area and Jordan River
catchment, site assessments have revealed additional heritage features. Newly
identified sites will require the implementation of a range of management and
mitigation strategies prior to construction and operation of the transport hub
facility. Details relating to all values have been described and management
strategies proposed in Section 2 of this document.
Purpose
S9.1 The purpose of the Heritage schedule is:-
(a) To conserve and enhance places of cultural significance.

(b) To conserve and enhance those values that contributes to the cultural
significance of a place, including natural, indigenous and cultural values.
(c) To ensure that development does not adversely affect the cultural
significance of a place.
(d) To conserve places of cultural significance by allowing a use or development
that would otherwise be prohibited, where it is demonstrated that the use
or development will assist with the conservation of the cultural significance
of the place.
Site assessments that were undertaken across the proposed transport hub
site have resulted in the identification of previously unknown heritage
values.
Development of the proposed hub will impact on a portion of these values;
however a voluntary Cultural Heritage Management Plan will be
developed and implemented to conserve the areas of highest significance.
The development of a management plan to protect and manage
Aboriginal heritage values is pioneering a new approach to heritage
management that will become more commonplace when the new
legislation is enacted.
The value of the newly identified and probable hut site referred to in
Section 2 is in the knowledge it can provide through excavation rather
than its preservation. It is anticipated that detailed investigation of this
68
site will provide a broader context and understanding of the interactions
between early settlers and the Aboriginal community in the early 1800s.
It is important to note that the cultural significance of the Jordan River
Valley has been enhanced as a result of the extensive assessments and
archaeology that has been undertaken across this site. Over many years
many smaller, incremental developments have occurred over a very large
area with no additions to the cultural heritage knowledge. The proposal to
site the Brighton Transport Hub at this location achieves a number of
positive outcomes, but two clear heritage outcomes; enhanced knowledge
of the Aboriginal and European past and importantly, a new approach to
conserving and managing important heritage into the future.
Places of cultural significance
S9.2 The requirements of the schedule apply to a place of cultural significance

including places shown on the Register of Places of Cultural Significance specified in
Table 9.1 of this Schedule, and other place that are, or likely to be, of cultural
significance of the place.
There are no places included on the Register of Places of Cultural Significance

however, as a result of afore mentioned site assessments and archaeological
investigations, a range of very significant values have been identified across
the site.
Historic Heritage values are recorded in some detail in the accompanying
report included as Appendix 7. Additionally, an overview of the recently
identified hut site is contained in Appendix 12. Aboriginal heritage values
have been described in Section 2 of this report in as much detail as is
appropriate at this stage of the investigations. The proposed Cultural
Heritage Management Plan, which will be completed in early 2009 will
describe the values in more detail and how they will be conserved for future
generations.
Importantly, Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania (AHT) and Heritage Tasmania
have been very supportive and have had substantial input into the approach
to heritage investigations across the site and future management strategies.
Application requirements
S9.3 Where Council is of the opinion that a place is of cultural significance or is likely
to be of cultural significance, it may require the applicant to submit a report
prepared by person approved by Council that identifies:
69
(a) Any cultural significance of that place;
(b) The likely impacts of the proposal upon that cultural significance; and
(c) Recommendations to mitigate adverse impacts upon cultural significance.
An Historic Cultural Heritage Assessment report and associated updates is included

as Appendix 7. Cultural significance, likely impacts and approaches to mitigation are
considered as part of this report.
A Method Statement to investigate the recently indentified hut site was recently
approved by Heritage Tasmania and an email in support has been included as
Appendix 12.
An overview of the Aboriginal Heritage Values is included in Section 2. A letter of
support from the Manager, Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania endorsing the approach to
investigation and management of Aboriginal values across the site is also included in
Appendix 12.
Decision Guidelines
S9.5 In addition to those matters listed in Clause 3.3, Council must consider the
following relevant matters before deciding on an application:-
(a) the cultural significance of the place and whether the proposal will adversely
affect the cultural significance;
(b) any applicable heritage study and any applicable policy;
(f) whether the proposed works will adversely affect the cultural significance of
a place;
(k) any advice sought and/or received from the Tasmanian Heritage Council or
the Aboriginal Heritage Office: and
The statements included in Section 2 of this report and the Historic Heritage
Assessment included as Appendix 7 provide a thorough overview of the cultural
heritage values across the site and the effects the proposed development will have on
the cultural significance of the area. Suffice to say that
In addition to the information contained in this report, studies have been undertaken
as part of the Brighton bypass developments. These reports describe and provide
broader context to related sites that exist outside of the proposed transport hub site.
Letters of endorsement from Heritage Tasmania and Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania
have been included overleaf.
4.1.3 Schedule 10 – Attenuation Distances

The proposed Brighton Transport Hub is not a sensitive use, nor is it listed in Table
S10.2 or S10.3 so this schedule does not apply.
70
5 STATE PLANNING OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
5.1 State Policies

5.1.1 State Coastal Policy 1996
The Tasmanian State Coastal Policy 1996 is applicable to all land within a distance
of one kilometre from the high-water mark. The proposed transport hub is within
1 km of the coast and, accordingly, the State Coastal Policy applies to this project.
There are three main principles guiding the policy:
 Natural and cultural values of the coast shall be protected.
 The coast shall be used and developed in a sustainable manner.
 Integrated management and protection of the coastal zone is a shared
responsibility.
This proposal involves locating a transport hub directly adjacent to the existing
Brighton Industrial estate. This development will not have an impact on the
sensitive aspects of the coastal zone. The proposal is located within a well
established industrial area and for this reason cannot be considered ribbon
development.
The proposal will involve the construction of a large area of hardstand, which will
generate significant stormwater runoff during high rainfall events. The design
involves a comprehensive stormwater management system encompassing a series
of retention basins that will ensure that the water leaving the site will not
adversely impact surrounding waterways, the coastal zone or any sensitive flora
and fauna species. The establishment of the transport hub in this location will not
promote new coastal hugging infrastructure.
The implementation of the Environmental Management Standards (Schedule 4)
contained within the Brighton Planning Scheme, and required for any subsequent
development applications, will ensure future development of the site will satisfy
the requirements of the State Coastal Policy, in particular:
 Point and diffuse source pollution control measures will be established;
 The proposal will have no impact on the coastline;
 The site footprint involves no environmentally sensitive areas;
 Future construction management and mitigation measures will ensure
that any potential short-term impacts on the environment will be
minimised; and
 Future design management and mitigation measures will minimise the
long term potential for impact on the coastal zone.
Significant planning has been undertaken in the establishment of the Brighton
Industrial Precinct to ensure sustainable development of the infrastructure. The
proposed footprint of the hub has been determined in response to natural and
cultural values within the locality.
71
5.1.2 State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2000
The Draft State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2007 provides for
sustainable agriculture on the State’s prime agricultural land. It goes further to
protect prime agricultural land (defined as Class 1, 2 or 3 land) from conversion to
non-agricultural use and development.
A Land Capability and Agricultural Assessment has been undertaken for the
proposed site of the Brighton transport hub. This report has determined the land
impacted by the hub footprint is a combination of class 4, 5s1 and 6s. The full
report is included as Appendix 9. In summary the report found that:
 There was no prime agricultural land present in the study area;
 The Objectives and Principles of the PAL Policy can be addressed for the
area proposed to be rezoned; and
 There is unlikely to be any fettering of surrounding agricultural activity
as a result of the industrial rezoning.
 There is adequate separation, or means of control to protect adjacent
land use from fettering by the proposal.
The area proposed for the transport hub has limited agricultural potential and is
well located with regards to services, transport infrastructure, environmental
features, workforce and existing industrial land.
Further consideration of the agricultural values of the site and the impacts of the
proposal is included in Section 2 on page 27.
5.1.3 State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997

This Policy applies to all surface waters, including coastal waters, and ground
waters, other than:
 privately owned waters that are not accessible to the public and are not
connected to, or flow directly into, waters that are accessible to the
public; or
 waters in any tank, pipe or cistern.
The relevant section of the State Policy on Water Quality Management is shown
below:
 30. Emissions from diffuse sources of pollution should be reduced and
managed through the development and implementation of best practice
environmental management, and so as not to prejudice the achievement
of water quality objectives.
 31.1 Planning schemes should require that development proposals with
the potential to give rise to off-site polluted stormwater runoff which
could cause environmental nuisance or material or serious
environmental harm should include, or be required to develop as a
72
condition of approval, stormwater management strategies including
appropriate safeguards to reduce the transport of pollutants off-site.
 31.5 Planning schemes must require that land use and development is
consistent with the physical capability of the land so that the potential
for erosion and subsequent water quality degradation is minimised.
The footprint of the transport road, rail and hardstand infrastructure is within the
Crooked Billet Creek catchment, which is part of the greater Bridgewater
catchment and the wider Derwent Estuary catchment. This catchment has been
largely modified since European settlement through the activities of agricultural,
industrial and urban development.
The water quality of Crooked Billet Creek is a function of its physical setting, as well
as historic and ongoing input of pollutants. These inputs can be broadly classified
as point sources and diffuse sources. Both diffuse and point source pollution can
be managed to protect the environmental values by development and
implementation of best practice environmental management, compliance with
approved codes of practice, the Brighton Planning Scheme 2000 (particularly the
Environmental Management Schedule) and emission limits set by the regulatory
authority (Brighton Council).
These issues have been addressed in detail in Section 3 page 57 of this report.
5.1.4 NEPM’s
There is no implication upon the requirements of the eight National Environmental
Protection Measures (NEPM’s) in consideration of the approval of the Brighton
transport hub.
5.1.5 Gas safety

A major gas main extends across the northern extend of the proposed hub
footprint. In addition, the eastern side of the hub platform extends adjacent to the
gas main as shown in design drawings.
DIER has been communicating with PowerCo and Jemena since the preferred site
was selected and is in the process of negotiating an agreement in relation to the
appropriate range of mitigation measures and future management of the gas
infrastructure. A number of measures are proposed including excavating and
exposing the pipeline for inspection and placing a concrete protection layer over
the pipeline prior to back filling.
73
6 CONLCUSION
This report has demonstrated that the proposal to establish and operate a
transport hub in the Brighton Municipality has considerable merit. The Resource
Planning and Development Commission have recently approved an expansion of
the Industry zone which means that the hub can be developed to its fullest
potential over coming years. Approval to rezone part of the site from Rural to
Industry zone acknowledges the strategic importance of the existing industrial
area.
The existing Industry zone is strategically located in terms of proximity to major
road and rail infrastructure, protection from sensitive uses via the environmental
buffer overlay and proximity to a number of settlements that can provide a ready
labour force.
Currently, there is rapid uptake and development of Industrial land and this
proposal will provide additional opportunities for the establishment of transport
related industries in the future. During the course of planning for construction of
the transport hub it has become apparent that there is considerable support from
industry and the community more broadly. Regular meetings with a range of
groups and stakeholders have enabled interested parties to provide input into the
development of the transport hub layout. The result will be a ‘fit for purpose’
facility that meets the needs of road and rail related industries as far as practicable.
The Southern Tasmania, National Transport Investment Program will deliver major
road upgrades, rail improvements and a transport hub in the near future. These
projects will further reinforce the comparative advantages enjoyed by the Brighton
industrial precinct. The economic and social benefits that will accrue to Brighton
communities and the region more broadly as a result of this investment, will be an
important factor in the future growth of Brighton as a viable and important
regional centre.
74
7 APPENDICES
Appendix 1 - Southern Transport Investment Program
Appendix 2 – Dam Assessment Report
Appendix 3 – Property Title Information
Appendix 4 – Letter to Affected Landowners
Appendix 5 – Australian Government – Decision on referral
Appendix 6 - Vegetation Survey and Fauna Habitat Assessment
Appendix 7 – Historic Heritage Assessment
Appendix 8 - Noise Assessment
Appendix 9 – Land Capability and Agricultural Assessment
Appendix 10 – Lighting Design
Appendix 11 – Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix 12 - Heritage Communications
75

Brighton Transport Hub Development Application Report v5

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Brighton Transport Hub Development Application Report v5

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

BRIGHTON TRANSPORT HUB

Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources

Report Prepared by:

1.2 What is a hub

1.3 Project objectives

1.4 The Proposal

1.5 Links with Other Projects

1.6 Statutory Approvals

Other permits required

B & G Resources Brighton Planning Scheme 2000

Assessment Water Management Act 1999

1.7 The Applicant

Name Position Contact Phone number

CT Volume 24898 / Folio 2

CT Volume 130200 / Folio 5

CT Volume 130201 / Folio 1

CT Volume 117688 / Folio 1

EPBCA listed species

TSPA listed Species

Status of flora and fauna permits

Table: Historic Heritage sites requiring further investigation

54 Early-mid Linear stone formation and stone mound Archaeological site

55 Unidentified stone Small 1m x 500mm oval shaped ring of Will be investigated to

AREA A – southern extent of the hub site (see Map overleaf)

• Characterised by low density artefact scatter with little or no subsurface artefact

• No major archaeological impediments to the proposed development of the hub

AREA B – northern extent of the hub site

• Comprises range of cultural features including moderate to high densities of

AREA C – area between north and south site

The Brighton Planning Scheme 2000 sets an “acceptable solution” for

Map showing locations of noise monitoring locations

Indicative Brighton Transport Hub Master Plan

Land capability plan

3 PLANNING SCHEME ASSESSMENT

Industry zone Rural zone Infrastructure zone

Discretionary Discretionary Permitted

State Policies Section 4

Planning Scheme Objectives Section 3

The availability of existing public utility services Section 1

The provision of access, loading, parking and manoeuvring of vehicles Section 3

Whether native vegetation is to be or can be protected, planted or regenerated Section 2

Protection of landscape and visual aesthetics Section 2

Comments of any other Department or Authority (all referrals required) Section 1

3.4 Brighton Planning Scheme 2000 Objectives

3.4.1 Scheme Objectives - Industry

2.6 Scheme Objectives - Industry

(a) To promote Brighton as an important regional industrial location.

3.4.2 Scheme Objectives - Rural

2.4 Scheme Objectives - Rural

2.9 Scheme Objectives - Infrastructure

(a) ability to comply with any recommended attenuation distances;

(b) ability to utilise existing infrastructure for waste emissions;

(d) any natural and cultural values on or near the land;

(e) suitable landscape treatment for all site boundaries;

(f) adequate screening of outdoor storage from public places;

(g) the use of lighting

(i) the environmental standards set down in Schedule 10.

The Rural zoned land does not represent a

(c) Environmental issues relating impacts on flora, character and heritage of

Use and development standards

Relevant Decision Guidelines:

Relevant Decision Guidelines:

(c) any relevant attenuation distance in Schedule 10; and

4 Principles and Scheme Standards