1

Ref File No:

L2019/

State Commission Assessment Panel Attn: Robert Kleeman GPO Box 1815 Adelaide SA 5001 22 May 2019 Dear Mr Kleeman RE: Referral Response - KI Plantation Timbers, Major Development Proposal – Timber Port Facility – Allotment Comprising Pieces Q51* & Q52* DP92343 Hundred of Menzies and Coastal Waters North Coast Kangaroo Island, Smith Bay Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above development proposal by Kangaroo Island Plantation Timbers (KIPT), for the development of its proposed timber port at Smith Bay on the North Coast of Kangaroo Island. Council acknowledges that the application is to be assessed by the State Commission Assessment Panel as a Major Development Proposal under Division 2, Major Development or Projects, of the Development Act 1993. Council has reviewed the proposal having had regard to relevant provisions of the Kangaroo Island Development Plan (KIDP) consolidated 17 September 2015, including the zone objectives, desired character and envisaged forms of development for the Coastal Conservation zone. The proposal, in general, is considered not to accord with the Coastal Conservation zone provisions which are applicable to the vast majority of Kangaroo Island’s coastline (without specific policy relating to any existing, commercialised localities). The proposal does demonstrate some merits when assessed against the provisions of the KI Development Plan. However Council holds the view that Smith Bay is not the appropriate location. Council’s assessment in respect of the KIDP has considered the following provisions. Bulk Handling and Storage Facilities Objective(s): 1 PDC(s): 1, 2, 3 & 4 Coastal Areas Objective(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 & 7 PDC(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 27, 28 & 29 Design and Appearance Objective(s): 1 & 2

2

PDC(s): 5, 6, 7, 14, 15, 17 & 18 Forestry Objective(s): 1 & 2 Hazards Objective(s): 2 & 8 PDC(s): 1, 2, 4, 24, 25 & 26 Industrial Development Objective(s): 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6 PDC(s): 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11 Interface Between Land Uses Objective(s): 1, 2 & 3 PDC(s): 1, 2, 4, 8, 11 & 18 Marinas and Maritime Structures Objective(s): 1 PDC(s): 5, 6, 7, 14, 15, 17 & 18 Natural Resources Objective(s): 2, 4, 8, 10, 12 & 13 PDC(s): 1, 3, 7, 12, 28 & 29 Orderly and Sustainable Development Objective(s): 2, 3 & 4 PDC(s): 7 Siting and Visibility Objective(s): 1 PDC(s): 1 & 8 Transportation and Access Objective(s): 1, 2 & 5 PDC(s): 1, 2, 3, 11 & 13 Beyond addressing the planning considerations against the KIDP, the response also expresses the views of the Elected Members of Council in reflecting community sentiment, which Council believes the Commission must consider in assessing this Major Development proposal. The concept of multi-use port facilities in their own right presents a major concern for Council and the community. It is stated in the EIS that “The Guidelines will not be amended as the Government position is that any wharf developed on the Island should have capacity to be used by multiple users." However in Council’s view this requirement has resulted in a serious lack of flexibility in design and location options and no other import or export users has been identified as part of the submission.

3

Guideline 6.3 requires KIPT to "provide evidence and/or justification (social, economic environmental) as to the potential suitability or unsuitability of each alternative location." Council is not satisfied that other sites have been adequately considered: not even a preliminary feasibility study is provided for any of them. As a result of these concerns the following resolutions were passed at the 14 May 2019 Council meeting:

1. Council advise the Minister the requirement to provide a single multi-user

port is not feasible and should be removed from the Guidelines so as to

extend the range of site options for the intended timber harvest export port.

2. Council views Yumbah Aquaculture as an industry that fits well with the

image of Kangaroo Island, supporting the seafood, primary production and

food industry sectors of the island. Council also views opportunities with the

KIPT forests as having the potential to provide positive outcomes for the

island. Both industries should be able to exist with quiet occupation of each

other.

3. Council does not view locating a seaport directly neighbouring the abalone

farm at Smith Bay as providing co habitation, without the ongoing dissimilar

land uses causing conflict and continued dispute for both industries.

4. Council requests that possible seaport locations west of Stokes Bay Road

be more fully assessed.

Council hold the view that, despite the outcome of the major development assessment, all reasonable precautions should be taken to ensure that industry of significant economic value is protected from adverse impacts. This would not necessarily be restricted to on-shore aquaculture as is the case with Smith Bay and the current assessment, but ensuring a balanced approach where industry should be afforded the greatest opportunity to exist, or co-exist, with surrounding industry and to develop sustainably and economically into the future.

The EIS does not quantify the economic impact if Yumbah closes. Indeed, it does not quantify the likely development/expansion limitations on Yumbah’s operations and

production if the Smith Bay port goes ahead, and it does not address the stalling effect the potential port has had on expansion of the Yumbah operations. The closure possibility is real and must be included in the assessments. The fact is that the proposed KIPT development is very close to the existing aquaculture business. There is no way that KIPT can guarantee its operations will not affect those of Yumbah. The EIS (Chapter 27) lists 48 explicit commitments (guarantees) to be delivered by KIPT in association with the Smith Bay Deep Water Port development: 19 of the 48 will be

difficult to implement and consistently maintained and so are unlikely to be reliably met on an ongoing basis. It is most unlikely they could or would be enforced. (see attachment which will be included within the letter once endorsed)

Although the proposal has clearly proceeded well beyond feasibility study stage and KIPT have freehold tenure of the subject land, Council contemplates that comparable levels of

4

investigation of the north-west coast of Kangaroo Island would provide an equallyif not substantially more compelling case for alternative sites to be considered. Smith Bay is further away from the product (supply) end than desirable or necessary and will impose a legacy of continual operation of logging trucks in the central island zone that is dangerous, costly and unnecessary. Much shorter distances to port will result in less kilometres travelled by less trucks and therefore a lower risk of serious incidents with road users and wildlife.

The current EIS fails to adequately address how to get the products to Smith Bay and the profound impact that it will have on the social and environmental island fabrics associated with that task. It is imperative that any road transport route for heavy forestry haulage avoids, as far as practicable, the existing tourism routes, and the major domestic traffic routes. If not, serious conflict and potential incidents with tourism traffic will become a substantial and severe risk, one which Council is not prepared to contemplate. Beyond the physiological and safety issues associated with transport routes, that have not been effectively addressed as part of this EIS, the cost of constructing and maintaining Council road networks to appropriate standards for the proposed semi-trailers, B-double or A-double unit weight and frequency of traffic movement is a deeply serious concern to Council. Defining heavy transport routes, and funding the construction and maintenance of the transport routes needs to be thoroughly considered by the State in assessing this Major Development proposal. Council cannot fund the necessary upgrades and maintenance nor should a small ratepayer base be required to meet such cost. In summary, Council is strongly committed to finding effective strategies for the harvest and export of the Island’s timber resources. However it does not consider the Smith Bay Wharf proposal feasible, especially in the context of road transport routes. Council asks that the above matters be given serious consideration during assessment of the proposed development. Council would appreciate being kept informed on the processing of the application including any variation / amendment that may occur as part of the processing. Should you wish to further discuss any matters associated with this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact me on 8553 4500. Yours sincerely Greg Georgopoulos Acting Chief Executive Officer

# Identifier

DEIS ref Proponent Commitment

Qual-

ified

Quant-

ified

Resili-

ence

Servic-

abity

Likely

Compliance comment

1

BIOSEC43

15.5.5

Investigation (during detailed design) of potential

surface treatments or alternative structures to minimise

the impact from exotic species.

✘ ✘ ? ? ❎ Needs particulars

2

GSW6

16.5.2

The dredge spoil dewatering system has been designed

to discharge water with acceptable sediment levels. No

untreated dredge water would be discharged directly into

the marine environment or into the adjoining Smith

Creek.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅ State ASA reference

3

GSW8

16.5.1

The site would be designed to contain and manage all

stormwater runoff during construction and operation as

to eliminate uncontrolled water channeling and

concentrated runoff streams - no site stormwater would

discharge to surface water bodies untreated.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ? ✅ Needs treated water limits

4

GSW9

16.5.1

The internal network of open drains, culvert, pipes and

wetland will be designed to ensure sufficient carrying

capacity with gradients and appropriate controls to

prevent bed erosion and damage.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅

5

GSW10

16.5.1

Erosion at the outlet of the wetland system will be

managed via a porous rock weir at the wetland outlet to

distribute water flow over a wide area.

✔︎ ? ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅ Needs flow velocity targets

6

GSW18

16.5.2

Timber log and wood chip storage yards will be

established with bunding and impermeable base, to

isolate runoff from the general stormwater system

and from groundwater. Stormwater runoff (assumed

to be leachate) will drain via a concrete forebay (in

the bunded area) to intercept gross sediment and

debris and to a retention basin (holding pond)

designed to contain flows from storm events. There

will be no discharge of leachate to surface water or

groundwater.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅

7

GSW21

16.5.2

The proposed operational wetland pond, retention

basin and swale system will be constructed during

the early phase of construction to function as

sediment capture basins during the major

earthworks and civil works construction phases.

✔︎ ✘ ✔︎ ? ❎

Sediment capture not

quantified

8

AQ5

17.5.4

Layout designed to minimise vehicle movements.

✔︎ ✘ ? ? ❎

Vehicle movements not

quantified

9

CCS8

19.4.4

Designing marine and coastal infrastructure to take

into account the predicted worst-case sea level rise

and sea temperature rise. This would prevent the

flooding of infrastructure and ensure that

construction materials were adequate for the

predicted sea temperature and acidity changes.

Consideration would also be given to the predicted

increase in storm intensity and frequency.

? ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅

Consideration' needs to be

a design inclusion - severe

weather event increase are

real.

10

CCS9

19.4.4

Designing the causeway structure for a 1-in-500-

year storm event (that is, a 10 per cent encounter

probability over the 50-year life of the structure) on

the basis that the wave modelling undertaken

demonstrates that the additional engineering

required to meet this standard is not significantly

greater-than for lesser storm event frequencies.

Causeway maintenance (for example, replacement

of a small percentage of armour rocks) would be

required after major storm events.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✘ ✘ ❎

Construction must fully

resist storm events

11

CCS10

19.4.4

Determining the size of surface water catchments,

including sedimentation ponds and

drainage/diversion infrastructure, by considering

the likely worst-case changes in the magnitude and

duration of rainfall events, to prevent below-quality

water being discharged to the environment.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅

worst case to be included,

Specify acceptable water

quality to be met

12

CCS11

19.4.4

Ensuring that construction materials for onshore

infrastructure were designed to cope with the

expected change in surface temperatures and

different wind conditions associated with increased

storm intensity and frequency.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅

13

CCS13

19.4.4

Designing habitable buildings to promote passive

cooling, thereby reducing energy demands and

providing respite for the workforce during extreme

heat days.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅

Currently a SA

requirement.

14

CCS15

19.4.4

Use of a floating pontoon for the berth face itself, to

ensure that the wharf height above water is

maintained at a constant level despite predicted

changes in sea level.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅

15

NVL1

18.3.4

The potential shielding provided by site

topography, woodchip and log stockpiles and

intervening buildings would be taken into account

in locating plant and equipment.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅

16

NVL3

18.3.4

Noisy plant, site access roads and site compounds

would be located as far from occupied premises as

practicable.

✘ ✘ n/a n/a ❎ Specify targets and limits

17

NVL4

18.3.4

Equipment that emits noise predominantly in a

particular direction wasbe sited such that noise is

directed away from occupied premises where

feasible.

✘ ✘ n/a ? ❎ Specify targets and limits

18

NVL5

18.3.4

Acoustic enclosures would be installed around

above ground equipment where noise levels are

predicted to exceed the relevant noise level targets

at sensitive land uses, where safe and practical.

✘ ✘ n/a ? ❎

Specify noise levels to be

met

19

AC2

1.5.4

Stormwater diversion channels, compacting

proposed storage areas, construction

of first-flush ponds and the use of closed conveyors

and telescopic shiploaders, would reduce the

potential impacts to negligible at the abalone farm’s

three seawater intake points.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅

Unclear. Are these definite

or being considered?

20

AC9

11.5.8

If considered necessary, an open bypass system

could be installed in the near-shore section of the

causeway to minimise the interruption to tidal

currents. This could comprise either large culverts

or a pier, the size of which would be determined by

hydrodynamic modelling. Given the small predicted

maximum increase in temperature such a measure

is not considered essential and it needs to be

recognised that the benefit of such a bypass system

may be offset by compromising the protective

barrier formed by the causeway in relation to

effluent from the degraded Smith Creek during

rainfall events.

✘ ✘ ? ? ❎ An observation?

21

AC10

11.5.8

It may be possible to engineer a gated culvert

through the causeway that could fulfil

a dual function by allowing through-flows during

summer (thereby managing the risk of small

temperature increases). The gate could then be

closed during other months and thereby facilitate

the redirection of Smith Creek discharges further

offshore during major flow events (particularly

during autumn and winter) thus improving

nearshore water quality.

✔︎ ✘ ✘ ✘ ❎ An observation?

22

TT7

21.5.5

Road design considerations (where upgrades are

proposed), including adjustment to the vertical and

horizontal alignments, low noise pavement

surfaces, road gradient modifications, speed limit

reduction and traffic management measures, where

these do not affect the function and safety of the

road.

✘ ✘ ? ? ❎ These are possibles only

23

MWQ

9.5.2

The fines content of material used in the causeway

core construction will be minimised in order to

minimise the impact of plume due to causeway

construction.

✔︎ ✘ ? n/a ❎ Specify targets and limits

24

MWQ6

9.5.2

10.5.1

The length of exposed causeway core before

geotextile fabric and armour placement will be

minimised in order to minimise the impact of plume

due to adverse sea states, and erosion prior to rock

armouring, during causeway construction.

✔︎ ✘ ✘ n/a ❎ Specify limits

25

NVL39

18.4.5

Piling should be scheduled outside the months

when cetaceans may be present in or near the

development area.

✔︎ ✘ n/a n/a ❎ Specify periods

26

BIOSEC2

15.5.3

Earthmoving equipment would be sourced locally

wherever possible.

✘ ✘ n/a n/a ❎ Definition needed

27

BIOSEC32

15.5.4

Equipment used during construction would meet

the national standards for biofouling management.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅

28

BIOSEC41

15.5.4

The pontoon (purchased in Korea as a barge) has

been sandblasted and repainted with anti-fouling

paint and would be inspected by Australian

engineers before arrival at Smith Bay.

✔︎ ✘ ✔︎ ✔︎ ❎

Standards to be met

needed.

29

AQ14

17.5.4

Variable-height woodchip stackers and/or

telescopic chutes may be used for shiploading.

✘ ✘ n/a n/a ❎ "..may be…." ?

30

CCS1

19.4.4

Minimising electricity consumption through the use

of energy-efficient infrastructure such as low-

friction conveyors, lighting and air-conditioning.

✘ ✘ n/a n/a ❎

Does this mean Energy

Audit? If so, needs

specifics

31

CCS2

19.4.4

Investigating the installation of solar photovoltaic

panels to supply electricity to site buildings and for

site lighting, minimising the potential for downtime

associated with power outages under peak load

situations.

✔︎ ✘ ✔︎ ✔︎ ❎

Unclear - is this standby or

load trimming?

32

MNES16

14.4.4

The number of vehicles required to transport timber

products would be minimised wherever possible by

using high productivity vehicles such as B-doubles

and A-doubles.

Duplicate - see #36

33

NVL2

18.3.4

Processes and equipment that generate lower noise

levels would be selected where feasible.

✔︎ ✘ n/a n/a ❎

Specify standards to be

met

34

NVL25

18.4.1

Low-vibration plant alternatives, such as the

smallest practicable vibratory compactor, would be

used where feasible.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅

35

NVL34

18.4.5

Low-noise-impact techniques such as suction piling

or vibro-piling should be used in preference to

impact piling where possible.

✔︎ ✘ n/a n/a ❎ Unclear.

36

TT2

21.5.5

The use of high productivity vehicles, specifically

Performance Based Standard (PBS) Level 2A (B-

double) and/or PBS Level 2B (short road train or

A-double) vehicles.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅ Duplicate - see #32

37

AC2

11.5.4

Stormwater diversion channels, compacting

proposed storage areas, construction

of first-flush ponds and the use of closed conveyors

and telescopic shiploaders, would reduce the

potential impacts to negligible at the abalone farm’s

three seawater intake points.

Duplicate - see #19

38

AC2

11.5.4

Stormwater diversion channels, compacting

proposed storage areas, construction of first-flush

ponds and the use of closed conveyors and

telescopic shiploaders, will reduce the potential

impacts to negligible at the abalone farm intake

area.

Duplicate - see #19

39

MNES4

14.4.3

Evaluating alternative piling methodologies that

have lower noise emissions.

Duplicate - see #35

40

NVL2

18.3.4

Processes and equipment that generate lower noise

levels would be selected where feasible.

Duplicate - see #34

41

NVL25

18.4.1

Low-vibration plant alternatives, such as the

smallest practicable vibratory compactor, would be

used where feasible.

Duplicate - see #34

42

NVL34

18.4.5

Low-noise-impact techniques such as suction piling

or vibro-piling should be used in preference to

impact piling where possible.

Duplicate - see #35

43

MWQ4

9.5.1

Realtime monitoring and reactive management

(detailed in the Dredge Management Plan (DMP))

will provide protection against acute plume impacts

at key sensitive receptors including:

• monitoring water quality at the Yumbah seawater

intakes and at an appropriate location between the

dredge and the seawater intakes

• water quality monitoring sensors that provide

‘real time’ data on water quality via telemetry

• assessing monitoring data in ‘real time’ against

threshold triggers

• providing the monitoring data in ‘real time’ to the

dredge operator, KIPT environmental management

personnel and EPA

• triggering audible stop work alarms on the dredge

if thresholds are exceeded

• dredge work ceases until turbidity levels return to

acceptable levels and have stabilised (these levels

to be defined in the DMP).

Due to the relatively close proximity of key

receptors and the dredge plume source (i.e.

approximately 500 metres), turbidity trigger

exceedances would need to be closely monitored

and the timescale for management response actions

would need to be short (~30 minutes) in order to be

of practical benefit in mitigating acute plume

impacts.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ n/a ✅

Offsets

44

MNES43

14.5.1

KIPT would commit funds towards the Kangaroo

Island Feral Cat Eradication Program, a joint

program, led by NRKI and the Kangaroo Island

Council, with the aim of eradicating feral cats, as

part of KIPT’s offset for potential impacts to

Kangaroo Island echidna.

✔︎ ✘ n/a n/a ❎ $ missing

45

TE2

13.5.2

Under the Native Vegetation Act 1991, clearing a

small amount of terrestrial native vegetation would

require the preparation of an offset strategy

developed in consultation with the NVC (see

Chapter 26 – Environmental Management

Framework). The offset package would likely

include an on-ground SEB to protect an area of

vegetation and provide fauna habitat.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a ✔︎ ✅

Not quantified yet but is

a mandatory requirement

(resolution presumed)

46

TE14

13.5.3

KIPT proposes to continue providing significant

ongoing support to the Glossy Black-Cockatoo

Recovery Program on Kangaroo Island to ensure

that KIPT's activities on Kangaroo Island result in a

net environmental benefit to the glossy black-

cockatoo species.

✔︎ ✘ n/a ✘ ❎ $ and period missing,

47

CCS4

19.4.4

Seeking to use grid electricity wherever possible

and increase the use of renewably- generated

electricity, to reduce the reliance on diesel-powered

on-site generation.

✔︎ ✘ ✔︎ ✔︎ ❎ Specify % renewable

48

CCS14

19.4.4

Minimising on-site water requirements by

investigating alternative sources of industrial water

to meet needs such as for dust suppression. This

would reduce the risk of supply shortages that may

occur as a result of greater evaporation rates and/or

higher consumption associated with warmer

weather.

✔︎ ✘ ✘ ✘ ❎

Specify requirements and

how achievable

Proponent has large

holdings of fresh water

further west.

49

BIOSEC61

15.7

KIPT would fund the marine pest and eradication

surveys of Smith Bay in addition to implementing

an operational Marine Pest Management Plan.

✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✔︎ ✅

50

NVL3

18.4.1 Purchase the nearest sensitive receptor (R1). ✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅

51

SE2

22.6.2

KIPT would assist government with understanding

housing needs, where it can, and sees benefit to the

company and the community in having a settled

resident workforce, living and working permanently

on Kangaroo Island.

✘ ✘ n/a ✘ ❎ Particulars needed

52

SE3

22.6.2

There is also scope to increase the size of Parndana

township through residential subdivision. The

Kangaroo Island Community Club (based in

Parndana) has specific plans to subdivide and

release housing allotments created from the

scrubland immediately to the west of the township

between Smith Street and Rowland Hill Highway.

KIPT has committed to provide a seed loan of up to

$100,000 to cover the initial project costs prior to

the marketing and sale of housing lots.

✔︎ ✔︎ n/a n/a ✅

53

SE4

22.6.2

There is also potential for residential development

on the western end of Kangaroo Island by re-

establishing housing vacated during the farm

consolidation and switch

to forestry that occurred in the 1990s and 2000s.

KIPT owns at least 30 potential residential

allotments that could be created with a change to

planning rules to allow the existing forestry estates

to be subdivided. Thirty new homes would

accommodate about 70 people. Every property has,

at the very least, a house site with a dam, phone

connection and electricity, some have habitable

dwellings and others have dilapidated structures

that could be replaced, or repaired and refurbished.

✘ ✘ ✔︎ ✔︎ ❎ Nil commitment

Legend

✔✔︎ = "appears met": ✘ = "appears not met"

Definitions used:

Explicit: stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt.

Commitment: The state or quality of dedication to a cause.

Qualify: Characterise, call, or name; define.

Quantify: Express or measure the quantity

Resilience: The capacity to recover quickly from difficulties.

Serviceable: Likely to meet 10 yr continuous service