NGR Final Assessment Report/media/Projects/N/New... · Assessment Report (IAR) and will be completed upon submission of the Final Assessment Report (FAR), expected in late 2013. The

Appendix D

Consultation report

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-ENV-RPT-001 RevE D-1

Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads New Generation Rollingstock Maintenance Centre Community Infrastructure Designation - Final Assessment Report

Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads New Generation Rollingstock Maintenance Centre Community Infrastructure Designation Consultation Report 10 September 2013

Document information

Client: Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads Title: New Generation Rollingstock Maintenance Centre Community Infrastructure Designation Subtitle: Consultation Report Document No: 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC Date: 10 September 2013

Rev Date Details

A 09/07/2013 Draft Consultation Report

B 06/09/2013 Final Consultation Report

C 10/09/2013 Final Consultation Report

Author, Reviewer and Approver details

Prepared by: Kelly Waltisbuhl Date: 10/09/2013 Signature:

Reviewed by: Naomi Holmes Date: 10/09/2013 Signature:

Approved by: Paul Setchell Date: 10/09/2013 Signature:

Distribution

Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, Parsons Brinckerhoff file, Parsons Brinckerhoff Library

©Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited 2013

Copyright in the drawings, information and data recorded in this document (the information) is the property of Parsons Brinckerhoff. This document and the information are solely for the use of the authorised recipient and this document may not be used, copied or reproduced in whole or part for any purpose other than that for which it was supplied by Parsons Brinckerhoff. Parsons Brinckerhoff makes no representation, undertakes no duty and accepts no responsibility to any third party who may use or rely upon this document or the information.

Document owner

Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Limited ABN 80 078 004 798 Level 4 Northbank Plaza 69 Ann Street Brisbane QLD 4000 GPO Box 2907 Brisbane QLD 4001 Australia Tel: +61 7 3854 6200 Fax: +61 7 3854 6500 Email: [email protected] www.pbworld.com Certified to ISO 9001, ISO 14001, AS/NZS 4801 A GRI Rating: Sustainability Report 2011

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC i

Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads New Generation Rollingstock Maintenance Centre Community Infrastructure Designation - Consultation Report

Contents Page number

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Context of the report 1

1.2 Project background and description 2

2. Community consultation scope 4

2.1 Objectives 4

2.2 Stakeholders identification 4

3. Community engagement tools 5

3.1 Community consultation activity timeline 5

3.2 Communications activities 5

3.3 Display of document 7

3.4 Stakeholder meetings 7

4. Community engagement outcomes 9

4.1 Communications activities 9

4.2 Meetings 9

4.3 Submissions to the IAR 11

4.4 Environmental and cultural heritage 12

4.5 Noise 12

4.6 Traffic and access 13

4.7 Consultation 13

4.8 Safety and security 13

4.9 Quality of information 13

4.10 Property values 14

4.11 Impact to lifestyle 14

4.12 Visual impacts and amenity 14

4.13 Project need 14

4.14 Air quality 14

4.15 Waste water quality 14

4.16 Proximity and land use 14

5. Conclusion 15

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC ii


6. Recommendations and evaluation 16

List of tables Page number

Table 3.1 Community engagement timeline 5 Table 3.2 Advertisement #1 publications 6 Table 3.3 Project contact points 7 Table 3.4 Draft IAR availability 7 Table 4.1 Frequency of issues raised 12

List of figures Page number

Figure 1.1 CID process timeline 1 Figure 1.2 Wulkuraka site location 2 Figure 4.1 Frequency of issues raised 11

List of appendices Appendix A Stakeholder list Appendix B Communications activities – Letters Appendix C Communications activities – Fact sheet Appendix D Communications activities – Advertisement Appendix E Communications activities – Webpage

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC 1


1. Introduction The Queensland Government has identified the need to upgrade and increase its train fleet in South East Queensland (SEQ). This will be Queensland’s largest single investment in trains and will support the government’s long-term commitment to public transport. The purchase of New Generation Rollingstock (NGR) will also require the support of a modern, purpose built maintenance centre.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) is in the process of gaining planning approval for the NGR maintenance centre through the Queensland Government’s Community Infrastructure Designation (CID) process under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

TMR engaged Parsons Brinckerhoff to undertake environmental assessment and community and stakeholder consultation for the CID process for the maintenance centre site as part of the NGR Project.

1.1 Context of the report The community and stakeholder consultation program was conducted in line with the CID guidelines. This report describes the activities conducted from Wednesday 24 July to Thursday 22 August and provides details of issues raised through the submission period.

Community and stakeholder consultation formally commenced in July 2012 with the preparation of the Initial Assessment Report (IAR) and will be completed upon submission of the Final Assessment Report (FAR), expected in late 2013. The IAR submission period commenced on Wednesday 24 July and was originally due to finish on Tuesday 13 August (15 business days). The submission period was extended to Thursday 22 August, providing an additional nine business days, to ensure the community and other key stakeholders had an ample opportunity to comment on the IAR.

Key activities provided directly affected landowners, identified stakeholders and the broader community with opportunities to provide feedback on the IAR and further identify potential impacts to inform the Final Assessment Report (FAR).

Figure 1.1 illustrates the CID process in the lead up to TMR’s FAR submission to the Minster.

Figure 1.1 CID process timeline

Initial Project Consultation

July 2012

Finalise initial assessment report (IAR)July 2013

IAR released public

notification & second

consultation 24 July - 22 August 2013

Prepare final assessment report (FAR)

FAR submitted to the Minister

for consideration

Sept 2013

CID process consultation



1.2 Project background and description 1.2.1 Site location

TMR has identified a preferred location for the maintenance centre in Wulkuraka, Ipswich. This site has been chosen due to its size, location near existing rail facilities and existing infrastructure. Figure 1.2 illustrates the proposed NGR maintenance centre location.

Figure 1.2 Wulkuraka site location

The NGR maintenance centre is part of the broader NGR Project. The NGR Project involves:

the purchase up to 100, six-car electric train sets (the final fleet number will be determined through further negotiations with the successful proponents)

maintaining these trains for approximately 30 years

construction and maintenance of a modern, purpose-built NGR maintenance centre for approximately 30 years

employment of up to 200 people during the operating period.

The NGR Project is currently going through the evaluation process to select the preferred proponent in a Public-Private Partnership delivery model. This process is expected to be completed by the end of 2013. Previously the Wulkuraka site was identified as the most suitable location for the maintenance centre which will support the NGR. In order to meet the Project timeframes it is imperative that the Wulkuraka site be available for development as soon as the PPP partner is awarded.

1.2.2 Maintenance centre requirements

During construction the main entrance to the site would be via Dixon Street (west). Car parking would be provided on the western side of the site with access via Dixon Street (west). The proposed primary access to the maintenance centre will be via the new access road on the eastern side of Lot 1 on RP148910 from Toongarra Road. This would be the primary access route for all trucks, delivery and service vehicles once operational. Dixon Street East will be used a secondary access for light vehicles and emergency vehicles, as well as access for NGR maintenance centre staff commuting via public transport.



The maintenance centre will be purpose-built to service the new electric passenger trains. Key components of the proposed NGR maintenance centre will include the following:

utility services

site track work including holding roads, handover roads and maintenance roads

signalling and yard control overhead traction line equipment

decant location

maintenance building underfloor wheel lathe building

train cleaning facility

storage areas

administration office with training/meeting rooms and amenities areas

car parking, roadways and pedestrian walkways

fencing, lighting and security

landscaping

temporary on-site office during construction

permanent on-site State and Operator office areas.

It is anticipated that there will be no more than 200 staff on site at the maintenance centre at any one time.

The traffic impact assessment has indicated that the proposed new access point will not materially change the scale and nature of traffic from the previous impact assessments undertaken during the preliminary development application stage. With regard to the treatment of the proposed access point, this forms part of a separate approvals pathway not covered under this CID process.

The preferred proponent is expected to be appointed in late 2013 to commence construction on the site. At this time and as the project progresses, more detailed information will be known about design and operational aspects of the maintenance centre.



2. Community consultation scope

2.1 Objectives Community consultation objectives have been developed to support the implementation of the Project and meet the requirements under the CID guidelines. The overarching objectives of the stakeholder and community consultation plan include:

ensure the consultation process and activities support TMR and the Project’s CID process

provide adequate, transparent, and relevant information to all stakeholders and interested parties

articulate key messages clearly and consistently

ensure stakeholders affected by the Project are identified and provided with appropriate information, timeframes and avenues for feedback

provide integral data to the technical studies forming part of the CID process

undertake an engagement approach that suits stakeholder requirements and constraints of the Project.

2.2 Stakeholders identification The stakeholder list is attached in Appendix A of this report and provides details of all stakeholders consulted with during the CID process so far.

Key stakeholders during the CID process include:

directly affected landowners

adjoining landowners

Ipswich City Council (ICC)

utilities and service providers

State Members of Parliament

Federal Members of Parliament

local community and environmental groups

government departments and agencies.



3. Community engagement tools

3.1 Community consultation activity timeline A number of community consultation activities have been conducted as part of the CID process. Table 3.1 details when each activity was completed.

Table 3.1 Community engagement timeline

Month/Year Activity Complete

June 2013 Begin consultation with directly affected landowners, local council and state government representatives

Begin CID process and IAR investigations

Commence directly affected landowner and stakeholder meetings

July 2013 Release IAR for CID submission period and provide channels for further information such as a Freecall number, email address and website

Distribute Project fact sheet

Distribute letter to identified stakeholders and conduct follow up calls

Continue property owner and stakeholder meetings (as required)

August 2013 Update IAR based on submissions and subsequent assessment

Continue IAR investigations

Continue property owner and stakeholder meetings (as required)

September 2013 Prepare Final Assessment Report (FAR)

September 2013 Forward FAR to the Minister for consideration

Late 2013 Minister’s decision

3.2 Communications activities 3.2.1 Letters

To date, a total of 17 letters have been distributed by the project team to identified stakeholders including, directly affected and adjoining landowners and government agencies.

These letters provided background information on the Project, CID process and the release of the IAR. Information also included the dates for the submission period, how submissions could be made and contact information. Directly affected landowners, utilities and service providers and government agencies were invited to meet with the project team to discuss possible impacts and benefits.

The letter also drew attention to the enclosed fact sheet that accompanied the letter to provide additional information regarding the Project and reiterated the Project contact points.



A copy of the letter is provided in Appendix B of this report.

3.2.2 Fact sheet

A fact sheet was made available on the Project website from Wednesday 24 July. The website detailed the Project, the CID process and availability of the IAR. The fact sheet also invited submissions on the IAR and provided background information on the criteria for submitting an eligible submission.

The fact sheet was distributed to 560 local residents during the week commencing Monday 5 August.

A copy of the fact sheet is provided in Appendix C of this report.

3.2.3 Advertisement #1

A Project advertisement was published to inform the broader community about the Project and to announce the release of the IAR for submission period. The advertisement appeared in the Queensland Times (a daily paper) and the Ipswich Advertiser (a weekly publication). Table 3.2 below, notes the publications in which the advertisement appeared, and the dates of publication.

Table 3.2 Advertisement #1 publications

Publication Dates published

Queensland Times Saturday, 20 July 2013

Queensland Times Wednesday, 24 July 2013

Ipswich Advertiser Wednesday, 24 July 2013

A copy of the advertisement tear sheets is provided in Appendix D of this report.

3.2.4 Project webpage

Project information was published on the TMR Project website to ensure up-to-date information was available to key stakeholders and interested community members during the consultation period. The webpage contained copies of Project information, including the factsheet and the IAR. The Project webpage was available on www.tmr.qld.gov.au/ngr throughout this time.

The webpage was updated on Wednesday 24 July to explain the CID process and detailed information on the submission period for the IAR. The fact sheet was also made available on the website at this time.

A copy of the webpage is included in Appendix E of this report.

3.2.5 Project contact points

To ensure interested stakeholders and community members had access to accurate and up-to-date Project information, a Freecall information line, email address and postal address was established.

All communication material promoted the Project contact points to ensure the community and stakeholders could contact the project team.

These community contact points were monitored by TMR during normal business hours. Details of these community contact points are outlined in the Table 3.3.



Table 3.3 Project contact points

Contact method Contact details

Freecall information line 1800 478 238

Email [email protected]

Postal address New Generation Rollingstock Project Road, Rail and Ports Department of Transport and Main Roads Floor 4, Capital Hill Building GPO Box 1549 BRISBANE QLD 4001

3.3 Display of document The IAR was released for submission period for 15 business days, from Wednesday 24 July through to the Tuesday 13 August. The submission period was extended to the Thursday 22 August, an additional seven business days, equating to 22 business days in total. Hard copies of the draft IAR were available for viewing at two localities during this time. Locations are listed in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 Draft IAR availability

Location Address

Ipswich City Council library reference desk 40 South Street, Ipswich

The office of the State Member for Ipswich West, Sean Choat

Shop 1, Brassall Shopping Centre 68 Hunter Street, Brassall

3.4 Stakeholder meetings 3.4.1 Elected representative meetings

3.4.1.1 Member for Ipswich West

On Thursday 20 June and Tuesday 23 July the TMR project team met with Sean Choat, the State Member for Ipswich West.

An update on the Project was provided and notification of TMR’s intentions to commence the CID process on the NGR maintenance centre at the Wulkuraka site. A brief overview of the CID process and timeline was provided.

3.4.1.2 Division 6, Ipswich City Council

On Tuesday 23 July, the TMR project team met with Cheryl Bromage, Councillor for Division 6 ICC.

An update on the Project was provided and notification of TMR’s intentions to commence the CID process on the NGR maintenance centre at the Wulkuraka site. A brief overview of the CID process and timeline was provided.

3.4.2 Council briefings

One briefing was provided to ICC to ensure understanding of the Project and the CID process. This allowed ICC to have accurate and the most up-to-date information to pass on to the broader community and other interested stakeholders.



3.4.3 Stakeholder meetings

Stakeholder meetings were held with directly affected and adjoining landowners and government agencies throughout the submission period. The purpose of these meetings was to discuss the Project and provide information about the CID process. These meeting also provided the opportunity to understand concerns about the NGR maintenance centre and identify key issues to inform the FAR.



4. Community engagement outcomes

4.1 Communications activities There were a total of 62 recorded contacts made with stakeholders and community members from the start of the CID submission period through to Thursday 22 August. These contacts were made via the Project contact points, meetings and submissions during the CID submission period.

4.1.1 Project contact points

From formal start of the submission period through to Thursday 22 August, there have been four calls recorded to the Project information line. Phone calls were primarily to confirm details of the Project or the IAR.

A total of six emails were received via the email address up to Thursday 22 August. This included five submissions to the IAR.

There were 41 letters received via the postal address, which included 38 submissions to the IAR. This also included correspondence between TMR and stakeholders (primarily Government and Council representatives) regarding impacts to properties owned by local residents.

Key issues raised through these avenues included:

the consultation process and level of engagement with nearby residents

the assessment process to determine that Wulkuraka was an appropriate site

perception that the Project was final and community feedback would not influence final decisions

work had already started on the Project

the use of out of date mapping in the IAR document.

4.2 Meetings During the submission period, there were 10 meetings held with key Project stakeholders including directly affected and adjoining landowners, local council and state government representatives

4.2.1 Elected representative meetings

Please note: Consultation began on the NGR maintenance centre CID process prior to the Federal election, Saturday 7 September. The stakeholder list in Appendix A of this report provides details of all current stakeholders for the Project. A review of the stakeholder list is recommended after the election takes place for future consultation.

4.2.1.1 Member for Ipswich West

General discussions with Mr Choat identified both his support and concerns about the Project. His main concerns were on behalf of his constitutes. Further he provided insight on suitable publications to advertise in to reach his constitutes. Mr Choat also held a community information session and correspondence with



stakeholders regarding the Project. Mr Choat provided a summary of the key issues raised at the meeting and during correspondence:

potential increases in traffic on local streets including Dixon, Grace and Arnold Streets – workers, deliveries and maintenance vehicles

noise from works on trains, safety sirens/alarms for movement of trains in and outside of centre

the potential for increased noise blasts from approaching trains in and around the centre and general network trains

concern about fumes and other gases emitted during maintenance activities

dust generated on site’s external compound

the treatment of waste water from cleaning and maintenance activities

the potential for increased stormwater run-off

potential impacts from light onto adjacent land and residences.

colour schemes and nature of buildings and structures

the need for screening plants and vegetation

the need for the regular upkeep of grounds

general safety

site regulations and management

potential impacts to koala’s and habitat

the type and level of environmental impacts undertaken on the site

the impact on the Sadliers Crossing Railway Bridge as it cannot accommodate contraflow (two trains at a time) and is heritage listed

marshalling on site with regard train movements

expected number of trains to be in the vicinity at any given time - including existing coal and passenger trains

potential impacts on property valuations in proximity and nearby the centre

the need to employ the local community

the need for continuing community consultation once the centre is operational

potential for future expansion once existing trains are replaced with additional trains

potential closure of other depots in southeast Queensland.

4.2.1.2 Division 6, Ipswich City Council

Discussion with Cr Bromage indicated she did not support the proposed location for the NGR maintenance centre. She advised that in a recent meeting, residents raised concerns in regards to the NGR maintenance centre relating to the potential impacts the facility would have on the local community.

4.2.2 Council briefings

There was one council briefing to provide ICC with up-to-date Project information to provide the community. Ongoing communication with ICC via emails and phones calls to ensure accurate information about the Project was on hand for Council to answer constitutes questions.



4.2.3 Stakeholder meetings

To date, six meetings have been held with project stakeholders, specifically directly affected and adjoining landowners and government agencies.

4.3 Submissions to the IAR TMR received a total of 38 submissions to the IAR. Submitters were sent an acknowledgement email or letter upon receipt of their submission. TMR and Parsons Brinckerhoff reviewed all submissions to determine if the IAR required amendment.

The content of the submission, including the identification of amendments required to the IAR as a result of submissions are included in detail in Appendix B of the FAR.

A copy of all submissions has been provided in Appendix C of the FAR.

A total of 13 separate issues were raised during the CID submission period. It is important to note that commonly, several issues were discussed in each submission. Further, 24 submissions were a proforma type of submission. Figure 4.1 below illustrates the issues raised and the frequency.

Figure 4.1 Frequency of issues raised

In order of most frequently raised, Table 4.1 lists issues raised by stakeholders during the CID submission period. Each issue is discussed in detail in Sections 4.4 to 5.16.



Table 4.1 Frequency of issues raised

Issue Frequency

Environmental and cultural heritage 36

Noise 34

Traffic and access 34

Consultation 32

Safety and security 31

Quality of information 30

Property values 28

Impact to lifestyle 28

Visual impacts and amenity 25

Project need 26

Air quality 24

Waste water quality 24

Proximity and land use 8

4.4 Environmental and cultural heritage Environmental and cultural issues accounted for 10% of the concerns raised. Of these, 30 submissions indicated the concern for potential vegetation clearing and the loss of habitat for native species of flora and fauna. In addition, six submissions noted the increased use of Sadliers Crossing Railway Bridge and perception that the historic land mark was not designed for the increased number of trains that would use the bridge to access the site.

4.5 Noise Noise concerns accounted for 9% of the issues raised. Noise-related concerns were noted in 34 submissions and generally the nature of concern differed across most of the submissions. Key reasons for concern included:

cumulative impacts of noise from the NGR maintenance centre in addition to the existing Wulkuraka Train Station and RAAF base noise

noise from trains crossing Sadliers Crossing Railway Bridge

the impact of increased hours of operation on residents including verbal announcement and horns for train movement, particularly during the middle of the night

the area acts as an amphitheatre for noise

noise from increased traffic

Noise monitoring was seen as insufficient and noise mitigation for the surrounding suburbs specifically closer to Sadliers Crossing Railway Bridge is not accounted for.



The proforma submissions queried reducing potential noise from Sadliers Crossing Railway Bridge, by replacing the ICC heritage protected bridge with a new bridge.

4.6 Traffic and access Traffic and access concerns accounted for 9% of the issues raised. There were a total of 34 submissions that noted traffic related impacts or property access concerns as a result of the NGR maintenance centre at the Wulkuraka site. These perceived impacts were associated with increased traffic on local roads.

4.7 Consultation There were six submissions that noted concern about the lack of consultation. Further to this, 26 submissions indicated a preference for a community or public meeting to provide further information and opportunities for residents to raise their concerns. These two issues, combined, accounted for 9% of the issues raised, of which 24 were part of the proforma submission. Additional comments noted a lack of engagement with community groups; concern there has been no indication of planned future consultation and recommended stakeholders for inclusion in future consultation.

4.8 Safety and security Safety and security concerns accounted for 9% of the issues raised. A total of 31 submissions highlighted varying concerns in relation to safety such as safety during construction and operation. Other specific safety and security concerns included:

safety in local streets

security for properties adjacent to the site

additional commuter traffic and heavy vehicles in the surrounding area

flood, bushfire and landslide identification and mitigation measures

bio-security and animal welfare risks.

The proforma submission highlighted safety concerns, accounting for 24 of these submissions.

4.9 Quality of information Issues relating to the quality of information about the Project and CID process were identified in 30 submissions. These made up 8% of the issues noted. Specific concerns included:

inaccurate or out-dated mapping and aerial photography

inaccurate or out-dated socio-economic data and statistics

the lack of supporting material online

inconsistent information about the details of the NGR maintenance centre

lack of detail regarding noise, traffic, amenity, stormwater assessment and management

failure to identify specific information such as Schools (West Moreton Anglican College and Leichardt State School), cycling, pedestrian and walking tracks.



4.10 Property values Concerns regarding impacts to property values, as a result of the NGR maintenance centre, accounted for 8% of the issues raised. There were 28 submissions in total that highlighted property values as an issue, of which 24 were proforma submissions.

4.11 Impact to lifestyle There were 28 submissions that indicated the NGR maintenance centre located at the proposed Wulkuraka site would impact their lifestyle. This issue makes up 8% of the issues raised. This issue was also outlined in the proforma submission, accounting for 24 of the submissions that identified this as an issue.

4.12 Visual impacts and amenity Visual impacts and amenity accounted for 7% of the issues raised. Submissions from 25 people, of which 24 were proforma submissions, noted varying reasons for why they perceived the proposed NGR maintenance centre would cause visual impacts and amenity issues such as:

reverse amenity or negative visual impact on the surrounding area in general

limited information provided about the amenity for the site

lack of information about the new access point, the existing access routes and the rail network.

4.13 Project need Of the issues raised, 7% were questions about the Project need. This was indicated in 26 submissions, 24 of which were proforma submissions. Concerns regarding Project need included questions why the Wulkuraka site was chosen as the most suitable of the 34 sites or indicated the preference for an alternative location to be chosen. Further some people outlined if the Sadliers Crossing Railway Bridge is closed for maintenance, access would be closed, isolating the proposed NGR maintenance centre.

4.14 Air quality There were 24 submissions that noted concerns regarding air quality impacts as a result of the NGR maintenance centre. Air quality accounted for 7% of the issues raised. Notably this issue was recorded in the proforma submission.

4.15 Waste water quality Concern for waste water quality was raised in 24 submissions, accounting for 7% of the issues raised. It is important to note this issue was only noted in a proforma submission.

4.16 Proximity and land use Of the issues raised in submissions, 2% related to the proximity and perceived impact on current or future land use. Four submissions highlighted concerns regarding proximity of the NGR maintenance centre to sensitive receptors such as residents and businesses. Four submissions indicated concern about the impact to land use (development or general) if the proposed facility proceeds at the Wulkuraka location.



5. Conclusion The submission period revealed information about underlying community values and sentiment toward this Project.

There were a total of 62 recorded contacts made with stakeholders and community members throughout the submission period. A total of 38 submissions were received. Additional contact occurred via phone calls, post, email and face-to-face meetings.

Information gathered throughout the stakeholder and community engagement process will inform TMR of the key concerns of stakeholders and the wider community. This information has been translated into key recommendations (refer to Section 6, below) to TMR for both the remainder of the CID process through to construction and operation of the proposed NGR maintenance centre.

Issues identified as part of consultation have been assessed and separately addressed in the FAR.



6. Recommendations and evaluation

Parsons Brinckerhoff proposes that a number of recommendations be adopted by TMR as part of the Project.

These recommendations require TMR to:

Maintain the Consultation database with up-to-date property owner information, correspondence and phone call details. Use this as the basis for all mail outs and community contact throughout the construction and operation phases of the Project.

Maintain ongoing consultation with the community, with particular focus given to the period prior to, and during, and after construction.

Provide information to interested community members on the Project progress and how their information has been used.

Maintain ongoing consultation with the Member for Ipswich and the ICC regarding the timing of, and potential location of infrastructure within the proposed Wulkuraka site.

Prepare a Communication Plan to guide consultation activities before, during and after construction to ensure the community and nearby residents are informed and have opportunities to provide feedback.

To meet the CID guidelines, a letter should be sent to submitters outlining the amendments made to the IAR as noted in Appendix B of the FAR.

Although not a requirement of the CID guidelines, TMR is making the FAR available publically available.

Appendix A

Stakeholder list

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC A-1


A1. Identified stakeholders Stakeholder group

Contact name and position

Organisation Address

Local government – Ipswich City Council

Carl Wulff, Chief Executive officer

Ipswich City Council PO Box 191 Ipswich QLD 4305

Cr Paul Pisasale, Mayor Ipswich City Council PO Box 191 Ipswich QLD 4305

Cr Victor Atwood, Deputy Mayor


Ms Jo Pocock, Development Planning Manager


Cr Cheryl Bromage, Councillor for

Ipswich City Council, Division 6 PO Box 5072 Brassall QLD 4305

Elected representatives

Sean Choat MP State Member for Ipswich West PO Box 5273 Brassall QLD 4305

Shayne Neumann Federal Member for Blair PO Box 5117 Brassall Q 4305

Other government agencies and departments

WGCDR Clive Wells Department of Defence: RAAF Base Amberley

PO Box 133 Amberley QLD 4306

David Harrison Department of Defence in Canberra

MS Judith Bedford, Assistant Director Zone/Master Planning

Department of Defence PO Box 7925 Canberra ACT 2610

Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and Multicultural affairs

Department of Community Safety

Ms Carol Rayner, Acting Manager State Interest Assessments

Department Environment and Heritage Protection

GPO Box 2454 Brisbane QLD 4001

Ms Catherine de Voil, Senior Planning Officer (Major Projects)

Department Natural Resources and Mines

PO Box 318 Toowoomba QLD 4350

Michael Whiting, A/Regional Director (South) Department of State

Development, Infrastructure and Planning

PO Box 129 Ipswich QLD 4305

Department of Transport and Main Roads

Ms Kate Rylands, Senior Property Planner

Queensland Rail GPO Box 1429 Brisbane QLD 4001

Mr Peter Mason Department of Emergency Services


Mr Conrad Hall, Project Projects Queensland GPO Box 611

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC A-2


Stakeholder group

Contact name and position

Organisation Address

Manager Brisbane QLD 4001

Mr Peter Mason, regional Support Officer

Queensland State Emergency Services


Community infrastructure

Mr Shannon O’Connell, Network Property Program Manager

Energex Ltd GPO Box 1461 Brisbane QLD 4001

Queensland Urban Utilities

Ms Vicky Elliot, Network Integrity FOH Co-ordinator

Telstra Operations

Business AV Jennings (developer of Essington Rise)

Adjacent industrial property owners

Education

West Moreton Anglican College

Leichardt State School

Community Ipswich Chamber of Commerce and Industry

Leichhardt-Wulkuraka Neighbourhood Watch

Sadliers Crossing community Association of Residents

Adjacent residential property owners

Environmental groups and organisations

Ipswich Koala Protection Society

Rana Frog Group Inc.

Ipswich Bushcare groups

Indigenous groups

Jagera Daran Pty Ltd

Jagera People #2

Appendix B

Communications activities – Letters

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC B-1


B1. Introduction letter





B2. Acknowledgement letter

Appendix C

Communications activities – Fact sheet

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC C-1


Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC C-2


Appendix D

Communications activities – Advertisement

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC D-1


D1. Queensland Times – 20 July 2013



D2. Queensland Times – 24 July 2013



D3. Ipswich Advertiser – 24 July 2013

Appendix E

Communications activities – Webpage

Parsons Brinckerhoff | 2178016A-DMS-RPT-002 RevC E-1






Documents

NGR Final Assessment Report/media/Projects/N/New... · Assessment Report (IAR) and will be completed upon submission of the Final Assessment Report (FAR), expected in late 2013. The