Water-related assessments are where DAs get held up.
Across the development applications we see, the water-related impact components, water quality, flooding, stormwater management, groundwater, consistently generate the most agency questions, the longest RFI cycles and carry potential heavy penalties. This is particularly true in NSW, where the EPA and DCCEEW have well-developed expectations. It's also true in Queensland, where DETSI and the local councils apply the State Planning Policy water quality objectives. And it's explicitly required for any development near a sensitive receiving environment.
The reason is straightforward: these assessments are highly technical, the guidelines are detailed, and most environmental consultants prepare them as one component of a broader generalist document. Eko doesn't. Water who we are.
What we deliver
- Water quality impact assessments constructed against the Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (ANZG 2018) and the catchment-specific objectives that apply to your site. Construction-phase and operational-phase impacts assessed separately, with mitigation specified for each.
- Flood impact assessments — hydraulic and hydrological assessment of flood behaviour, change in flood levels, afflux, change in flow velocity, and change in flood extent attributable to the development. Prepared in accordance with Australian Rainfall and Runoff 2019 and the relevant state flood guidelines.
- Stormwater management assessments — water-sensitive urban design (WSUD) treatment trains designed to meet the relevant local government water quality objectives, with MUSIC modelling, treatment device sizing, and maintenance specifications.
- Groundwater impact assessments — where development affects shallow groundwater, intersects acid sulfate soils, or requires dewatering, we assess groundwater impact and prepare the documentation required for any associated water licences or environmental authorities.
Written by the technical author, not summarised by a generalist.
Most water quality and flood impact sections in EIS and DA documents are written by a project manager summarising a sub-consultant's report. The sub-consultant's report uses one set of assumptions, terminology, and modelling outputs. The summary in the EIS interprets them, sometimes accurately, sometimes not. The agency reads both, and the discrepancy generates an RFI.
When Eko prepares the water components of your assessment, they're written by the engineer doing the technical work. There's no interpretation layer. The numbers in the executive summary match the numbers in the modelling outputs. The mitigation in the impact assessment matches the mitigation in the construction plans. The narrative makes sense.
The agencies notice. RFIs reduce. Determination accelerates.