Original source · versioned page text
Appendix I - Bushfire Hazard Report
REPORT
Appendix I
Bushfire Hazard Report
PR139784 | Town Planning Report | v4 | 5 June 2019
rpsgroup.com
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 37 pages
Page 2
NATURAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT FOR BUSHFIRE RISK
10 & 22 Rose Gum Rd and 521 Elm St, Black Mountain
Client: Lutheran Community Care C/- RPS
Project Management
Ref: S50335ER002
Date: 7th August 2018
Page 3
ii
Table of Contents
Contents
Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................... iv
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 5
1.1 Site Description .................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Proposed Development ........................................................................................................ 7
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 8
BUSHFIRE HAZARD OVERLAYS ..................................................................................... 10
SITE-SPECIFIC BUSHFIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT ...................................................... 11
4.1 Current conditions .............................................................................................................. 11
4.2 Site Sub-units ..................................................................................................................... 11
4.3 Assessment of Vegetation Communities ............................................................................ 12
4.4 Assessment of Slope .......................................................................................................... 17
4.5 Assessment of Aspect ........................................................................................................ 18
4.6 Field Verification ................................................................................................................. 19
4.7 Severity of Bushfire Hazard ................................................................................................ 19
4.8 Qualitative Review .............................................................................................................. 20
BUSHFIRE HAZARD OF ADJACENT LANDS ................................................................... 21
5.1 Safety Buffers ..................................................................................................................... 24
5.2 Overall Hazard Rating of the Site Following Development ................................................. 24
Assessment against the SPP ............................................................................................. 25
6.1 Part E – State Interest Policies and Assessment Benchmarks ........................................... 25
CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 28
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 29
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 4
iii
Figures Site Plan, prepared by BVN, AR-A-DA-02
Appendix A Bushfire Hazard Units Slope Calculations
Appendix B Bushfire Overlay (Noosa Plan, Noosa Shire Council)
Bushfire Hazard Map (State Planning Policy, 2016)
Quality Control
Prepared for: Lutheran Community Care C/- RPS Project Management
Prepared by: S5 Consulting Pty Ltd (ACN 600 187 844)
PO Box 602
Lutwyche, QLD, 4030
T 0481 367 555
www.s5consulting.com.au
Date: 7th August, 2018
Version Description Date Author Verifier Approver
01 DRAFT 20/10/2017 RF/SYB RS RS
02 FINAL 07/08/2018 RS SYB RS
S5 Consulting Pty Ltd has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the
document. No other party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of S5 Consulting Pty Ltd. These materials or parts of
them may not be reproduced in any form, by any method, for any purpose except with written permission from S5 Consulting Pty Ltd. Subject
to these conditions, this document may be transmitted, reproduced or disseminated only in its entirety.
Disclaimer
S5 Consulting Pty Ltd trading as S5 Environmental has developed this Bushfire Hazard Assessment, taking
into consideration the State Planning Policy and relevant local authority policies and guidelines. However,
there can be no guarantee that following the recommendations made in this assessment can guarantee
safety of property and human life.
Fire is an element of nature, and as such fire events (small or large) can have disastrous outcomes even
with the best planning in place. The authors of this report and S5 Environmental accept no responsibility for
any harm to property or human life caused by fire or any other cause to persons utilising property or
structures
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 5
iv
Abbreviations
AS Australian Standards
BAL Bushfire Attack Level
BHU Bushfire Hazard Sub-Unit
DEHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
DET Department of Education and Training
DNRM Department of Natural Resources and Mines
DoE Department of Environment
DSDIP Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning
EPBC Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development
GLA General Learning Area
Ha Hectares
NSC Noosa Shire Council
PDA Priority Development Area
QFES Queensland Fire and Emergency Services
SPA Sustainable Planning Act 2009
SPP State Planning Policy
SPR Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009
TOR Terms of Reference
ULDA Urban Land Development Authority
VMA Vegetation Management Act 1999
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 6
5
INTRODUCTION
S5 Environmental was commissioned by RPS Project Management on behalf of Lutheran Community
Care, to undertake a Bushfire Hazard Assessment for the proposed Master Plan development of the
properties located at 10 and 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street, Black Mountain. The properties
have a total area of approximately 24.15 hectares (ha) and will herein be referred to as the ‘site’. The
site is located within Noosa Shire Council (NSC) Local Government Area.
This Bushfire Hazard Assessment aims to determine the site-specific hazard in relation to bushfire on
and around the site and management actions required to mitigate the risk.
1.1 Site Description
The subject site is located 10 and 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street, Black Mountain and is
also described as Lots 1 and 2 on RP 862537 and Lot 2 on SP267294. Black Mountain is characterised
by Rural, Rural Settlement, Open Space Conservation and Community Service Areas. Yurol State
Forest adjoins the western boundary of the site and Tewantin National Park is located to the north of
the site.
A review of recent aerial photography of the subject site, indicates that the site contains three
residencies with frontage to Elm Street and Rose Gum Road. Two of the properties are approximately
2 ha is size and the largest property is over 20 ha and contains multiple fenced paddocks utilised for
horse agistment. A vegetated waterway traverses through the southern portion of the site and the
central and southern paddocks contain scattered mature native canopy trees. The site is bound by
Elm Street and Rose Gum Road to the north and further north of Rose Gum Road is the North Coast
Rail Line. Adjoining the eastern boundary of the site is Yurol State Forest and bounding the southern
boundary of the site is the Bruce Highway. The western boundary of the site was adjoined by a
vegetated rural residential block with a single residence. Refer to Site Context in Figure 1 and Site
Aerial in Figure 2, below.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 7
6
Figure 1 Site Context
Source: Google Imagery 2017 & Esri Shapefiles of Localities, Cadastre © State of Qld
Figure 2 Site Aerial
Source: Google Earth Pro. 2017, Imagery dated 6 July 2016
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 8
7
1.2 Proposed Development
S5 Environmental understand that Lutheran Community Care propose a Master Plan Concept for a
‘Care Farm’ development which will be a multi-staged development of an 80-100 bed facility
comprising dementia care, transitional care and a respite facility. The Concept Master Plan indicates
proposed infrastructure as follows:
Respite Care in a farm and garden environment;
Palliative Care overlooking the dam
Central Services Building located at the entry of the site;
Dementia Care in a farm and garden setting;
Nature Study Centre located adjacent to the forest and riparian zone;
Cottages for volunteers and support staff near the care facilitates; and
Cottages for disadvantaged groups located around the dam and overlooking the riparian
zone.
The proposed ‘Care Farm’ development has been consolidated in the northern extent of the site. Refer
to Extract of the BVN Site Plan in Figure 3, below, and within the Figures Section of this report.
Figure 3 Extract of the BVN Site Plan
Source: BVN Architects
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 9
8
METHODOLOGY
The intent of this report is to provide an informed assessment of the potential bushfire hazard within
the site and surrounding areas in relation to the proposed development. Accordingly, S5
Environmental’s approach involved both quantitative and qualitative assessments of the site. The
quantitative assessments included a review of the vegetation communities, slope and aspect. The
qualitative assessments were based upon the known bushfire behaviour of the subject land. S5
Environmental’s Senior and Graduate Ecologists conducted a review of the site and surroundings
lands, vegetation communities, slope angles and aspects on Thursday, 12th of October, 2017.
A measured walkover of the entire site was achieved with a particular focus on the areas of the site
mapped within a Bushfire Prone Area. Vegetation communities were inspected in order to assess
their structure, dominance, associations and connectivity to adjoining bushland. The vegetation
community structure, fuel loads and potential hazards were also assessed and documented.
S5 Environmental utilised the elevations and contours indicated in the Noosa Shire Council online
mapping system in order to complete the quantitative assessment.
Aerial photography was utilised to discern connectivity of the site to bushland areas in the locality.
The State Planning Policy, Interactive Mapping Bushfire Hazard Overlay (attached at Appendix A)
was reviewed prior to the field assessment in order to inform potential bushfire hazard areas. As
shown in Figure 4, below, an extract of the SPP Mapping, the majority of site is mapped as either
“Very High Potential Bushfire Intensity”, “High Potential Bushfire Intensity” (red shading), “Medium
Potential Bushfire Intensity” (yellow shading) or “Potential Impact Buffer” (hatched areas).
Figure 4 Extract of SPP Bushfire Overlay
Source: SPP Interactive Mapping, 2017
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 10
9
The Noosa Plan mapping also has development constraint overlays including a Bushfire Hazard
Overlay. As shown in Figure 5, below, an extract of the Bushfire Hazard Overlay for NSC, indicates
that the site is mapped within either “Very High Potential Bushfire Intensity”, “High Potential Bushfire
Intensity”, “Medium Potential Bushfire Intensity” or “Potential Impact Buffer” Areas around the
perimeter of the site and extending into the site.
Figure 5 Extract of NSC Bushfire Overlay
Source: Noosa Plan 2017
The NSC Planning Scheme requires a site-specific bushfire hazard assessment to be undertaken for
sites within Bushfire Hazard Areas. This site-specific bushfire hazard assessment is to be prepared
in accordance with the superseded SPP 1/03: Mitigating the adverse Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and
Landslide and SPP Guideline. Accordingly, S5 Environmental’s site specific Bushfire Hazard
Assessment has been completed in accordance with the SPP 1/03. This approach involves both
quantitative and qualitative assessments of the site. The quantitative assessments included a review
of the vegetation communities, slope and aspect. The qualitative assessments were based upon the
known bushfire behaviour of the subject land.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 11
10
BUSHFIRE HAZARD OVERLAYS
S5 Environmental understand that the Development Application will be assessed under the Noosa
Plan, dated 3 July 2017. The Noosa Plan mapping has development constraint overlays including a
Bushfire Hazard Overlay. This map and the State Planning Policy 2016 (SPP) Bushfire Hazard Area
Maps (attached in Appendix A) were consulted to determine the preliminary bushfire hazard ratings
of the site.
As noted above, the Bushfire Hazard Overlay for NSC indicates that the site is mapped within either
the Very High Potential Bushfire Intensity, High Potential Bushfire Intensity, Medium Potential Bushfire
Intensity or Potential Impact Buffer Areas over parts of the site and the SPP Bushfire Hazard Areas
map indicates that the site is either Very High Potential Bushfire Intensity, High Potential Bushfire
Intensity, Medium Potential Bushfire Intensity or Potential Impact Buffer (refer to Bushfire Hazard
Overlay and SPP Map in Appendix A).
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 12
11
SITE-SPECIFIC BUSHFIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT
The following provides a detailed, site specific, technical assessment of the site to determine the actual
level of potential bushfire risk. It is understood that this assessment will be used as supporting
documentation for the Development Application to NSC. Accordingly, this site-specific assessment
has been prepared in accordance with the SPP Guideline 1/03.
The site-specific bushfire hazard assessment involves a quantitative assessment utilizing a cumulative
scoring system accounting for vegetation communities, aspect, and slope. The following sections are
in accordance with this approach.
4.1 Current conditions
The site currently is used for rural residential purposes and indicated extensive paddocks which were
agisting horses at the date of inspection. The paddocks contained scattered native canopy trees and
were fenced. A high level tributary of Six Mile Creek traverses through the southern and central portion
so the site. The eastern portion of the waterway indicated a tall Open Forest community which was
considered remnant vegetation.
The site falls from the northern and western boundaries towards the waterway corridor that runs
roughly west to south-east through the site (see Figure 3, above). The waterway flows in an arc from
near the south-western corner of Lot 3 on SP235191 to the eastern boundary of the same Lot. To the
south of the waterway corridor the topography rises again to the southern boundary.
4.2 Site Sub-units
An assessment of the vegetation community, slopes and aspects displayed across the site was
undertaken with the goal of breaking the site down into areas referred to as ‘Bushfire Hazard Sub-
units’ (BHUs). Each BHU is essentially an area of land with a particular combination of vegetation,
slope and aspect characteristics. For this site, five BHUs have been identified on site, as follows:
BHU 1 – North-western residence, landscaped areas, slashed and grazed paddocks;
BHU 2 – Native Regrowth;
BHU 3 – North-eastern residences, landscaped areas, slashed and grazed paddocks;
BHU 4 – Waterway Corridor; and
BHU 5 – Southern grazed paddocks.
These BHUs are described in more detail in the following section and illustrated in Figure 6, below.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 13
12
Figure 6 Site Bushfire Hazard Sub-Units
Source: Google Earth Pro. 2017, Imagery dated 6 July 2016
4.3 Assessment of Vegetation Communities
Hazard scores for the vegetation communities associated with each BHU have been taken from the
SPP1/03 Guideline – Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide, Appendix 3
Table A3.1 – Hazard Scores and Associated Fire Behaviours for Various Vegetation Communities. In
addition to assessing the existing conditions within each BHU, an assessment has been made of the
likely future conditions within each BHU, following the completion of development works (as discussed
in Section 1.2, above). In particular, the future conditions within BHUs 1, 2, and 3, post development,
are assumed to be mown turf, paved roadways and footpaths, garden beds and scattered landscape
vegetation.
Below is a description of vegetation communities within each BHU with the relevant Hazard Scores
for the existing site conditions and future conditions, following development, provided in Table 1,
below.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 14
13
BHU 1 – North-western residence, landscaped areas, slashed and grazed paddocks
Located in the north-western portion of the site, north of the waterway was an existing residence on
Lot 1 on RP862537, ancillary sheds, septic tanks, animal enclosures, a farm dam, fruit orchards and
landscaping. Native canopy trees were scattered within this community and were characterized by
Pink Bloodwood (Corymbia intermedia), Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis), Brush Box
(Lophostemon confertus), Swamp Box (Lophostemon suaveolens) with a sub-canopy of Broad-leaved
Paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia) and Black She-oak (Allocasuarina littoralis). Exotic Slash Pine
(Pinus elliottii) was also present
The shrub layer was characterised by common landscaping species including Weeping Bottlebrush
(Melaleuca viminalis), Wild May (Leptospermum polygalifolium) with spot Lantana (Lantana camara)
also present. The understory was slashed and areas were grazed by horses at the date of inspection.
Located in this BHU was a dam with eroding banks. The water in the dam indicated high turbidity and
the dam banks were sparsely vegetated with regrowth Acacia species and native and exotic grass
species. Refer to Plates 1 – 6, below.
Plate 1: View north towards western residence indicating slash Plate 2: View of central residence with horses grazing in the
lawn and scattered native canopy. paddock to the rear.
Plate 3: View across ungrazed woodland. Plate 4: View west across dam indicating eroding bank and high
turbidity.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 15
14
Plate 5: View of semi-mature Paperbark Woodland over a Plate 6: View west towards shelter and dam overflow.
grazed understorey.
BHU 2 – Native Regrowth
This BHU was located to the south of the central residence on Lot 2 on RP862537 and fenced in
entirety by barbed wire fencing. The vegetation was characterised by regrowth native Blackwood,
Broad-leaved Paperbark, Cheese Trees (Glochidion ferdinandi) with Swamp Mahogany (Eucalyptus
robusta) and exotic Slash Pine (Pinus elliottii) also present. The shrub layer indicated infestations of
exotic species including Lantana and Groundsel (Baccharis halimifolia) with regenerating native
Blackwood and Blue Tongue (Melastoma affine). The understorey indicated native grasses and
sedges including Rough Saw-sedge (Gahnia aspera), Blue-fax Lily (Dianella caerula), Bracken
(variable species), Sword Sedge (Lepidosperma laterale) and Pouched Coral Fern (Gleichenia
dicarpa). Refer to Plates 7 and 8, below.
Plate 7: View regrowth vegetation indicating juvenile to semi- Plate 8: Open grasslands within regrowth vegetation.
mature native regrowth.
BHU 3 – Eastern residences, landscaped areas, slashed and grazed paddocks
Located in the eastern portion of the site, north of the waterway was the existing residences on Lot 2
on RP862537 and Lot 3 on SP235191, ancillary sheds, septic tanks, animal enclosures, a farm dam,
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 16
15
landscaping and open paddocks. Native canopy trees were scattered within this community and were
characterized by Pink Bloodwood (Corymbia intermedia), Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis),
Brush Box (Lophostemon confertus), Swamp Box (Lophostemon suaveolens) with a sub-canopy of
Broad-leaved Paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia) and Black She-oak (Allocasuarina littoralis).
Exotic Slash Pine (Pinus elliottii) was also present
Where present, the shrub layer was characterised by common landscaping species including Weeping
Bottlebrush (Melaleuca viminalis), Wild May (Leptospermum polygalifolium) with spot Lantana
(Lantana camara) also present. The understory was slashed and areas were grazed by horses at the
date of inspection. A small dam was located to the east of the residence on the eastern lot of the site.
This dam indicated regenerating native and exotic species on the dam banks. Refer to Plates 9 – 12,
below.
Plate 9: View south of grazed paddock with individual natives Plate 10: View south towards waterway vegetation across open
within the cleared area. paddock.
Plate 11: View of eastern residence indicating grazing horses Plate 12: View west of small patch of Swamp Box Woodland.
and landscaping.
BHU 4 – Waterway Corridor
Also located centrally within the subject site is a waterway corridor. This community is also located
south of the proposed development footprint. The community was characterised by Weeping Lilly
Pilly, Broad-leaved Paperbarks, Pink Bloodwood, Flooded Gum, Brush Box, Swamp Box and Forest
Red Gum. The sub-canopy and shrub layer contained Blackwood and Black Wattle (Acacia
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 17
16
leiocalyx) and the understorey indicated Rough saw-sedge, Mat-rush, Wiry Panic and Blue-flax Lilly.
Refer to Plate 13, below.
Plate 13. View of riparian waterway corridor located centrally within
the site and south of the proposed development footprint.
BHU 5 – Southern grazed paddocks
Located to the south of the waterway corridor, making up the balance of Lot 3 on SP862537, was an
area of grazed paddocks, which were fenced with predominately electric fencing with several
paddocks grazing horses. The paddocks contained scattered mature native canopy trees
characterised by Pink Bloodwood, Grey Gum (Eucalyptus propinqua), Brush Box, Swamp Box with
Flooded Gum (Eucalyptus grandis) present on the lower slopes within proximity to the waterway. The
shrub layer was absent and the understorey was grazed and contained native and exotic grasses.
Along the southern boundary of the site this BHU adjoined the Bruce Highway and indicated fauna
exclusion fencing. Refer to Plates 14 and 15, below.
Plate 14: View across the grazed paddocks with scattered native Plate 15: View to the south towards the fauna exclusion fencing
canopy. adjacent to the Bruce Highway.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 18
17
Table 1, below, identifies the Vegetation Community that most closely describes site conditions and
the associated hazard score rating for the vegetation communities present on the site.
Table 1 Hazard Score and Associated Fire Behaviour for the Vegetation Communities on the
Site
Existing Future
Sub-unit Vegetation Communities Fire Behaviour Comments Hazard Hazard
Score Score
Grazing reduces intensity, slow Slashed grass with scattered
Grazed grasslands,
BHU1 moving, may be difficult to canopy trees and 2 1
slashed grass.
extinguish, frequent fire breaks. landscaping species.
Grassy eucalypt and Due to the regrowth nature
Fire intensity may be severe
acacia forest, exotic pine of this vegetation a Hazard
BHU2 with flame lengths to 20 m, but 5 1
plantations, cypress pine Score of 5 is considered
less attack from embers.
forests, wallum heath. appropriate.
Grazing reduces intensity, slow Slashed grass with
Grazed grasslands,
BHU3 moving, may be difficult to scattered canopy trees and 2 1
slashed grass.
extinguish, frequent fire breaks. landscaping species.
Paperbark heath and Fire intensity depends on fuel
swamps, eucalypt forest accumulation, but can be
Slashed grass with
with dry-shrub ladder severe, with flame lengths to
BHU4 scattered canopy trees and 8 8
fuels. 20 m, spot fires frequent across
landscaping species.
fire breaks, radiant heat and
direct flame for 15 minutes.
Grazing reduces intensity, slow
Grazed grasslands, Predominantly grassland
BHU5 moving, may be difficult to 2 2
slashed grass. with scattered canopy trees.
extinguish, frequent fire breaks.
4.4 Assessment of Slope
The severity of a slope and location of the slope in relation to the subject site is relevant as fire travels
faster upslope than downslope and steeper slopes can potentially increase the speed at which the fire
travels. Site contours from NSC’s Interactive Mapping System indicate that the site elevation varies
from approximately 106 m Australian Height Datum (AHD), adjacent to the waterway near the eastern
boundary, to approximately 125 mAHD, along the northern boundary (see Figure 7, below). Table 2,
below, indicates the hazard score for the slope measured for the site.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 19
18
Figure 7 BHU Slope Calculations
Source: Google Earth Pro 2017, NSC 1m contours
Table 2 Hazard Score for Slope
Sub-unit Slope Hazard Score
BHU 1 (9.29 %) Undulating (>5% to 10%) 2
BHU 2 (9.29 %) Undulating (>5% to 10%) 2
BHU 3 (8.50 %) Undulating (>5% to 10%) 2
BHU 4 (1.05 %) Plain (0% to 5%) 1
BHU 5 (5.47 %) Undulating (>5% to 10%) 2
4.5 Assessment of Aspect
As discussed above, the land is approximately flat with little or no slope present and, therefore,
effectively no aspect. Table 3 provides the hazard scores for the aspect occurring on the site.
Table 3 Hazard Scores for Aspect
Sub-unit Aspect Hazard Score
BHU 1 East to South and all land under 5% slope 0
BHU 2 West to South 2
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 20
19
Sub-unit Aspect Hazard Score
BHU 3 West to South 2
BHU 4 East to South and all land under 5% slope 0
BHU 5 North to East 1
4.6 Field Verification
As stated, S5 Environmental’s Senior and Graduate Ecologist conducted a site inspection of the site
and surroundings lands, vegetation communities, slope angles and aspects on Thursday the 12th of
October 2017 and verified the on-ground site conditions.
4.7 Severity of Bushfire Hazard
In accordance with SPP1/03 Guideline – Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and
Landslide Appendix 3, the scores for the individual factors determined for vegetation community, slope
and aspect have been summed to provide a total for each sub-unit as follows:
Total hazard score = vegetation community hazard score + slope hazard score + aspect hazard score.
The total fire hazard scores calculated for the site as per the SPP1/03 Guideline are shown below in
Table 4, below. The scores for the individual factors determined for vegetation communities, slope
and aspect have been summed to provide a total for each sub-unit.
Table 4 Sub-unit Hazard Score
Sub-unit Vegetation Slope Score Aspect Current Future Current Future
Score Score Hazard Hazard Hazard Hazard
Score Score Rating Rating
BHU 1 2 / 1* 2 0 4 3 LOW LOW
BHU 2 5 / 1* 2 2 10 5 MEDIUM LOW
BHU 3 2 / 1* 2 2 7 5 MEDIUM LOW
BHU 4 8 / 8* 1 0 9 9 MEDIUM MEDIUM
BHU 5 2 / 2* 2 1 5 5 LOW LOW
Note:
* Current Vegetation Score / Future Vegetation Score
In accordance with the SPP1/03 Guideline, a total fire hazard score of 13 or greater is considered to
be ‘High’ bushfire hazard areas, a total fire hazard score of 6 to 12.5 is considered ‘Medium’ Hazard
Areas and a hazard score of 1 to 5.5 is considered ‘Low’ Hazard. Therefore, under the current
conditions the site itself is considered a LOW to MEDIUM Bushfire Hazard Area. After completion of
development works, assuming the future landscaping conditions will be in accordance with those
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 21
20
outlined above, the site will be considered a LOW Bushfire Hazard Area with the waterway corridor
being a MEDIUM Bushfire Hazard Area.
4.8 Qualitative Review
S5 Environmental investigated any known bushfire behaviour. No formal information regarding past
bushfire activity was available.
In addition, enquiries were made with the Department of National Parks, Sport and Racing (NPSR)
regarding bushfire management on the adjoining Tewantin National Park and Yurol State Forest (to
the north and east, respectively). To date, no information has been received from NPSR. However,
it is understood that NPSR actively manages the bushfire risk on all National Park land and,
therefore, the bushfire risk associated with the adjacent National Parks to the north and east is
assumed to be low.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 22
21
BUSHFIRE HAZARD OF ADJACENT LANDS
It is important to have an understanding of the adjacent properties when developing a risk profile and
management strategies for a site. The site is bounded to the north-west and south by major road
networks being the Bruce Highway to the south-west and Elm Street and Rose Gum Road to the
North. A railway line is also present to the north-east. These transport corridors effectively provide a
cleared break/buffer between the site and any vegetation to the north and south, as well as limiting
the vegetation to the west of the site to a triangular portion covering two rural residential Lots.
Further to the north of Elm Street and Rose Gum Road is Tewantin National Park. To the east of the
site is Yurol State Forest and to the west of the site a vegetated rural-residential Lot with a dwelling
and associated structures.
It was clear during the field assessment that the highest potential for Bushfire Attack is from the
vegetation immediately to the east of the subject site located within Yurol State Forest.
Lands to the East of the Site – Yurol State Forest
The land adjoining the subject site to the east is part of the Yurol State Forest. The vegetation is set
back from the site fence line by a 6 m wide vehicle access track located along the western boundary.
It is noted that this vegetation is management by Queensland Parks and Wildlife for fire hazard. This
community consists of an Open Forest community characterised by Forest Red Gum and Pink
Bloodwood with a sub-canopy of regenerating canopy species as well as Grey Gum, Swamp Box.
The shrub layer is largely absent. The understorey contains native Blady Grass and Bracken Fern.
Refer to Plates 16 and 17, below.
Plate 16. View of the 6m wide access road within the State Plate 17. View of the access road within the State Forest
Forest. and the typical composition and structure illustrated.
Adjacent lands to the North – Road Reserve and Tewantin National Park
The vegetation located immediately to the north of the subject site occupies a relatively small area
bounded by Elm Street and the Railway Line to the north-west and north-east, respectively. Beyond
the road and rail line is Tewantin National Park, which is managed by Queensland Parks and Wildlife
Service for fire hazard. Additionally, this vegetation is buffered from the frontage of the subject site
by the 50 m to 60 m wide road and rail corridors. The vegetation within Tewantin National Park is
characterised by Open Forest communities consisting of Pink Bloodwood, with Grey Gum, Brush Box
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 23
22
and Black She-oak. The shrub layer is largely absent due to a thick sub-canopy of regenerating
canopy species. The understorey consists of Blady Grass, Kangaroo Grass and Forest Grass Tree.
Refer to Plates 18 and 19, below.
Plate 18. View of the composition and structure of Plate 19. View of the road reserve vegetation to the
vegetation within Tewantin National Park located to the north of the subject site indicating the typical composition
north of the subject site with Pink Bloodwood clearing and structure.
evident in the canopy.
Adjacent lands to the West – Vegetated Rural-residential Lot
A rural-residential Lot exists to the west of the subject site with a residence at the northern frontage
and the balance of the site vegetated. The vegetation in the northern half of the site surrounding the
residence contains scattered mature native canopy characterised by Forest Red Gum and Pink
Bloodwood over a maintained understorey. The vegetation within the southern half of the Lot is
characterised by Broad-leaved Paperbark and Black Wattle with an emergent native canopy of Pink
Bloodwood and Swamp Box. The understorey consisted of native grasses including Kangaroo Grass.
There was a small empty dam and a dirt vehicle access track was observed within this community
close to the boundary fence line. Refer to Plate 20 and 21, below.
Plate 20. View of the vegetation within the adjoining Lot Plate 21. View of vegetation within the adjoining Lot west
west of the subject site indicating Broad-leaved of the site indicating scattered native canopy and
Paperbarks and small empty dam in the background. residence in the background.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 24
23
Adjacent Land to the South
Adjoining the southern boundary of the site is the Bruce Highway road corridor. This corridor is
approximately 180 m wide and is considered to provide an adequate buffer/break to any bushfire risk
that may be associated with the rural residential properties on the opposite side of the highway. On
this basis, a bushfire hazard score has not been calculated for land to the south of the site.
Table 5, below, summarises the potential bushfire hazard of the lands surrounding the subject site
and provides a classification in accordance with the SPP1/03 Guideline – Mitigating the Adverse
Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide Appendix 3. Slope calculations for the surrounding lands
are shown in the calculation sheet attached in Appendix B. The potential bushfire hazard on the site
and surrounding lands, including Bushfire Hazard Buffer Areas, are illustrated in Figure 8, below.
Table 5 Adjacent Lands – Bushfire Hazard
Severity of
Adjacent Hazard
Vegetation Aspect Slope Bushfire
Land Score
Hazard
Grassy eucalypt and
East to South
acacia forest, exotic pine Undulating
and all land
East plantations, cypress pine (>5% to 10%) 8 MEDIUM*
under 5% slope.
forests, wallum heath. Hazard Score 2
Hazard Score 0
Hazard Score 6
Grassy eucalypt and
North to North-
acacia forest, exotic pine Undulating
West.
North plantations, cypress pine (>5% to 10%) 11.5 MEDIUM*
forests, wallum heath. Hazard Score
Hazard Score 2
3.5
Hazard Score 6
Paperbark heath and
East to South
swamps, eucalypt forest Undulating
and all land
West with dry-shrub ladder (>5% to 10%) 10 MEDIUM
under 5% slope.
fuels. Hazard Score 2
Hazard Score 0
Hazard Score 8
Note:
* Bushfire risks on lands to the east and north are actively managed by QPWS and, therefore, the Bushfire
Hazards for these lands are likely to be lower than those calculated.
It was evident from the assessment of adjacent lands that the bushfire risk on surrounding properties
was Medium to the north, east and west. Importantly, however, QPWS are proactively managing the
risk of Bushfire from the National Park to the north and the State Forest on adjacent land to the east
and the actual bushfire hazard associated with these lands is likely to be lower than those calculated.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 25
24
5.1 Safety Buffers
The final step for a site-specific Bushfire assessment in accordance with the SPP1/03 Guideline is the
inclusion of a safety buffer for ‘Medium’ rated bushfire hazard areas. It states that land within 50 m of
an area identified as having a Medium bushfire severity classification should be included in the
‘Medium’ bushfire hazard area. Therefore, due to the waterway corridor and areas to the east and
west of the site being assessed as medium, buffers 50 m wide adjacent to these areas have been
defined as Medium Bushfire Hazard Buffer Areas, as shown on Figure 8, below.
Figure 8 Potential Bushfire Hazard and Buffer Areas
Source: Google Earth Pro 2017, NSC 1m contours
5.2 Overall Hazard Rating of the Site Following Development
S5 Environmental’s site specific Bushfire Hazard Rating for the site, following development is
predominantly LOW with 50 m Medium Bushfire Hazard Buffer Areas along the eastern and
western boundaries associated with Medium Bushfire Hazards on adjacent lands in these directions.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 26
25
ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE SPP
A single State Planning Policy 2013 (SPP) came into effect in Queensland in December 2013 and
was since amended in 2017. The State Planning Policy (SPP) provides local governments with
guidance on a variety of State Interests and how they are to be dealt with in local planning schemes.
S5 Environmental understands the Noosa Plan, does not appropriately integrate the state interests
detailed in the SPP. Therefore, an assessment against Part E: State Interest Policies and Assessment
Benchmarks of the SPP (2017) in relation to Natural Hazards, Risk and Resilience has been provided
in Section 3.1 below. The relevant SPP Map is enclosed in Appendix A of this report.
6.1 Part E – State Interest Policies and Assessment Benchmarks
As outlined above, the proposed development needs to be assessed against the Planning for safety
and resilience to hazards requirements of the SPP 2017.
Table 6, below, is an assessment against Part E of the SPP in relation to Biodiversity and Natural
Hazards, Risk and Resilience. The proposal is for the Reconfiguration of a Lot with the development
of a residential lots and townhouses.
Table 6 Assessment of Part E State Interest Policies and Assessment Benchmarks
State Interest Policies Development Response
Outcome
Assessment Benchmarks – natural hazard, risk and resilience
These performance outcomes apply to the following development applications, to the extent the SPP has
not been identified in a local planning instrument as appropriately integrated.
A development application for a material change of use, reconfiguration of a lot or operational works on
premises in any of the following:
(1) Bushfire prone areas;
(2) Flood hazard areas;
(3) Landslide hazard areas;
(4) Storm tide inundation areas; and
Erosion prone area.
Erosion prone areas within a coastal management district:
(1) Development does not occur in an N/A The subject site is not located in a coastal
erosion prone area within a coastal management district or erosion prone area.
management district unless the
development cannot feasibly be located
elsewhere and is:
a. Coastal-dependent
development; or
b. Temporary, readily relocatable
or able to be abandoned
development; or
c. Essential community
infrastructure; or
d. Minor redevelopment of an
existing permanent building or
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 27
26
structure that cannot be
relocated or abandoned.
(2) Development permitted in (1) above, N/A Refer to above.
mitigates the risks to people and
property to an acceptable or tolerable
level.
Bushfire, flood, landslide, storm tide inundation, and erosion prone areas outside of the coastal
management district:
(3) Development other than that assessed A/S The proposed development has been centred
against (1) above, avoids natural in the lowest hazard section of the site which
hazard areas, or where it is not possible was rated as Low from the above Site Specific
to avoid the natural hazard area, Assessment. A 50 m strip around the
development mitigates the risks to perimeter of the development footprint has
people and property to an acceptable or been designated Medium Hazard due to the
tolerable level. addition of safety buffers.
The Concept Master Plan (Figure 3, above)
generally allows for these setbacks within
design. Minor amendments should be
considered on the western boundary.
S5 Environmental further understands from the
Concept Masterplan, that construction
materials and landscaping will generally be
low-flammability methods and materials – e.g.
concrete paths, mown turf, vegetable patches
and buildings.
All natural hazard areas:
(4) Development supports and does not S5 Environmental understand that the
hinder disaster management response proposed development will incorporate
or recovery capacity and capabilities. appropriate access for emergency services
given the nature of the proposed use and the
well-developed Emergency Response Plans
enacted on such sites.
(5) Development directly, indirectly and S5 Environmental understands the proposed
cumulatively avoids an increase in the development is to incorporate low-flammability
severity of the natural hazard and the landscaping throughout and around the
potential for damage on the site or to perimeter of the proposed development to
other properties. mitigate the risks of bushfire to people and
property.
(6) Risks to public safety and the S5 Environmental understand that hazardous
environment from the location of materials (where present on site) will be
hazardous materials and the release of appropriately located to minimise the risk of
these materials as a result of a natural release as a result of a natural hazard.
hazard are avoided.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 28
27
(7) The natural processes and the S5 Environmental understands the proposed
protective function of landforms and the development includes the retention of existing
vegetation that can mitigate risks vegetation, where possible. This includes the
associated with the natural hazard are waterway and vegetation in the southern
maintained or enhanced. paddocks.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 29
28
CONCLUSIONS
This Bushfire Hazard Assessment has completed a quantitative and qualitative bushfire hazard
assessment of the site and surrounding areas in accordance with the SPP 1/03: Mitigating the adverse
Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide and SPP Guideline. The assessment determined the
majority of the development site held a LOW Bushfire Hazard Rating with the exception of the site
waterway corridor which scored a ‘Medium’ Bushfire Hazard Rating. With the addition of buffers from
the waterway corridor and adjacent lands, the majority of the proposed development footprint remains
LOW.
Accordingly, and in accordance with the SPP 1/03, S5 Environmental conclude that the proposed
development is an acceptable proposal as:
It does not increase the number of persons living in a natural hazard area given that the
development footprint is being centralised in the Low Bushfire Hazard Area;
The proposed development is sited in the lowest hazard rated area of the allotment;
The proposal mitigates the risk through the use on non-flammable building materials and
surrounding of the residence by mown turf, landscaping, and vegetable patches allowing
appropriate setbacks from adjacent vegetation;
Adequate road access for firefighting and other emergency vehicles and safe evacuation is
available Elm Street and Rose Gum Road;
The nature of the development allows for the balance of the site to maintain and potentially
enhance its ecological values particularly with regard to the waterway corridor.
Further the proactive management of bushfire risk by QPWS of the National Park to the north and
east of the site further reduces the likelihood of bushfire causing property damage or risk to human
life.
However, given the presence of Medium Bushfire Hazard Areas within the waterway corridor and on
adjacent properties, as well as the Medium Bushfire Hazard Buffer Areas around the perimeter of the
proposed development, it is recommended that a Bushfire Management Plan is prepared for the site
and that this is incorporated into the Facility’s Emergency Response Planning.
It should be noted that fire is unpredictable and a natural process within bushland areas. Therefore, it
is important that people present in facilities situated within bushfire prone areas are educated and
prepared for bushfire in order to ensure the protection of property and life.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 30
29
REFERENCES
CFA (2012) Plant Selection Key [online], <http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/plan-prepare/plant-selection-
key/ > Country Fire Authority, Victoria.
CFA (2011) Landscaping for Bushfire [online],
http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/fm_files/attachments/plan_and_prepare/landscaping/landscaping_for_bus
hfire.pdf > Country Fire Authority, Victoria.
CSIRO (2008) The Fire Triangle [online], < http://www.csiro.au/en/Outcomes/Safeguarding-
Australia/FireTriangle.aspx > Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.
CSIRO (2012) Queensland Bushfire Risk Planning: Project Stage 1 Report, Department of
Community Safety – Strategic Policy Division.
DSDIP (2016) State Planning Policy, [online], <http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/about-planning/state-
planning-policy.html > Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning, Brisbane.
DSDIP (2016) State Planning Policy Interactive Mapping [online], http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/about-
planning/state-planning-policy.html > Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning,
Queensland Government, Brisbane.
DTMR (2013) Road Planning and Design Manual – 2nd edition, Queensland Practice [online],
https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/business-industry/Technical-standards-publications/Road-planning-and-
design-manual-2nd-edition.aspx. Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland
Government, Brisbane.
QG (2003 - Repealed September 2013) State Planning Policy 1/03 – Mitigating the Adverse Impacts
of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide, [online], < http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/resources/policy/spp-ifbl.pdf
> Queensland Government Brisbane.
QG (2003 - Repealed September 2013) State Planning Policy 1/03 Guidelines – Mitigating the
Adverse Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide, [online], < http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/codes-
policies-and-regulatory-provisions/lapsed-or-repealed-state-planning-policies.html > Queensland
Government Brisbane.
Queensland Fire and Emergency Services (2015) Regional Fire Stations: Brisbane Region [online],
https://www.fire.qld.gov.au/about/regions/region5.asp > QFES, Brisbane.
Standards Australia Committee FP – 020 (2009) Australian Standard – Construction of buildings in
bushfire-prone areas (AS3959-2009), Council of Standards Australia, Sydney.
ULDA. (2011), Greater Flagstone Urban Development Area Development Scheme, [online],
https://www.dilgp.qld.gov.au/resources/plan/pda/greater-flagstone-development-scheme.pdf > Urban
Land Development Authority, Queensland Government, Brisbane.
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 31
30
FIGURES –
Site Plans prepared by Brad Read Design, August 2005
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 32
KEY
AREA SCHEDULE
1. Central courtyard with chapel and hall
2. Palliative Care
BUILDING 3. Day Respite
4. Respite Care
Dementia Care 688.8m² 5. Central Services
T Telephone +61 7 3852 2525
EE 6. Dementia House
TR
Facsimile +61 7 3852 2544
Respite Care 688.8m²
MS
www.bvn.com.au
7. Chapel
Day Respite 492.01m² EL 8. Community Hall
ROSE GUM RO
Palliative Care 1367.4m² AD 9. Nature Study Centre - Future Stage INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
10. Substation COPYRIGHT BVN ARCHITECTURE PTY LIMITED. UNLESS OTHERWISE
AGREED IN WRITING;ALL RIGHTS TO THIS DOCUMENT ARE SUBJECT TO
Central Services 328.99m² 11. Grounds Service Store PAYMENT IN FULL OF ALL BVN CHARGES;THIS DOCUMENT MAY ONLY
BE USED FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE AND PROJECT FOR WHICH IT
HAS BEEN CREATED AND DELIVERED, AS NOTIFIED IN WRITING BY
Chapel 275.84m² 12. Fire Tanks/Pump Room BVN;AND THIS DOCUMENT MAY NOT BE OTHERWISE USED, OR COPIED.
ANY UNAUTHORISED USE OF THIS DOCUMENT IS AT THE USER'S SOLE
RISK AND WITHOUT LIMITING BVN'S RIGHTS THE USER RELEASES AND
13. Caretaker's Residence / Existing Bldg INDEMNIFIES BVN FROM AND AGAINST ALL LOSS SO ARISING.
Community Hall 272.14m² 14. Aviary NOTE
CONTRACTOR TO CHECK AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS ON SITE PRIOR
15. Kitchen Gardens TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK OR PREPARATION OF SHOP DRAWINGS.
Existing Residence 193.84m² DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING
SETBACK
10000
16. Flower Garden ISSUE DATE FOR
10 17. Animal Yard
Total GFA 4996.62m² 12 CARPARKS
18. Stable
3
19 CARPARKS
19. Chicken Pen
Carpark Bays 53 20. Fire Pit
5
19 21. Future Stage
22 CARPARKS
2 18 17
KEY 5 PR
OP
ER
T YB
OU
ND
Existing Vegetation Footprint - Indicative 16 AR
Y
4 21
12 13
Vegetation Regeneration Zone
7
1
8
FOR LANDSCAPE DESIGN AND 15
DETAIL, REFER TO LANDSCAPE 21
ARCHITECT'S DOCUMENTATION
6
20 CONSULTANT
-
10000 21 -
SETBACK CONSULTANT
-
6 -
CONSULTANT 2
-
11 -
CONSULTANT
15 -
9
-
21 PROJECT MANAGER
10000
-
SETBACK -
CLIENT
LUTHERAN SERVICES
CLIENT NUMBER
1701009
PROJECT
BIOSPHERIC CARE FARM COMMUNITY
BLACK MOUNTAIN, COOROY
BVN PROJECT NUMBER
1701009
DRAWING KEY
TRUE NORTH PROJECT NORTH
BR
UC
EH GRAPHIC SCALE
IG
HW
AY
0 2000 5000
SCALE
1 : 1000@A1
STATUS
PD
DRAWING
SITE PLAN SITE PLAN
BVN
ISSUE
AR-A-DA-02
C:\REVIT_LOCAL2017\1701009_Care Farm_Site File_Masterplan_2017_bhdoherty.rvt 25/05/2018 9:52:49 AM
Page 33
31
Appendix A –
Bushfire Hazard Units Slope Calculations
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 34
Project Cooroy Farm Care
Number: S50335
Client: Lutheran Community Care
BUSHFIRE SLOPE CALCULATOR
BHU 1 Top Elevation 122 m
SE Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 109 m 9.29% 5.32
0.092857
Distance 140 m
BHU 2 Top Elevation 123 m
SW Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 108 m 9.09% 5.21
0.090909
Distance 165 m
BHU 3 Top Elevation 125 m
SW Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 108 m 8.50% 4.87
0.085
Distance 200 m
BHU 4 Top Elevation 107 m
SW Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 106 m 1.05% 0.60
0.010526
Distance 95 m
BHU 5 Top Elevation 114 m
NE Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 107 m 5.47% 3.13
0.054688
Distance 128 m
East Top Elevation 120 m
SE Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 107 m 8.13% 4.66
0.08125
Distance 160 m
North Top Elevation 122 m
NW Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 107 m 6.00% 3.44
0.06
Distance 250 m
West Top Elevation 123 m
SW Slope % Slope 0
Bottom Elevation 113 m 7.52% 4.31
0.075188
Distance 133 m
Page 35
32
Appendix B –
Bushfire Hazard Overlay Map NSC
Bushfire Hazard Map SPP
S50335ER002 BFA 10 & 22 Rose Gum Road and 521 Elm Street,
Black Mountain
Page 36
Noosa Shire Council does not warrant the accuracy of
information in this publication and any person using or 16/10/2017
relying upon such information does so on the basis that
Noosa Shire Council shall bear no responsibility or liability
whatsoever for any errors, faults, defects or omissions in
the information.
1:9028
Page 37
State Planning Policy
¢
Making or amending a local planning instrument
and designating land for community infrastructure Date: 19/10/2017
Department of Disclaimer:
Infrastructure, Local 0 140 280 420 560
This map has been prepared with due care based on the best available information at the time of publication.
However, the State of Queensland (acting through the department) makes no representations, either express
Government and Planning or implied, that the map is free from errors, inconsistencies or omissions. Reliance on information contained
in this map is the sole responsibility of the user. The State disclaims responsibility for any loss, damage or
© The State of Queensland 2017. Metres inconvenience caused as a result of reliance on information or data contained in this map.
Page 38
Legend
Drawn Polygon Layer
Override 1
Cadastre (10k)
Cadastre (10k)
Bushfire prone area
Very High Potential Bushfire Intensity
High Potential Bushfire Intensity
Medium Potential Bushfire Intensity
Potential Impact Buffer
Department of
State Planning Policy
Making or amending a local planning instrument
Infrastructure, Local and designating land for community infrastructure Disclaimer:
Government and Planning
This map has been prepared with due care based on the best available information at the time of publication.
However, the State of Queensland (acting through the department) makes no representations, either express
or implied, that the map is free from errors, inconsistencies or omissions. Reliance on information contained
in this map is the sole responsibility of the user. The State disclaims responsibility for any loss, damage or
© The State of Queensland 2017. Date: 19/10/2017 inconvenience caused as a result of reliance on information or data contained in this map.