2008-18281 SRA Information request

                                                                                                 2008-18281 SRA



       whether the koala habitat area will be cleared to create the boundary fence and resulting
       vegetation buffer.

       Action:
       Provide an assessment against PO1 that demonstrates that:
             alternative development options to retain koala habitat areas have been considered (i.e.
              through siting and design of the proposed development) but were not reasonably
              practicable (note justification should be provided on why alternative options with no or less
              impacts were not reasonably practicable)
             there is no alternative other than interfering with koala habitat areas for the development
              to occur (note justification will need to be provided of why koala habitat areas could not be
              retained)
             the minimum amount of koala habitat area will be cleared (note this includes refining
              clearing to areas of koala habitat areas that provide the lowest koala habitat value) (note
              alternative designs considered should be provided along with justification of why this is the
              chosen siting and design results in the smallest impact on koala habitat area possible),
              and
             actions to mitigate impacts on koala habitat values are included in the planning and design
              of the development (justification will need to be provided on why the proposed mitigation
              measures are considered appropriate).
       It is advised that any impacts to koala habitat are refined to areas of the site that provide the
       lowest koala habitat values. This should be supported by a report that provides an assessment
       on the quality of koala habitat across the development site. The report must be prepared by a
       suitably qualified ecologist that identifies the methodology undertaken for the assessment and
       address the following:
              use or potential use of the site or parts of the site by koalas (e.g., koala survey, literature
                 review (identifying preferred habitat types))
              the location of koala habitat trees that are being used by koalas (identified through site
                 survey and supported by evidence of koala use (e.g., scats, scratches or koala sittings)
              the location of other koala habitat trees
              existing and potential connectivity between koala habitat areas inside and outside the
                 site, and
              waterways and drainage lines.

PO2 and PO3 - Fragmentation, connectivity and safe koala movement
2.     Issue:
       PO2 and PO3 of State code 25 ensure that koala habitat areas are not fragmented as a result of
       the proposed development and that the proposed development ensures connectivity and safe
       koala movement opportunities are incorporated into the siting, design, construction and operation
       of the proposed development.
       The proposed development could impact connectivity on the site by clearing previously un-
       fragmented areas of koala habitat area, and erecting fences that will restrict koala movement
       through the site (the design of any fencing is unknown). The application should detail any fencing
       proposed as a result of the reconfiguration and consider koala sensitive fencing as outlined the
       Koala Sensitive Design Guideline available here:
       https://environment.des.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/102859/koala-sensitive-design-
       guideline.pdf.


       Action:


State Assessment and Referral Agency                                                                Page 2 of 5