2008-18281 SRA Information request

                                                                                                 2008-18281 SRA




       Provide material to demonstrate that koala habitat areas are not fragmented as a result of the
       proposed development and that vegetation between patches of koala habitat areas (which act as
       corridors or ‘stepping stones’ for koala movement) are maintained. If this cannot be achieved,
       justification for this will need to be provided along with alternative solutions to provide
       connectivity and safe koala movement. Justification why alternative solutions are considered to
       be appropriate should also be provided.
       An assessment of the existing connectivity values and safe koala movement opportunities,
       undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist, must be provided along with the connectivity values
       and safe koala movement opportunities that will remain as a result of the proposed development.
       The application material should detail any fences that are intended as a result of the
       reconfiguration and consider incorporating koala sensitive design principles that allow koalas to
       safely move through the area.

PO5 Matters of State Environmental Significance
4.     Issue:
       PO5 of State code 25 requires impacts to matters of state environmental significance (MSES) to
       be avoided, minimised and mitigated to the greatest extent possible. If there will still be a
       significant residual impact to a MSES that is a prescribed environmental matter, an
       environmental offset may be required if an offset is a suitable outcome.
       Development which does not avoid or minmise impacts on koala habitat and other MSES may
       not be approved if the application cannot demonstrate how development avoids, minmises
       and/or mitigates impacts on these values.
       The application material has not discussed impacts to MSES, and therefore has not sufficiently
       demonstrated how the development has avoided or minimised and mitigated impacts to MSES.
       A desktop assessment of the development site shows that the area contains the following MSES:
       The site is mapped as containing the following MSES:
           Koala habitat area – core (SEQ)
           Koala habitat area - locally refined (SEQ)
           High Ecological Significance wetlands on the map of Referable Wetlands
           Regulated vegetation – Essential habitat:
                     Phascolarctos cinereus – koala – vulnerable (V) under the Nature Conservation
                       Act 1992 (NCA)
                     Xanthostemon oppositifolius - southern penda - (V) under the NCA,
           Threatened (endangered or vulnerable) wildlife:
                     Rhodomyrtus psidioides - native guava – Endangered (E) under the NCA
                     Xanthostemon oppositifolius - southern penda – (V) under the NCA,
           Special least concern animal:
                     Ornithorhynchus anatinus – platypus,
           Regulated Vegetation – Of Concern in Category B (remnant) - RE: 12.3.2
           Regulated Vegetation – Endangered in Category C (regrowth):
                     RE: 12.11.10/12.11.3/12.11.16/12.11.2
                     RE: 12.11.10/12.11.2/12.11.16/12.11.3
                     RE: 12.3.11/12.3.2/12.3.1a/12.3.4, and
           Regulated Vegetation - intersecting a watercourse.

       Action:
       Provide a report prepared by an appropriately qualified ecologist that:
        identifies all MSES that is known to exist, or is likely to exist, on or within proximity to the site


State Assessment and Referral Agency                                                                Page 3 of 5