MCU14/0056 Ecology Addendum report Att G - Information response

Page 2

Survey methods undertaken by Saunders Havill Group over a one day period (between sunrise and sunset) included
aquatic and terrestrial habitat assessments, opportunistic records, bird surveys (visual observation), scats, tracks and
other active searches and aquatic observations. These methods are considered sufficient to identify fauna species
likely to occupy the site and were supported with an observed site species list which included all species on or
adjacent to the site including site fly-overs (refer Table 5 of the EAR). Efforts were also placed on identifying plant
species that were considered to have the potential to provide habitat foraging/food resources to fauna that exist on
site or may utilise the site temporarily throughout the year. Survey methods undertaken during the ecological
assessment are detailed in Section 4.4 of the EAR. These methods are consistent with EAR requirements of other
Councils such as Brisbane City Council and Fraser Coast Regional Council which advocate the use of survey methods
appropriate to the site, potential impact and proposed use.

In addition, no fauna listed in Ecotone Environmental Services “Fauna and its Associated Biodiversity Values in
Noose Shire” study were identified within the application site or area considered likely to utilise the site. Further the
site is not identified as a ‘Significant Track” for fauna movement by overlay mapping in the report.

Item 32: Riparian Buffer
32 - Information Required
Provide an assessment of the proposal with relation to each of the Riparian Buffer Area Outcome 5 specific outcomes, in
particular:
      a) How the proposal protected riparian zones by avoiding new development in the riparian buffer area
      b) How the proposal protected riparian zones by retaining aquatic and terrestrial habitats in riparian zones
      c) How the proposal protects riparian zones by maintaining wildlife corridors along watercourses and drainage
          lines for fauna movement
      d) How the proposal protects riparian zones by avoiding edge effects and incompatible uses in riparian zones
      e) How the proposal protects riparian zones by maintaining water quality by maintaining bank stability by
          minimising bank erosion and slumping
      f) How the proposal protects riparian zones by maintaining water quality by filtering sediments, nutrients and
          other pollutants
      g) How the proposal protects riparian zones by removing undesirable plant species and replacing them with
          vegetation of a local origin.

The following responses have been provided to each of the Riparian Buffer Area Outcome 5 specific outcomes.

    a)   How the proposal protect[s] riparian zones by avoiding new development in the riparian buffer area.

As discussed in Appendix D of the EAR, the proposed development will occur on premises containing a mapped
Riparian Buffer Area. This buffer extends over approximately half of the site and protects the waterway that traverses
the south-eastern corner. Much of this riparian buffer area to the west of the watercourse has been highly disturbed
and cleared of vegetation. Approximately 0.005ha of the 1.1ha mapped riparian buffer contains riparian vegetation,
while the remainder of the mapped buffer area (approximately 1.095ha) contains mowed grass with some native
trees along the northern and southern property boundaries which act as a landscape buffer to adjacent arterial roads
(refer to Attachment 1). The proposed development intends to retain all riparian vegetation as well an additional
10m buffer along the existing vegetation boundary to minimise edge effects from the development.

The mapped riparian buffer protects a Stream Order 1 (lowest value) watercourse which under the Regional
Vegetation Management Code for Southeast Queensland Bioregion 2006 and the SEQ Healthy Waterways
Partnership is recommended to be protected by a minimum 10m riparian buffer. The existing vegetated riparian
corridor is on average 20m in width from the high bank with an addition 10m buffer from the existing vegetation
boundary proposed by the development (a total minimum average 30 buffer to the stream order
watercourse).Therefore, the proposed riparian buffer exceeds the recommended waterway setback for a stream order
1 watercourse.

Page 3

It was noted in the EAR that this watercourse is highly disturbed and modified, fragmented by major arterial
development to the north and south and passes through a number of stormwater pipes. Site survey identified this
area to be heavily infested with weeds and considered to have poor water quality and limited ecological value. It is
considered that the proposed average 30m buffer from the high bank is suitable to protect the values associated with
the highly modified watercourse and allows potential for enhancement and rehabilitation of the existing waterway
corridor.

Further, the majority of the mapped riparian buffer area is be retained as open space with the provision of soft
treatments such as stormwater detention basins and landscaped vegetation located within this area. Proposed
development within the riparian buffer area is limited to a small portion of the Tourist Park and car park which will
occupy approximately 0.32ha of the 1.1ha riparian buffer (refer to Attachment 1). While this will result in impervious
surfaces developed over the existing mowed paddock and subsequently a potential increased in gross pollutants in
runoff, all runoff from the development site will be captured and treated in on-site sediment basins prior to entering
the waterway. The Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP), informed by MUSIC Modelling prepared by VT
Consulting Engineers states stormwater drainage for the proposed multi-use development will be piped to
individual bio-retention basins for each area which will flow into a large single detention basin located to the south
of the site. It is proposed that this detention basin will then drain to the existing overland flow path at via a new
concrete headwall channelling stormwater towards the two existing box culverts under Myall Steet. The SWMP also
states that no worsening of stormwater flows up to and including Q100 stormwater events is anticipated from the
development and modelling demonstrates that an 82% reduction in suspended solids and a 100% reduction in gross
pollutants is expected (refer to SWMP by VT Consulting Engineers for further detail).

Therefore, while the project proposal does not avoid new development in the riparian buffer area, proposed
development is restricted to areas already cleared of vegetation which have been identified by the EAR as containing
low to no ecological value or function as a riparian corridor (refer Section 4.2.1 of the EAR). No further clearing of
waterway vegetation is proposed by the development and an additional 10m open space buffer proposed to
minimise edge effects. No impact to hydrology is anticipated by the development and run-off from impervious areas
will be treated via a system of stormwater detention basins that will result in no worsening of flows and reduction in
gross pollutants leaving the site.

    b) How the proposal protect[s] riparian zones by retaining aquatic and terrestrial habitats in riparian zones

As discussed in the response to 32a, the project proposes no further clearing of riparian vegetation and an additional
10m buffer to the existing vegetation boundary (an average 30m total waterway buffer) to protect existing
watercourse values and potential habitat. Field survey (refer to Section 4.2.1 of the EAR) identified that the
watercourse is heavily degraded and highly modified, fragmented by arterial roads (Myall Street to the north and
Bruce Highway to the south) and currently passing through a number of stormwater pipes. In addition, survey noted
the watercourse is heavily infested with weeds including Pinus elliotti (Slash Pine) and Cinnamomum camphora
(Camphor Laurel) restricting potential habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species. The majority of the site has been
cleared and does not provide habitat for species of Commonwealth, State or local significance. Section 4.4 of the EAR
notes that due to these factors, the site presents limited opportunity to provide habitat connectivity and usage is
limited to highly mobile species.

In relation to potential aquatic and terrestrial habitats in the riparian zone, Section 4.4 of EAR notes that:

     
   Only common species were observed during field survey with specific attempts made to check under fallen
         logs and within leaf litter around the mapped watercourse.
     
   Two common reptile species, Cyptoblempharis vigatus (Wall Skink) and Intellagama lesueurii (Eastern Water
         Dragon) and one pest amphibian Bufo marinus (Cane Toad) were observed throughout the mapped
         waterway.

Page 4

     
   In its current condition, the watercourse does not support enough features to provide habitat for native
         amphibian species.
     
   The area is dominated by introduced flora species and at the time of the assessment contained stagnant
         water in small ponded areas adjacent to the stormwater pipes.
     
   A number of common bird species including Cracticus nigrogularis (Pied Butcherbird), Dacelo novagguineae
         (Laughing Kookaburra), Grainilla cyanoleuca (Magpie), Lopholaimus antarticus (Pigeon), Platycercus adscitus
         (Pale-headed Rosella) and Trichoglossus haematodus (Rainbow Lorikeet) were also observed within large
         habitat trees within the waterway corridor.

Existing habitat for identified and potential terrestrial aquatic species will be retained by the development in its
current form and protected from edge effects of the proposed by development by an additional 10m buffer (refer
Attachment 1). Rehabilitation works, including the removal of weed species within the waterway area is also
proposed by the development to enhance potential habitat for native flora and fauna species. Rehabilitation works
will be undertaken in accordance with the approved Rehabilitation and Weed Management Plan. Further the SWMP
anticipates no change to existing hydrology and details appropriate treatment and management controls to filter
potential pollutants and ensure no worsening of water quality as a result of the development (refer to the SWMP by
VT Consulting Engineers for further detail).

    c)   How the proposal protects riparian zones by maintaining wildlife corridors along watercourses and drainage
         lines for fauna movement

The site was identified in a preliminary risk based assessment by Saunders Havill Group and in an Council’s
commissioned report by Ecotone Environmental Services “Fauna and its Associated Biodiversity Values in Noosa
Shire” as Low Conservation Priority and not as containing significant tracks for fauna movement. Further, site
surveys did not identify the presence of or habitat for significant Commonwealth, State or local species fauna or
flora species.

As discussed in the response to 32a and 32b, the project proposes no further clearing of riparian vegetation and an
additional 10m buffer to existing vegetation boundary (an average 30m total waterway buffer) to protect watercourse
values and potential habitat. The proposed development is restricted to already cleared areas of the site and intends
to retain potential habitat associated with the waterway corridor in its current form. It is however important to note
that Section 4.2.1 of the EAR identified that this corridor is fragmented by major arterial development (Mayall Street
to the north and Bruce Highway to the south) which restricts fauna movement to highly mobile species. Further,
broad assessment of the area identified that the waterway is not considered part of a strategic wildlife corridor.
Rehabilitation works, including the removal of weed species within the waterway area is also proposed by the
development to protect existing and enhance potential habitat for native flora and fauna species.

    d) How the proposal protects riparian zones by avoiding edge effects and incompatible uses in riparian zones

As discussed in the response to 32a-c, the project proposes no further clearing of riparian vegetation. The existing
waterway corridor is proposed to be retained in its current form, with an additional 10m buffer to existing vegetation
to mitigate edge effects from the development. This will result in an average 30m buffer to the waterway which is
identified as a highly modified and fragmented low level (Stream Order 1) watercourse. Further, soft treatments
including bioretention basins, a stormwater detention area and landscaping with native species will be located
adjacent to the protected waterway corridor to provide an addition buffer to edge effects. The proposed soft
treatments will provide a strengthened buffer to the waterway area reducing exposure to habitats within the
waterway corridor and likelihood of predators.

    e)   How the proposal protects riparian zones by maintaining water quality by maintaining bank stability by
         minimising bank erosion and slumping

Page 5

As discussed in the previous responses to item 32, the project proposes to retain the existing waterway corridor
(approximately 1.325ha) in its current form with an additional 10m buffer from the existing vegetation boundary to
safeguard impacts to bank stability and water quality. Soft treatments including biorention basins, a stormwater
detention area and landscaping with native species is proposed adjacent the protected waterway corridor to
minimise edge effects from the development. Further, bulk earthworks are not proposed within close proximity to
the retained waterway area and minimal hard surfaces (i.e. car park and Tourist Park) are located adjacent to the
buffered area.

No impacts on bank stability, including erosion and slumping is anticipated by the development. No works are
proposed within the existing riparian corridor and stormwater will be managed to maintain existing hydraulic
conditions. Detailed Bulk Earthworks Plans and Erosion and Sediment Control Plans will be prepared at operational
works to be approved by Council. Further, the SWMP details that the detention basin will be designed to mitigate
the effects of additional runoff and to ensure no worsening of stormwater flows up to and including Q100 stormwater
events. To assist with the removal of gross pollutants from run-off, Enviropod baskets are proposed to be installed in
all stormwater gullies and inlets (refer to the SWMP by VT Consulting Engineers for further detail on erosion and
sediment controls).

    f)   How the proposal protects riparian zones by maintaining water quality by filtering sediments, nutrients and
         other pollutants

As discussed in previous responses to Item 32, the waterway corridor will be retained in its current form with an
additional 10m buffer proposed on the existing vegetation boundary. Further, adjacent land uses to the waterway
corridor will include soft treatments such as bioretenison basins, a stormwater detention basin and landscaping with
native species to minimise edge effects from the development and allow runoff to be captured and filtered prior to
entering the waterway corridor area.

A SWMP has been prepared for the site which provides details on the proposed detention basins and stormwater
management of the site. This will involve a number of individual bioretention basin which will flow into a larger single
detention basin located at the South of the site. It is proposed that this detention basin will then drain to the existing
overland flow path at the South of the site via a new concrete headwall, channeling the stormwater towards the two
existing box culverts and Myall Street. The bioretenion system is designed to treat the stormwater runoff by filtering
runoff through densely planted vegetation and percolating the runoff through the filter media. The proposed design
is in accordance with the Water Sensitive Urban Design Technical Guidelines by Water Design. Further, to assist with
the removal of gross pollutants, it is proposed that Enviropod baskets be installed in all stormwater gullies and inlets.

Stormwater management and water quality standards will comply with the State Planning Policy Guideline – State
Interest – Water Quality August 2014 and SEQ Water Development Guidelines: Development Guidelines for Water Quality
Management in Drinking Water Catchments in 2012. MUSIC modelling for proposed bioretenion basis areas shows an
overall reduction in gross pollutant loads is anticipated from existing conditions through storm water management
proposed by the development and meets required Water Quality Objectives. Refer to the extract from the SWMP
below and IR Response Items 14 & 15 by VT Consulting Engineers for further detail.

Page 6

    g)   How the proposal protects riparian zones by removing undesirable plant species and replacing them with
         vegetation of a local origin.

A list of observed weed species was noted within Section 4.3 the EAR including declared pests and locally listed
environmental weeds. The proposal intends to retain and rehabilitate the waterway corridor. Detailed Weed
Management and Rehabilitation Plans will be prepared as part of operational works.

Weed management be undertaken throughout the site with particular focus on removal of competitive species
within the corridor area and will provide a basis of aiding natural regeneration within the riparian corridor. Where
significant disturbance occurs, infill tubestock planting will be utilised to aid stabilisation and native vegetation
succession. Weed removal will be managed to ensure bank stability and hydrological function are not impacted. Post
weed-removal, revegetation of the riparian corridor will be undertaken to varying degrees, depending on the level of
disturbance. This will involve the cultivation and planting of native species and erosion and sediment control
management. The Revegetation and Weed Management Plan will provide details on the types of plant species which
will be used to rehabilitate the riparian corridor (refer to Landscape and Design Plans further detail on revegetation
and weed management measures proposed).

Item 33: Riparian Buffer
31 - Information Required
Provide justification, based on environmental grounds, for the development to occur with[in] the riparian buffer area.

The site has been identified by in a preliminary risk based assessment by Saunders Havill Group and in the Council’s
commissioned report by Ecotone Environmental Services Report as Low Conservation Priority due to historical
land use and surrounding urban development resulting in the development site being highly modified, largely
devoid of native vegetation, and isolated by major arterial development to the north and south. Field survey of the
site did not identify the presence of, or habitat for, significant Commonwealth, State or local species fauna or flora
species. Further, the EAR prepared for the project identified that due to the highly disturbed and fragmented nature
of the site, the application area presents limited opportunity to provide habitat connectivity and usage is limited to
highly mobile species.

Site survey identified that ecological values contained to the waterway corridor which traverses the south-eastern
portion of the site. The mapped waterway is identified as a low value (stream order 1) watercourse and is highly
fragmented from surrounding areas by major arterial development to the north and south. Assessment of the area
identified that the waterway is not considered part of a strategic wildlife corridor or containing significant tracks for
fauna movement (refer to the “Fauna and its Associated Biodiversity Values in Noosa Shire” report by Ecotone
Environmental Services). Further, field survey noted that the waterway is heavily infested with weeds and in its
current degraded condition does not contain enough features to provide habitat for native amphibian species.

Proposed development of the site is restricted to already cleared areas of the site which were identified by the
EAR for the project as containing low to no ecological value. As discussed in the response to Item 32a, the riparian
buffer area extends over approximately half of the site (refer Attachment 1), with only 0.005ha of the 1.1ha western
riparian buffer containing complex riparian vegetation and the remainder of the mapped buffer area (approximately
1.095ha) consisting of mowed grass. The 0.005ha of riparian vegetation, along with an additional 10m buffer from the
existing vegetation boundary is to be retained by the development (a total average 30m buffer from the stream order
1 watercourse). The project however proposes development within the remainder of the western buffer area which
consists of maintained grass and identified by the EAR as containing no ecological values or function as a riparian
corridor. This area of encroachment consists of highly degraded and treated grass, is not mapped by Commonwealth
of State environmental overlays and is identified as not containing vegetation that falls within Council’s
environmental protection category (refer to EAR – Appendix D for further detail).

Page 7

The proposed works will maintain and enhance current values of the riparian corridor and buffer by removing weed
species, treating stormwater and revegetating degraded areas. Weed management will be undertaken throughout
the site with particular focus on removal of competitive species within the corridor area and will provide a basis of
aiding natural regeneration within the riparian corridor. Where significant disturbance occurs, infill tubestock
planting will be utilised to aid stabilisation and native vegetation succession. Stormwater will be managed on site to
maintain current hydraulic conditions and water quality of run-off entering the creek. MUSIC modelling for proposed
bioretenion basis areas shows an overall reduction in gross pollutant loads is anticipated from existing conditions
through storm water management proposed by the development and meets required Water Quality Objectives.
Modelling also shows that under current conditions the waterway will degrade further and support the spread of
weeds and pest species through the site.

Therefore, based on environmental grounds the proposal will provide an overall benefit to the ecological value of the
site through weed removal and management, revegetation and rehabilitation, and treatment of stormwater resulting
a net improvement in water quality and ecological function of the waterway.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards,




Keira Grundy
Environmental Planner – Saunders Havill Group

Attachment 1 - Proposed Development within Riparian Buffer

Page 8

Ss saunders havill group # oe

ATTACHMENT 1 -

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN RIPARIAN BUFFER

Page 9

                                                                                  My
                                                                                     al
                                                                                     l


                                                                                            St




                          Br
                            uc
                                 e



                                            Hw
                                                 y




Legend

            Project Site Boundary
                                                          Figure 1 Development within Riparian                      Vurve Building Design
                                                                                                                         & Concepts
            Noosa biodiversity overlay                             Corridor
            Retained vegetation

            10m buffer area                               File ref. 6520 E Figure 1 Openspace Veg Retention A
                                                          Date      4/12/2014
            Hardstand area                                Project Myall St - Mixed Used Development

            Open space & bioretention


Layer Sources DCDB (DNRM 2013), Aerial (QLD Globe 2012)
                                                          0        25       50                100 m

                                                          Scale (A4): 1:2,500 [ GDA 1994 MGA Z56 ]              ¯   THESE PLANS HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE
                                                                                                                    OF THE C LIENT. SAUNDERS HAVILL GROUP CANNOT ACCEPT
                                                                                                                    REPONSIBILITY FOR ANY USE O F OR RELIANCE UPON THE
                                                                                                                    CONTENTS OF THESE DRAWING BY ANY THIRD PARTY.