MCU14/0056 Ecology Addendum report Att G - Information response

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.