2014-03-25 Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda Pages 81-167

PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                 25 MARCH 2014


It is my opinion that environmental offsets should generally be the ‘last resort’ for developments
impacting on koalas. On the other hand, it is my experience that more often than not it is easier
to achieve ecologically sustainable development in larger scale developments (such as Noosa on
Weyba) rather than small ones (where options are usually quite limited for satisfactory ecological
outcomes to be realised).

Another key aspect of the proposal is that it will be developed under a Community Title – this
gives some comfort that koala protection measures to be put in place integral to the proposal are
less likely to be eroded over time and provides a mechanism to generate the ongoing resourcing
that will be needed for maintaining the long term requirements for the koala conservation aspects
of the proposal.

In the particular circumstances of the ‘Noosa on Weyba’ proposal, it is my opinion that the case is
persuasive that a better outcome for koalas will be achieved by this sort of holistic approach, in
contrast to the likely outcome of the piecemeal developments already approved or in prospect for
the area.

Mr Carrick’s inference that the site is at risk of piecemeal development that would have greater
impacts on koalas is not supported. The Hofmann Consent Order represents the only currently
secured development rights on the site. It allows rural residential development west of Walter
Hay Drive and continuing rural use east of Walter Hay Drive. The impacts associated with low
intensity rural and rural residential use, limited road and infrastructure upgrades and a much
smaller residential population are significantly less than the impacts posed by the current
development. Should the further tourist villa approval for the lakefront land (currently in appeal)
proceed, its impacts are also very minor in comparison.

The application also relies heavily on the body corporate arrangement to justify the proposal in
an ecologically sensitive location, without consideration of less intensive development that would
likely provide greater benefit to koala conservation values.

Existing Koala Population

The application material fails to provide an estimate of the koala population within the
development area. The supplied material describes findings of characteristic scratch marks and
droppings of koalas but doesn’t accurately document where these were located. No sightings of
koalas during the survey period were recorded. The application material concludes the koala
population is in low densities on the site and not uniformly distributed. It also states the koala
survey confirms the general accuracy of the mapped habitat values of the site.

The ambiguity around the habitat values and koala records, coupled with the lack of maps
showing documented evidence of habitat usage, do not provide for an adequate detailed
assessment of the likely impact of the development on the existing koala population or give
surety that koala conservation values can be adequately accommodated by the development
design and/or conditions of approval.

Proposal

The application material states upwards of 11,000 koala food trees will be cleared to enable the
development to proceed in the proposed manner. Offsite impacts associated with the provision of
water, sewer, telecommunication and power infrastructure do not form part of the offset
calculation clearing estimates and it is likely the proposed layout and associated infrastructure
requirements will require additional clearing. The clearing of 5,515 koala food trees is proposed
to be offset by the provision of 5 trees for every 1 removed. The offset plantings are proposed
throughout the development site and the send site.



                                                                                 Page 121 of 231