Council archive · source document
Response to Info Request - Attachment 6a - Ecological Assessment Part 1 MCU18-0015 & RAL18-0015 · MCU18/0015
ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Lot 27 on RP89506
27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill
A Report Prepared for
Novato Group
NOVEMBER 2018
NEW SOUTH WALES
8/48 Tamar Street (PO Box 1465) Ballina NSW 2478
p 02 6686 3858 ● f 02 6681 1659 ● e [email protected]
QUEENSLAND
Suite C, Building 21 Garden City Office Park, 2404 Logan Road, Eight Mile Plains QLD 4113
p 07 3219 9436 ● f 07 3423 2076 ● e [email protected]
www.jwaec.com.au
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 68 pages
Page 2
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Document
Title Ecological Assessment
Job Number Q12038
File Reference SERVER\data\2012 CLIENTS\Q12038_Attunga Heights, Noosa\2018
Version and Date RW3 02.11.18
Client Novato Group
Revision History (office use only)
Draft/ Date Distributed No. Delivery
Issue Version Media
Final Sent To Copies Method
1 RW1 DRAFT 02.05.18 JWA 1 Word Email
2 RW2 DRAFT 14.05.18 IPS 1 PDF Email
3 RW3 FINAL 02.11.18 IPS 1 PDF Email
4
5
Client Issue
Author Approved by
Version Date
Name Initials Name Initials
RW2 14.05.18 Nicole Davies ND Adam McArthur AM
RW2 14.05.18 Nicole Davies ND Adam McArthur AM
© 2018 JWA Pty Ltd All Rights Reserved. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to
JWA Pty Ltd and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner
or form or in or on any media to any person without the prior written consent of JWA Pty Ltd.
Page 3
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................6
1.1 Background ...................................................................................6
1.2 The Subject Site .............................................................................6
1.3 Planning Context ............................................................................7
1.4 The Proposed Development ................................................................7
2 DESKTOP ASSESSMENT ...............................................................................8
2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................8
2.2 Methods .......................................................................................8
2.2.1 Literature Review .......................................................................8
2.2.2 Database Searches ......................................................................8
2.2.3 DEHP Environmental Mapping .........................................................9
2.3 Results ...................................................................................... 12
2.3.1 Literature Review ..................................................................... 12
2.3.2 Database Searches .................................................................... 12
2.3.3 DEHP Environmental Mapping ....................................................... 16
3 FLORA ASSESSMENT ................................................................................ 18
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 18
3.2 Methods ..................................................................................... 18
3.2.1 Background ............................................................................. 18
3.2.2 Site Vegetation Surveys .............................................................. 18
3.3 Results ...................................................................................... 20
3.3.1 Introduction ............................................................................ 20
3.3.2 Vegetation Community Descriptions................................................ 20
3.3.3 Regulated Vegetation ................................................................. 21
3.3.4 Protected Plant Framework ......................................................... 22
4 FAUNA ASSESSMENT................................................................................ 23
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 23
4.2 Methods ..................................................................................... 23
4.2.1 Background ............................................................................. 23
4.2.2 Site Fauna Surveys .................................................................... 23
4.2.3 Habitat Suitability Assessment ...................................................... 28
4.3 Results ...................................................................................... 29
4.3.1 Introduction ............................................................................ 29
4.3.2 Amphibians ............................................................................. 29
4.3.3 Reptiles ................................................................................. 29
4.3.4 Birds ..................................................................................... 30
4.3.5 Mammals................................................................................ 31
4.3.6 Habitat Suitability Assessment for Threatened Fauna Species ................. 32
4.3.7 Essential Habitat ...................................................................... 32
5 CORRIDORS AND CONNECTIVITY .................................................................... 36
5.1 Background ................................................................................. 36
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 3
Page 4
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
5.2 Recognition of Corridor Values on or Near the Subject Site ........................ 36
5.3 Site Assessment ............................................................................ 36
5.3.1 Existing corridor values............................................................... 36
5.3.2 Amphibians ............................................................................. 37
5.3.3 Reptiles ................................................................................. 37
5.3.4 Ground-dwelling Mammals ........................................................... 38
5.3.5 Arboreal Mammals .................................................................... 38
5.3.6 Microchiropteran bats ................................................................ 38
5.3.7 Megachiropteran bats................................................................. 38
6 IMPACTS AND AMELIORATION ....................................................................... 39
6.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 39
6.2 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Development ..................................... 39
6.2.1 Habitat Loss/Vegetation Clearing................................................... 39
6.2.2 Impacts on Threatened Fauna ....................................................... 40
6.2.3 Impacts on Waterways and Wetlands .............................................. 40
6.2.4 Impacts on Corridor Values .......................................................... 40
6.2.5 Potential indirect impacts ........................................................... 40
6.3 Amelioration Strategies................................................................... 41
6.3.1 Amelioration Measures for Habitat Loss/Vegetation Clearing .................. 41
6.3.2 Amelioration Measures for Impacts on Threatened Fauna ...................... 42
6.3.3 Amelioration Measures for Impacts on Waterways and Wetlands .............. 42
6.3.4 Amelioration Measures for Impacts on Corridor Values .......................... 42
6.3.5 Amelioration Measures for Potential Indirect Impacts ........................... 42
7 CONSIDERATION OF STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS .................................................... 44
7.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 44
7.2 Commonwealth EPBC Act (1999) ........................................................ 44
7.2.1 Background ............................................................................. 44
7.2.2 Declared World Heritage Areas on or Near the Site .............................. 45
7.2.3 Declared Ramsar Wetlands on or Near the Site ................................... 45
7.2.4 Commonwealth Listed Threatened Flora and Fauna Species ................... 46
7.2.5 Listed Ecological Communities ...................................................... 47
7.2.6 Listed Migratory Species on or Near the Site ...................................... 48
7.2.7 Requirement for Commonwealth Referral ......................................... 49
7.3 Queensland Nature Conservation Act (1992) and Nature Conservation (Wildlife)
Regulation (2006) .......................................................................... 49
7.3.1 Background ............................................................................. 49
7.3.2 Requirements for EVNT Flora Species .............................................. 50
7.3.3 Requirements for EVNT Fauna Species ............................................. 50
7.3.4 Site Assessment ........................................................................ 51
7.3.5 Summary ................................................................................ 52
7.4 Queensland Vegetation Management Act (1999) ...................................... 52
7.4.1 Background ............................................................................. 52
7.4.2 Assessable Vegetation on the Subject Site ........................................ 53
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 4
Page 5
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
7.5 South East Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulatory Provisions
(2010) ....................................................................................... 55
7.5.1 Background ............................................................................. 55
7.5.2 Applicability to the Subject Site .................................................... 55
7.6 State Planning Policy 2/10: Koala Conservation in South East Queensland ....... 56
7.6.1 Background ............................................................................. 56
7.6.2 Applicability to the Subject Site .................................................... 56
7.7 The Queensland Coastal Plan (2014).................................................... 56
7.7.1 Background ............................................................................. 56
7.7.2 Site Assessment ........................................................................ 57
7.8 The Noosa Plan (as amended 2017) ..................................................... 57
7.8.1 Background ............................................................................. 57
7.8.2 Zoning ................................................................................... 57
7.8.3 Biodiversity Overlay Code ............................................................ 57
8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................... 58
REFERENCES 60
APPENDIX 1 – FLORA LIST................................................................................ 64
APPENDIX 2 - HABITAT SUITABILITY ASSESSMENTS FOR THREATENED AND MIGRATORY FAUNA SPECIES .... 67
APPENDIX 3 – STATE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PROVISIONS (SDAP) STATE CODE 16: CLEARING NATIVE
VEGETATION ............................................................................... 84
APPENDIX 4 - THE NOOSA PLAN (AS AMENDED 2017) - BIODIVERSITY OVERLAY CODE ASSESSMENT ....... 94
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 5
Page 6
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
JWA Pty Ltd have been engaged by Novato Group to complete an updated Ecological
Assessment for land at 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill.
JWA Pty Ltd previously completed an Ecological Assessment for the subject site (JWA 2016).
An application has been lodged for a residential development on the site and Noosa Council
has subsequently issued an Information Request. Item 14 of the Information Request
requires an updated Ecological Assessment over the site with recent field data and current
mapping and database records and addressing current statutory requirements. This
updated Ecological Assessment has been prepared to satisfy this condition.
The assessment has involved the following:
• determining the suite of Commonwealth and State listed threatened and regionally
or locally significant flora and fauna species that occur in the locality from
literature and database records;
• ground truthing vegetation communities and determining their conservation status
in accordance with the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines
(DNRM) Regional Ecosystem Framework (Vegetation Management Act [VMA, 1999]);
• assessing the likelihood of occurrence of threatened flora and fauna species on the
subject site;
• searching for and recording threatened and regionally or locally significant flora
and fauna species;
• assessing habitat provided by the site in the context of the surrounding area;
• assessing the corridor values of the site at a local and regional scale;
• assessing the potential impacts of the proposed development on ecological values
and determining appropriate mitigation measures;
• addressing relevant statutory requirements regarding impacts to flora, fauna and
ecological communities; and
• addressing compliance with relevant development assessment codes and policies.
1.2 The Subject Site
The site is located at 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill, and is formally described as Lot 27
on RP89506 (FIGURE 1). The site is approximately 1.805 ha in area. An aerial photograph
of the site is shown in FIGURE 2. An unnamed creek traverses the site in a generally north–
south direction.
Adjacent to the eastern boundary is Viridian Noosa Resort and Apartments. To the west is
existing residential and resort development on Edgar Bennett Avenue and Picture Point
Crescent. A small creek is present on the eastern boundary at the base of a steep
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 6
Page 7
Noosa
National
Tewantin
Park
N
Noosa Heads
SUBJECT SITE Noosaville
Lake
Weyba
Weyba
Downs
INSET NOT TO SCALE
0 500m
SOURCE: Google Maps CLIENT TITLE
Novato Group
FIGURE 1
SCALE: 1 : 20 000 @ A4
PROJECT
Ecological Assessment
LOCALITY
JWA PTY LTD
Lot 27 on RP89506
PREPARED: BW
PLAN
27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018
Ecological Consultants FILE: Q12038_Locality.cdr
Noosa Shire Council LGA
Page 8
ay
a W
Alm
Attunga Heights
Edgar Bennett Avenue LEGEND
Subject Site
SOURCE: QLD Globe 06 July 2017 Aerial CLIENT TITLE
0 25m
Novato Group
FIGURE 2
PROJECT AERIAL
N
SCALE: 1 : 1000 @ A3 Ecological Assessment
1 : 1 000
JWA PTY LTD
Lot 27 on RP89506
PREPARED: BW
PHOTOGRAPH
27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018
Ecological Consultants FILE: Q12038_Aerial.cdr
Noosa Shire Council LGA
Page 9
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights Quaternary dune, which dominates the majority of the site. Exotic weed species dominate the vegetation understorey and several areas of unvegetated, eroding sand are quite visible, indicating a considerable level of degradation on the site. 1.3 Planning Context The subject site is located within the Noosa Shire Council Local Government Area (LGA). The site is subject to The Noosa Plan (as amended 2017). On the Noosa Plan zoning map, the site contains areas mapped as Open Space Conservation, Attached Housing and Detached Housing (FIGURE 3). 1.4 The Proposed Development The proposed development is for the construction of twelve (12) dwellings over three (3) lots (FIGURE 4). An area of dedicated open space will be retained along the unnamed creek line, providing a wildlife corridor at a minimum width of 40m, and covering 7,710 m2 in total. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 7
Page 10
DR
A
OS
NO
AV E
NNETT
LEGEND
Detached housing
Semi-attached housing
Attached housing
N
Community services
Open space recreation
Open space conservation
Major water bodies
0 50m Urban growth boundary
Subject Site
SOURCE: The Noosa Plan (27/11/17) - Zone CLIENT TITLE
Map Noosa Heads (Zone Map ZM6) Novato Group
FIGURE 3
SCALE: 1 : 2000 @ A4
PROJECT
Ecological Assessment
NOOSA HEADS
JWA PTY LTD
Lot 27 on RP89506
PREPARED: BW
ZONE MAP
27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018
Ecological Consultants FILE: Q12038_Zoning.cdr
Noosa Shire Council LGA
Page 11
N
DD10
DD10
DD09
DD09
DD08
D
C
E
B
F
20 creek line 25 25
> >
>
proposed lot 3
>
> >
1,589 m²
>
>
type B
> > > > > proposed lot 2
> 1,232 m²
>
>
> > type B
> >
>
> >
> > vehicular
3 2 access
>
3
driveway
gate
type C
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 2 public
11 type A type A type A type A type A type A
type B 9100
footpath
type D Type A 1
access
12 12 11 10 9 8 7
1
type E
A type E 7000 A
3000
s'bk
3000
2000
s'bk
DD08
2000
s'bk
s'bk
6 5 4
pedestrian
existing path 3 x significant hoop pines retain existing fig tree
site access - to be protected and retained
D
C
E
B
F
schedule of building areas
dwelling type internal external garage no. of gross floor area
no. floor area floor area floor area bedrooms
1 type E 312 m² 65 m² 65 m² 3 317 m² mrv loading
2 type B 325 m² 82 m² 46 m² 3 330 m²
3 type C 323 m² 81 m² 46 m² 3 336 m²
4 type A 319 m² 94 m² 46 m² 3 325 m²
entry exit
5 type A 319 m² 94 m² 46 m² 3 325 m²
6 type A 319 m² 94 m² 46 m² 3 325 m²
7 type A 319 m² 94 m² 46 m² 3 325 m²
8 type A 319 m² 94 m² 46 m² 3 325 m²
9 type A 319 m² 94 m² 46 m² 3 325 m²
10 type A 319 m² 94 m² 46 m² 3 325 m² unit 2 mrv
11 type D 314m² 102 m² 45 m² 3 319 m² - type b turning
12 type E 312 m² 65 m² 65 m² 3 317 m²
gfa total 3,894 m²
mrv turning plan 1:250
SOURCE: Tim Ditchfield Architects - Site Plan CLIENT TITLE
0 25m DD 05-P2 dated Sept 2018 (Ref: Revised Novato Group
FIGURE 4 PROPOSED
Architectural Plans.pdf) PROJECT
1 : 1 000 SCALE: 1 : 1000 @ A3 Ecological Assessment
PREPARED: BW DEVELOPMENT
Lot 27 on RP89506
JWA PTY LTD
Ecological Consultants 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018 LAYOUT
Noosa Shire Council LGA FILE: Q12038_Layout.cdr
Page 12
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
2 DESKTOP ASSESSMENT
2.1 Introduction
A desktop assessment was completed to highlight any potential conservation significant
vegetation communities, potential habitat for threatened flora and fauna, or ecologically
sensitive areas on the site. The following section details the methodology utilised to
provide a thorough list of flora and fauna species which are known or considered likely or
possible occurrences on the site.
2.2 Methods
2.2.1 Literature Review
The following reports were reviewed as part of the desktop assessment:
• WBM Oceanics (2001) Fauna assessment for the Bayview (now Viridian) Noosa site;
• James Warren and Associates (2004) Flora and Fauna Assessment, Attunga Heights
- a report to Victor Feros Town Planning; and
• JWA Pty Ltd (2016) Ecological Assessment, 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill (Lot 27
on RP89506) – a report prepared for David and Carol Neate.
2.2.2 Database Searches
2.2.2.1 Background
The following databases were reviewed as part of the desktop assessment:
• the Commonwealth Environment Protection Biodiversity and Conservation (EPBC)
Act (1999) Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST); and
• the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP)
Wildlife Online database.
2.2.2.2 EPBC Act PMST
The Commonwealth PMST generates a list of protected matters under the Commonwealth
EPBC Act that may occur in or near the subject area including:
• world heritage and national heritage areas;
• wetlands of international significance (Ramsar Wetlands);
• Commonwealth marine areas;
• threatened ecological communities;
• threatened species; and
• migratory species.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 8
Page 13
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
The database incorporates information from a range of sources including government,
research and community organisations. It should be noted that there are limitations on the
accuracy of some matters reported by the PMST. Database records of threatened and
migratory species are based on their current known distribution and do not necessarily
correlate to an actual observation. Database records are an indicator of potential presence
only and do not take into account if suitable vegetation, geology, soil, climate or habitat
types are actually present to support the occurrence of a significant species or community.
The Commonwealth PMST was used to determine the suite of threatened flora and fauna,
migratory species and threatened ecological communities that were likely to be present
within a 10 km radius of the subject site.
2.2.2.3 DEHP Wildlife Online
The DEHP Wildlife Online database contains recorded wildlife sightings and listings of
plants, fungi, protists, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, freshwater fish, marine
cartilaginous fish and butterflies in Queensland. The database is based on collated species
lists and wildlife records acquired by the Queensland government through a range of
sources including specimen collections, research and monitoring programs and community
wildlife recording programs.
The DEHP Wildlife Online database was consulted to determine the variety of threatened
flora and fauna species known to occur within a 10 km radius of the subject site.
2.2.3 DEHP Environmental Mapping
2.2.3.1 Background
The following environmental mapping was reviewed as part of the desktop assessment:
• Regulated Vegetation Management Mapping;
• Regional Ecosystem (RE) and High Value Regrowth Mapping (version 10.1);
• Property Map of Assessable Vegetation (PMAVs) Mapping;
• Essential Habitat Mapping (version 7.02);
• Map of Referable Wetlands and Wetland Protection Areas;
• State Planning Regulatory Provisions (SPRP) and State Planning Provisions (SPP)
Koala Habitat Mapping;
• Coastal Hazard Mapping; and
• Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map.
DNRME and DEHP environmental mapping was obtained from the respective websites using
the Lot and Plan numbers of the subject site.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 9
Page 14
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
2.2.3.2 Regulated Vegetation Management Mapping
Regulated vegetation management maps are used to determine the requirements that
apply under the State Development Assessment Provisions (VMA 1999). The vegetation
categories on the map are:
• category A (red) - areas subject to compliance notices, offsets and voluntary
declarations;
• category B (dark blue) - remnant vegetation;
• category C (light blue) - high-value regrowth vegetation;
• category R (yellow) - regrowth vegetation within 50m of watercourses in priority
reef catchment areas; and
• category X (white) - areas not regulated under the Vegetation Management Act
1999.
2.2.3.3 Regional Ecosystems, High Value Regrowth and PMAV Mapping
Regional ecosystems (REs) are vegetation communities that are consistently associated
with a particular combination of geology, land form and soil in a bioregion. Each RE has
been assigned a conservation status which is based on its current extent in a bioregion as
a proportion of its pre-clearing extent. Regional ecosystem maps show the extent and
conservation status of regional ecosystems at a property level. On a regional ecosystem
map, remnant vegetation is shown as either a remnant endangered regional ecosystem, a
remnant of concern regional ecosystem, or a remnant least concern regional ecosystem.
High value regrowth (HVR) vegetation is defined as native woody vegetation that has not
been cleared for 15 years and is also shown as either a high value regrowth that is an
endangered regional ecosystem, high value regrowth that is an of concern regional
ecosystem, or high value regrowth that is a least concern regional ecosystem.
The Queensland Herbarium has mapped the extent of RE’s, HVR and Essential Habitat
across Queensland, however it should be noted that mapping was completed at scales of
between 1:25,000 and 1:100,000 and as such there are inaccuracies at a property scale. As
a result, RE maps should be considered to indicative only and should not be relied upon as
an inherently correct source of vegetation mapping. Site ground truthing is required to
confirm the presence of RE types and their extent, verify floristics and structure and
confirm conservation status.
A Property Map of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) is a property scale map that is prepared
to amend the Regulated Vegetation Management Mapping in cases where it does not
accurately reflect the site’s ground truthed vegetation distribution, or in other cases, to
‘lock in’ the current extent of remnant and non-remnant vegetation.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 10
Page 15
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
2.2.3.4 Essential Habitat Mapping
Essential Habitat are areas identified by DES as essential habitat for a species of wildlife
listed as endangered, vulnerable or near threatened under the Nature Conservation Act
1992.
Essential habitat, for protected wildlife, means a category A area, a category B area or
category C area shown on the regulated vegetation management map:
1. that has at least three (3) essential habitat factors for the protected wildlife that
must include any essential habitat factors that are stated as mandatory for the
protected wildlife in the essential habitat database; or
2. in which the protected wildlife, at any stage of its life cycle, is located.
These areas are shown on RE maps and Essential Habitat maps.
2.2.3.5 Referable Wetlands Mapping
Referable wetlands maps show the location of wetlands as defined under the
Environmental Protection Regulation 2008 and wetland protection areas (WPAs) in the
Great Barrier Reef catchments.
Wetlands on the referrable wetlands maps have been mapped using the Aquatic Biodiversity
Assessment and Mapping Methodology and have been assessed for ecological significance
using the environmental values for wetland in section 81A of the Environmental Protection
Regulation 2008. Wetlands are considered either High Ecological Significance (HES) or of
General Ecological Significance (GES) for the purposes of the environmental values.
WPAs in the Great Barrier Reef catchments consist of two (2) parts: a WPA wetland and a
surrounding assessable development trigger area. WPA wetlands are wetlands in Great
Barrier Reef catchments that have been designated as being of HES. WPA wetlands have a
100m assessable development trigger area in urban zones and 500m assessable
development trigger area in rural zones.
Within WPAs certain types of development or development involving high impact
earthworks (i.e. earthworks that drain, fill or divert water) are made assessable under
Schedule 3 of the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009. The policy outcome and
assessment criteria for assessing these applications are described in the State Planning
Policy 4/11: Protection Wetlands of High Ecological Significance in Great Barrier Reef
Catchments (SPP for GBR Wetlands).
2.2.3.6 SPRP and SPP Koala Habitat Mapping
SPRP and SPP koala habitat mapping show areas within South East Queensland that must
incorporate koala conservation and habitat protection outcomes into planning decisions.
The koala habitat values mapping identifies areas of bushland habitat, areas suitable for
rehabilitation and other areas of value.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 11
Page 16
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
2.2.3.7 Coastal Hazard Mapping
Queensland coastal hazard areas maps show areas within the Coastal Management District
that are vulnerable to coastal erosion or storm tide inundation.
2.2.3.8 Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map
The protected plants flora survey trigger map shows high risk areas for protected plants.
High risk areas represent areas where endangered, vulnerable or near threatened plants
are known to exist or are likely to exist. Clearing in high risk areas may require a flora
survey and/or clearing permit.
2.3 Results
2.3.1 Literature Review
Previous fauna surveys conducted by WBM Oceanics (2001) on the Bayview-Noosa
development immediately adjacent to the subject site were reviewed. During surveys
conducted by WBM Oceanics five (5) significant species were recorded in the locality as
shown in TABLE 1.
TABLE 1
SIGNIFICANT SPECIES RECORDED DURING PREVIOUS SURVEYS IN THE LOCALITY
Group Scientific Name Common Name Status*
Birds Calyptorhyncus lathami Glossy black cockatoo QV
Mammals Phascolarctos cinereus Koala CV, QV
Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed flying fox CV
Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked echidna QSLC
Reptiles Ramphotyphlops silvia A blind snake QNT
*CV, CE = Commonwealth (Vulnerable or Endangered)
QE, QV, QNT, QSLC = State (Vulnerable, Endangered, Near Threatened or Special Least Concern)
2.3.2 Database Searches
2.3.2.1 Threatened Flora Species and Ecological Communities
Database searches using the Commonwealth PMST identified seventeen (17) threatened
flora species that may occur within 10km of the subject site based on the availability of
suitable habitat in the locality. The DEHP Wildlife Online database indicated that twenty-
three (23) threatened flora species have been recorded from within 10km of the subject
site.
Threatened flora species detected in the database searches are listed in TABLE 22. The
conservation status of each species listed in TABLE 2 2 is shown in accordance with the
Commonwealth EPBC Act (1999) and Queensland Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation
(NCWR, 2006).
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 12
Page 17
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
TABLE 2
DATABASE RECORDS OF LISTED THREATENED FLORA SPECIES
WITHIN 10 KM OF THE SITE
Scientific Name Common Name EPBC# NCWR*
Acacia attenuata Whipstick wattle CV QV
Acacia baueri subsp. baueri Tiny wattle - QV
Acronychia littoralis Scented acronychia (CE) QE
Allocasuarina emuina Emu Mountain she-oak CE QE
Allocasuarina thalassoscopica CE (QE)
Archidendron lovelliae Bacon wood CV QV
Arthraxon hispidus Hairy-joint grass CV QV
Baloghia marmorata Marbled balogia CV (QV)
Blandfordia grandiflora Christmas bells - QE
Bulbophyllum globuliforme Miniature moss-orchid (V) QNT
Boronia keysii Key’s boronia (CV) QV
Bosistoa transversa Three-leaved bosistoa CV (-)
Carex breviscapa - - QV
Cryptocarya foetida Stinking cryptocarya CV QV
Cryptostylis hunteriana Leafless tongue-orchid CV (-)
Eucalyptus conglomerata Swamp stringybark CE QE
Glycine argyrea Silver glycine - QNT
Gossia inophloia - QNT
Habenaria harroldii - - QE
Lobelia membranacea - - QNT
Macadamia integrifolia Macadamia nut CV (QV)
Macadamia ternifolia Small-fruited Queensland nut CV (QV)
Macarthuria complanata - - QNT
Marsdenia coronate Slender milkvine - QV
Pararistolochia praevenosa Richmond birdwing butterfly vine - QNT
Phaius australis Lesser swamp-orchid CE QE
Prasophyllum wallum Wallum leek-orchid CV (QV)
Samadera bidwillii Quassia CV QV
Symplocos harroldii Hairy hazelwood - QNT
Thesium australe Austral toadflax CV (QV)
Triunia robusta Glossy spice bush CE (QE)
Xanthostemon oppositifolius Southern penda (CV) QV
# CCE - Critically Endangered, CE – Endangered & CV - Vulnerable as listed within schedules of the
Commonwealth EPBC Act (1999);
* QE - Endangered, QV - Vulnerable & QNT – Near Threatened as listed within schedules of the Queensland
NCWR (2006);
() listed but not found in site database search.
Database searches using the Commonwealth PMST also revealed that three (3) threatened
Ecological Communities are known to occur within 10km of the subject site:
• Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia (Critically Endangered);
• Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh (Vulnerable); and
• Coastal Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca) Forest of New South Wales and South East
Queensland ecological community (Endangered).
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 13
Page 18
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
2.3.2.2 Threatened Fauna Species and Migratory Species
Database searches using the Commonwealth PMST identified thirty (30) threatened fauna
species that may occur within 10km of the subject site based on the availability of suitable
habitats. The DEHP Wildlife Online database indicated that twenty-six (26) threatened
fauna species have been recorded from within 10km of the subject site.
Threatened fauna species detected in the database searches are listed in TABLE 3. The
conservation status of each species listed in TABLE 3 is shown in accordance with the
Commonwealth EPBC Act (1999) and the Queensland NCWR (2006). Marine species that will
clearly not occur on the site (e.g. albatross, whales, sea turtles) have been omitted.
Database searches using the Commonwealth PMST also revealed that forty (40) migratory
species may occur within 10km of the site based on the availability of suitable habitat.
Migratory species identified in database searches are listed in TABLE 4.
TABLE 3
DATABASE RECORDS OF LISTED THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES
WITHIN 10 KM OF THE SITE
Scientific Name Common Name EPBC# NCWR*
Anilios silvia Striped blind snake - QNT
Anthochaera phrygia Regent honeyeater CCE (QE)
Argynnis hyperbius inconstans Australian fritillary CCE (QE)
Botaurus poiciloptilus Australasian bittern CE (-)
Calidris canutus Red knot CE QE
Calidris ferruginea Curlew sandpiper CCE QE
Calidris tenuirostris Great knot (CCE) QE
Calyptorhynchus lathami
Glossy black-cockatoo (eastern) - QV
lathami
Chalinolobus dwyeri Large-eared pied Bat CV (QV)
Charadrius leschenaultii Greater sand plover CV (-)
Charadrius mongolus Lesser sand plover CE QE
Crinia tinnula Wallum froglet - QV
Cyclopsitta diophthalma coxeni Coxen's fig-parrot CE (QE)
Dasyurus hallucatus Northern quoll CE (-)
Dasyurus maculatus maculatus
Spot-tailed quoll CE (QV)
(SE mainland population)
Delma torquata Collared delma CV (QV)
Erythrotriorchis radiatus Red goshawk CV QE
Esacus magnirostris Beach stone-curlew - QV
Furina dunmalli Dunmall’s snake CV (QV)
Lathamus discolor Swift parrot CCE (QE)
Limosa lapponica baueri Bar-tailed godwit CV QV
Northern Siberian bar-tailed
Limosa lapponica menzbieri CV (QE)
godwit
Litoria freycineti Wallum rocketfrog - QV
Litoria olongburensis Wallum sedge frog CV QV
Mixophyes iterates Giant barred frog CE (QE)
Nannoperca oxleyana Oxleyan pygmy perch (CE) QV
Numenius madagascariensis Eastern curlew CCE QE
Ornithoptera richmondia Richmond birdwing - QV
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 14
Page 19
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
Scientific Name Common Name EPBC# NCWR*
Phaethon rubricauda Red-tailed tropicbird - QV
Petauroides volans Greater glider CV QV
Pezoporus wallicus wallicus Ground parrot - QV
Phascolarctos cinereus Koala CV QV
Phyllodes imperialis smithersi Pink underwing moth CE (-)
Poephila cincta cincta Southern black-throated finch CE QE
Potorous tridactylus tridactylus Long-nosed potoroo CV (QV)
Pseudomugil mellis Honey blue eye (CV) QV
Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed flying-fox CV -
Rostratula australis Australian painted snipe CE QV
Saiphos reticulatus Three-toed snake-tooth skink CV (-)
Tenuibranchiurus glypticus Swamp crayfish - QE
Turnix melanogaster Black-breasted button-quail CV QV
Xeromys myoides Water mouse CV QV
# CCE - Critically Endangered, CE – Endangered & CV - Vulnerable as listed within schedules of the
Commonwealth EPBC Act (1999);
* QE - Endangered, QV - Vulnerable & QNT – Near Threatened as listed within schedules of the Queensland
NCWR (2006);
() listed but not found in site database search.
TABLE 4
DATABASE RECORDS OF COMMONWEALTH LISTED MIGRATORY SPECIES
WITHIN 10KM OF THE SITE
Scientific Name Common Name Status#
Actitis hypoleucos Common sandpiper M, Ma
Anseranas semipalmata Magpie goose Ma
Apus pacificus Fork-tailed swift M, Ma
Ardea alba Great egret Ma
Ardea ibis Cattle egret Ma
Arenaria interpres Ruddy turnstone M, Ma
Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed sandpiper M, Ma
Calidris canutus Red knot M, CE, Ma
Calidris ferruginea Curlew sandpiper CCE, M, Ma
Calidris melanotos Pectoral sandpiper M, Ma
Calidris ruficollis Red-necked stint M, Ma
Calonectris leucomelas Streaked shearwater Ma
Charadrius bicinctus Double-banded plover M, Ma
Charadrius leschenaultii Greater Sand plover CV, M, Ma
Charadrius mongolus Lesser Sand plover CE, M, Ma
Caradrius ruficapillus Red-caped plover Ma
Cuculus optatus Oriental cuckoo M, Ma
Gallinago hardwickii Latham's snipe M, Ma
Gallinago megala Swinhoe's snipe M, Ma
Gallinago stenura Pin-tailed snipe M, Ma
Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied sea-eagle Ma
Heteroscelus brevipes Grey-tailed tattler Ma
Hirundapus caudacutus White-throated needletail M, Ma
Lathamus discolor Swift parrot CCE, Ma
Limosa lapponica Bar-tailed godwit M, Ma
Merops ornatus Rainbow bee-eater Ma
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 15
Page 20
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
Scientific Name Common Name Status#
Monarcha melanopsis Black-faced monarch M, Ma
Monarcha trivirgatus Spectacled monarch M, Ma
Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin flycatcher M, Ma
Numenius madagascariensis Eastern curlew CCE, M, Ma
Numenius minutus Little curlew M, Ma
Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel M, Ma
Pandion haliaetus Osprey M, Ma
Pluvialis fulva Pacific golden plover M, Ma
Pluvialis squatarola Grey plover M, Ma
Rhipidura rufifrons Rufous fantail M, Ma
Rostratula benghalensis Painted snipe Ma
Tringa brevipes Grey-tailed tattler M
Tringa nebularia Common greenshank, Greenshank M, Ma
Xenus cinereus Terek sandpiper M, Ma
# CCE - Critically Endangered, CE - Endangered, CV – Vulnerable, M – Migratory Ma – Marine
migratory as listed within schedules of the Commonwealth EPBCA (1999)
2.3.3 DEHP Environmental Mapping
2.3.3.1 Regulated Vegetation Management, Regional Ecosystem and High Value Regrowth
Mapping
The current regulated vegetation management map of the subject site includes both
Category B (remnant vegetation) and Category X (vegetation not regulated under the VMA)
areas. Category B areas cover the majority of the subject site (1.66 ha). The Regional
Ecosystem (RE) mapping identifies the Category B regulated vegetation as a combination
Of Concern RE consisting of the following REs (FIGURE 5):
• RE 12.2.1 (Of Concern) - Notophyll vine forest on parabolic high dunes; and
• RE 12.2.5 (Least Concern) - Corymbia intermedia, Lophostemon confertus, Banksia
spp., Callitris columellaris open forest to low closed forest on beach ridges.
Additionally, small areas (0.14 ha) of Category X vegetation (non-remnant) occur along the
southern and eastern boundaries of the subject site. Other features include an unnamed
watercourse present along the eastern boundary.
2.3.3.2 Essential Habitat Mapping
Essential Habitat for Wallum rocket frog (Litoria freycineti), Wallum froglet (Crinia
tinnula), Wallum sedgefrog (Litoria olongburensis) and Glossy black-cockatoo
(Calyptorhynchus lathami) is mapped on-site concurrent with the mapped remnant
vegetation (FIGURE 5).
2.3.3.3 Referable Wetlands Mapping
Referable Wetlands mapping shows no Referable Wetlands or Wetland Protection Areas on
or near the subject site.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 16
Page 21
LEGEND
Category B area containing of concern regional ecosystems
Non-remnant
N
Essential habitat on the essential habitat map
Watercourses and drainage features on the vegetation management
watercourse and drainage feature map
Roads
0 50m Property boundaries
Subject Site
SOURCE: QLD DNRME Regulated Vegetation CLIENT TITLE
Management Map (map dated 19.04.18) Novato Group
FIGURE 5 REGIONAL
PROJECT
SCALE: 1 : 2000 @ A4 Ecological Assessment
PREPARED: BW ECOSYSTEMS &
Lot 27 on RP89506
JWA PTY LTD
Ecological Consultants 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018 ESSENTIAL HABITAT
Noosa Shire Council LGA FILE: Q12038_RE Map.cdr
Page 22
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights 2.3.3.4 SPRP and SPP Koala Habitat Mapping The site is outside the SPRP mapping area. SPP mapping shows the area as generally not suitable habitat for koalas (FIGURE 6). 2.3.3.5 Coastal Hazard Mapping The site is outside the Coastal Management District. The subject site is not included in the Indicative Erosion Prone Area or the Storm Tide Inundation Area. 2.3.3.6 Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map The protected plants flora survey trigger mapping shows the entire site as mapped as a High Risk area. A protected plants survey following DEHP’s Flora Survey Guidelines – Protected Plants is therefore required. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 17
Page 23
LEGEND
Low value bushland
Low value rehabilitation N
Low value other
Generally not suitable
Subject Site
0 50m
SOURCE: QLD DES Koala Habitat in CLIENT TITLE
Southeast QLD (map dated 19.04.18) Novato Group
FIGURE 6
SCALE: 1 : 2000 @ A4
PROJECT
Ecological Assessment
KOALA
JWA PTY LTD
Lot 27 on RP89506
PREPARED: BW
HABITAT
27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018
Ecological Consultants FILE: Q12038_Koala SPP.cdr
Noosa Shire Council LGA
Page 24
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
3 FLORA ASSESSMENT
3.1 Introduction
This section discusses the methods used in the flora assessment and presents the results of
the assessment.
3.2 Methods
3.2.1 Background
To provide a description of the vegetative characteristics of the subject site, site
assessments were completed and previous reports from the site or surrounding locality
were reviewed.
3.2.2 Site Vegetation Surveys
3.2.2.1 Introduction
A number of site inspections and surveys of existing flora communities within the subject
site have been completed by JWA including:
• A site assessment completed by two (2) JWA ecologists on the 13th November 2003.
A total of approximately six (6) person hours were spent assessing site vegetation
communities during this survey;
• Site assessments were carried out by one (1) JWA ecologist during late November
2012 and again on the 29th May 2013, to verify the existing mapping in relation to
regional systems; and
• A site assessment completed by one (1) JWA ecologist between the 16th to 20th April
2018 in accordance with protected plants survey requirements (i.e. following
DEHP’s Flora Survey Guidelines – Protected Plants) and to verify previous mapping.
The flora surveys employed an assessment of floral taxa and vegetation communities in
keeping with the methodology employed by the Queensland Herbarium for the survey of
Regional Ecosystems and vegetation communities (Neldner et al. 2005). Preliminary
identification of the vegetation communities was conducted prior to the commencement
of fieldwork via interpretation of current RE mapping (Version 8) and aerial photographs.
Field surveys involved a botanical assessment at a number of representative sites within
remnant and non-remnant vegetation communities. The surveys utilised a number of
standard methods including random meander searches.
3.2.2.2 Random Meander Searches
The random meander technique (Cropper 1993) was used to identify changes in landform,
identify vegetation community boundaries and to complete targeted searches for
threatened flora species (in accordance with the requirements of DEHP’s Flora Survey
Guidelines – Protected Plants). The floral characteristics of each vegetation community
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 18
Page 25
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights that was evident from detailed aerial photographs were examined by ‘on foot’ inspections. Vegetation communities were mapped and described using the technique contained in Walker and Hopkins (1998). Vegetation structural formation classes were assessed according to Neldner et al. (2005). RE classification of vegetation communities were determined as per Sattler and Williams (1999), and in accordance with the Regional Ecosystems Description Database (REDD) (Queensland Herbarium 2018). 3.2.2.3 Weeds Weeds were assessed for significance under the Queensland Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002 (LP Act) and the Commonwealth Weed of National Significance (WoNS). The Queensland LP Act lists exotic flora and fauna that are considered Class 1, 2 or 3 pests under the Act. The different classes require different pest management strategies and landholder requirements to control pests on their land. Landowners are required to manage Class 1 and 2 Declared weed on their land (DAFF 2011). Thirty-two (32) Weed of National Significance (WoNS) have been identified by Australian governments based on their invasiveness, potential for spread and environmental, social and economic impacts. A list of twenty (20) WoNS endorsed in 1999 and a further twelve (12) were added in 2012. Individual landowners and managers are responsible for managing WoNS on their land. 3.2.2.4 Specimen Identification For those species not identified in the field, samples were pressed and dried and positive identifications of plant specimens were subsequently made under laboratory conditions or forwarded to the Queensland Herbarium for identification. Where available, fruiting and/or flowering specimens were taken to assist with identification. All identifications were made by qualified botanists with experience identifying flora taxa of Queensland vegetation communities. 3.2.2.5 Nomenclature Taxonomic nomenclature used for the description of floral species is according to Henderson (2002). Introduced species are signified in all text by an asterix (*). Any additional changes in taxonomic nomenclature have been incorporated as described in Jessup (2002, 2003 and 2005). Field references utilised for the identification and description of floral species include: Stanley and Ross (1989); Harden et al. (2006); Brooker and Kleinig (1994a and 1994b); Leiper et al. (2008); Haslam (2004); Queensland Museum (2003). Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 19
Page 26
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights 3.3 Results 3.3.1 Introduction One hundred and eighteen (118) plant species have been recorded on the subject site. A full flora species list is provided in APPENDIX 1. No significant flora species as listed in the Queensland Nature Conservation Wildlife Regulation (NCWR) 2006 or EPBC Act (1999) were recorded during the 2003/2004 or 2018 site assessments. A very high proportion of weeds were recorded in both vegetation communities present on the subject site. The high level of weed species recorded would be attributable to the fact that residential developments and major road networks border the site. The majority of the weed species recorded are regarded as environmental weeds that originated as ornamental garden plants. The disturbance that is evident on the site and the influence of external factors (e.g. dumping of garden refuse) would have contributed to the relatively high weed species diversity. Weed species recorded on the site are presented as part of the flora species list in APPENDIX 1. 3.3.2 Vegetation Community Descriptions 3.3.2.1 Background Two (2) broad vegetation communities were identified on the subject site. This section provides a description of each of these vegetation communities and a discussion of the condition and conservation status of each. The conservation status of vegetation communities is discussed with reference to the Regional Ecosystem Description Database (Queensland Herbarium 2014) and the Queensland VMA (1999) where appropriate. 3.3.2.2 Community 1: Tall Open Dry Forest (Coastal Cypress Pine/Hoop Pine/She-oak) Location and Area This community is located along the western and southern margins of the subject site (FIGURE 7). Description This is a highly disturbed and weed infested community consisting of predominantly Coastal cypress pine (Callitris columellaris), Hoop pine (Araucaria cunninghamii), Rusty fig (Ficus rubiginosa), Beach acronychia (Acronychia imperforate), Black she-oak (Allocasuarina littoralis) with Prickly alyxia (Alyxia ruscifolia), Blue lilly pilly (Syzygium oleosum), Wattle mat-rush (Lomandra filiformis), also present. Dominant weed species include Ground asparagus* (Asparagus aethiopicus), Mother-of-millions* (Bryophyllum delagoense) Umbrella tree* (Schefflera actinophylla), Weeping lantana* (Lantana montevidensis) and Wandering jew* (Commelina benghalensis). Trees, shrubs/small trees and ground within this community were to 20m, 3m and 0.5m respectively. Condition This is a highly disturbed and weed infested community. No significant species were recorded in this community. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 20
Page 27
ay
a W
Alm
Attunga Heights
Edgar Bennett Avenue LEGEND
Community 1: Tall Open Dry Forest (Coastal Cypress
Pine/Hoop Pine/She-oak) - RE 12.2.5
Community 1: Tall Open Dry Forest (Coastal Cypress
Pine/Hoop Pine/She-oak) - Regrowth / Non-remnant
Community 2: Tall Open Wet Forest (Blue Quandong/
Cheese Tree/Guava) - RE 12.2.1
Community 2: Tall Open Wet Forest (Blue Quandong/
Cheese Tree/Guava) - Regrowth / Non-remnant
Subject Site
SOURCE: JWA Site Investigations 2013 & 2018; CLIENT TITLE
0 25m QLD Globe 06 July 2017 Aerial Novato Group
FIGURE 7
PROJECT VEGETATION
N
SCALE: 1 : 1000 @ A3 Ecological Assessment
1 : 1 000
JWA PTY LTD
Lot 27 on RP89506
PREPARED: BW
COMMUNITIES
27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018
Ecological Consultants FILE: Q12038_Veg.cdr
Noosa Shire Council LGA
Page 28
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights Conservation Status This vegetation community is considered to be analogous in terms of species composition to RE 12.2.5, which has a conservation status of Least Concern under the VMA (1999). Parts of this community do not meet remnant criteria in terms of height and canopy cover and have been categorised as regrowth (FIGURE 7). The remainder is considered to represent remnant vegetation. 3.3.2.3 Community 2: Tall Open Wet Forest (Blue Quandong/Cheese Tree/Guava) Location and Area This community is located in the eastern portion of the site, immediately adjacent to the creek line that runs along the site’s eastern margin (FIGURE 7). Description This community consists of predominantly Blue quandong (Elaeocarpus grandis), Cheese tree (Glochidion ferdinandi), Guava* (Psidium guajava), Blush macaranga (Macaranga tanarius), and Broad-leaved climbing pandan (Freycinetia scandens) with Hairy-leaved bolly gum (Neolitsea dealbata), Guioa (Guioa semiglauca), Blush walnut (Beilschmiedia obtusifolia), Native guava (Rhodomyrtus psidioides), Willow primrose (Ludwigia octovalvis) and Soap tree (Alphitonia excelsa) also present. Trees, shrubs/small trees and ground within this community were to 20 m, 10 m and 1 m respectively. Condition No significant species were recorded in this community. This area is in poor condition due to the weed infestations. Conservation Status This vegetation community is considered to be analogous in terms of species composition to RE 12.2.1 which has a conservation status of Of Concern under the VMA (1999). Parts of this community do not meet remnant criteria in terms of height and canopy cover, and have been categorised as regrowth (FIGURE 7). The remainder is considered to represent remnant vegetation. It is noted that RE 12.2.1 is not listed as an equivalent state vegetation classification/ecological community which is representative of either the Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia ecological community, or the Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia ecological community, both which are listed as Critically Endangered within schedules of the EPBC Act. 3.3.3 Regulated Vegetation The current regulated vegetation management map of the subject site includes both Category B (remnant vegetation) and Category X (vegetation not regulated under the VMA) areas. Category B areas cover the majority of the subject site (1.66 ha) and consist of Of Concern RE 12.2.1 / 12.2.5 (FIGURE 5). Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 21
Page 29
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights Site investigations have allowed the remnant vegetation to be mapped at a much finer scale over the site. Vegetation on the site is in comprised of several separate polygons of the above REs (FIGURE 7). There are also areas of the site considered to be representative of high-value regrowth of the above RE types (FIGURE 7). It is recommended that a Property Map of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) is lodged with DNRME to correct the current RE mapping over the site. A PMAV is a property-scale map that shows the boundaries of vegetation categories on the property. Once a PMAV is certified by DNRME, it replaces the regulated vegetation management map for determining the location and extent of the areas of regulated vegetation. 3.3.4 Protected Plant Framework The random meander (Cropper 1993) searches for protected plants (completed in accordance with the requirements of DEHP’s Flora Survey Guidelines – Protected Plants) failed to not detect any Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened (EVNT) plants in the clearing impact area. A clearing permit from DEHP is therefore not required. However, as the protected plants flora survey trigger mapping shows the site as mapped as a High Risk area, an exempt clearing notification must be submitted to DEHP within one year of the survey being undertaken and at least one week prior to the clearing commencing. Clearing that has complied with this process will not be subject to any further survey or approval requirements once clearing commences. Re-clearing and/or routine maintenance can also be completed for up to 10 years after the original authorised clearing. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 22
Page 30
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
4 FAUNA ASSESSMENT
4.1 Introduction
This section discusses the methods used in the fauna assessment and presents the results
of the assessment.
4.2 Methods
4.2.1 Background
To provide a description of the vegetative characteristics of the subject site, site
assessments were completed and previous reports from the site or surrounding locality
were reviewed.
4.2.2 Site Fauna Surveys
4.2.2.1 Introduction
A number of site inspections and fauna surveys have been completed by JWA including:
• A fauna survey was completed by two (2) JWA ecologists between the 10th and 15th
November 2003;
• Records of incidental fauna observations were collected by one (1) JWA ecologist
during late November 2012 and again on the 29th May 2013; and
• A comprehensive fauna survey was completed by one (1) JWA ecologist between
the 16th and 20th April 2018.
The comprehensive fauna survey was completed in accordance with the methodology set
out in the Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey Guidelines for Queensland (Eyre et al. 2012)
where applicable.
Fauna species were detected using a combination of trapping techniques, opportunistic
sightings and active searches during daylight and at night. The fauna surveys were designed
to target identified threatened species. Techniques utilised during the fauna surveys are
described below. Unless otherwise indicated, the following survey techniques were utilised
in both the 2003 and 2018 site assessments. The 2013 fauna surveys included incidental
observations only whilst traversing the site.
All traps were routinely checked as soon as practicably possible after first light to minimise
the capture stress to any trapped animals and to prevent captured animals from
overheating during warm daylight hours. Captured animals were handled for a minimum
amount of time to reduce stress associated with handling. Care was taken to ensure that
captured animals were released into areas where they could find immediate and safe
shelter and predators could not intercept them.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 23
Page 31
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
FIGURES 8 and 9 show the locations of trap and survey sites for the 2003 and 2018 surveys
respectively. A summary of the 2003 and 2018 survey effort for the site assessments are
shown in TABLE 5.
TABLE 5
SUMMARY OF TRAPPING EFFORT
Trap / Survey Type Survey Effort 2003 Survey Effort 2018
Elliott trapping 100 trap nights 320 trap nights
Cage traps 24 trap nights 16 trap nights
Pitfall/Funnel traps 60 trap nights 128 trap nights
Anabat/SongMeter
- 4 nights
(bat calls)
Spotlighting 9.5 hours 8 hours
Call playback 3 nights 4 nights
Diurnal dusk/dawn survey – Diurnal dusk/dawn survey –
4 hrs, searches for orts – 4 hrs, searches for orts –
Bird survey
1 hr, 5 days opportunistic 1 hr, 5 days opportunistic
records records
4 hours targeted active 8 hours targeted active
Amphibian and Reptile
searches, 4 nights searches, 4 nights of
surveys
opportunistic records opportunistic records
Camera traps - 16 trap nights
4.2.2.2 Opportunistic Sightings
The random meander technique (Cropper 1993) was used to traverse the site. All incidental
records of fauna utilising the study area were recorded. Discoveries of scratch marks on
trees, scats, footprints, diggings, bones and other animal traces were noted.
4.2.2.3 Active Searching
Herpetofauna was surveyed by two (2) ecologist between the 10th November 2003 and the
15th November 2003 for a total of approximately four (4) person hours. Herpetofauna was
surveyed by one (1) ecologist between the 16th and 20th April 2018 for a total of
approximately eight (8) person hours.
Survey methodology included physical searches in all habitats. Any logs, sheets of tin,
cardboard, bark and leaves were overturned in search of reptiles and amphibians while
traversing the site. Searches were undertaken for diggings, scats, and bones. Smooth-
barked trees were inspected for signs of koala activity such as scratch marks and scats.
Active observation of bird and amphibian activity, both aurally and visually, was
undertaken during the site visit.
Methodology was designed to target significant species as listed under the EPBC Act and
NCWR (e.g. Litoria cooloolensis, L. freycineti, L. brevipalmata, Crinia tinnula,
Coeranoscincus reticulatus, Ophioscincus truncatus).
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 24
Page 32
ay
a W
Alm
Attunga Heights
Edgar Bennett Avenue LEGEND
Elliott trap line
Hair tube trap
Cage trap
Pitfall trap
Call playback site
Subject Site
SOURCE: JWA Site Investigations 2003; CLIENT TITLE
0 25m Google Earth May 2016 Aerial Novato Group
FIGURE 8 2003
PROJECT
FAUNA SURVEY
N
SCALE: 1 : 1000 @ A3 Ecological Assessment
1 : 1 000 PREPARED: BW
Lot 27 on RP89506
JWA PTY LTD
Ecological Consultants 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018 SITES
Noosa Shire Council LGA FILE: Q12038_Survey 2003.cdr
Page 33
ay
a W
Alm
LINE C
ANABAT B LINE D
PITFALL C
PITFALL D
SAT SITE 2
LINE B ANABAT A Attunga Heights
PITFALL A
PITFALL B LINE A
SAT SITE 1
Edgar Bennett Avenue LEGEND
Trapping Line
Pitfall trap
Anabat
SAT Site
Subject Site
SOURCE: JWA Site Investigations April 2018; CLIENT TITLE
0 25m QLD Globe 06 July 2017 Aerial Novato Group
FIGURE 9 2018
PROJECT
FAUNA SURVEY
N
SCALE: 1 : 1000 @ A3 Ecological Assessment
1 : 1 000 PREPARED: BW
Lot 27 on RP89506
JWA PTY LTD
Ecological Consultants 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018 SITES
Noosa Shire Council LGA FILE: Q12038_Survey 2018.cdr
Page 34
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights 4.2.2.4 Diurnal Bird Survey This methodology was designed to target species such as Grey Goshawk, Black-chinned Honeyeater, Ground Parrot, and Latham’s Snipe. One count was undertaken in the early morning (between dawn and two hours after dawn) and one count in the late morning (two to four hours after dawn) for a total of four (4) hours of survey during the 2003 survey, and a total of four (4) hours of survey during the 2018 survey. Due to the suitable visual access across the site, bird sightings were recorded during standard bird surveys and opportunistically. Searches were also completed for chewed Allocasuarina cones (orts - a sign of Glossy Black Cockatoo presence) on the site in 2003 for a total of one (1) person hour and in 2018 for a total of one (1) person hour. 4.2.2.5 Nocturnal Bird and Mammal Playback This methodology was employed to target the Powerful Owl and Koala. Nocturnal playback sessions were conducted on three (3) consecutive nights in 2003, and four (4) consecutive nights in 2018. On commencement of each playback session a 10-minute listening period was undertaken, followed by the broadcast of pre-recorded calls. The call was played for three minutes, followed by a two-minute listening period. After the calls had been played, each observer scanned the immediate area by spotlight for ten (10) minutes. The locations where playback was broadcast from are shown in FIGURES 8 and 9. 4.2.2.6 Spotlighting This methodology was employed to target nocturnal fauna including reptiles, birds, amphibians and terrestrial and arboreal mammals. In 2003, spotlighting involved two (2) or three (3) observers traversing the entire site on foot with 50W spotlights on three (3) consecutive nights, for a total of nine and a half (9.5) person hours during the survey period. In 2018, spotlighting involved one (1) observer traversing the entire site on foot with 50W spotlight on four (4) consecutive nights, for a total of eight (8) person hours during the survey period. 4.2.2.7 Elliott Trapping This methodology was employed to target small and medium terrestrial mammals. In 2003 a total twenty-five (25) Type A Elliott traps were set along two (2) trapping lines (10 traps on one line, 15 traps on the other) at approximately 10 m apart. Traps were set for four (4) nights providing 100 trap nights across the study site. Elliott traplines are shown in FIGURE 8. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 25
Page 35
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights Eighty (80) type ‘A’ Elliott traps were deployed over a period of four (4) nights in 2018. Traps were deployed along four (4) trapping lines, spread out across the subject site to ensure each vegetation type was adequately surveyed (i.e. 2 trap lines per vegetation community). Trapping effort totalled three hundred and twenty (320) trap nights for the 2018 survey. Trap locations are shown in FIGURE 9. During both surveys the traps were baited with peanut butter, rolled oats, honey and pistachio essence. Traps were cleared early each morning, and trapped animals were identified and released at the point of capture. 4.2.2.8 Cage Trapping In 2003, six (6) wire cage traps (30 x 30 x 90cm) were set for a period of four (4) nights. A total of twenty-four (24) cage trap nights was achieved. 2003 cage trap locations are shown in FIGURE 8. In 2018, one (1) wire cage trap was set along each trapping line i.e. four (4) cage traps in total, for a period of four (4) nights. A total of sixteen (16) cage trap nights was achieved. The 2018 wire cage trap locations are shown in FIGURE 9. During both surveys the traps were set with a combination of vegetarian (i.e. combination of apple, banana and rolled oats, honey and peanut butter mix) and carnivorous (i.e. sardine, tuna oil and flour mixture) baits. Traps were cleared early each morning, and trapped animals were identified, sexed and released at the point of capture. 4.2.2.9 Pitfall/Funnel Trapping Pitfall trapping was employed to target small mammals, amphibians and reptiles, and in particular, Wallum Froglets, Wallum Sedgefrogs, Cooloola Sedgefrogs and Ophioscincus truncatus. In 2003, pitfall trap-lines were set at three sites incorporating open dry and wet forest vegetation. Trap lines consisted of five (5) holes at two (2) sites and four (4) holes at the third site. They were approximately 50 cm deep, and were lined with plastic sheeting, set five (5) metres apart and connected by an appropriate drift fence. Pitfall lines were left open for four (4) nights and checked each morning for captures which were identified and released. In total sixty (60) pitfall trap nights were achieved over the survey period. Pitfall traplines are shown in FIGURE 9. In 2018, a combination of pitfall and funnel traps were set along a series of line transects throughout the subject site. Two (2) pitfall/funnel line transects were set per vegetation community for a total of four (4) pitfall/funnel trap line transects. Each line included a combination of four (4) pitfalls and four (4) funnels connected by an appropriate drift fence. Trap lines were set for a period of four (4) nights for a total of one hundred and twenty-eight (128) trap nights. 2018 pitfall/funnel trap lines are shown in FIGURE 9. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 26
Page 36
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
4.2.2.10 Ultrasonic Bat Detection
In 2018, an Anabat II sonar detector (Titley Electronics, Ballina) was used to record the
ultrasonic calls of microbats from the subject site. The Anabat unit was placed at four (4)
locations over four (4) nights (one night per location) between the hours of dusk (1800h)
and dawn (0600h) (FIGURE 9). The data from these recordings were analysed by an expert
in echolocation call identification.
4.2.2.11 Infrared Motion Detector Cameras
In 2018, four (4) infrared motion detector cameras were positioned throughout the site for
a period of four (4) nights for a total of sixteen (16) trap nights. The infrared motion
detector cameras were installed in trees located at a height of approximately 2 m above
the ground and positioned to monitor bait stations baited with a sardine, tuna oil and flour
mixture to draw animals into the range of the camera. Camera locations are shown in
FIGURE 9.
4.2.2.12 Koala Surveys
The Spot Assessment Technique (SAT) (Phillips and Callaghan 2011) was used to determine
habitat usage by Koalas. The methodology for this assessment involves determining
appropriate sampling intervals (FIGURE 9) and completing SAT analysis at all “A” sampling
sites. SAT analysis is then completed at each “B” site adjacent to any “A” site in which
Koala activity was recorded.
The SAT analysis was completed by one (1) JWA ecologist on the 18th April 2018. An aerial
was overlayed with a grid identifying potential “A” and “B” sampling sites. The grid was
not able to be extended offsite due to access restrictions.
The SAT involves a radial assessment of Koala “activity” within the immediate area
surrounding a tree of any species that is known to have been utilised by the species or
otherwise considered to be of some importance for Koala conservation and/or management
purposes. In the field the technique is applied as follows:
1. Locate and uniquely mark with flagging tape a tree (the centre tree) that meets
one or more of the following selection criteria:
a. a tree of any species beneath which one or more Koala faecal pellets have
been observed and/or;
b. a tree in which a Koala has been observed and/or;
c. any other tree known or considered to be potentially important for Koalas,
or of interest for other assessment purposes.
2. Identify and uniquely mark the twenty-nine (29) nearest trees (DBH>100mm) to the
centre tree; and
3. Undertake a search for Koala faecal pellets beneath each of the thirty (30) marked
trees based on a cursory inspection of the undisturbed ground surface within a
distance of 100 cm around the base of each tree, followed (if no faecal pellets are
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 27
Page 37
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
initially detected) by a more thorough inspection involving disturbance of the leaf
litter and ground cover within the prescribed search area.
4.2.3 Habitat Suitability Assessment
The suitability of the habitats on the site for listed threatened fauna species and migratory
species identified in database searches was assessed to determine which of those species
could potentially occur on the site. Assessments were based on the following:
• desktop research of scientific journal articles and botanical literature;
• consultations with specialist academic staff; and
• targeted field surveys within the subject site and surrounds.
The impacts associated with current landuses, vegetation clearing, land and waterway
erosion/degradation, weed and feral invasion and previous fire regimes were all considered
when completing habitat suitability assessments. Furthermore, the assessment determined
whether it was likely for habitat features that typically support threatened species to be
present on the subject site. Particular attention was paid to habitat features such as:
• the presence of mature trees with hollows, fissures and/or other suitable
roosting/nesting places;
• the presence of koala food trees;
• the presence of preferred glossy black cockatoo feed trees (forest oak and/or black
she-oak);
• the presence of characteristic signs of foraging (e.g. chewed cones or glider feeding
scars);
• condition, flow and water quality of drainage lines and bodies of water;
• areas of dense vegetation;
• presence of hollow logs/debris and areas of dense leaf litter;
• presence of fruiting flora species;
• presence of blossoming flora species, particularly winter-flowering species;
• vegetation connectivity and proximity to neighbouring areas of intact vegetation;
and
• presence of caves and man-made structures suitable as microchiropteran bat roost
sites.
Potential occurrences of threatened fauna species and migratory species are discussed as
unlikely, possible or likely to occur in habitats on the site. Possible occurrences are species
which may occur sporadically or are provided with small areas of potentially suitable
habitat. Likely occurrences are provided with habitat of high quality on the subject site.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 28
Page 38
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
4.3 Results
4.3.1 Introduction
The following sections provide details of the fauna species and associated habitats recorded
on the site during the 2003 and 2018 fauna surveys.
4.3.2 Amphibians
A total of five (5) species of amphibians were recorded during the survey periods (TABLE
5). One species, the Cane toad, is introduced and is very abundant across the site. Native
species found are listed as ‘common’ under the Commonwealth EPBC Act 1999 and the
NCWR 2006. No threatened amphibian species were recorded.
TABLE 5
AMPHIBIAN SPECIES RECORDED AT THE STUDY SITE
Scientific Name Common Name Year Recorded
Rhinella marina* Cane toad 2003, 2018
Limnodynastes terraereginae Scarlet sided pobblebonk 2003, 2018
Limnodynastes peronii Striped marshfrog 2003, 2018
Litoria fallax Eastern sedgefrog 2003, 2018
Litoria peronii Emerald spotted treefrog 2003, 2018
*Introduced species
The quality of habitat for amphibians is generally influenced by the hydrological
characteristics of water bodies, riparian vegetation, water quality and climate (Lemckert
and Penman 2012). The subject site contains a range of suitable habitat for frogs, including
a vegetated drainage line.
4.3.3 Reptiles
A total of eleven (10) species of reptile were recorded during the survey periods (TABLE
6). All species are listed as ‘common’ under the under the NCWR 2006 and the EPBC Act
1999.
TABLE 6
REPTILE SPECIES RECORDED AT THE STUDY SITE
Scientific Name Common Name Year Recorded
Calyptotis lepidorostrum Cone eared calyptotis 2003, 2018
Cryptoblepharus pulcher Elegant Snake-Eyed Skink 2003, 2018
Hemidactylus frenatus Asian house gecko 2003, 2018
Lampropholis amicula Friendly sunskink 2003, 2018
Lampropholis delicata Dark-flecked garden sunskink 2003, 2018
Morelia spilota Carpet python 2003
Ophioscincus truncatus Short-limbed snake skink 2003
Physignathus lesueurii Eastern water dragon 2003, 2018
Eroticoscincus graciloides Elf skink 2018
Varanus carius Lace monitor 2018
Demansia psammophis Yellow-faced whip snake 2018
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 29
Page 39
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
The quality of habitat for reptiles is strongly determined by the structural characteristics
of vegetation (e.g. complexity of vegetation density and vertical strata) and ground cover
(e.g. woody debris and rocky outcrops) which influence micro-climate, solar irradiance and
the availability of suitable basking and shelter sites (Garden et al. 2007). The majority of
leaf litter and ground cover occurs in the lower slopes of the creek line, and therefore the
greatest diversity of reptiles can be expected in this area.
4.3.4 Birds
A total of twenty-one (21) species were recorded during the survey periods (TABLE 7). All
species are listed as ‘common’ under the under the NCWR 2006 and the EPBC Act 1999. No
threatened bird species were recorded.
TABLE 7
BIRD SPECIES RECORDED AT THE STUDY SITE
Scientific Name Common Name Year Recorded
Aegotheles cristatus Owlet nightjar 2003
Alectura lathami Australian brush-turkey 2003, 2018
Cracticus torquatus Grey butcherbird 2003, 2018
Dicrurus bracteatus Spangled drongo 2003, 2018
Eurystomus orientalis Dollarbird 2003
Eudynamys scolopacea Common koel 2003
Manorina melanocephala Noisy miner 2003, 2018
Meliphaga Lewinii Lewin's honeyeater 2003, 2018
Oriolus sagittatus Olive-backed oriole 2003, 2018
Pachycephala pectoralis Golden whistler 2003, 2018
Podargus strigoides Tawny frogmouth 2003, 2018
Sericornis frontalis White-browed scrubwren 2003, 2018
Sphecotheres viridis Figbird 2003, 2018
Strepera graculina Pied currawong 2003, 2018
Zosterops lateralis Silvereye 2003, 2018
Dacelo novaeguineae Laughing kookaburra 2018
Trichoglossus moluccanus Rainbow lorikeet 2018
Anthochaera chrysoptera Little wattlebird 2018
Philemon corniculatus Noisy friarbird 2018
Eopsaltria australis Eastern yellow robin 2018
Colluricincla harmonica Grey shrike-thrush 2018
Searches beneath Allocasuarina species present on the site did not reveal the presence of
any chewed cones, which are indicative of Glossy black cockatoo presence.
The significance of near coastal environments of the New South Wales Far North Coast and
South East Queensland as over-wintering habitat for migratory birds has been established
by many observers and bird banders, including Keast (1968), Robertson (1973), Gravatt
(1974), Porter (1982) and Robertson and Woodall (1983). These patterns may be
attributable to the relatively high winter temperatures and long growing season of this
region compared with the rest of south-eastern Australia (Fitzpatrick and Nix 1973;
Edwards 1979; Nix 1982; Specht et al 1981). Many insectivorous birds from higher latitudes
and elevation over-winter in the locality. These include species such as the Fantail cuckoo
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 30
Page 40
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
(Cacomantis pyrrhophanus), Sacred kingfisher (Todiramphus sanctus), Rainbow bee-eater,
Noisy pitta (Pitta versicolor), Tree martin (Hirundo nigricans), Black-faced cuckoo-shrike
(Coracina novaehollandiae), Cicada bird (C. tenuirostris), Golden whistler (Pachycephala
pectoralis), Rufous whistler (P. rufiventris), Rose robin (Petroica rosea), Grey fantail
(Rhipidura rufifrons), White-throated gerygone (Gerygone olivacaea), Silvereye (Zosterops
lateralis), Olive-backed oriole (Oriolus sagittatus) and Spangled drongo (Dicrurus
bracteatus).
Blossom feeding birds such as honeyeaters and lorikeets are nomadic and their movements
depend on the availability of nectar and pollen resources. Seasonal variations in the
flowering times of important nectar bearing plants in the genera Eucalyptus and Melaleuca
provide a continuity of food for nectarivorous birds throughout the year. The Queensland
blue gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) is an important food source for scaly-breasted and
rainbow lorikeets (Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus and T. haematodus, respectively) as this
species flowers during the lorikeet’s winter breeding period.
No eucalypt trees are present on the site, which may limit feeding resources for nectivorous
species such as honeyeaters and lorikeets, however, a number of fruiting species are
present which may provide resources for frugivorous species such as orioles and figbirds.
4.3.5 Mammals
A total of nine (9) species of mammal were recorded during the site surveys (TABLE 8). No
introduced species were recorded. One (1) significant species, Grey-headed Flying Fox
(Pteropus poliocephalus) listed as ‘vulnerable’ under Commonwealth Legislation was
recorded during the 2003 site survey.
TABLE 8
MAMMAL SPECIES RECORDED IN THE SURVEY AREA
Scientific Name Common Name Year Recorded
Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed Flying-fox 2003
Pteropus alecto Black flying-fox 2018
Pseudocheirus peregrinus Common Ringtail Possum 2003, 2018
Rattus rattus Black Rat* 2003, 2018
Trichosaurus vulpecula Common brushtail Possum 2003, 2018
Rattus fuscipes Bush rat 2018
Canis lupus familiaris Dog* 2018
Felis catus Cat* 2018
Miniopterus australis Little bent-wing bat 2018
*Introduced species
Small terrestrial mammals generally occur in highest densities in association with a
complex vegetation structure. A dense understorey layer, which provides shelter from
predators and provides nesting opportunities, is particularly important. In general,
medium-large terrestrial mammals such as macropods (kangaroos and wallabies) select
habitats which provide a dense cover for shelter and refuge and open areas for feeding.
The larger species tend to occupy drier more open habitats; the smaller species, moister
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 31
Page 41
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights and more densely vegetated habitats. Understory vegetation on the site is likely to provide habitat for disturbance adapted small mammals, such as introduced and native rat species. Arboreal mammals occurring in the region (with the exception of the koala) utilise tree hollows for nesting and shelter. Smith and Lindenmeyer (1988) consider that shortage of nest hollows is likely to limit arboreal mammal populations where density of hollow bearing trees is less than two (2) to eight (8) trees per hectare. The site does not contain hollow bearing trees, therefore arboreal mammals are likely to be restricted to common urbanised species such as the ringtail possum. Assessment of possible Koala habitat revealed an absence of Koala feed tree species (i.e. no Eucalypt species were recorded on the site). One (1) Brush box (Lophostemon confertus) was present at the entrance of the subject site. Koala activity was surveyed using the SAT analysis (Phillips and Callaghan 2011) at two (2) “A” sampling sites (FIGURE 9). No Koala pellets were found during the SAT analysis, therefore no “B” sites were required to be surveyed. No Koala activity was recorded on the Subject site. 4.3.6 Habitat Suitability Assessment for Threatened Fauna Species Habitat suitability assessments of threatened fauna and migratory species that are known to occur or considered possible occurrences in the locality (TABLE 3 and TABLE 4) determined that two (2) threatened and five (5) migratory species have reasonable potential to be present within the subject site. These species are: Threatened species: • Grey-headed flying fox (Pteropus poliocephalus)(KNOWN); and • Glossy black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami). Migratory species: • Fork-tailed swift (Apus pacificus); • White-throated needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus); • Black-faced monarch (Monarcha melanopsis); • Spectacled monarch (Monarcha trivirgatus); and • Rufous fantail (Rhipidura rufifrons). APPENDIX 2 lists the threatened and migratory fauna species that are known or considered to possibly occur in the locality and discusses the likelihood of occurrence of each species within the subject area. Species that will clearly not occur on the site, e.g. marine and wetland species, have been omitted from the assessment. 4.3.7 Essential Habitat 4.3.7.1 Introduction Essential Habitat for Wallum rocket frog (Litoria freycineti), Wallum froglet (Crinia tinnula), Wallum sedgefrog (Litoria olongburensis) and Glossy black-cockatoo Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 32
Page 42
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
(Calyptorhynchus lathami) is mapped on-site concurrent with the mapped remnant
vegetation (FIGURE 5).
Essential habitat, for protected wildlife, means a category A area, a category B area or
category C area shown on the regulated vegetation management map:
1. that has at least three (3) essential habitat factors for the protected wildlife that
must include any essential habitat factors that are stated as mandatory for the
protected wildlife in the essential habitat database; or
2. in which the protected wildlife, at any stage of its life cycle, is located.
A review of the relevant essential habitat factors for each of the above species is provided
in the following sections.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 33
Page 43
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
4.3.7.2 Assessment of Essential Habitat Factors
TABLE 9
ASSESSMENT OF ESSENTIAL HABITAT FACTORS
Position in
Species Vegetation Community Altitude Soils Site Assessment
Landscape
RE 12.2.5 is a listed as a mandatory essential RE 12.2.5 (mandatory
habitat factor for this species. Freshwater essential habitat factor)
acidic swamps/lagoons (permanent or does occur on site however
temporary still water) dominated by sedges there are no acidic
(e.g. Baumea and Eleocharis spp.) in swamps/lagoons present.
Sandy and
Wallum rocket heathland (e.g. Banksia/Xanthorrhoea), Sea level to Suitable habitat is not
alluvial None
frog (Litoria wallum (Banksia aemula shrubland/woodland) 200 m considered to occur for this
substrates
freycieti) or Melaleuca open forest (e.g. M. species.
quinquenervia), and adjacent Eucalyptus
racemosa forest, also found around acidic
coastal lakes; on sand and sandstone; can be
found well away from water during non-
breeding season.
RE 12.2.5 is a listed as a mandatory essential RE 12.2.5 (mandatory
habitat factor for this species. Permanent to essential habitat factor)
ephemeral acidic (pH 4.3 - 5.2), soft does occur on site however
freshwater in Melaleuca (e.g. M. Sandy and there are no permanent or
Wallum froglet quinquenervia) swamps, sedgeland, wet and Sea level to sandy- ephemeral acidic swamps,
None
(Crinia tinnula) dry heathland (e.g. Banksia robur, 150 m alluvial or areas of heath present.
Xanthorrhoea) and wallum (Banksia aemula substrates Suitable habitat is not
shrubland/woodland) areas coastal lowlands considered to occur for this
on sand or sandstone, occasionally in adjacent species.
open forest/woodland (e.g. Eucalyptus
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 34
Page 44
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
Position in
Species Vegetation Community Altitude Soils Site Assessment
Landscape
racemosa, Corymbia citriodora) with heathy
understorey; known to persist in small
remnants (<10 ha); may be found well away
from water.
RE 12.2.5 is a listed as a mandatory essential RE 12.2.5 (mandatory
habitat factor for this species. Well vegetated essential habitat factor)
permanent to ephemeral freshwater swamp, does occur on site however
sedgeland, lake or creek, e.g. dense reed there are no permanent or
beds (including Baumea, Restio spp.) ephemeral acidic/wallum
Wallum
occasionally with Melaleuca quinquenervia or swamps, or areas of heath
sedgefrog Sea level to Sandy Near/in
Callistemon pachyphyllus, acidic wallum present. Suitable habitat is
(Litoria 200 m substrates waterbodies
swamps and wallum creeks on coastal sand not considered to occur for
olongburensis)
masses; most abundant in wallum (Banksia this species.
aemula) swamps that seasonally flood where
they are found year-round; recorded in
adjacent wet heath, dry heath, Gahnia heath
and Melaleuca swamp forest/open forest.
Lowland and highland eucalypt forest and Allocasuarina littoralis
woodland, including riparian, Callitris and occurs on the subject site
brigalow scrub areas, with Casuarina (C. and may be utilised by this
Glossy black-
glauca, C. cristata)/Allocasuarina spp. (A. species as a forage
cockatoo Sea level to
torulosa, A. littoralis). Nest in large vertical None None resource. No suitable
(Calyptorhynchus 1200 m
hollow (1-2 m deep, 25-50 cm diameter) up to nesting sites were observed
lathami)
28 m above ground in tall slightly isolated tree or are considered to occur
usually near principal food source on site.
(Allocasuarina/Casuarina).
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 35
Page 45
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
5 CORRIDORS AND CONNECTIVITY
5.1 Background
The term ‘connectivity’ is used to describe the degree to which the landscape facilitates
or impedes the movement of species among habitat areas (Bélisle 2005). The level of
connectivity between habitat areas in the landscape can be described along a continuum
from high, to medium, to low and isolated.
Landscapes with high levels of connectivity form an unbroken expanse of habitat through
which a wide range of the inhabitant species are able to easily move and select high quality
habitats. Landscapes with low levels of connectivity are characterised by habitat areas that
are separated by wide gaps and where the quality and quantity of remaining habitat is
reduced (habitat fragmentation). Habitat fragmentation impedes the movement of species
among remaining suitable habitat areas (Andrén 1994; Fahrig 2003) and generally restricts
movement to all but the most mobile of species.
At a broad landscape scale, maintaining habitat connectivity is necessary to maintain the
viability of species populations in the long term (Beier and Noss 1998). In fragmented
landscapes, corridors of native vegetation (ecological corridors) connect larger habitat
areas and can enhance landscape connectivity by:
• providing habitat for fauna and flora species; and
• facilitating the movement and dispersal of fauna and flora species between larger
and/or more suitable habitat areas in the landscape.
The following sections provide an assessment of the corridor and connectivity values of
native vegetation on the site and surrounding areas.
5.2 Recognition of Corridor Values on or Near the Subject Site
State, regional and local corridors in south-east Queensland have been identified in the
Biodiversity Planning Assessment (BPA): South East Queensland South Landscape Expert
Panel Report (EPA 2006). The majority of the site is mapped within a State corridor (FIGURE
10).
A large portion of the site is also mapped as occurring within an Environmental Protection
Area by Noosa Shire Council (FIGURE 11), however Council provides no specific corridor
mapping.
5.3 Site Assessment
5.3.1 Existing corridor values
Existing approved development surrounds the subject site to the east, west and south,
however a continuous vegetated corridor follows the unnamed creek from the north of the
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 36
Page 46
LEGEND
State Corridor
BPA Corridor Triggered Vegetation - State N
Cadastral boundaries
Subject Site
0 150m
SOURCE: QLD DEHP Biodiversity Planning CLIENT TITLE
Assessment v4.1 Criteria J Corridors & Statewide Novato Group
FIGURE 10
Corridors GIS dataset PROJECT
Ecological Assessment
BPA
SCALE: 1 : 5000 @ A4
JWA PTY LTD
Lot 27 on RP89506
PREPARED: BW
CORRIDORS
27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018
Ecological Consultants FILE: Q12038_BPA Corridors.cdr
Noosa Shire Council LGA
Page 47
DR
A
OS
NO
T AV E
E NNE T
LEGEND
Riparian buffer area
Environmental protection N
Environmental enhancement
Watercourses and drainage lines
Subject Site
0 50m
SOURCE: The Noosa Plan (27/11/17) - Noosa CLIENT TITLE
Heads Biodiversity Overlay (Map OM6.1) Novato Group
FIGURE 11 NOOSA HEADS
PROJECT
SCALE: 1 : 2000 @ A4 Ecological Assessment
PREPARED: BW BIODIVERSITY
Lot 27 on RP89506
JWA PTY LTD
Ecological Consultants 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018 OVERLAY
Noosa Shire Council LGA FILE: Q12038_Bio Overlay.cdr
Page 48
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights site through to the site’s south-eastern corner. Movements of fauna on and off the site are therefore restricted in most directions, excepting this corridor. The long and narrow shape of the site has meant that it has been prone to a range of detrimental edge effects. This has resulted in a high level of degradation including the presence of a high proportion of weeds in both vegetation communities recorded on the site. These edge effects are likely to have considerably reduced the corridor value of the site, particularly to species that are more vulnerable in edge habitats due to an increase in predation. In addition to being separated from continuous habitat regionally, there was also a considerable degree of fragmentation evident on the site itself. Areas of exposed sand dominated by Ground asparagus* (Asparagus aethiopicus) regularly intersected areas of Callitris forest where a more protective understorey and layer of leaf litter is present. These gaps between canopy elements present effective barriers to some species, particularly those with low mobility. The proposed development layout provides for the conservation of areas of both vegetation communities present on the subject site. An area of dedicated open space will be retained along the unnamed creek line, providing a wildlife corridor at a minimum width of 40m, and covering 7,710 m2 in total. A minimum 10 m wide riparian vegetation buffer, measured from the top of the bank on each side of the creek, is also proposed as part of the development. Furthermore, the removal of weeds and planting of additional locally native plant species where feasible, will ensure that the value of this site as a wildlife corridor will not be compromised as a result of the proposed development. The following sections discuss likely impacts on movement/dispersal of each of the fauna groups. 5.3.2 Amphibians The site does provide a tenuous link between patches of habitat for amphibians associated with the creek line habitat. A small linkage occurs to suitable habitat north and south along the creek line. This habitat is, however, degraded with weeds and heavily infested with the introduced Cane toad (Rhinella marina). This is likely to significantly reduce the sites suitability for amphibians. Rehabilitation work that will accompany the proposed development is likely to improve opportunities for amphibians to utilise the site. 5.3.3 Reptiles The site does provide a tenuous link between patches of habitat for reptile species including Short-limbed snake-skink (Ophioscincus truncatus). It is likely that suitable habitat will be lost as a result of the proposed development, however rehabilitation work proposed for the site is likely to improve remaining habitat and corridor suitability for reptile species including Ophioscincus truncatus. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 37
Page 49
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights 5.3.4 Ground-dwelling Mammals The site supports a low diversity of native small ground-dwelling mammals. The site does provide a tenuous link between patches of habitat, however, because of its degraded nature has little value as a corridor for the majority of native ground-dwelling mammals. It is expected that the proposed development would not negatively impact ground-dwelling mammal movements through the site, and may in fact improve them as a result of proposed rehabilitation works. 5.3.5 Arboreal Mammals The site does not currently provide a continuous well vegetated link between other habitat areas but does support good populations of Brushtail and Ringtail possums. These populations are urbanised and likely to be utilising adjacent residential development and vegetation present on the site. The site does not support any hollow bearing trees required by smaller arboreal species. It is not expected that the development would negatively impact on the movements of arboreal mammals. 5.3.6 Microchiropteran bats Flyways in the form of open vegetation types, forest (canopy) elements and the existing unnamed creek will be retained to facilitate the movement of all species. 5.3.7 Megachiropteran bats This group does not rely on formal corridors but rather patches of habitat, which are utilised sporadically. Retention of any areas of habitat will assist movement/local migration of this group of species. Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 38
Page 50
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
6 IMPACTS AND AMELIORATION
6.1 Introduction
The following sections examine the likely direct and indirect impacts of the proposed
development and discuss recommend amelioration measures to minimise and mitigate
impacts on the biodiversity and habitat values of the site.
6.2 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Development
6.2.1 Habitat Loss/Vegetation Clearing
The proposed development will result in vegetation and habitat loss associated with the
construction of buildings, roads and other infrastructure. In addition, Asset Protection
Zones (APZ) are proposed in order to significantly reduce bushfire risks on the site. APZs
for dwellings will take the form of Inner Protection Zones within which vegetation is
proposed to be removed and/or modified so as to be effectively free of available fuel.
Refer to the Bushfire Management Plan prepared by Bushfire Risk Reducers for details of
the proposed APZs.
The impact of the proposed development on regional ecosystems on the site is shown in
FIGURE 12. The proposal will result in the removal of approximately 0.57 ha of remnant
vegetation and as result of the development footprint and approximately 0.52 ha of
remnant vegetation will be impacted by proposed APZ. The impacts of clearing on
vegetation communities are provided in TABLE 10.
TABLE 10
IMPACTS TO VEGETATION COMMUNITIES ON THE SUBJECT SITE
Area to be Area to be Area to be
Total Area
Vegetation Community Removed Impacted by Retained
(ha)
(ha) APZ (ha) (ha)
Community 1: Tall/Open Dry
0.39 ha 0.39 ha 0.37 ha
Forest (Coastal cypress pine/ Hoop 1.15 ha
(34%) (34%) (32%)
pine/ She-oak) – RE 12.2.5
Community 1: Tall/Open Dry
Forest (Coastal cypress pine/ Hoop 0.03 ha 0.05 ha 0.02 ha
0.10 ha
pine/ She-oak) – Regrowth/ (32%) (49%) (19%)
Non-remnant
Community 2: Tall Open Wet
0.15 ha 0.08 ha 0.25 ha
Forest (Blue quandong/ Cheese 0.48 ha
(32%) (17%) (52%)
tree/ Guava) – RE 12.2.1
Community 2: Tall Open Wet
Forest (Blue quandong/ Cheese 0 ha 0.003 ha 0.06 ha
0.07 ha
tree/ Guava) - Regrowth/ (0%) (4%) (96%)
Non-remnant
0.57 ha 0.52 ha 0.70 ha
TOTAL 1.80 ha
(32%) (29%) (39%)
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 39
Page 51
ay
a W
Alm
Attunga Heights
LEGEND
Edgar Bennett Avenue Proposed impact areas - Development footprint
Proposed impact areas - APZ
Community 1: Tall Open Dry Forest (Coastal Cypress
Pine/Hoop Pine/She-oak) - RE 12.2.5
Community 1: Tall Open Dry Forest (Coastal Cypress
Pine/Hoop Pine/She-oak) - Regrowth / Non-remnant
Community 2: Tall Open Wet Forest (Blue Quandong/
Cheese Tree/Guava) - RE 12.2.1
Community 2: Tall Open Wet Forest (Blue Quandong/
Cheese Tree/Guava) - Regrowth / Non-remnant
Subject Site
SOURCE: JWA Site Investigations 2013 & 2018; CLIENT TITLE
0 25m Tim Ditchfield Architects - Site Plan DD 05-P2; Novato Group
FIGURE 12 IMPACT ON
Bushfire Risk Reducers - Draft BMP 03.05.18 PROJECT
VEGETATION
N
SCALE: 1 : 1000 @ A3 Ecological Assessment
1 : 1 000 PREPARED: BW
Lot 27 on RP89506
JWA PTY LTD
Ecological Consultants 27 Attunga Heights, Noosa Hill QLD DATE: 31 October 2018 COMMUNITIES
Noosa Shire Council LGA FILE: Q12038_Impact Veg.cdr
Page 52
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
6.2.2 Impacts on Threatened Fauna
Grey-headed flying foxes have been observed on the site. No further threatened fauna
species were detected, however several threatened or migratory species were considered
to be possible or likely occurrences, based on the presence of suitable habitat (APPENDIX
2):
• Glossy black cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami);
• Fork-tailed swift (Apus pacificus);
• White-throated needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus);
• Black-faced monarch (Monarcha melanopsis);
• Spectacled monarch (Monarcha trivirgatus); and
• Rufous fantail (Rhipidura rufifrons).
While a proportion of vegetation may be removed as a result of the proposed development,
the proposed works have been planned around the need to retain the best quality existing
habitat and will not result in the loss of significant habitat for the above species.
6.2.3 Impacts on Waterways and Wetlands
One (1) unnamed watercourse traverses the eastern portion of the site (FIGURES 4 and 5).
The proposed development has been designed to retain the watercourse and adjacent
vegetation. However, indirect impacts may include changes to hydrological regimes,
erosion and sedimentation, and an increase in weeds in riparian areas.
6.2.4 Impacts on Corridor Values
Corridor values on the site are provided by the watercourse and associated vegetation. The
location of residential dwellings alongside this corridor will reduce the existing width of
the corridor and introduce edge effects that may deter more sensitive fauna species. The
proposed development has been designed to retain the watercourse and riparian
vegetation, with a corridor width of 40m – 50m, and it is therefore expected that impacts
on corridor usage by fauna as a result of the development will be minimal.
6.2.5 Potential indirect impacts
Additional impacts that may occur as a result of the removal of vegetation communities on
the subject site are summarised as follows:
• Clearance of vegetation on the subject site will reduce the size and area of habitats
available for the dispersal and recruitment of native flora species and may reduce
dispersal and visits by pollinators which may negatively impact on the reproductive
success of remaining flora in the area.
• Disturbance to the subject site will create opportunities for further weeds to
colonise both the site and adjacent vegetation. Weeds are likely to be introduced
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 40
Page 53
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
to the subject site and adjacent vegetation in construction materials or by vehicles.
Weed numbers on site may increase due to dumping of garden waste, changes in
the nutrient status of the soil and increased light penetration.
• Occupation of the subject site by future residents may create opportunities for
ornamental and landscape garden plant species to disperse into adjacent areas of
retained vegetation.
• The removal of vegetation from the subject site will result in a decrease in organic
material and biomass on the site.
• Edge effects may be experienced in areas of conserved vegetation adjacent to
development zones. In these circumstances, there is likely to be a change in the
composition of flora communities and subsequent impacts on fauna species.
• Occupation of the site may increase the risk of fire release into areas of native
vegetation on the subject site leading to a disturbance in the natural fire regime of
the locality and impacts on fire-sensitive flora species and/or those that require
specific fire regimes.
• The removal of vegetation will disturb the soil structure and integrity which can
reduce the health and longevity of remaining vegetation and result in increased soil
erosion which may cause sedimentation of watercourses.
• Clearing may result in injury, displacement and death to fauna.
• Clearing physically removes food sources, shelter and other habitat attributes that
fauna use.
• Domestic dogs and cats prey on native fauna and may have significant impacts on
the populations of native species. The proposed development may increase the rate
by which non-native predators such as dogs and cats are introduced into habitats
retained on the site or adjoining the site.
• Vegetation clearing resulting in fragmentation of remaining habitat areas leads to
reduced habitat connectivity and reduces dispersal opportunities for fauna and flora
species.
• The establishment of infrastructure with people, noise and lighting can have
important implications for the behaviour of fauna within retained vegetation
(particularly nocturnal fauna) and may cause reclusive species to move away from
habitat edges and will act as a deterrent on the movement of animals through the
site.
6.3 Amelioration Strategies
6.3.1 Amelioration Measures for Habitat Loss/Vegetation Clearing
The proposed development will result in the removal of approximately 0.57 ha of
vegetation, with an additional 0.52 ha to be impacted by proposed APZs. Rehabilitation
works will be undertaken in accordance with an approved Site Rehabilitation Plan, in order
to enhance and maintain habitat links to be retained within the site. Rehabilitation works
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 41
Page 54
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
on the site will be completed within the proposed dedicated open space area along the
unnamed creek line and within areas covered by APZs.
In order to comply with the requirements of the Bushfire Management Plan, rehabilitation
and landscaping works with the APZ should be comprise of locally endemic flora species
that are fire resistant and/or of low combustibility.
6.3.2 Amelioration Measures for Impacts on Threatened Fauna
Some loss of habitat for the Grey-headed flying fox and several other threatened and
migratory species potentially occurring on the site will occur. In order to minimise direct
impacts on these species as a result of the development, clearing should be undertaken in
accordance with measures outlined in an approved Fauna Management Plan.
Rehabilitation works should comprise locally endemic flora species, including
flowering/fruiting species suitable as Grey-headed flying fox forage.
6.3.3 Amelioration Measures for Impacts on Waterways and Wetlands
The watercourse occurring on site will incur some loss of riparian vegetation. Rehabilitation
and Stormwater Management Plans will be prepared prior to commencement of works.
Rehabilitation and landscaping works should incorporate plant species typical of RE
12.2.1/12.2.5 where appropriate.
6.3.4 Amelioration Measures for Impacts on Corridor Values
Some vegetation contributing to fauna movement corridors will be removed from the site.
Rehabilitation works will be undertaken in accordance with an approved Site Rehabilitation
Plan, in order to enhance and maintain habitat links to be retained within the site.
6.3.5 Amelioration Measures for Potential Indirect Impacts
The following amelioration measures are recommended to avoid and/or reduce the severity
of potential indirect impacts as a result of the proposed development:
• Any landscape plantings should utilise locally endemic native plant species.
• Weeds should be controlled during construction through vehicle, tool and plant
hygiene measures.
• Weeds should be controlled in landscaped areas and known environmental weeds
(e.g. Umbrella tree) should be avoided in landscape plantings.
• The use of appropriate fencing to allow fauna movement between vegetated areas
and exclude fauna from hazardous areas should be incorporated into the detailed
design.
• Landowners should control dogs and cats. All dogs should reside within fenced
enclosures and be on a leash when outside of the enclosure.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 42
Page 55
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
• Appropriate disposal of rubbish and food scraps reduces opportunities for non-native
predators and disturbance adapted competitors.
• The effects of light on adjoining vegetation could be managed by the capping of
night lights to reduce glare into the sky and the careful positioning of lighting and
use of screening vegetation.
• Appropriate flora and fauna management strategies including the use of a spotter-
catcher and tree protection fencing should be implemented during site clearing
operations to minimise potential adverse impacts on flora and fauna.
• Vegetation removed during construction should be mulched for use on the site. This
will prevent the introduction of weeds from seeds in mulch brought in from
elsewhere and will retain biomass that would otherwise be removed from the
system.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 43
Page 56
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
7 CONSIDERATION OF STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
7.1 Introduction
This section includes assessments of the impacts of the proposed development with regard
to the following Commonwealth, State and Local legislation:
• the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act
(1999);
• the Queensland Nature Conservation Act (1992) and subordinate legislation;
• the Queensland Vegetation Management Act (1999);
• the South-East Queensland Koala State Planning Regulatory Provisions (2010);
• the Queensland State Planning Policy 2/10: Koala Conservation in South East
Queensland (2010);
• the Queensland Coastal Plan (2012); and
• the Noosa Plan (as amended 2017).
7.2 Commonwealth EPBC Act (1999)
7.2.1 Background
The Environment Protection Biodiversity and Conservation (EPBC) Act (1999) was passed
by Commonwealth Parliament in June 1999 and came into force on the 16th July 2000. A
person must not, without an approval under the Act, take an action that has or will have,
or is likely to have, a significant impact on a Matter of National Environmental Significance
(MNES). These MNES are listed as follows:
• the world heritage values of a declared World Heritage property;
• the ecological character of a declared Ramsar wetland;
• a threatened species or endangered community listed under the Act;
• a migratory species listed under the Act; or
• the environment in a Commonwealth marine area or on Commonwealth land.
The Act also prohibits the taking, without an approval under the Act, of:
• a nuclear action; or
• an action in a Commonwealth marine area or on Commonwealth land that has or
will have, or is likely to have, a significant impact on the environment.
MNES in Queensland are:
• declared World Heritage areas;
• declared Ramsar wetlands;
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 44
Page 57
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
• listed threatened species (Schedule 1 and 2 of the Commonwealth Endangered
Species Protection Act 1992);
• listed ecological communities; and
• listed migratory species (JAMBA and CAMBA).
An action includes a project, development, undertaking or an activity or series of activities.
An action does not require approval if it is a lawful continuation of a use of land, sea or
seabed that was occurring before the commencement of the Act. An enlargement,
expansion or intensification of a use is not a continuation of a use.
The EPBC Act (1999) does not require Commonwealth approval for the rezoning of land. It
does, however, suggest that when rezoning land, planning authorities should consider
whether to allow actions that could significantly affect NES matters or the environment of
Commonwealth land.
A Commonwealth Assessment will be required for proposed activities on the subject site if
they affect a MNES. The Commonwealth Department of the Environment has prepared EPBC
Act Policy Statements, including the EPBC Act – Principal Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1
(2009) which provides a self-assessment process to assist in determining whether an action
should be referred to the Commonwealth for a decision on whether assessment and
approval is required under the Act. The proposed development has been considered against
the Principal Significant Impact Guidelines for each of the MNES identified on the subject
site. This assessment is provided in the following sections.
7.2.2 Declared World Heritage Areas on or Near the Site
There are no declared World Heritage areas on, or within 10km, of the subject site.
7.2.3 Declared Ramsar Wetlands on or Near the Site
7.2.3.1 Significant Impact Criteria
An action is likely to have a significant impact on the ecological character of a declared
Ramsar wetland if there is a real chance or possibility that it will result in:
• areas of the wetland being destroyed or substantially modified;
• a substantial and measurable change in the hydrological regime of the wetland, for
example, a substantial change to the volume, timing, duration and frequency of
ground and surface water flows to and within the wetland;
• the habitat or lifecycle of native species, including invertebrate fauna and fish
species, dependent upon the wetland being seriously affected;
• a substantial and measurable change in the water quality of the wetland, for
example, a substantial change in the level of salinity, pollutants, or nutrients in the
wetland, or water temperature which may adversely impact on biodiversity,
ecological integrity, social amenity or human health; or
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 45
Page 58
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
• an invasive species that is harmful to the ecological character of the wetland being
established (or an existing invasive species being spread) in the wetland.
7.2.3.2 Site Assessment
There are no declared Ramsar wetlands on, or within 10km of the subject site. It is
considered that any future development of the site will not occur on any significant wetland
and will not significantly impact on any wetland of international importance.
7.2.4 Commonwealth Listed Threatened Flora and Fauna Species
7.2.4.1 Significant Impact Criteria
An action is likely to have a significant impact on a Critically Endangered, Endangered or
Vulnerable species if there is a real chance or possibility that it will:
• lead to a long-term decrease in the size of a population;
• reduce the area of occupancy of the species;
• fragment an existing population into two or more populations;
• adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species;
• disrupt the breeding cycle of a population;
• modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat
to the extent that the species is likely to decline;
• result in invasive species that are harmful to a critically endangered or endangered
species becoming established in the endangered or critically endangered species’
habitat;
• introduce disease that may cause the species to decline; or
• interfere with the recovery of the species.
A ‘population of a species’ is defined under the EPBC Act as an occurrence of the species
in a particular area. In relation to critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable
threatened species, occurrences include but are not limited to a geographically distinct
regional population, or collection of local populations, or a population, or collection of
local populations that occur within a particular bioregion.
An ‘invasive species’ is an introduced species, including an introduced (translocated) native
species, which out-competes native species for space and resources or which is a predator
of native species. Introducing an invasive species into an area may result in that species
becoming established. An invasive species may harm listed threatened species or ecological
communities by direct competition, modification of habitat or predation.
7.2.4.2 Site Assessment
One (1) EPBC Act (1999) listed Vulnerable species (i.e. Grey-headed flying fox) was
recorded on the subject site in 2003. However, it is not considered that a significant
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 46
Page 59
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
population occurs or utilises the subject site. As such, future development is unlikely to
cause a significant impact on this species.
7.2.5 Listed Ecological Communities
7.2.5.1 Significant Impact Criteria
An action is likely to have a significant impact on a critically endangered or endangered
ecological community if there is a real chance or possibility that it will:
• reduce the extent of an ecological community;
• fragment or increase fragmentation of an ecological community, for example by
clearing vegetation for roads or transmission lines;
• adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of an ecological community;
• modify or destroy abiotic (non-living) factors (such as water, nutrients, or soil)
necessary for an ecological community’s survival, including reduction of
groundwater levels, or substantial alteration of surface water drainage patterns;
• cause a substantial change in the species composition of an occurrence of an
ecological community, including causing a decline or loss of functionally important
species, for example through regular burning or flora or fauna harvesting; or
• cause a substantial reduction in the quality or integrity of an occurrence of an
ecological community, including, but not limited to:
− assisting invasive species, that are harmful to the listed ecological
community, to become established; or
− causing regular mobilization of fertilisers, herbicides or other chemicals or
pollutants into the ecological community which kill or inhibit the growth of
species in the ecological community; or
− interfere with the recovery of an ecological community.
7.2.5.2 Site Assessment
Database searches revealed that three (3) threatened Ecological Communities are known
to occur within 10 km of the subject site:
• Coastal Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca) Forest of NSW and South East Qld Ecological
Community;
• Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia – critically endangered; and
• Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh – vulnerable.
None of these communities are considered to occur on the site.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 47
Page 60
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
7.2.6 Listed Migratory Species on or Near the Site
7.2.6.1 Significant Impact Criteria
An action will require approval if the action has, will have, or is likely to have a significant
impact on a listed migratory species. Note that some migratory species are also listed as
threatened species. The significant impact criteria below are relevant to migratory species
that are not threatened.
An action is likely to have a significant impact on a migratory species if there is a real
chance or possibility that it will:
• substantially modify (including by fragmenting, altering fire regimes, altering
nutrient cycles; or
• altering hydrological cycles), destroy or isolate an area of important habitat for a
migratory species; or
• result in an invasive species that is harmful to the migratory species becoming
established in an area of important habitat for the migratory species; or
• seriously disrupt the lifecycle (breeding, feeding, migration or resting behaviour) of
an ecologically significant proportion of the population of a migratory species.
An area of ‘important habitat’ for a migratory species is:
• habitat used by a migratory species occasionally or periodically within a region that
supports an ecologically significant proportion of the population of the species;
and/or
• habitat that is of critical importance to the species at particular life-cycle stages;
and/or
• habitat utilized by a migratory species which is at the limit of the species range;
and/or
• habitat within an area where the species is declining.
Listed migratory species cover a broad range of species with different life cycles and
population sizes. Therefore, the definition of what an ‘ecologically significant proportion’
of the population is varies with the species (each circumstance needs to be evaluated).
Some factors that should be considered include the species’ population status, genetic
distinctiveness and species specific behavioural patterns (for example, site fidelity and
dispersal rates).
The term ‘population’ in relation to migratory species, means the entire population or any
geographically separate part of the population of any species or lower taxon of wild
animals, a significant proportion of whose members cyclically and predictably cross one (1)
or more national jurisdictional boundaries including Australia.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 48
Page 61
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
7.2.6.2 Site Assessment
Whilst a number of migratory species are considered likely or possible occurrences on the
subject site, it is not considered that any important habitat occurs or will be impacted by
the proposed development.
7.2.7 Requirement for Commonwealth Referral
Based on the assessment provided above, residential development on the subject site is
unlikely to result in a significant impact on any matter of NES. Referral to the
Commonwealth Department of Environment is therefore not considered to be required.
7.3 Queensland Nature Conservation Act (1992) and Nature
Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation (2006)
7.3.1 Background
The Queensland Nature Conservation Act (NCA, 1992) details the management intent for
listed flora and fauna species considered presumed Extinct, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near
Threatened, Least Concern, International and Prohibited in Queensland. It discusses their
significance and states the declared management intent and the principles to be observed
in any taking and use for each group.
The proposed management intent for Endangered wildlife includes the following:
• to take action to ensure viable populations of the wildlife in the wild are preserved
or re-established;
• to regularly monitor and review the status of Endangered wildlife and its habitat;
• to encourage scientific research and inventory programs likely to contribute to an
understanding of Endangered wildlife and its habitat and management
requirements;
• to recognize that the habitat of Endangered wildlife is likely to be a critical habitat
or area of major interest; and
• to monitor and review the adequacy of environmental impact assessment
procedures to ensure that they take into account the need to accurately assess the
extent of the impact on Endangered wildlife and develop effective mitigation
measures.
The proposed management intent for Vulnerable wildlife includes the following:
• to take action to ensure viable populations of the wildlife in the wild are reserved
or established;
• to recognize that the conservation of the habitat of Vulnerable wildlife is critical
to ensuring survival of that wildlife; and
• to monitor and review the adequacy of environmental impact assessment
procedures to ensure that they take into account the need to accurately assess the
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 49
Page 62
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
extent of the impact on Vulnerable wildlife and develop effective mitigation
measures.
The proposed management intent for Near Threatened wildlife includes the following:
• to regularly monitor and review the wildlife’s conservation status and its habitat;
• to recognize the habitat of the wildlife as a potentially critical habitat or area of
major interest; and
• to monitor and review the adequacy of environmental impact assessment
procedures to ensure that they take into account the need to accurately assess the
extent of the impact on Near Threatened wildlife and develop effective mitigation
measures.
7.3.2 Requirements for EVNT Flora Species
The protected plants flora survey trigger map shows high risk areas for protected plants.
High risk areas represent areas where endangered, vulnerable or near threatened plants
are known to exist or are likely to exist. Clearing in high risk areas may require a flora
survey and/or clearing permit.
If the flora survey does not detect any Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened (EVNT)
plants in the clearing impact area or the impacts on EVNT plants can be avoided (i.e.
clearing will not take place within 100 m of the EVNT plants), a clearing permit is not
required but an exempt clearing notification must be submitted to the Department of
Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) within one (1) year of the survey being
undertaken and at least one (1) week prior to the clearing commencing.
If the flora survey identifies the presence of EVNT plants in the clearing impact area, a
clearing permit is required before any potential clearing. The clearing permit authorises
the clearing of an area of land rather than the individual species of plant present. The
application for a clearing permit must include a flora survey report and an impact
management report.
7.3.3 Requirements for EVNT Fauna Species
Under the Nature Conservation (Wildlife Management) Regulation (2006) tampering with
an animal breeding place of protected animals that are classified as extinct in the wild,
endangered, vulnerable, near threatened (ENVT), special least concern, colonial breeder
or least concern is prohibited except under specific conditions. Animal breeding places
include obvious structures such as bird nests and tree hollows, as well as more cryptic
places such as amphibian or reptile habitat where breeding takes place.
For any proposed activity that will impact on breeding places of protected animals an
Species Management Program (SMP) for that species is required. An SMP is only required
where an animal breeding place has been identified and activities are proposed to tamper
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 50
Page 63
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
with the breeding place in order to complete the scope of works. The purpose of an SMP is
to:
• Assess the threats to native animal breeding places resulting from a planned
activity;
• Incorporate management actions that will avoid or minimise both the immediate
and the long term impact of removing or altering an animal breeding place; and
• Set monitoring and reporting requirements that demonstrate the management
actions in the SMP are effectively implemented and produce the intended results.
Depending on the species, proponents may use one of the following standard SMP
documents:
• SMP for tampering with animal breeding places - low risk of impacts: relate to
protected animals classed as least concern (excluding special least concern or
colonial breeders) where the impacts are unlikely to affect broader population.
• SMP for tampering with animal breeding places - high risk of impacts: relate to all
other protected animals including special least concern animals and colonial
breeders where the broader population is at a greater risk from impacts.
An entity can register for approval to use these standard documents prior to any works
being undertaken on a project site. Both documents will require essential information
including location of the activity, area of impact and species the subject of the tampering
with the breeding place. The SMP “high risk of impacts” will require additional information
tailored for the identified species.
7.3.4 Site Assessment
7.3.4.1 Flora
No State-significant flora species were identified within the subject site. Thirty (30)
threated flora species listed under the Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation (2006)
are considered possible occurrences in the locality (as listed in TABLE 2). The proposed
development will not significantly impact potential habitat for these species.
7.3.4.2 Fauna
Thirty-six (36) fauna species listed under the Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation
(2006) are considered possible occurrences in the locality (as listed in TABLE 3). One (1)
of these, the Glossy black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami lathami) was considered a
possible occurrence on the subject site.
Searches beneath Allocasuarina species present on the site did not reveal the presence of
any chewed cones, indicative of Glossy black-cockatoo presence.
Three (3) wallum dependent frog species are listed as having essential habitat on the site
however site inspections revealed that suitable habitat does not occur.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 51
Page 64
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
7.3.5 Summary
The flora survey failed to not detect any EVNT plants in the clearing impact area. A clearing
permit from DEHP is therefore not required. However, as the protected plants flora survey
trigger mapping shows the site as mapped as a High Risk area, an exempt clearing
notification must be submitted to DEHP within one (1) year of the survey being undertaken
and at least one (1) week prior to the clearing commencing.
Surveys of the site failed to detect any animal breeding place for protected animals. An
SMP is therefore not required.
7.4 Queensland Vegetation Management Act (1999)
7.4.1 Background
The purpose of the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VMA) is to regulate the broad scale
clearing of vegetation on freehold land to preserve remnant Regional Ecosystems (RE),
vegetation in areas of high nature conservation value areas and areas vulnerable to land
degradation. The VMA also ensures that clearing does not cause land degradation,
maintains or increases biodiversity, maintains ecological processes and allows for
ecologically sustainable land use. The VMA is currently supported by the State Policy for
Vegetation Management (2013), which includes codes for the clearing of vegetation.
Approval is required under the VMA when clearing is to be undertaken within a declared
area or within a remnant Regional Ecosystem, unless listed under Exemptions relating to
the Act. A declared area is an area declared by the Minister to be of high conservation
value or vulnerable to land degradation. Approvals to clear remnant vegetation on
properties greater than 5 ha are managed by the State Assessment and Referral Agency
(SARA). SARA coordinates the assessment of vegetation clearing applications which are
considered against the State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAP).
The SDAP includes State Code 16: Native Vegetation Clearing (2018) which uses certified
mapping (DEHP mapping) to administer the VMA. Mapping includes:
• regulated vegetation management mapping for remnant vegetation and remnant
vegetation associated with any natural watercourse or wetland;
• regional ecosystem (RE) mapping for Endangered REs and Of Concern REs;
• essential habitat (EH) mapping for habitat essential for threatened species; and
• referable wetlands mapping for waterway contributing to the Great Barrier Reef
catchment.
Other categories assessed under State Code 16 include:
• clearing to maintain connectivity;
• clearing on acid sulphate soils;
• soil erosion; and
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 52
Page 65
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
• salinity.
Property Maps of Assessable Vegetation (PMAVs) are a part of the framework of the VMA.
They are property-scale maps that show the location, boundary and conservation status of
vegetation. PMAVs are submitted by landholders and used to update DEHP’s Regulated
Vegetation mapping for determining the location of vegetation assessable under the VMA.
7.4.2 Assessable Vegetation on the Subject Site
7.4.2.1 Site Assessment
The current regulated vegetation management map of the subject site includes both
Category B (remnant vegetation) and Category X (vegetation not regulated under the VMA)
areas. Category B areas cover the majority of the subject site (1.66 ha). The Regional
Ecosystem (RE) mapping identifies the Category B regulated vegetation as a combination
of the following REs (FIGURE 5):
• RE 12.2.1 (Of Concern) - Notophyll vine forest on parabolic high dunes; and
• RE 12.2.5 (Least Concern) - Corymbia intermedia, Lophostemon confertus, Banksia
spp., Callitris columellaris open forest to low closed forest on beach ridges.
Additionally, small areas (0.14 ha) of Category X vegetation (non-remnant) occur along the
southern and eastern boundaries of the subject site. Other features include an unnamed
watercourse present along the eastern boundary.
Site investigations have allowed the remnant vegetation to be mapped at a much finer
scale over the site. Vegetation on the site is in comprised of several separate polygons of
the above REs (FIGURE 7).
There are also areas of the site considered to be representative of high-value regrowth of
the above RE types (FIGURE 7).
It is recommended that a Property Map of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) is lodged with
DNRME to correct the current RE mapping over the site. A PMAV is a property-scale map
that shows the boundaries of vegetation categories on the property. Once a PMAV is
certified by DNRME, it replaces the regulated vegetation management map for determining
the location and extent of the areas of regulated vegetation.
7.4.2.2 Possible Exemptions
Exemptions on freehold land include clearing of Least Concern or Of Concern remnant
vegetation (Category B regulated vegetation) ‘in an urban area for an urban purpose (e.g.
residential, industrial, sporting, recreational or commercial)’.
The Noosa Plan (as amended 2017) identifies the site largely as ‘Open Space Conservation’,
with small areas of ‘Attached Housing’ and ‘Detached Housing’. Exemptions may apply
within these latter areas, however clearing in the remainder of the site will need to comply
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 53
Page 66
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights with the Queensland vegetation management state code, Tables 16.2.2 and 16.2.3 of the SDAP. The development application will include reconfiguring a lot and therefore Table 16.2.2 – Performance Outcomes (PO) 1 – 4, and Table 16.2.3 – PO7, PO11, PO16, PO20, PO22 – PO24 and PO27 are applicable. An assessment of compliance with the relevant PO and Acceptable Outcomes (AO) is provided in APPENDIX 3. Additional details in relation to Essential Habitat and vegetation clearing to maintain connectivity are provided in the following sections. 7.4.2.3 Essential Habitat Essential Habitat for the Glossy black-cockkatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami), Wallum rocket frog (Litoria freycineti), Wallum sedgefrog (Litoria olongburensis) and the Wallum froglet (Crinia tinnula) is mapped on-site concurrent with remnant vegetation (FIGURE 5). However, it is considered that site conditions are not suitable as habitat for the above Wallum frog species, which require a wallum environment. Development within the subject site will need to meet Essential Habitat performance requirements for the Glossy black cockatoo by adopting the relevant acceptable solution in State Code 16 Table 16.2.3, or by providing another solution that meets the performance requirement. An assessment of compliance with the relevant PO and AO is provided in APPENDIX 3 and has determined that the proposed development is in compliance. 7.4.2.4 Vegetation Clearing to Maintain Connectivity The subject site is approximately 1.805 ha in area and is shaped as a long thin rectangle less than 100 m wide. The site is also surrounded by existing approved development to the east, west and south. While continuous vegetation greater than 10 ha occurs in the locality, connection to this vegetation from the site is limited to thin vegetated corridors less than 100 m wide that contain roads and other impediments. In addition to being separated from continuous vegetation regionally, the site also shows a considerable degree of fragmentation evident. Areas of exposed sand dominated by Ground asparagus* (Asparagus aethiopicus) regularly intersected areas of Callitris forest where a more protective understorey and layer of leaf litter is present. The long and narrow shape of the site has meant that it has been prone to a range of detrimental edge effects. This has resulted in a high level of degradation including the presence of a high proportion of weeds in both vegetation communities recorded on the site. These edge effects are likely to have considerably reduced the corridor value of the site. As such, the vegetation communities identified on the site do not have high connective values. An assessment of compliance with the relevant PO and AO is provided in APPENDIX 3 and has determined that the proposed development can be completed in general accordance with the requirements of the Code. An Alternate Solution is proposed in relation to PO 16 Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 54
Page 67
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
(Maintaining connectivity). It is noted that the following proposal was devised on site in
consultation with Andrew Collins (Senior Vegetation Management Officer, DNRM) in January
2016.
The proposed development will result in the loss of approximately 0.57 ha of vegetation,
with an additional 0.52 ha to be impacted by proposed APZs. Vegetation to be retained will
be of a sufficient size and configured in such a way that current connectivity values are
maintained. The site currently holds limited connectivity value in the context of the
locality and clearing of a small proportion of vegetation is not expected to impact on
movement opportunities for local fauna. An area of dedicated open space will be retained
along the unnamed creek line, providing a connectivity corridor at a minimum width of 40
m, and covering 7,710 m2 in total. A minimum 10 m wide riparian vegetation buffer,
measured from the top of the bank on each side of the creek, is also proposed as part of
the development.
Proposed rehabilitation works will reduce threatening processes acting on the site and
ensure that the vegetation continues to contribute positively to the local landscape.
The proposed development layout provides for the conservation of areas of both vegetation
communities present on the subject site. The removal of weeds and planting of additional
locally native plant species where feasible, will ensure that the value of this site as a
wildlife corridor will not be compromised as a result of the proposed development.
The above Alternate Solution is deemed to comply with the requirements of PO16.
7.5 South East Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning
Regulatory Provisions (2010)
7.5.1 Background
The South East Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulatory Provisions (2010)
(Koala SPRP) came into effect in May 2010. The regulatory provisions apply to assessable
development within the South East Queensland Koala Protection Area (SEQKPA) where
koalas are identified as most at risk – i.e. the Koala Coast and Pine Rivers areas. The Koala
SPRP outlines requirements for development within the SEQKPA in order to minimize the
impacts of development on koala populations.
7.5.2 Applicability to the Subject Site
The subject site is outside SPRP Koala Assessable Development Areas. The South East
Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulatory Provisions does not apply to this
site.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 55
Page 68
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
7.6 State Planning Policy 2/10: Koala Conservation in South East
Queensland
7.6.1 Background
The State Planning Policy 2/10: Koala Conservation in South East Queensland (Koala SPP)
came into effect on the 31st May 2010. The Koala SPP complements the South East
Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulatory Provisions (2010) and provides
direction to local governments when making or amending their planning schemes, as well
as for other land allocation processes such as master planning/structure planning
processes, and community infrastructure designations. The Koala SPP significantly expands
the area within South East Queensland that must incorporate koala conservation and
habitat protection outcomes into planning decisions. The Koala SPP applies to the seven
eastern local government areas of South East Queensland: Sunshine Coast Regional Council,
Moreton Bay Regional Council, Brisbane City Council, Redland City Council, Ipswich City
Council, Logan City Council and Gold Coast City Council.
The Koala SPP contains Koala Habitat Values maps that apply to the seven eastern local
government areas. The Koala Habitat Values mapping identifies areas of bushland habitat,
areas suitable for rehabilitation and other areas of value.
7.6.2 Applicability to the Subject Site
SPP Koala Habitat mapping shows the area as generally not suitable as koala habitat
(FIGURE 6).
7.7 The Queensland Coastal Plan (2014)
7.7.1 Background
The Coastal Management Plan is prepared under the Coastal Protection and Management
Act 1995 (Coastal Act) to describe how the coastal zone of Queensland is to be managed.
The objects of the Coastal Act related to coastal management are to:
• provide for the protection, conservation, rehabilitation and management of the
coastal zone, including its resources and biological diversity; and
• encourage the enhancement of knowledge of coastal resources and the effect of
human activities on the coastal zone.
This plan provides direction and guidance for use of Queensland's coastal resources to
achieve coastal management outcomes. Queensland Coastal Hazard Areas maps show areas
vulnerable to coastal erosion or storm tide inundation.
Coastal development is assessed by SARA under the State Development Assessment
Provisions (SDAP) State Code 8: Coastal Development and Tidal Works.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 56
Page 69
Ecological Assessment – Attunga Heights
7.7.2 Site Assessment
Current mapping shows that the subject site does not occur within the Coastal Management
District.
7.8 The Noosa Plan (as amended 2017)
7.8.1 Background
The Noosa Plan (as amended 2017) was prepared in accordance with the requirements of
the Integrated Planning Act 1997 which requires Councils to have a planning scheme that
is prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Noosa Plan first commenced
in February 2006. The current version of The Noosa Plan is dated the 3rd July 2017.
The purpose of the Noosa Plan is to provide a framework for managing development in a
way that advances the purpose of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 by:
• identifying assessable, self-assessable and exempt development;
• identifying outcomes sought to be achieved in the local government area as the
context for assessing development; and
• identifying the criteria for assessment of development that is not exempt
development.
7.8.2 Zoning
Under the current Noosa Plan (as amended 2017) the site is located within the Noosa Heads
locality and is zoned as Open space conservation, Attached housing and Detached housing
(FIGURE 3).
7.8.3 Biodiversity Overlay Code
The subject site is mapped under the Noosa Plan (as amended 2017) locality biodiversity
overlay map as containing an Environmental Protection Area (FIGURE 11). The proposed
development will remove approximately 0.53 ha of land identified as an Environmental
Protection Area for proposed buildings, roads and infrastructure (FIGURE 13). A further
approximately 0.46 ha of land identified as an Environmental Protection Area will be
impacted by proposed APZs (FIGURE 13). The proposed development is therefore
assessable under the Biodiversity overlay code.
An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant Performance Objectives
and Acceptable Outcomes of the biodiversity overlay code has been completed (APPENDIX
4) and has determined that the proposed development generally complies with the code.
Job No: Q12038/RW3 JWA Pty Ltd 57
Used in these records
Response to Info Request - Attachment 6a - Ecological Assessment Part 1 MCU18-0015 & RAL18-0015.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 7.6 MB (large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.