2020-03-10 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                    10 MARCH 2020


Whilst the proposed bushfire management plans may provide a functional solution from the
threat of bushfire, the proposed mitigation actions rely on the clearing of vegetation within the
part of the site required to be dedicated to the Crown and zoned Open Space Conservation and
is not supported. The removal of trees less than 5 metres in height and the modification of the
understorey will also have a detrimental effect on the environmental values of this part of the site
and impact on the ability of this area to provide a buffer to the adjoining wetland.
Furthermore, the suggestion within the BMP that koala habitat trees be replanted within the UMZ
raises concern as it is contrary to the requirement that trees less than 5 metres in height be
removed from this area. It is unclear as to how one component of the BMP can require trees less
than 5 metres in height be removed but also support the re-planting of the same vegetation.
Accordingly, the proposed bushfire management plan is not supported as it proposes vegetation
removal and management within a part of the site which is zoned Open Space Conservation and
includes elements which are contrary with each other.
Koala habitat
The site is currently mapped as being located within a Koala Assessable Development Area
(KADA) under the superseded State Planning Regulations Provisions mapping. It is also mapped
as “generally not suitable” habitat for koalas. Due to the site’s location in a KADA the application
requires assessment under the assessment benchmarks listed in Schedule 11 of the Planning
Regulation 2017. These include that the site is designed to provide safe koala movement
opportunities and consider habitat connectivity values of the site. Native vegetation clearing is
also required to be undertaken in a sequential manner and under the guidance of a koala spotter
where the native vegetation is a non-juvenile koala habitat tree and landscaping activities provide
food, shelter and movement opportunities for koalas consistent with the site design.
The Noosa Plan requires that development avoid impacts on koala habitat areas and provide
ecological linkages for safe and appropriate koala movement.
Council’s consulting ecologist advises that the re-planting of koala habitat trees on site to provide
'no net loss' would produce an adequate outcome for koalas at this particular site in terms of
habitat. However, the proposed measures to achieve no net loss of koala habitat are not practical
due to bushfire requirements as the vast majority of the identified re-planting zones, aside from
the UMZ, are incapable of being re-planted due to their proximity to structures. A 126m2 area
within the north-eastern corner of the site already contains significant canopy coverage these
areas however are within proximity of power-lines and are likely required to remain cleared to
provide clearance to the power lines and to allow for satisfactory sightlines for vehicles exiting the
site. The area proposed for replanting within the UMZ is also already vegetated and the density
of vegetation in this area will mean replanted vegetation will compete with existing vegetation and
hinder their development into adequate koala food trees.
Furthermore, a number of existing trees proposed to be retained are located within close
proximity of the proposed buildings and internal access driveway. Retention of large Koala food
trees amongst buildings and within vehicle and pedestrian frequented areas, is likely to be
compromised by construction activities and future demands for risk mitigation, and inevitably
result in the trees being lost from the landscape. The applicant has proposed the use of pervious
paving to maintain surface water penetration for the koala food trees, however this measure is
redundant considering the high water table. The koala food trees are largely reliant on ground
water and the provision of permeable paving to allow surface water to penetrate to the ground is
of inconsequential value. In addition the construction of the permeable paving will have a similar
impact on root zones of koala food trees compared with the construction of a standard
impermeable paving.
An acoustic report was provided in the original application and included a recommendation that a
2 metre high acoustic fence be constructed and in part setback 2.0 metres from the property
boundary. This recommendation was included as a condition of the approval. The acoustic fence
has not been adequately considered in the applicant’s determination of koala habitat loss. The


                                                                                      Page 34 of 53