Skip to the record
For the highest quality transcripts.

Original source · versioned page text

MCU14/0106 & OPW15/0001 Appendix F - Ecological and Bushfire Management Response

of 76

Page text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Page text read automatically using OCR, there may be inaccuracies

Very large file: it may take a few minutes

The original of this document is very large (27.6 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.

                                                                         Information Request Response Report - Ecology
                                                                                                Noosa Civic Expansion



2.8             Fauna & Insect Management
2.8.1           Request Item 63
63. Provide comment on the likely management issues and responses to fauna and mosquito control for the
open air pedestrian and dining link.

2.8.2           Response to Item 63
This request is addressed within the Supplementary Ecological Assessment Report (28/04/15). In
summary, the potential level of risk that Noosa Civic staff and patrons will experience adverse amenity or
health outcomes as a result of exposure to mosquitoes is equivalent to the level of risk experienced at many
existing residential and commercial developments within the coastal sections of the Noosa Shire which are
also situated in close proximity to coastal wetlands that have equivalent, and in some instances greater,
mosquito production potential. A range of management measures can be implemented by the operators of
the Noosa Civic development to ensure that staff and patrons are not exposed to unacceptable levels of
exposure to mosquito. These are described within the Supplementary Ecological Assessment Report
(28/04/15).
Impacts from fauna species (e.g. nuisance birds) will be managed through the use of hardscape and landscape
design, and supplemented with additional fauna management controls as per those described within the
Supplementary Ecological Assessment Report (28/04/15).

2.9             Covenant J
2.9.1           Request Item 63
64. Describe how the proposal will fulfil the purposes of Covenant J on SP182845 and:
a.      Where the proposal is unable to meet the intent and purpose of the covenant, provide alternative
        solutions that will preserve existing vegetation on the lot.
b.      Describe how the pedestrian link will avoid significant vegetation, including stag and roost trees.
c.      Describe how the vegetation within the covenant will be managed during the operational stages to
        ensure the purpose of the covenant is met.

2.9.2           Response to Item 63
The proposal will result in the permanent removal of ~525m2 to enable the construction of the pedestrian link
and the temporary removal of ~206m2 of vegetation to enable the construction of batters associated with the
Hofmann Drive extension. The batter will be revegetated following the completion of construction.
The landscape concept integrates the retention of vegetation outside of, but contiguous with, Covenant J
accounting for an area of ~1,660m2 (see Figure 2 of the Supplementary Ecological Assessment Report
(28/04/15)). While this includes some vegetation that may incorporate walking trails or is proximate to
infrastructure, in nonetheless supports ~630m 2 that is unencumbered and acts as a northern extension to the
covenant area (i.e. ~105m 2 more than the area to be lost).
A total of ~43 trees will require removal for the pedestrian link within an area of ~525m2. The species and
particulars of individual trees are described in Supplementary Ecological Assessment Report (28/04/15).
None of the trees within this area are stags, support notable habitat features (e.g. hollows or observable roosts)
or are regarded as species of conservation significance.
While the pedestrian link intersects the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of approximately 55 trees, those outside
of the immediate development footprint can be retained and protected during construction (i.e. while ~43 will
be removed the remaining ~12 can be retained, but may require some pruning). Specifically the use of piered
building techniques will ensure there will be minimal impact to TPZs and trunks will be protected during
construction through the use of slats.
Vegetation within Covenant J will be managed during the operational stages as per the approaches outlined
within the Covenant Management Plan and Bushfire Management Plan.



28 April 2015                                         Cardno                                                        6
Log in to download the original file

MCU14_0106 & OPW15_0001 Appendix F - Ecological and Bushfire Management Response.pdf · 27.6 MB (very large file)

Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.

Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.