28 January Ryan Strauss Strauss Property Developments PO Box 947 Gymea NSW Referral EPBC 2013/6974 Additional Information Request

Transcription

1 28 January 2014 Ryan Strauss Strauss Property Developments PO Box 947 Gymea NSW 2227 Referral EPBC 2013/6974 Additional Information Request Dear Ryan, Cumberland Ecology PO Box 2474 Carlingford Court 2118 NSW Australia Telephone (02) Mobile Facsimile (02) Web: As requested in the letter from the Department of the Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC now DoE), dated 20 September 2013, this letter provides additional information regarding your referral (EPBC 2013/6974) for the proposed development at 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville. This letter is to be submitted with the Species Impact Statement, dated October 2013, which was prepared to gain approval under the NSW state government, but also contains important information regarding Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES). The adequacy of the proposed offset is required to be assessed in accordance with the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (SEWPaC, 2012), the EPBC Calculator and the assessment guidelines (DoE, 2013). Appendix A contains the additional information in the format requested by the federal government and Appendix B contains the letter requesting this additional information. Please don t hesitate to call me on (02) if you have any questions. Yours sincerely Dr. David Robertson Director david.robertson@cumberlandecology.com.au

2 Appendix A Additional Information

3 A.1 Introduction A.1.1 Subject Site The subject site is a rural residential property of approximately 4 ha and of rectangular shape with access to Balmoral Road in Kellyville, north-west Sydney. The site is partially vegetated and contains cleared areas in the northern half of the site, such as a tennis court, a residential dwelling, garden areas, paths and driveways. The site is located in a heavily urbanised landscape and forms part of the Balmoral Road Release Area of approximately 537 ha, which is intended to cater for 6,000 new dwellings and an additional population of 13,000, 60% of which are to reside in multi-unit dwellings. The land to the north and the south of the site has already been developed and many surrounding lots are currently under construction. The adjacent property to the west is subject to a DA for a sub-division and development similar to this proposal. The Norwest Business Park is immediately adjacent to the south-west of the site. Since European settlement, this area has been used for agriculture and grazing and the vegetation has been heavily cleared. The remaining vegetation exists in isolated small patches and has been heavily degraded by long-term impacts such as grazing by cattle, mowing for asset protection, urban run-off, weed invasion, nitrification, edge effects and human disturbance, such as storage of agricultural machinery/material and dumping of rubbish and garden clippings. A.1.2 Project Background The subject site and adjacent properties were first surveyed by Cumberland Ecology in 2006, when the area was zoned as Deferred Land. The results of that survey showed that a patch of Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) exists on the subject site and the adjacent property to the west. In 2012 the area was rezoned from Deferred Land to R2 Low Density Residential. It is interesting to note that while this site contains some CPW, the adjacent lots to the east have largely been cleared and were nevertheless zoned RE1 (Public Recreation) under The Hills Local Environmental Plan (LEP). In 2012, the proponent commissioned SLR to conduct a flora and fauna survey (SLR, 2013) to be included in a development application for a residential subdivision. In order to offset the impact of the development on CPW, the proponent commissioned Cumberland Ecology to launch a BioBanking Statement Application (Cumberland Ecology, 2013a) in May Under the BioBanking methodology (DECC 2009), CPW in the Hawkesbury-Nepean CMA is estimated to be 95% cleared, which makes it a red flag area. BioBanking Statement Applications for red flag areas have to include a Red Flag Variation Report (Cumberland Ecology, 2013b), which needs to be determined by the Director General. If a red flag area is larger than four hectares, BioBanking is not an option. Cumberland Ecology received written advice from the OEH BioBanking team that the four hectare threshold only applies to vegetation within the subject site and does not include adjacent properties. In May 2013, the Hills Shire Council commissioned Teresa James (Teresa James, 2013) to assess the condition and value of CPW on the subject site to assist the decision making process. In July 2013 the BioBanking Statement Application was rejected by OEH, due to the fact that the patch of CPW on the CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX 3 28 JANUARY 2014

4 subject site and the adjacent property to the east is larger than four hectares. The proponent then commissioned Cumberland Ecology to provide a Species Impact Statement (SIS) (Cumberland Ecology, 2013c) and to undertake any additional surveys to be compliant with the Director General s Requirements (DGRs) and the OEH guidelines (DEC (NSW) 2004). The SIS contains information on species, populations and ecological communities, threatened or nonthreatened, occurring or having potential to occur on site, as well as a description of the proposal and its potential impact on these species. It also contains mitigation measures and discussion of different layout options of the proposal, some of which are repeated in Section A.2 below. The proponent proposes to purchase the BioBanking credits required to offset the impacts of the proposed development on CPW. If the development gains approval, these credits will be retired and the conservation and management of a much larger patch of CPW will be financed in perpetuity. A.1.3 Matters of National Environmental Significance The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) provides for the protection of the environment, especially Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES). Under the EPBC Act, a person must not take an action that has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on any of these matters without approval from the Australian Government Environment Minister or the Minister s delegate. To obtain approval from the Environment Minister, the proposed action was referred in August The Minister determined that the proposal is a controlled action and further information will be required to assess the impacts by the proposal on MNES. A copy of the decision is provided in Appendix B. The Minister also requires additional information regarding: Avoidance and mitigation measures, which are addressed in Section A.2 below; and Detailed information on the offset, which is addressed in Section A.3 below. An assessment of likelihood of occurrence of all MNES on the subject site has been conducted and is provided in Table 3.2 of the SIS. The following MNES are known to occur on site and have potential to be affected by the proposed development at 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville: Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis); One individual of this species was observed foraging on the site during the 2013 survey. This is a migratory species listed under the EPBC Act. It migrates between New Guinea and New Zealand and inhabits shallow water and wetlands, which could be inland or coastal, freshwater or saline, permanent or ephemeral, open or vegetated, large or small, natural or artificial. It may therefore occasionally utilise habitats within the subject site, but is unlikely to be negatively impacted by the proposed development; Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus); Individuals of this species were observed and heard flying over the site during several surveys. While there is limited foraging habitat on site for this species in the form of food trees, there is no roosting habitat. It is assumed that this species occasionally visits the site as part of a much wider foraging area and loss of a small fragment of habitat is unlikely to affect the survival of this species; and CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX 4 28 JANUARY 2014

5 Cumberland Plain Shale Woodlands and Shale-Gravel Transition Forest, referred to here as Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW), is critically endangered under the EPBC Act. The proposed development will remove 0.15 ha of CPW in poor condition, 0.27 ha of CPW in moderate condition and 2.91 ha of CPW in good condition, which results in a total loss of 3.33 ha. The request for additional information (Appendix B) addressed in this letter, specifically relates to the loss of CPW on site. During a total of 253 person-hours of site survey no other MNES have been found. The SIS (Cumberland Ecology, 2013c) contains lists of threatened flora (Table 3.1) and fauna (Table 3.2) known to occur within a 10 kilometre circle around the site and their potential to occur on the subject site. Figures 3.3 and 3.4 of the SIS show all the OEH Atlas records of MNES recorded within a 10km radius of the site since A.2 Avoidance and Mitigation Measures This section addresses additional information requested in section 1 of the letter by SEWPaC (Appendix B). A.2.1 Alternative Options Considered In order to avoid impacts on CPW, three options have been considered for this site: 1) Do nothing option: The vegetation on the subject site and surrounding land has suffered sustained impacts by agricultural and residential use of the land. During the surveys in 2006, the patch of CPW on this site was already considered to be highly modified. Invasive weeds such as Blackberry and Bamboo exist in large patches on and adjacent to the site. The fauna species recorded between 2006 and 2013 are dominated by common species and feral animals, such as rabbits, foxes and mynas. Negative impacts on biodiversity will only be exacerbated by the recent accelerated urbanisation of the surrounding lands. The do nothing option of retaining the subject site in its current state would lead to further degradation of the vegetation, unless actively managed for conservation. However, there is little incentive for land owners to manage weeds and control feral animals on their properties and the retention of this small patch of vegetation is unlikely to make any real contribution to the conservation of Cumberland Plain Woodland in the locality. 2) Partial development and retention of some vegetation: The general area within which the subject site is located has been identified in strategic planning documentation by the Hills Council with a pre-determined road layout to facilitate an orderly sub-division across existing property boundaries. Thus there is minimal scope to amend the road layout to minimise impact on the environment. This road layout dictates the design layout of the proposed individual sub-division lots, which is required to be a minimum 700m 2 in size. In turn, the individual lots are required by The Hills Council's DCP to permit the construction of a nominal 20x20m (total 400m 2 ) dwelling. Further, given the natural contours of the site, infrastructure services that require gravity feed, such as CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX 5 28 JANUARY 2014

6 storm water and sewerage, are required to be installed outside the nominal dwelling footprint, which necessarily requires disruption to the remaining vegetation. The planned road dissects the site along the existing power lines on the adjacent property to the west and transects the subject site along its southern boundary. The patch of good quality CPW is mainly in the southern part of the site. Any retention of native vegetation in a heavily built up environment would result in additional fragmentation and reduction in patch size, which will result in additional reduction of viability in the future. Additionally, the site is zoned for residential development. The vegetation of the site is fragmented by existing housing and other infrastructure and surrounded by intense development. The existing development and vegetation condition combined with land ownership and current zoning provides little scope for effective conservation. 3) Development of the whole site and offsetting of impacts: The long term viability of the native vegetation on site was put at risk when the land was rezoned for residential development. The proposed residential subdivision is consistent with the planning intent for the Balmoral Road Release Area, as exemplified in the zoning of the lands for residential development purposes by the Hills Shire Council. This third option consists of developing the whole site, which entails extensive earthworks and construction of housing and associated infrastructure. This involves the removal of most of the vegetation from the subject site. Nevertheless, some trees on lot boundaries and on road verges will be retained where possible. Due to the small size and fragmentation of the site and its current zoning, it is considered that the proposed clearing of the subject site and creation of a larger off-site conservation area is considered to be the most feasible option, both economically and with regard to the long-term conservation of CPW. A.2.2 Discussion of Issues with Alternative Options i. Ecological Issues The site is a relatively small patch of vegetation (<4 ha) in a heavily cleared landscape that will continue to be cleared further as development proceeds according to the latest zoning. The subject site is located within the Balmoral Road Release Area of approximately 537 ha, which was gazetted in the Hills Shire Council LEP. As such, the following issues should be taken into account: The ecological value of CPW on the subject site has significantly decreased due to agricultural use of the land, urbanisation of the area and residential developments on surrounding lots; A development on the site is consistent with the planning intent for the Balmoral Road Release Area, as exemplified in the zoning of the lands for residential development purposes by the Hills Shire Council; Large patches of land within the Balmoral Land Release Area have already been developed directly adjacent to the north and south of the site and further development is continuing. The site therefore no longer forms part of any ecological corridors and is generally isolated from other native vegetation; CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX 6 28 JANUARY 2014

7 Retention of this remnant patch of CPW in a heavily cleared landscape will not result in a positive outcome for this vegetation type in the long-term. This is due to the small size of the subject site, the linear shape of the patch, fragmentation, edge effects of adjacent developments and low viability in the future. Scientific research suggests that CPW requires a much more significant patch size in order to be viable in the future and to retain a reasonable complement of native plant and animals species (DECCW, 2011); Modification of the development design for the residential subdivision could ostensibly retain a small patch of CPW on the southern part of the site in the long-term if actively managed. However, in practice, while the proponent will retain and protect some CPW trees where possible, any retention of patches of CPW on the site in an attempt to avoid adverse impacts on this CEEC is likely to be impractical and relatively futile. This is unlikely to provide the best ecological outcome for the conservation of CPW on a regional scale; and For this site, the best environmental option, which would improve the long-term biodiversity value of CPW in the catchment, consists of funding the conservation of an area of CPW off the site as part of a larger and more viable patch that can be protected and actively managed in the long-term. ii. Economic Issues The considered alternatives are not viable from an economic point of view for the following reasons: Access roads (other than the ones dictated by the DCP) could be altered and housing lots removed leaving the main woodland as a small pocket in the southern part of the site within the surrounding developments. This would result in a small remnant of CPW at the expense of over 25 lots, i.e. approximately two thirds of the development. The loss of 25 lots to preserve a small isolated patch of CPW which is unlikely to be viable in the long-term, does not make sense from an economic point of view; Future management and conservation of the CPW on site will require long-term funding. As there will be no body corporate or such to maintain this responsibility, it is likely that this patch surrounded by a housing estate would only be neglected and/or poorly managed to the point that it would deteriorate from an environmental point of view; and If the assumption is made that the whole of the property is used as a BioBanking offset site, i.e. producing CPW credits to be sold elsewhere, a maximum of $800,000 could be generated. This figure is far less than the current land value and the site would be placed under permanent conservation with detailed non-negotiable management actions to be carried out in perpetuity. This calculation is based on the 53 HN528 credits the site requires as a BioBanking development site and on the current market value of approximately $15,000 per credit. These hypothetical calculations show, that it is impossible to achieve conservation of this patch of CPW in an economically viable way under the BioBanking scheme and that the off-site conservation of a much larger patch of CPW is the most feasible option. CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX 7 28 JANUARY 2014

8 A.2.3 Avoidance In view of the issues discussed in Sections A.2.1 and A.2.2 above, which include the predetermined road layout and the degraded, fragmented and isolated occurrence of CPW, the only possible avoidance measure is the retention of trees on site where possible. A.2.4 Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures are designed to prevent or minimise the relevant direct and indirect impacts on CPW to be undertaken before, during and after construction. The following ameliorative and mitigating measures are designed to minimize any adverse effects of the proposal on any species on the subject site, not only the threatened ones. The measures are: Relocation of native fauna where appropriate; Euthanizing introduced fauna where appropriate; and Pre-clearance survey of bat habitat. These mitigation measures are described in detail in section 6.2 of the SIS. Since no species listed under the EPBC Act are likely to be impacted directly or indirectly by the proposed development, the details for these measures are not repeated in this letter. In view of the issues discussed in Sections A.2.1 and A.2.2 above, mitigation measures to minimise impacts on CPW will be as follows: CPW trees will be retained as stepping-stone habitat where possible; and The retained trees will be protected during construction. A.3 Offset This section addresses additional information requested in section 2 of the letter from SEWPaC (Appendix B). A.3.1 Compensation of Residual Impacts The proponent has initiated negotiations with the Western Sydney Parklands Trust to purchase 53 BioBanking Ecosystem credits for CPW, i.e. HN528 credits. At the time of writing, Western Sydney Parklands Trust had only 49 HN528 credits left for sale. Due to the BioBanking scheme following open market demands, the availability and price of credits change all the time. The commencement of clearing and construction will be subject to the correct amount of credits being purchased and retired, if the project is approved. All HN528 credits available on the market have passed through the same rigorous assessment under the BioBanking scheme (DECC, 2007) and are assumed to be of similar environmental value. Due to the fact that additional information has been requested on a specific offset, it is assumed, for the purpose of this letter, that all 53 credits will be bought from Western Sydney Parklands Trust. CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX 8 28 JANUARY 2014

9 These HN528 credits have been approved and issued by OEH and the BioBanking Agreement document (Agreement ID 70) is available on the BioBanking Public Register on: This agreement is binding under the NSW TSC Act and is in accordance with the NSW BioBanking methodology (OEH, 2012). The agreement document contains a detailed description of the offset, including size, location, condition and proposed management actions, some of which are summarised below. The management actions are mandatory, subject to regular monitoring and are funded in perpetuity by the NSW BioBanking scheme (DECC, 2007). The proposed offset is owned by Western Sydney Parklands Trust and contains the following two sites: Cecil Park South-East (Lot 3 in DP ); and Chandos West (Lot/s 1-4 in DP , Lot 122 in DP and Lot D6 in DP ). Cecil Park South-East does not contain any CPW and therefore did not generate the type of credits required for this project. Chandos West contains ha of CPW, which generated a total of 96 CPW HN528 credits. A full list of mandatory management actions and their implementation timeframe for this offset can be found in Annexure C2 of the BioBanking agreement document ID70 on the BioBanking public register. A.3.2 Description of Offset The details in this section are presented to satisfy the request for additional information by SEWPaC as shown in Appendix B. The information is extracted from the above mentioned BioBanking Agreement Document ID 70. The information within the BioBanking Agreement document has been provided by a third party and verified by OEH. It has therefore not been scrutinised by Cumberland Ecology nor has any staff member of Cumberland Ecology visited the offset. i. Location of Offset Chandos West is known as Walgrove Rd, Chandos Rd and Chandos Rd, in Horsley Park NSW, The site comprises Lots 1-4 in DP , Lot 122 in DP and Lot D6 in DP The total size of the offset is hectares. It contains three vegetation communities in various conditions: 5.69 ha of Forest Red Gum Rough-barked Apple grassy woodland on alluvial flats of the Cumberland Plain, Sydney Basin (HN526): o 0.59 ha in low condition; o 2.1 ha in moderate/good condition; and o 3.0 ha in moderate/good condition but weedy ha of Grey Box Forest Red Gum grassy woodland on flats of the Cumberland Plain, Sydney Basin (HN528): o 1.03 ha in low condition; and CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX 9 28 JANUARY 2014

10 o 9.22 ha in moderate to good condition ha of Grey Box Forest Red Gum grassy woodland on shale of the southern Cumberland Plain, Sydney Basin (HN529) in moderate to good condition. ii. Site Condition In order to assess the quality of the vegetation under the BioBanking scheme, ten variables are collected within a 20 x 20m vegetation quadrat, such as number of native species, percent native foliage cover per stratum, percent foliage cover of weeds, metres of fallen logs and number of tree hollows. These variables are then entered into the BioBanking calculator which generates a site quality score for each vegetation plot compared to the scientifically established benchmark values for that vegetation community (DECC, 2009). The average quality of the vegetation within the three flora quadrats conducted in CPW at Chandos West is 45% of the CPW benchmark values (DECC, 2009). In comparison, the average quality of the CPW on the impact site at 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville is 33% of the CPW benchmark values. This suggests that the vegetation on the offset site is in better condition than on the impact site. Additionally, the offset site has already been managed for conservation and the condition of the vegetation has been improved over the last three years (Toolijooa, 2011). The management actions performed between January 2009 and June 2011 include removal of woody weeds, removal of exotic vines, planting of native trees, removal of litter and installation of fencing around the site. The current condition is described as a sustainable bushland remnant which requires little work other than sporadic maintenance sweeps to prevent the reoccurrence of woody weeds (Toolijooa, 2011), which suggests that the offset is in good condition and sustainable in perpetuity. iii. Site Context The eastern section of Chandos West forms part of the Eastern Creek riparian corridor, which connects the Nurragingy Reserve located 8km north of the site to the Western Sydney Parklands located 2km south of the site. The Prospect reservoir is located 1km to the east of Chandos West. The proposed offset has therefore a much better connectivity to other reserves and patches of remnant vegetation than the impact site, which is completely isolated and surrounded by development. iv. Species Stocking Rate The Chandos West offset site has not been assessed for threatened species in order the sell species credits under the BioBanking scheme (DECC, 2007). A detailed survey for threatened species was therefore not necessary and has not been conducted. The BioBanking scheme assumes that if vegetation such as CPW is conserved and actively management, it will automatically provide improved habitat for threatened species associated with the vegetation community. Due to the size and connectivity to other reserves, it can be assumed that Chandos West provides better habitat and a higher presence of flora and fauna species than the isolated and fragmented patches of CPW on the impact site. CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX JANUARY 2014

11 v. Management of Offset The BioBanking agreement constitutes a legal commitment by the land owner to execute management actions within the scope and time frame detailed in the agreement. Annual reporting and monitoring is mandatory and subject to scrutiny by OEH prior to releasing management funds every year. Additionally, the BioBanking scheme contains clauses of noncompliance if these obligations are not met. The BioBanking agreement contains: Over 30 standard management actions, including fencing, weed control, feral animal control, retention of timber, exclusion of disturbance, etc.; Several additional management actions; Map of management zones and descriptions; Planting schedule for each management zone where appropriate; Weed Management Plan with methods of eradication, time frames, monitoring and reporting templates; Fire Management Plan with prescribed burns, timing, monitoring and reporting templates; and Feral Animal Management Plan with methods, timing, monitoring and reporting templates. A full list of these management actions and the land owner s obligations can be found in Annexure C2 of the BioBanking agreement document ID70 on the BioBanking public register. A.3.3 Adequacy of Offset The adequacy of the proposed offset has been assessed in accordance with the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (SEWPaC, 2012), the EPBC Calculator and the assessment guidelines (DoE, 2013). The offsite conservation of CPW will be an adequate offset for the proposed development under the EPBC Environmental Offset Policy and will result in a net environmental gain for the following reasons: The patch of CPW placed under conservation by retiring the 53 ecosystem credits will constitute a direct offset; The conservation management actions on the offset commence before or at the same time as the impact occurs, due to the retirement of credits before clearing and construction; The CPW on the offset site will be managed for conservation in perpetuity with permanent funding secured in a government trust; The management actions, such as weed control, feral animal control, fencing, replanting and fire management, of the offset are subject to mandatory and funded annual monitoring and reporting under the BioBanking scheme; The risk of loss in environmental value of the offset is low, due to the strict management and monitoring rules under the BioBanking scheme; and The offset cannot be re-used as an offset (i.e. no double-dipping) under the BioBanking scheme (DECC, 2007) and the conservation status of the land is permanently attached to the title. CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX JANUARY 2014

12 A.4 References CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY 2013a. BioBanking Assessment Report for BioBanking Statement Application, 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville. CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY 2013b. Red Flag Variation Report for BioBanking Statement Application at 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville. CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY 2013c. Species Impact Statement for 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville, NSW. DECC BioBanking - Biodiversity Banking and Offsets Scheme: Scheme Overview, Sydney South, NSW, Department of Environment and Climate Change. DECC BioBanking Vegetation Benchmarks Database, Hurstville, NSW, Department of Environment and Climate Change. DOE How to use the Offsets Assessment Guide. OEH Draft BioBanking Assessment Methodology, Hurstville, NSW, Office of Environment and Heritage. SEWPAC Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Environmental Offsets Policy. October 2012, Canberra, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. SLR Flora & Fauna Assessment Report for No. 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville, Lane Cove NSW. TERESA JAMES Flora Report for 16 Balmoral Road, Kellyville. TOOLIJOOA Priority Sites Contract Final Report Western Sydney Parklands Trust. CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX JANUARY 2014

13 Appendix B Request for Additional Information CUMBERLAND ECOLOGY LET8.DOCX JANUARY 2014

14

15

16