biolink ecological consultants east coomera koala population … › documents › ma ›...
TRANSCRIPT
Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
P a g e 20 | 95
20
The extent of the grid cells that recorded significant koala activity levels
consistent with established koala home range use and breeding activity (i.e. >
23% in higher habitat quality areas and > 10% in lower quality upland areas)
appears to have increased in the north-eastern section of the study area in
2017 compared to the results from 2006-07.
Note: Some private property owners for Lots that still support reasonably
substantial areas of bushland habitat elected to decline approval for access to
undertake the koala surveys in 2017. These sites are reasonably evident as
areas of forest cover without corresponding koala activity cells in Figure 2.
3.2 Koala sightings A total of 37 different adult koalas were observed during the East Coomera
field surveys including 14 males (37.8%) and 23 females (62.2%). All but four
of these were recorded within either our radial search sites or transect search
areas. Seven adult koalas were observed within the 106 x 25 m radial
searches at SAT sites (covering 20.78 ha) and 30 adult koalas were observed
within the 72 x strip transect searches (covering 63.16 ha), which included
four of the SAT koala sightings (see Table 4 and Appendix 3). Transect
search locations are depicted in Figure 4. Full koala sighting details are
provided in Appendix 4.
Seven of the 23 adult females (30.4%) that were sighted had a dependent
young that was obvious when examined through binoculars. Two of the adult
males (14.3%) and six of the adult females (26.1%) showed obvious signs of
disease (i.e. cystitis and/or conjunctivitis). These koalas tended to be in the
southern and eastern sections of the study area. All other observed koalas
appeared to be in good to average body condition with no obvious signs of
illness. Sighting locations are illustrated on Figure 6.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 493
P a g e 23 | 95
23 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
3.3 Koala density and size estimation
Separate koala density estimates were derived for both the SAT-based radial
koala search results (7 koalas sighted from 106 radial searches) and the strip
transect search results (30 koalas sighted from 72 strip transects) as detailed
below.
Density estimate 1: SAT-based radial searches
A density estimate of 0.34 ± 0.05 (SE) koalas per hectare (ha-1) was derived
from the 106 SAT-based radial surveys.
Density estimate 2: Transect searches
A density estimate of 0.47 ± 0.06 (SE) koalas ha-1 was derived from the 72
strip transect surveys.
Density estimate 3: Combined SAT-Transect density estimate
The Shapiro-Wilk test results for the two koala survey datasets indicated that
neither was normally distributed (radial searches W = 0.2047, P < 0.001;
transect searches W = 0.4491, P < 0.001). A Kolmogorov-Smirnov two-
sample test indicated that the two survey datasets do not follow the same
distribution (K-S D = 0.2306, P = 0.017). Both datasets were subsequently
standardized and transformed prior to running a Levene’s test, which
indicated that the variance of the two datasets was significantly different (F =
16.057, 177df, P < 0.001). A corresponding t-test for unequal variances
indicated that the two samples were significantly different (t = -2.4801, 140df,
P = 0.014).
A combined SAT-transect density estimate, although not statistically
supported in this case, would produce a density estimate of 0.41 ± 0.05 (SD)
koalas ha-1.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 496
P a g e 24 | 95
24 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
Population size estimate The koala density estimate derived from the SAT-based radial searches is
directly comparable to that derived using the same survey methodology in
2006-07 of 0.23 ± 0.03 (SE) koalas ha-1. Transect searches were not
undertaken for the East Coomera study area in 2006-07 and in 2017 the
results from the transect searches were heavily influenced by two survey sites
in the most densely populated section in the far east of the East Coomera
study area, which both resulted in four koala sightings. If these two sites were
removed from the dataset the transect-based density estimate would fall to
0.36 ± 0.057 (SE) koalas ha-1. The narrowest confidence intervals (error
margins) were produced by the SAT-based radial search results, which are
arguably more reliable given the prolonged search effort applied at SAT sites
for faecal pellet surveys and tree health assessments.
In 2006-07, the koala density estimate was extrapolated across 2,217 koala
habitat hectares to derive an overall population estimate of 510 ± 129 (SE)
koalas. The equivalent analysis for 2017 involved extrapolating the koala
density estimate of 0.34 ± 0.05 (SE) derived from the SAT-based radial
searches across an estimated current total area of 1,467 habitat ha remaining
in the East Coomera study area to derive a current koala population
estimate for the East Coomera study area of 499 ± 74 (SE) koalas.
For comparison purposes, an equivalent estimate was derived by digitising
forested areas from Google earth imagery captured in May 2016, which
identified a total of 1,437 ha of potential koala habitat across the East
Coomera study area, illustrated in Figure 5. The subsequent koala population
estimate derived from this approach was 489 ± 72 (SE) koalas.
Note: The koala density estimates derived from the 2017 surveys represent
average estimates for the East Coomera study area. When considered at the
scale of individual SAT survey sites (n = 106), koala density estimates ranged
from 0 to 10.2 koalas ha-1 and from individual transect survey sites (n = 72),
from 0 to 8 koalas ha-1.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 497
P a g e 25 | 95
25 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
Figure 5. Digitised forest areas (potential koala habitat) using Google earth imagery captured
in May 2016 for the East Coomera study area.
Despite a reduction in available koala habitat hectares by approximately 34%
and relocation of 180 koalas from development sites through the City of Gold
Coast’s East Coomera Koala Conservation and Translocation Program, the
koala population size appears to be very similar now to that in 2007, albeit
with koalas now occurring at higher average densities within a reduced area
of available habitat.
3.4 Koala Meta-population Model The koala meta-population model produced from the 2017 SAT surveys
delineates locations of current significant koala activity across the East
Coomera study area, supporting resident koalas with established home
ranges and breeding activity (Figure 6). The vast majority of koalas that were
observed during the surveys were located within the modelled areas of
significant activity.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 498
P a g e 26 | 95
26 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
When compared to the model derived from the baseline surveys in 2006,
there are many areas of similarity confirming that koalas are still resident in
the majority of previously occupied locations, where suitable habitat remains.
Some clear points of difference in 2017 include:
I. A substantial reduction and fragmentation of bushland habitat
and associated evidence of established resident koalas within
central and western sections of the study area where urban
development has been focused.
II. An apparent increase in areas supporting established resident
koalas in the north-eastern section of the study area beyond
the extent of intensive urban development.
III. The 2017 model depicts some areas of expected significant
koala activity that coincide with properties where permission
to undertake the survey work was declined. The modelling
has captured these areas due to survey results from adjoining
areas. Field surveys would be necessary at these specific
locations to verify and refine the modelling at site-scale.
IV. It is evident that the majority of areas that support remaining
koala habitat and resident koalas within the urban footprint will
be lost as development of the new Coomera Town Centre
proceeds. Remaining habitat patches within the urban area
are highly fragmented and the resident koalas in these areas
will be at increased risk without active management.
V. Koalas persist within habitat patches and adjoining residential
areas in the far eastern section of the urban footprint away
from the emerging Town Centre and have some prospects for
future survival with ongoing community support and
connectivity with the rural landscape.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 499
Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
P a g e 28 | 95
28
3.5 Vegetation condition and sapling health Data pertaining to the assessment of tree health for 2,615 trees across 106
survey sites is presented in Appendix 5.
Surveyed trees Overall, 243 trees were assessed as falling into the highest health category
(3) having > 70% expected healthy foliage cover, while 1,909 trees were
assigned to category (2) with 30-70% expected healthy foliage, and 463 trees
were assigned to the lowest health category (1) as having < 30% expected
healthy foliage (see Figures 7 and 8).
With respect to the proportion of trees assigned to each condition score at
each SAT site, all sites except for four (P323, P333, P359, P403) were
assessed as having > 50% of trees in the middle health category (i.e. 30-70%
estimated proportion of expected healthy foliage present). Three sites (P323,
P333 and P344) recorded > 40% of surveyed trees falling into the lower
health category, while 11 sites (P016, P188, P303, P323, P325, P333, P338,
P344, P359, P397, P403) were assessed as having > 20% of trees in the
lowest health category (see Appendix 5). These sites tended to be located in
the northeast, southeast and northwest sections of the study area.
Preferred Koala Food Trees Preferred Koala Food Trees (PKFTs) (i.e. forest red gum E. tereticornis,
Tallowwood E. microcorys, small-fruited grey gum E. propinqua, swamp
mahogany E. robusta, and red mahogany E. resinifera) were present at 73.6%
(n = 78) of the 106 sites and represented ≥ 20% of surveyed trees at 31.1% of
sites. A total of 380 PKFTs were assessed with 74.21% of these assigned to
the middle health category (2), displaying 30-70% expected healthy foliage
cover (see Table 5).
Nine sites (8.49%) contained more than one PKFT species (P095, P130,
P161, P176, P191, P209, P341, P376, P399). Forest red gum was the most
abundant PKFT present (n = 303), occurring within 57 sites and the sole
PKFT present at 54 sites. The second most abundant PKFT was small-fruited
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 501
P a g e 31 | 95
31 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
recorded mean FPC readings above 80%, predominantly in north-eastern
sections beyond urban areas. The remaining mean FPC readings for 15 sites
that fell below 40% corresponded mainly to locations that were within or
adjoining urban areas or partially cleared rural lands.
Note: The surveys did not identify any overt signs of over-browsing by koalas
at this stage, although there were some possible early signs on the Coleman
Road peninsula area. The absence of PKFT saplings from around half of the
survey sites and a general low proportional representation raises some
potential concerns that may warrant a management response in conjunction
with ongoing habitat restoration programs and future monitoring.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 504
Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
P a g e 32 | 95
32
Figure 7. Health condition scores for non-sapling trees surveyed within SAT sites. Rating 1 = < 30% expected healthy foliage present, Rating 2 = 30-70% expected
healthy foliage present, Rating 3 = > 70% expected healthy foliage present (continued in Figure 7).
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 505
P a g e 33 | 95
33 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
Figure 8. Health condition scores for non-sapling trees surveyed within SAT sites. Rating 1 = < 30% expected healthy foliage present, Rating 2 = 30-70% expected
healthy foliage present, Rating 3 = > 70% expected healthy foliage present (continued from Figure 7).
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 506
P a g e 49 | 95
49 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
It is very clear that the urban sub-population in the emerging Coomera Town
Centre section of the urban area is at significant risk and is unlikely to be
viable over the longer term. In peripheral sections of the Urban Footprint that
adjoin rural areas, koala populations may continue to persist by recruiting
dispersing-aged koalas from the potential future source population in the rural
landscape.
The model outcomes suggest that the future of the remaining urban koala
population in peripheral areas to the east of the emerging Coomera Town
Centre (such as in the Coomera Waters and Coleman peninsula areas) would
be unlikely to be significantly altered by the rescue and relocation or
translocation of between 40 to 80 koalas from remaining habitat patches that
will be impacted by pending development activities. These koalas would likely
be lost from the remaining urban sub-population without intervention. The
potential relocation of some of these koalas could potentially enhance
prospects for establishing a stable source population in rural areas to the
north of the Urban Footprint, although the currently available habitat area is
already predominantly occupied and could only support a preliminary estimate
of approximately 25-30% of the koalas that are expected to be displaced over
the immediate to short term. Additional recipient sites would need to be
identified in the Gold Coast hinterland to accommodate the remaining koalas.
4.0 Discussion
Despite a reduction in available koala habitat and relocation of 180 koalas
from development sites through the City of Gold Coast’s East Coomera Koala
Conservation and Translocation Program over the past decade, the koala
population at East Coomera appears to be very similar in size in 2017 to that
in 2007, with koalas now occurring at higher average densities across the
reduced area of remaining habitat.
The reasons for the similarity in koala population estimates from the baseline
surveys in 2006 to the current surveys in 2017 are likely to reflect a
combination of factors. In particular, these factors are considered to include i)
expansion in significant use of suitable habitat beyond the extent of the Urban
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 522
P a g e 50 | 95
50 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
Footprint in the northeast of the study area, and ii) increased average koala
densities within available habitat across the study area. This increase in koala
density is likely to be an artifact of the habitat clearing process for the new
Coomera Town Centre and the associated effect of condensing remaining
koalas into smaller and more isolated areas of remaining habitat.
The baseline survey report in 2007 estimated a maximum carrying capacity at
that time of 674 koalas (Biolink 2007b). Given that approximately 750 ha
(34%) of available koala habitat has been cleared since 2007, the estimated
carrying capacity would equate to approximately 441 koalas in 2017 and is
only marginally higher than the current lower range koala population estimate
of 425 koalas (i.e. 499 minus 74 SE). Hence, the current East Coomera koala
population is likely to be close to maximum carrying capacity and may have
already exceeded this estimated threshold in some smaller and more isolated
habitat patches. If the City of Gold Coast had not undertaken the koala
relocation program between late 2009 and early 2014, and had some of these
koalas survived clearing operations to be displaced into adjoining areas of
koala habitat, the koala population is likely to have exceeded the carrying
capacity well before the current time, with a likely corresponding increased
incidence of clinical signs of disease and decline in habitat health.
The increased average koala activity levels and densities within remaining
habitat areas pose some concerns. This will need to be monitored to confirm
that the habitat is coping with increased browsing pressures and that the
incidence of clinical disease does not increase within the koala population due
to added social pressures and interaction between koalas. The 2017 surveys
did not detect any marked increase in the expected incidence of overt clinical
disease amongst the sighted koalas and no overt signs of significant over-
browsing by koalas was detected at this stage.
The meta-population model identified an apparent increase in areas
supporting established resident koalas and breeding activity in the north-
eastern section of the study area beyond the extent of intensive urban
development within the urban footprint. This lends support to the case for
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 523
P a g e 51 | 95
51 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
considering this area as the preferred ‘core’ location for re-establishing a
sustainable koala population within the rural landscape.
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The results from this study indicate that the establishment and protection of a
sustainable koala population within the rural landscape at East Coomera is
still possible, despite major impacts on the habitat and the population over the
past decade. A program to establish a sustainable koala population would
require a concerted and well-planned effort targeting the entire population with
coordinated actions aimed to maximize outcomes and efficiencies. This would
require a multifaceted strategy to direct and coordinate the blend of essential
actions. An ongoing monitoring program would be necessary in order to
regularly evaluate the efficacy of specific measures and to respond decisively
to any adverse or unexpected events.
The window for assertive action towards establishing a sustainable source
population of koalas in the study area is rapidly narrowing as habitat clearing
continues for the new Coomera Town Centre and adjoining residential and
commercial areas and threats continue to increase, particularly within the
urban landscape.
The urban landscape is rapidly being converted from a predominance of large
and well-connected habitat patches that were characteristic of the area 10
years ago, to increasingly fragmented, isolated and smaller habitat patches,
embedded within a high-risk, intensive urban matrix. The chances for
dispersing young koalas or displaced koalas to safely negotiate and traverse
the high-risk urban environment to locate suitable habitat and to establish new
home range areas are now extremely remote.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 524
P a g e 52 | 95
52 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
6.1 TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE KOALA POPULATION
6.1.1 The concept The development of the new Coomera Town Centre will ultimately remove the
majority of the koala habitat within the Urban Footprint at East Coomera. The
Population Viability Analysis modelling that was undertaken as a component
of the koala population study in 2006-07 indicated that the koala population
appeared likely to be sustainable at that time without the impost of further
habitat loss, increased threats and elevated mortality associated with
intensive urban development.
The concept of re-establishing a sustainable koala population at East
Coomera would involve re-creating a large area of connected habitat outside
the Urban Footprint and ensuring this area is protected and set aside for the
primary purpose of conservation for koalas and biodiversity. The area would
need to be of adequate size to ultimately support greater than the Minimum
Viable Population (MVP) of koalas necessary to maintain genetic diversity and
would need to include sufficient established habitat to support an initial core
population. Ideally, this area would also accommodate at least some
additional koalas that will be displaced as development proceeds within the
Urban Footprint. Ensuring the area is able to support greater than the
minimum viable number of koalas would be of vital importance to allow scope
for population expansion over time and to cope with potential future stochastic
events such as wildfire or drought conditions. The aim would be to offset the
ultimate displacement of the original stable population, not by conventional
site-by-site offsetting, but by protecting, restoring and managing sufficient
connected habitat to provide a new secure ‘core’ area capable of sustaining
the bulk of the population into the future.
6.1.2 Benefits The East Coomera koala population remains the largest population within the
City of Gold Coast east of the M1. The protection and management of this
population would make an important contribution to biodiversity conservation
within southeast Queensland and would help to maintain and support overall
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 525
P a g e 53 | 95
53 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
genetic diversity within the broader koala population across the City. An
ongoing East Coomera koala population would provide a wonderful legacy for
Gold Coast City residents and could provide an important resource for nature-
based tourism and a potential planning model for conservation of koala
populations that adjoin high-density residential areas. The population could
also provide an ongoing educational resource and a potential source for
recruiting young koalas in the future should it be feasible or necessary to re-
establish koala populations in other parts of the City.
In the face of widespread koala population declines in southeast Queensland,
the loss of the East Coomera koala population would be a sad outcome.
However, conversely the successful re-establishment of a sustainable koala
population would be a great achievement for the City and a fitting response to
the threats posed by urbanisation throughout much of the area that historically
supported this significant koala population.
6.1.3 Expected outcomes if no specific action is taken Without a well-designed and multi-layered conservation program aimed to
secure a new core area with capacity to sustain a minimum viable population,
the East Coomera koala population will likely be lost over the ensuing several
decades. This would constitute the loss of a significant opportunity to
demonstrate what could still potentially be achieved for the future of the koala
population by exploring beyond immediate constraints and finding solutions to
make the concept of securing a sustainable koala population a reality.
6.1.4 What will be needed to support a sustainable koala population The original koala population study for East Coomera recommended a target
of 1,500 ha of consolidated koala habitat to sustain at least the estimated
MVP of 170 koalas (Biolink 2007b). This area was considered necessary
based on the overall density estimate of 0.23 koalas ha-1 derived from the
2006 surveys and to allow for a 50% habitat occupancy rate to accommodate
population contraction and expansion associated with future stochastic events
such as wildfires and droughts. Whilst this still holds valid as the ultimate
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 526
P a g e 54 | 95
54 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
target, an area of 1,150 ha could be considered an immediate target value to
accomodate an average density of 0.30 koalas ha-1 and 50% occupancy.
The level of threats associated with roads, dogs, disease and bushfires within
a future koala conservation area would need to be carefully monitored and
managed to ensure that koala mortality rates are maintained at adequately
low levels ideally below 2% as was factored into the original baseline 2007
PVA modelling.
The configuration and design of the koala conservation area could be guided
by recent advances in understanding of landscape ecology requirements for
koala populations. For example, the work of McAlpine et al. (2006) confirmed
the importance of size of forest habitat patches, the spatial configuration and
quality of habitat, and habitat connectivity for the occurrence and persistence
of koala populations. McAlpine et al. (2005, 2007) established that koala
populations were less likely to occur in areas of fragmented habitat where
habitat patches were less than around 50 to 100 ha in size. Rhodes et al.
(2008) found that koala habitat-occupancy values were best described by
threshold models, rather than by linear relationships, whereby minimum
requirements for native forest cover of around 60% were identified for the
Noosa area in order to support and sustain koala populations. Rhodes et al.
(2006, 2014) reported that the probability of koala presence increased with the
amount of primary and secondary quality koala habitat and decreased in
areas supporting high proportions of marginal koala habitat as well as when
the density of roads increased. From the perspective of landscape genetics,
the work of Dudaniec et al. (2013) found that koala gene flow is correlated
with foliage projective cover (FPC) until it falls below approximately 30% (as
commonly occurs with significant habitat clearing and disturbance effects),
with only highways and freeways further explaining genetic distance beyond
the effect of FPC.
These research findings and others collectively confirm the importance of
ensuring that any future koala conservation area for East Coomera is based
on a suitably large area of koala habitat that is centered in one consolidated
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 527
P a g e 55 | 95
55 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
location where gaps between habitat patches can be largely replaced by
restored forest areas.
6.1.5 Challenges posed by the two adjoining landscapes The challenges associated with establishing and retaining a sustainable koala
population at East Coomera extend beyond the need to ensure the protection
and restoration of a suitably large and consolidated area of koala habitat. In
addition it will be vital to minimize the impacts associated with threatening
processes and to reduce koala mortality rates. This will involve the need for
risk mitigation measures at the interface between the urban and rural
landscapes, where the home ranges of some animals may extend over the
notional line where the two sub-populations meet, and across which sub-adult
koalas may disperse in either direction. Both the urban and rural landscapes
present their own compliment of threats and opportunities that need to be
identified, considered and addressed.
The following sections propose the basis for developing a comprehensive
planning framework to establish and maintain a sustainable koala population
at East Coomera into the future.
6.2 URBAN KOALAS 6.2.1 Management during future clearing activities
As approved future clearing activities progress within the East Coomera urban
area, remaining resident koalas will be increasingly likely to be displaced into
the surrounding urban landscape, where they will be at grave risk due to road
strike, dog attack and disease.
A. Spotting koalas during clearing
It is vitally important to ensure that koalas are not missed during pre-
clearing surveys and clearing activities on future development sites.
Koalas are generally cryptic in dense vegetation and even the most
experienced ecologists and koala spotters will inevitably miss seeing
some koalas during survey events. Hence, the following
recommendations are aimed to minimize the chances that koalas will
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 528
P a g e 56 | 95
56 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
be missed and either lost or displaced during remaining approved
clearing activities for the Coomera Town Centre.
6.2.1-A Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast require appointed koala spotters to be accredited
and highly experienced with extensive previous koala spotting work
and familiarity with the recorded distribution of koalas in the East
Coomera area.
b) City of Gold Coast require any koala sighting to be reported to the
City as soon as practicable following the sighting.
B. Assessing dispersal risks
An assessment should be undertaken of the likelihood that koalas at
each given future development site will be displaced and if considered
likely, the capacity of adjoining habitat to support additional koalas
should be evaluated. Koala densities are expected to be lower than the
current average density of 0.34 koalas ha-1 and estimated carrying
capacity of 0.3 koalas ha-1 at some future development sites where the
habitat is already highly fragmented and patch sizes are relatively
small. However, in these situations the likelihood of resident koalas
being displaced and dispersing from the location and the risks as they
venture into the urban landscape will be high.
6.2.1-B Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast require proponents to evaluate and report on the
likelihood of any resident koalas being displaced and dispersing
from future development sites into the existing urban landscape.
b) Where the likelihood of displacement and dispersal into the urban
landscape is assessed as high, the City of Gold Coast should
investigate options for the resident koalas to be recruited into an
approved research program involving relocation or translocation.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 529
P a g e 57 | 95
57 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
C. Koala relocation or translocation
The need to consider this option arises largely from the time period
since the completion of the translocation component of the City of Gold
Coast’s East Coomera Koala Conservation Project in 2014. Since that
time some future development sites within the Urban Footprint from
which koalas were translocated have not progressed to an operation
works vegetation clearing stage, allowing koalas to repopulate.
The current survey outcomes suggest that up to approximately 80
koalas are still likely to reside within future development sites in the
Urban Footprint at East Coomera. The koalas within the majority of
these sites are likely to be at serious risk at the habitat clearing stage
and are generally likely to be displaced into adjoining residential or
commercial areas. The PVA included models that allowed for potential
relocation of some koalas from future development sites inside the
Urban Footprint and re-establishment into the adjoining rural
population. The models factored in an estimated 80% rate for
successful re-establishment of relocated koalas on the basis of current
knowledge and best practice methodologies.
The remainder of the urban koala population resides in areas of
comparatively lower risk in locations such as Finnegan Reserve and
Coomera Waters Estate, where habitat areas and linkages are
protected and managed for conservation purposes. These locations
warrant special management attention to support ongoing koala
occupancy and do not require consideration for koala relocation. The
PVA models for the urban sub-population indicates that it is in decline
and is likely to continue on this trajectory, regardless of the possible
relocation of koalas at high risk to areas outside the urban landscape -
noting that these koalas would likely be lost to the urban population in
either case. However, locations such as Finnegan Reserve and
Coomera Waters are expected to receive a rescue effect with some
young koalas recruiting into these sites from the rural sub-population
via existing habitat connections. Any measures that ultimately reduce
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 530
P a g e 58 | 95
58 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
mortality and disease within the remaining urban sub-population would
improve prospects for ongoing survival. Monitoring and active
management will be necessary to support long-term persistence of the
urban sub-population given the relatively small size and pending further
reduction as development proceeds, comparatively high risks
associated with the urban environment, and overall decline trend. It
should be noted that sensitive development designs adopted for the
Coomera Waters Estate appear to have enabled the local koala
population to continue to occupy protected habitat patches,
streetscapes and parkland areas across much of the estate.
It would be regrettable not to relocate the koalas from high risk sites
within pending development areas prior to approved clearing activities,
and to thus afford these koalas strong prospects for survival and
potential future contributions to conservation of the rural sub-
population. The protection and restoration of a substantial,
consolidated area of koala habitat beyond the Urban Footprint is of
foremost importance as the essential basis to re-establish and support
a sustainable koala population over the medium term. Whilst the areas
proposed for consideration by this report would not currently support all
koalas at high risk at future development sites within the urban
landscape, there is scope to support some additional koalas – subject
to outcomes from a recommended further specific investigation to
identify optimal numbers and placement options.
The role of koala rescue and welfare (primarily provided by Wildcare
Australia and Currumbin Wildlife Hospital within Gold Coast City) also
needs to be acknowledged in regards to koala relocation within the
East Coomera population, given that koalas sometimes need to moved
away from imminent danger (within permitted distances) in response to
koala rescues and following hospital treatment.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 531
P a g e 59 | 95
59 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
6.2.1-C Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast identify potential land holdings that would be
available and suitable as recipient sites for relocated koalas within
the East Coomera rural landscape and beyond.
b) City of Gold Coast initiate a specific investigation to i) assess the
current requirements for koala relocation or translocation programs,
ii) evaluate the potential for coordinating a further relocation or
translocation program, iii) prioritise future development sites where
this would be required and confirm approximate numbers of koalas
at each site, and iv) identify and assess potential recipient sites.
c) City of Gold Coast identify future development conditioning and
communication requirements in conjunction with any future koala
relocation or translocation program to protect koalas from harm.
d) City of Gold Coast partner with Wildcare Australia and Currumbin
Wildlife Hospital to develop and refine protocols to help guide where
koalas should be released at East Coomera following rescue or
rehabilitation to support koala population and habitat management.
6.2.2 Threat mitigation
The urban koala sub-population will require actions to mitigate threats
associated particularly with road strike, domestic dog attack, and disease. A
range of suitable measures are outlined within the City of Gold Coast’s Koala
Conservation Plan for East Coomera (KCPEC) and Koala Conservation Plan
for the City (KCP) - additional recommendations in relation to risks associated
with pending habitat clearing are listed below.
A. Vehicle strike
Ongoing traffic management measures for the urban koala population
are already contained in the KCPEC and KCP, however increased local
threats during approved future clearing operations warrant further
specific consideration.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 532
P a g e 60 | 95
60 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
6.2.2-A Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast identify sections of road where risks of koala
vehicle strike are likely to increase markedly as a result of future
habitat clearing operations.
b) City of Gold Coast install mobile electronic road signage in areas
identified through recommendation a) above, in order to increase
community awareness of possible koala crossings during clearing
activities in the immediate area.
B. Domestic dog attack
Further to the dog management measures for the urban koala
population that are already contained in the KCPEC and KCP, the
following additional recommendations are proposed.
6.2.2-B Recommendations:
a) In the case of any new development sites that adjoin or contain
protected habitat areas, City of Gold Coast consider applying a
prohibition on domestic dog ownership with respect to residential
Lots that border the protected habitat areas.
b) In the case of established developments that adjoin or contain
protected habitat areas, City of Gold Coast consider developing a
targeted community awareness and education program to further
encourage responsible dog ownership.
C. Disease management
Disease poses an ongoing threat to koalas in urban landscapes where
resident koalas are likely to face added nutritional and social stress
associated with limited available habitat and safe dispersal
opportunities, and in some cases elevated koala densities.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 533
P a g e 61 | 95
61 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
6.2.2-C Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast continue to partner with Wildcare Australia and
support their activities to rescue koalas in distress and increase
community awareness in the East Coomera area and across the
City of Gold Coast.
b) City of Gold Coast continue to support ongoing koala disease and
trauma management services provided by Currumbin Wildlife
Hospital and if possible, allow more koalas to be treated locally and
improve prospects for survival where longer-term care is required.
c) City of Gold Coast continue to support and partner in future koala
research programs that seek to improve disease management and
koala survival.
6.2.3 Ongoing management
It is clear that the urban koala population will require ongoing monitoring and
an adaptive management approach into the future. The PVA modelling
indicates that although the urban sub-population at East Coomera will
continue on a decline trend over the coming decades, it is not inconceivable
for the component of the sub-population to the east of the new Town Centre to
be stabilised with active management prior to effective local extinction.
6.2.3 Recommendations:
a) Ongoing regular monitoring and an adaptive management approach
will be vital in order to respond quickly and effectively to future
challenges as they arise, such as increased bushfire risks,
vegetation dieback, or increased disease incidence or severity.
b) City of Gold Coast should install one-way koala exclusion fencing
around the periphery of Finnegan Reserve and associated
connections to the rural landscape in order to prevent young koalas
dispersing out of the reserve into the high-risk urban landscape.
This measure would also reduce risks from roaming domestic dogs
and prevent the reserve from acting as an ‘attractive sink’ for any
young koalas that recruit in from the adjoining rural sub-population.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 534
P a g e 62 | 95
62 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
c) City of Gold Coast investigate and monitor koala movement and
use of the Celestial Way underpass structure that connects
Finnegan Reserve with the rural landscape to the northeast.
Measures to improve safe koala usage and connectivity values
should be identified and implemented.
6.3 RURAL KOALAS Future prospects for an East Coomera koala population will depend upon
establishing a suitably large and contiguous area of koala habitat to support a
sustainable (source) population of koalas within the rural landscape.
6.3.1 Habitat protection and restoration
The Biolink (2007b) report recommended the need to protect and manage an
area of approximately 1,500 ha of koala habitat in order to sustain the
estimated MVP of approximately 170 koalas. Based on the findings of the
current study, we suggest an immediate target area of around 1,150 ha in
order to support a MVP at estimated Carrying Capacity, with allowance for
50% habitat occupancy at any given time and scope for moderate population
expansion. Whilst the previous recommended target area of 1,500 ha (Biolink
2007b) would afford greater certainty and provides an ultimate target, the
lesser immediate area of 1,150 ha may be more achievable over the shorter
term. As outlined in section 6.1.4, the source area for the population should
ideally be focused on a main consolidated area of habitat, supported by well-
connected habitat patches where risks are effectively managed to avoid
situations whereby dispersing-aged koalas could be drawn into patches of
suitable habitat that pose high risks (such as within the urban landscape) and
hence function as ‘attractive sink’ areas for koalas.
A. Priorities for habitat protection
The largest remaining areas of preferred koala habitat outside the Urban
Footprint at East Coomera are located to the east of Kerkin Road. The
2017 field surveys confirmed the presence of significant koala activity
within the remaining habitat in this area, with the evidence suggesting that
a substantial proportion of the available habitat is currently utilised by
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 535
P a g e 63 | 95
63 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
members of an established breeding population. Hence, remaining koala
habitat within this area constitutes the highest overall priority for immediate
protection and management for koala conservation purposes. At fine-scale
resolution the highest priority should be assigned to properties that adjoin
or are in close proximity (i.e. within around 100 m) of existing protected
habitat areas, particularly where the existing protected areas support
preferred koala food tree species and form part of connected patches of
habitat in excess of 100 ha in overall size.
6.3.1A Recommendations:
a) Recommended priority areas for consideration for koala habitat
protection, consolidation and restoration are illustrated in figure 21.
Highest priority should be assigned to Area 1, followed by Area 2 and
Area 3, and then Area 4. At a minimum, sections of Areas 5, 6 and 7
would also be necessary to satisfy the immediate area requirement of
1,150 ha. All seven areas combined would form a consolidated extent
of approximately 1,565 ha and would provide a sound basis for
establishing a sustainable koala population.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 536
P a g e 65 | 95
65 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
representation of PKFTs to assess whether site treatment or
supplementary plantings with PKFTs would be appropriate.
If the area to the east of Kerkin Road were to be secured and managed to
create a consolidated koala habitat area, the next highest priority for
protection and restoration would involve the closest portions of land to the
immediate west of Kerkin Road North that form part of Areas C, D and E
on Figure 13. The recommended target would be to add an additional
minimum area of 150 ha from the adjoining lands to form an overall koala
habitat area of at least 1,150 ha. In order for the overall area to function
effectively as a connected population, whilst ensuring that threats and
associated koala mortality rates are maintained at low levels throughout
the koala conservation area, it would be vital to also adopt measures to
mitigate risks of vehicle-strike on Kerkin Road North. In the event that
adjoining land to the north of Pimpama River (Area E on Figure 13) could
form part of a consolidated koala conservation area, it is highly probable
that dispersing koalas would readily swim across the river given its narrow
width of approximately 20 m in this section. Notwithstanding, it would be
helpful to investigate the possibility of providing a small number of bridging
structures to provide dry access for koala movement across the river.
It is not essential for all areas of protected and restored habitat to
constitute preferred koala habitat. The East Coomera koala population is
naturally distributed across a range of Regional Ecosystem types of
varying habitat quality. The objective should always be to restore areas to
the ecosystems that are best suited to each given location. Emphasis can
be placed on forest community types that naturally support preferred koala
food trees wherever this is appropriate. Koala carrying capacity and
associated koala density will vary in response to factors such as the
abundance, size, and nutritional quality of the preferred food resources, as
well as factors such as the locations where koala breeding populations are
established. Whilst forest communities where preferred koala food trees
are naturally more-abundant and nutritional values are high will be capable
of supporting higher densities of koalas and typically provide a focus for
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 538
P a g e 66 | 95
66 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
breeding activity, koalas are also able to occupy home ranges within areas
of less-optimal habitat at comparatively lower densities and can move with
greater safety through forest communities even when preferred food and
shelter resources are absent.
6.3.2 Threat mitigation
As clearly demonstrated by the PVA modelling, the establishment and
maintenance of a sustainable koala population at East Coomera will only be
achieved through a comprehensive multi-pronged strategy that combines
protecting, restoring and managing a suitably large and consolidated area of
habitat together with effective measures to reduce risks to koalas and lower
mortality rates. This includes fostering a healthy population with optimal
breeding output, opportunities for population growth and safe dispersal of sub-
adults, and healthy recovery following stochastic environmental events.
A. Vehicle strike
It would be crucial to ensure that any future consolidated koala
conservation area is kept as free as possible from sealed roads and
regular vehicle traffic. The threat associated with Kerkin Road North
would need to be carefully managed irrespective of whether the road
bisected a future koala conservation area or bordered the conservation
area on one side. Koalas should ideally be prevented from accessing
the road surface by exclusion fencing in conjunction with suitable
crossing structures for koalas and other fauna species.
6.3.2-A Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast ensure that further new sealed roads are not
established within any future consolidated koala conservation area
other than as required for essential management purposes
including bushfire management.
b) City of Gold Coast ensure that measures to minimise risks to koalas
associated with Kerkin Road North are identified and implemented,
with the specific design of suitable measures dependent upon future
goals for the rural koala population at East Coomera.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 539
P a g e 67 | 95
67 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
B. Wild dogs
The City of Gold Coast undertakes wild dog and fox monitoring and
management programs within the reserves at East Coomera. Ongoing
wild dog management at East Coomera has potentially assisted in
allowing the koala population to expand within the rural landscape over
the last decade. This effort will need to be continued and expanded to
encompass any additional protected and restored habitat areas that
form components of an overall koala conservation area within the rural
landscape. This effort should continue to extend into connected
patches of habitat within the Urban Footprint that support koalas such
as Finnegan Reserve and linkages between the rural landscape and
Condor Reserve in Coomera Waters estate.
6.3.2-B Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast continue wild dog and fox monitoring and
management programs focused on the reserves at East Coomera
and expand this effort into any additional protected and restored
areas that form part of a future koala conservation area.
b) City of Gold Coast liaise with landowners in the rural landscape at
East Coomera extending outward from existing reserves with a view
to forming ongoing cooperative partnerships for wild dog and fox
management to eventually encompass the entire area supporting
the future koala source population.
C. Disease
The prevalence of koala disease and incidence of clinical illness is
expected to be lower within the rural landscape than within urban areas
where inflated koala densities and associated social and nutritional
stresses are more likely to be heightened. Nevertheless, disease levels
should be monitored and managed within the rural landscape in
conjunction with regular assessment of breeding rates. The impacts of
koala Chlamydial disease would be expected to diminish over time if a
large and consolidated area of habitat can be protected and restored
outside the Urban Footprint. The PVA modelling has predicted the
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 540
P a g e 68 | 95
68 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
positive effects on the koala population should the current average
annual breeding rate of approximately 53% increase by 5% to around
58%. The recommendations for disease management in 6.2.2-C also
apply to the rural landscape, with the following additions.
6.3.2-C Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast implement an annual koala monitoring program
for the rural landscape with particular focus on assessing breeding
rates, obvious clinical signs of disease, and the extent of koala
occupancy.
b) City of Gold Coast evaluate the potential for increasing breeding
rates via a targeted Chlamydia vaccine program for the rural
landscape if considered necessary, based on outcomes from koala
monitoring over five years and progress towards establishing a
large, consolidated koala conservation area in the rural landscape.
c) Individual koalas that are rescued for veterinary assessment from
the East Coomera koala population should be routinely vaccinated
against Chlamydial disease when this becomes possible.
D. Bushfire
The PVA modelling has illustrated the important role of bushfire
management for the future of the East Coomera koala population. This
applies to each individual reserve and bushland patch, as well as to the
notional large, consolidated koala conservation area and source
population within the rural landscape. The aim should be to ensure that
the overall impact of wildfire events as a result of the combination of
frequency and severity does not increase and ideally reduces over time
through ongoing dedicated management.
6.3.2-D Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast continue to work with the rural bushfire brigades
and the State rural fire authority to minimise the risks of widespread
and intense wildfire events.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 541
P a g e 69 | 95
69 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
b) Bushfire planning requirements should be incorporated into the
management planning process for a potential future consolidated
koala conservation area within the rural landscape including the
need for fire trails, fire breaks, bushfire assets and regular hazard
reduction programs.
6.3.3 Ongoing management
A strategic planning framework and a detailed management plan would be
essential to guide establishment and ongoing management of a consolidated
koala conservation area within the rural landscape at East Coomera.
6.3.3 Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast prepare a strategic plan to evaluate and guide
further investigation and potential establishment of a consolidated
koala conservation area within the rural landscape.
b) Subject to outcomes from the above action, the City of Gold Coast
amend and update the relevant Koala Conservation Plans to
incorporate relevant planning and management actions.
6.4 URBAN-RURAL INTERFACE AREAS
A. Inter-Regional Transport Corridor (IRTC) Optimal designs and positioning for fauna connectivity structures
across the future IRTC route should be guided by the extent of
established and planned urban development on the immediate
Coomera Town Centre side of the route. The location and extent of
planned future habitat protection and restoration programs for the rural
landscape side of the IRTC should also be taken into consideration.
Specific fauna connectivity structures should only be provided in
locations that link through to protected and comparatively safe habitat
areas on the Coomera Town Centre side of the IRTC. Otherwise, the
structures could facilitate fauna movement into small and fragmented
habitat patches and linear corridors within the urban landscape where
risks are high.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 542
P a g e 70 | 95
70 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
6.4A Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast liaise with the Department of Transport and Main
Roads (DTMR) to request fauna specific connectivity structures to
be factored into the engineering designs for the planned future
IRTC at an early stage – with reference to recommended general
locations illustrated in Figure 22.
b) City of Gold Coast seek further advice on the types of connectivity
structures likely to be most effective for koalas and other fauna
following consultation with DTMR regarding possible options for
consideration.
Figure 22. Recommended general locations for specific fauna crossing structures in
conjunction with the planned IRTC. Green highlighted sections are suggested for
consideration regardless of the extent of potential future koala habitat restoration within the
rural landscape. The pink highlighted location should only be considered if areas to the
immediate south and north are planned for habitat restoration programs.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 543
P a g e 71 | 95
71 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
B. Urban-Rural interface
The urban-rural interface should be carefully managed to allow for
some interaction between the urban and rural koala sub-populations,
whilst endeavoring to ensure that the urban landscape does not
operate as an attractive sink area for young koalas dispersing in from
the future rural source population.
6.4B Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast liaise with land owners in the urban-rural
interface area to investigate possibilities for installing one-way koala
exclusion fencing in key strategic locations to minimise chances of
dispersing-aged koalas entering residential areas from the rural
landscape.
b) City of Gold Coast seek to focus potential future koala dispersal
between the urban and rural landscapes to vegetated corridors that
connect to conservation areas such as Finnegan Reserve and to
constrain koalas to the reserve system where risks are
comparatively low. This would require the installation of one-way
koala exclusion fencing along linkages and reserve boundaries.
c) The above approach would not be necessary in the case of
Coomera Waters estate where parkland and streetscape plantings
and retained habitat patches facilitate koala movement within the
estate and into adjoining retained and restored habitat at the rural
interface.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 544
P a g e 72 | 95
72 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
6.5 MONITORING The East Coomera koala population should ideally be monitored annually at
this point in order to support an adaptive management approach and to fine-
tune management actions. Periodic follow-up PVA should be undertaken to
help evaluate management outcomes and guide future programs.
6.5 Recommendations:
a) City of Gold Coast develop a targeted koala monitoring program for
the East Coomera population specifically designed to assess key
information for strategic planning purposes and to guide immediate
management.
b) City of Gold Coast develop a more-intensive monitoring program for
implementation each five years over the next decade in order to i)
gauge changes in the distribution, density, occupancy level and
estimated size of the koala population, ii) identify and assess any
changes in health, mortality and breeding rates, iii) establish the
level of use of initial restored habitat areas, and iv) identify any
changes in habitat health using the tree health assessment data
collected for the 2017 surveys as a current baseline.
c) City of Gold Coast undertake follow-up PVA in 2027 to further guide
ongoing koala conservation actions.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 545
P a g e 73 | 95
73 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
7.0 References
Biolink. 2005. An ecological overview of koalas and their habitat on the Innes
Peninsula, Port Macquarie NSW. Unpublished report.
Biolink. 2007a. Koala Habitat and Population Assessment for Gold Coast City LGA.
Final report prepared for Gold Coast City Council. Biolink Ecological Consultants.
Uki. NSW.
Biolink. 2007b. Conserving koalas in the Coomera-Pimpama Koala Habitat Area: a
view to the future. Final report prepared for Gold Coast City Council. Biolink
Ecological Consultants. Uki. NSW.
Dudaniec, R., Rhodes, J., Worthington Wilmer, J., Lyons, M., Lee, K., McAlpine, C.
and Carrick, F. 2013. Using multilevel models to identify drivers of landscape-genetic
structure among management areas. Molecular Ecology 22: 3752-3765.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Nature Conservation (Koala) Conservation
Plan 2006 and Management Program 2006-2016 Queensland Government -
Environmental Protection Agency.
Kimura, M. and Crow, J.F. 1963. The measurement of effective population number.
Evolution 17:279-88.
Lacy, R.C. and Pollak, J.P. 2014. Vortex: A Stochastic Simulation of the Extinction
Process. Version 10.0. Chicago Zoological Society, Brookfield, Illinois, USA.
Lacy, R.C., Miller, P.S. and Traylor-Holzer, K. 2015. Vortex 10 User’s Manual. 19
January 2015 update. IUCN SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, and
Chicago Zoological Society, Apple Valley, Minnesota, USA.
Lehmkuhl, J.F. 1984. Determining size and dispersion of minimum viable populations
for land management planning and species conservation. Environmental
Management 8:167-76.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 546
P a g e 74 | 95
74 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
Lunney, D., O’Neill, L., Matthews, A. and Sherwin, W.B. 2002. Modelling mammalian
extinction and forecasting recovery: koalas at Iluka (NSW, Australia). Biological
Conservation 106:101-113.
McAlpine, C.A., Callaghan, J.G., Lunney, D., Bowen, M.E., Rhodes, J.R.,
Mitchell, D.L. and Possingham, H.P. 2005. Conserving south-east
Queensland koalas: how much habitat is enough? Pages 11-17 (part II) in G.
L. Siepen and D. Jones, editors. Proceedings of the 2005 south east
Queensland biodiversity conference. University of Queensland, Gatton
Campus.
McAlpine, C.A., Rhodes, J.R., Callaghan, J., Bowen, M., Lunney, D., Mitchell,
D., Pullar, D. and Possingham, H.P. 2006. The importance of forest area and
configuration relative to local habitat factors for conserving forest mammals: A
case study of koalas in Queensland, Australia. Biological Conservation 132:
153-165.
McAlpine, C.A., Rhodes, J.R., Peterson, A., Possingham, H.P., Callaghan, J.,
Curran, T., Mitchell, D. and Lunney, D. 2007. Planning Guidelines for Koala
Conservation and Recovery-a guide to best planning practice. Australian
Koala Foundation and the University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:124088.
Penn, A. M., Sherwin, W. B., Gordon, G., Lunney, D., Melzer, A. and Lacy, R. C.
2000. Demographic forecasting in koala conservation. Conservation Biology
14(3):629-638.
Phillips, S. 2002. An Assessment of koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) populations of
the Kings Forest area in a regional context. Report to NSW Department of
Environment & Conservation.
Phillips, S. and Callaghan, J. 2011. The Spot Assessment Technique: a tool for
determining localised levels of habitat use by Koalas. Australian Zoologist 35(3): 774-
80.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 547
P a g e 75 | 95
75 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
Preacher, K.J. 2001. Calculations for chi-square test: An Interactive
calculation tool for chi-square tests of goodness of fit and independence.
Computer software available at http://quantpsy.org.
Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. 2002. EK News Vol 1 December
2002. EPA/QPWS.
Rhodes, J. R., Wiegand, T., McAlpine, C.A., Callaghan, J., Lunney, D.,
Bowen, M. and Possingham, H.P. 2006. Modeling species distributions to
improve conservation in semiurban landscapes: koala case study.
Conservation Biology 20: 449-459.
Rhodes, J.R., Callaghan, J., McAlpine, C., de Jong, C., Bowen, M., Mitchell,
D., Lunney, D. and Possingham, H.P. 2008. Regional variation in habitat-
occupancy thresholds: a warning for conservation planning. Journal of Applied
Ecology 45(2): 549-557.
Rhodes, J., Lunney, D., Callaghan, J. and McAlpine, C. 2014. A Few Large
Roads or Many Small Ones? How to Accommodate Growth in Vehicle
Numbers to Minimise Impacts on Wildlife. PLOS ONE 9(3): 1-10.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 548
P a g e 92 | 95
92 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
Appendix 6. Baseline 2017 (+3% M) - PVA modelling parameters for East Coomera Koala Population
Study 2017.
PVA Parameter Value
Scenario settings
Number of iterations 1000
Number of years 50
Extinction definition Only 1sex remains
Number of populations 1
Species description
Number of types of catastrophe 1
Reproductive system
Type Polygyny
Age at first offspring for females 2
Age at first offspring for males 4
Maximum age of reproduction 10
Maximum number progeny per year 1
Sex ratio at birth (in % males) 48.8
Reproductive rates
% adult females breeding 100
EV in % breeding 20
Distribution of broods/ years
0 47
1 53
Specify distribution of number of offspring Normal
Mortality rates
Mortality of females aged 0-1 (%) 16 ± 5 (SD)
Mortality of females aged 1-2 (%) 18 ± 7 (SD)
Mortality of females after age 2 (%) 14 ± 3 (SD)
Mortality of males aged 1-2 (%) 18 ± 7 (SD)
Mortality of males aged 2-3 (%) 15 ± 3.5 (SD)
Mortality of males aged 3-4 (%) 24 ± 7.5 (SD)
Mortality of males after age 4 (%) 28 ± 5.5 (SD)
Catastrophes
Label Fire
Frequency (%) 5
Reproduction severity 0.75 (= 25% decline in reproduction)
Survival severity 0.75 (= 25% mortality)
Mate monopolization
% males in breeding pool 18
Initial population size
Distribution Stable age distribution
Initial population size 499
Carrying capacity (K) 445 ± 74 (SD in K due to EV)
Future change in K No
Harvest population
First year of harvest na
Last year of harvest na
Interval between harvests (years) na
% of population harvested na
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 565
P a g e 95 | 95
95 Biolink Ecological Consultants East Coomera Koala Population Study 2017
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 568
ITEM 7 CITY PLANNING CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1) 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY 1.1 I recommend that this report be considered in Closed Session pursuant to section
275 (1) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the reason that the matter involves
(h) other business for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the
interests of the local government or someone else, or enable a person to gain a financial advantage.
1.2 I recommend that the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those
parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides a summary of the public consultation undertaken for the first major updates to City Plan. Public consultation was undertaken from 4 October 2017 to 15 November 2017. The following items were included in the public consultation:
(a) City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B (b) Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) (c) Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan
This report also provides an overview of the nature of submissions received in relation to City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B and Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6). A separate report addressing submissions for Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan, will be brought to a future City Planning Committee.
The number of submissions received are as follows:
Package Number of submissions
City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B 73
Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) 16
Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan 21
Total 110
Most submissions related to multiple topics. In relation to City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B, the items which attracted the most submissions were:
Item Number of submissions
Flood overlay 23
Alignment of residential density and lot size in the Low density residential zone
15
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 569
ITEM 7 (Continued) CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1)
Gold Coast Cultural Precinct 13
Remove reference to Wave Break Island for the Integrated Resort Development at the Broadwater
10
With regards to Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6), the item which attracted the most submissions was the updated draft Land Development Guidelines (LDG). It is anticipated that City officers will seek endorsement of submission responses and updated package for Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) in January 2018. At this time, City officers will also seek endorsement to commence with these updates in March 2018. City officers will continue to review the submissions in relation to City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B. It is anticipated City officers will present recommended changes to the update packages, will be presented to City Plan Committee for consideration in February 2018. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of public consultation undertaken on the first major updates to City Plan, provide an overview of the submission analysis process and outline the next steps. 4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS Council resolved on 5 September 2017 (G17.0905.026) to undertake public consultation on the first major updates to City Plan consistent with the endorsed Community Engagement and Communications Plan. Council resolved on 5 September 2017 (G G17.0905.027) to undertake public consultation on the Major update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) consistent with the endorsed Engagement and Communications Plan. Council resolved on 13 September 2017 (G17.0915.028) to undertake public consultation on the draft LGIP amendment 1 occurs in accordance with the Engagement and Communications Plan and City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B. 5 DISCUSSION 5.1 Public consultation summary The endorsed Community Engagement and Communications Plan outlined a number of strategies to create awareness across the City, including: notice in local newspaper; online/digital advertising; radio advertising; social media advertising; and Planning & Development Alerts. This was supported with information to educate the community on the draft updates and how to make a submission, including: website; fact sheets; notification in water and sewer rates notice; letters to landowners, who don’t receive a water and sewer rates notice; community information events; industry briefing; and an update hotline. During the consultation period, the GC Have Your Say website received 7,500 visits. With 4,556 of those being referred from Facebook.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 570
ITEM 7 (Continued) CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1) A notification was included in 69,465 water and sewer rates notices (properties covered by proposed flood overlay map) and an additional 3,195 landowners were notified in writing (properties covered by the proposed flood overlay map, which don’t receive a water and sewer rates notice). There were 2,336 document downloads from the website, the most downloaded documents being:
Top three major update items
1 City Plan Major Update 1 – Item 1 (Small lot housing review) 180
2 City Plan Major Update 1B – Item 7 (Alignment of residential density and lot size in the Low density residential zone)
118
3 City Plan Major Update 1 – Item 3 (Flood overlay) 105
Top three fact sheet downloads
1 Burleigh Heads character 262
2 Tugun Village character 118
3 Major Update overview 105
An industry briefing event was held on 3 October 2017, with approximately 130 attendees. Six community information events were held across the City, a total of 137 people attended these sessions. A total of 40 calls were received through the dedicated update hotline number. 5.2 Submission analysis City officers have acknowledged and registered all of the submissions received.
Package Number of submissions
City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B 73
Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) 16
Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan 21
Total 110
A separate report addressing submissions for Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan, will be brought to a future City Planning Committee. Most submissions related to multiple topics. The submissions have been broken down into categories based on subject matter (points of submission). The following table provides a breakdown of the number of submissions received in relation to each item for Major Update 1 and 1B:
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 571
ITEM 7 (Continued) CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1)
Item Number of submissions
Small lot housing review 9
Party House land use controls 9
Flood overlay 23
Burleigh Heads Village character 9
Tugun Village character 5
Transport definitions 6
Gold Coast Cultural Precinct 13
Building over or near Council infrastructure 5
Social, community and public supporting uses 4
Covered car parking setbacks in Medium and High density residential zones
6
Remove reference to Wave Break Island for the Integrated Resort Development at the Broadwater
10
Hours of operation for accepted commercial uses in District centres 4
Categories of development and assessment for lease, access easement, community title and volumetric subdivisions
3
Emerging community zone setback/site cover provisions 4
Categories of development and assessment for Utility installations affected by overlays
5
The Biggera Waters Centre and Surrounding Land Study 6
Alignment of residential density and lot size in the Low density residential zone
15
Not related to updates in consultation package 9
The following table provides a breakdown of the number of submissions received in relation to each item for Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6):
Item Number of submissions
Bushfire management plans 1
Landscape work 1
Land development guidelines 11
Environmental management plans 3
Geotechnical stability assessment 0
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 572
ITEM 7 (Continued) CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1) 10 STATUTORY MATTERS This update package was commenced under the (now repealed) Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) and related Statutory Guideline 01/16 ‘Making and amending local planning instruments’ (MALPI). Under s267 of the Planning Act 2016, the repealed SPA and MALPI process continues to apply to the amendments. The flowchart below outlines the relevant MALPI steps for a major update and the progress of City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B.
Similarly, the flowchart below outlines the relevant MALPI steps for a major update and the progress of Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6).
City officers will now continue to analyse submissions and seek endorsement of draft responses, prior to seeking endorsement from the Minister to commence a new version of City Plan. 11 COUNCIL POLICIES Not applicable. 12 DELEGATIONS Not applicable. 13 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION Not applicable.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 575
ITEM 7 (Continued) CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1) 14 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS All submitters have been advised of the receipt of their submission through an acknowledgement email or letter. This correspondence also included a unique response ID which will be used in all future correspondence to the submitter. It is anticipated that all submitters will be advised about how their submission was dealt with in early 2018. Submission responses will be presented for Council consideration in early 2018. 15 TIMING The following timeframes are proposed:
Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6)
December 2017
City officers finalise review of submissions and collate responses.
City officers draft recommended changes to proposed Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) package.
January 2018
Council consideration of submission responses and updated Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) package for commencement.
Advise submitters about how their submission was dealt with.
March 2018 Commencement of Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) package.
City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B
December 2017 – January 2018
City officers finalise review of submissions and collate responses.
City officers draft recommended changes to proposed City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B packages.
February – March 2018
Council consideration of changes to update packages and submission responses to City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B packages.
Advise submitters about how their submission was dealt with.
Send documentation to State to seek endorsement to adopt.
Mid 2018 Commencement of City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B packages.
16 CONCLUSION This report has provided an update and summary on the submissions received during public consultation of the first major updates to City Plan. The items included in the public consultation were:
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 576
ITEM 7 (Continued) CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1) City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B, Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6), and Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan. Most submissions related to multiple update packages:
Package Number of submissions
City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B 73
Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) 16
Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan 21
Total 110
This report provided an overview of the nature of submissions received in relation to City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B and Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6). A separate report addressing submissions for Major Amendment 1 to the Local Government Infrastructure Plan, will be brought to City Planning Committee. It is anticipated that City officers will seek endorsement of submission responses and updated package for Major Update to City Plan Policies (Schedule 6) in January 2018. At this time, City officers will also seek endorsement to commence with these updates in March 2018. In relation to City Plan Major Update 1 and 1B, City officers will continue to analyse submissions and prepare draft responses. It is anticipated City officers will present recommended changes to update packages and seek endorsement of submission responses in February 2018. 17 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: 1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts
deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.
2 That the contents of this report be noted.
Author: Authorised by:
Katherine Berlin Dyan Currie Senior Planner Director Planning and Environment 28 November 2017
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 577
ITEM 7 (Continued) CITY PLAN SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON FIRST MAJOR UPDATE PD98/1132/27/02(P1)
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION CP17.1205.007 moved Cr Gates seconded Cr Baildon 1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed
by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.
2 That the contents of this report be noted.
CARRIED
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 578
ITEM 8 (Continued) NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRES INVESTIGATION PD113/1275/15 9 RISK MANAGEMENT This activity supports the mitigation of the following Directorate Risk:
CO00510 – City Plan delivers inadequate and/or ineffective strategic development policy (e.g. poor planning, built form, growth, social and environmental outcomes – including flood impacts).
10 STATUTORY MATTERS The Neighbourhood Centres Investigation recommendations for future City Plan major updates presently have no statutory effect in assessment of development applications. After proposed City Plan updates are endorsed by Council, they are required to follow the statutory amendment process before being included in City Plan. 11 COUNCIL POLICIES Not applicable.
12 DELEGATIONS Not applicable. 13 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION Title of the Stakeholder Consulted
Directorate or Organisation Is the Stakeholder Satisfied With Content of Report and Recommendations (Yes/No) (comment as appropriate)
Executive Coordinator, Feasibility & Partnerships Major Projects
Economic Development & Major Projects
Endorsed
Executive Coordinator, Planning Assessment
City Development, City Planning
Endorsed
Coordinator, City Plan
City Planning Endorsed
Principal Urban Designer
Office of the CEO Endorsed
Senior community safety officer, Safe & Liveable Communities
Community Services Endorsed
Coordinator, Policy & Program Development
Environmental Health & City Law Services, Community Services
Endorsed
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 587
ITEM 8 (Continued) NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRES INVESTIGATION PD113/1275/15 3 That the recommended changes to City Plan outlined in this report are endorsed
to be included as part of City Plan Major Update 3, including any consequential updates.
4 That the further investigations outlined in the report be progressed and reported back to Council.
Author: Authorised by:
Wing Chiu Dyan Currie Senior Regional Planner Director Planning & Environment 22 November 2017
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 589
ITEM 8 (Continued) NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRES INVESTIGATION PD113/1275/15
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION CP17.1205.008 moved Cr Gates seconded Cr Baildon 1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed
by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.
2 That the contents of this report and attachments be noted.
3 That the recommended changes to City Plan outlined in this report are endorsed to be included as part of City Plan Major Update 3, including any consequential updates.
4 That the further investigations outlined in the report be progressed and reported back to Council.
CARRIED
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 590
ITEM 9 CITY PLANNING FLOOD FREE LAND TLPI PD113/1303(P1) Refer 11 page attachments 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY 1.1 I recommend that this report be considered in Closed Session pursuant to section
275 (1) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 for the reason that the matter involves
(h) other business for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the
interests of the local government or someone else, or enable a person to gain a financial advantage.
1.2 I recommend that the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those
parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the proposed Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017 (TLPI No.5 2017). The proposed TLPI No.5 2017 has been prepared further to a Council resolution G17.1017.013 endorsing a new flood policy to ensure residential development is not exposed to:
a flood inundation depth greater than 0.6 metres; and a flood water velocity greater than 0.8 metres per second.
In addition, the proposed TLPI No.5 2017 will also require Reconfiguring a Lot applications for residential, commercial and industrial uses to provide a sufficient area of land at or above the Designated Flood Level (DFL). The purpose of the proposed TLPI No.5 2017 is to prevent the potential loss of the city’s flood resilience and enable the sustainable mitigation of flood hazard on flood affected land. As such, the TLPI No.5 2017 will amend the operation of the Flood overlay code provided in City Plan by including new overall outcomes and assessment benchmarks to be applied during development assessment. It is envisaged that the TLPI No.5 2017 will have a life span of 2 years from the following proposed commencement date of 8 December 2017. Section 9(4) of the Planning Act 2016 allows Council, with the Minister’s agreement, to make the TLPI take effect from the day Council resolved to give the TLPI and the request for an earlier effective day to the Minister for approval. Council is requested to endorse the proposed TLPI No.5 2017 included in Attachment A which will allow Council to write to the Minister seeking its approval. Further to the Minister’s approval, Council will be required to adopt the draft TLPI No.5 2017. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to:
(a) seek Council’s endorsement of Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017 provided in Attachment A of this report; and
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 725
ITEM 9 (Continued) FLOOD FREE LAND TLPI PD113/1303(P1) The proposed TLPI No.5 2017 is provided in Attachment A and it is recommended that Council endorse the adoption of the TLPI and sending it to the Minister for approval
It is also recommended that the TLPI No.5 2017 has a commencement date of 8 December 2017. 17 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows:
1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.
2 To prepare a Temporary Local Planning Instrument to implement minimum flood free land.
3 To endorse the proposed Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Risk Reduction) 2017, in the form of Attachment 1.
4 That the commencement date of Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Risk Reduction) 2017 be 8 December 2017.
5 That Council writes to the Minister to request approval of the Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017 and consideration of a 8 December 2017 commencement date.
6 That Council provide the Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017 and relevant supporting material in the form of Attachment B in accordance with Schedule 3 of the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules.
7 Further to the Minister’s response, a report will be brought back to Council seeking adoption of the Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017.
Author: Authorised by:
Pradesh Ramiah Dyan Currie Supervising Planner Director Planning and Environment 29 November 2017
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 730
ITEM 9 (Continued) FLOOD FREE LAND TLPI PD113/1303(P1)
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION CP17.1205.009 moved Cr PJ Young seconded Cr O’Neill
1 That the report/attachment be deemed non-confidential except for those parts deemed by the Chief Executive Officer to remain confidential in accordance with sections 171 (3) and 200 (5) of the Local Government Act 2009.
2 To prepare a Temporary Local Planning Instrument to implement minimum flood free land.
3 To endorse the proposed Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Risk Reduction) 2017, in the form of Attachment 1.
4 That the commencement date of Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Risk Reduction) 2017 be 8 December 2017.
5 That Council writes to the Minister to request approval of the Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017 and consideration of 8 December 2017 commencement date.
6 That Council provide the Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017 and relevant supporting material in the form of Attachment B in accordance with Schedule 3 of the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules.
7 Further to the Minister’s response, a report will be brought back to Council seeking adoption of the Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.5 (Flood Free Land and Residential Risk Reduction) 2017.
CARRIED There being no further business the meeting was declared closed at 9.59am.
748th Council Meeting 8 December 2017 City Planning Committee Meeting 5 December 2017
ADOPTED REPORT 731
These Pages
Numbered 1 to 743
Constitute The Report Of The Meeting
Of The City Planning Committee
Held Tuesday, 5 December 2017