sandy bay campus landscape subject plan · landscape subject plan volume 2- university reserve...

University of Tasmania – Sandy Bay Campus- volume 2 Landscape Subject-plan

Prepared by Urban Initiatives i

SANDY BAY CAMPUS

LANDSCAPE SUBJECT PLANVolume 2- University Reserve

Prepared for:The University of Tasmania

Prepared by:Urban Initiatives Pty LtdLandscape Architects and Urban Design ConsultantsGround floor 143 Franklin StreetMelbourne 3000

Ph 9329 6844Fax 9329 6336Email: [email protected]

NOV 2004• Issued for comment 27/5/04• Issued for review 10/6/04• Final Draft 19/8/04• Final Issue 23/11/04


Prepared by Urban Initiativesii

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ........................................................................ ii

1 Introduction ............................................................................. 11.1 Study Area................................................................................................. 1

1.1.1 1.1.1 Precincts ...................................................................... 31.1.2 Site Overview......................................................................... 3

1.2 Planning Framework................................................................................. 6

1.2.1 Review of Previous Plans...................................................... 61.2.2 The Sandy Bay Framework Plan 2000................................. 61.2.3 Purpose of this Landscape Subject Plan.............................. 81.2.4 Objectives .............................................................................. 8

1.3 Structure of this Plan .............................................................................. 10

2 Philosophical Basis .............................................................. 112.1 Philosophical Context ............................................................................. 11

2.2 Principles of Landscape Masterplanning............................................... 12

2.2.1 Principles.............................................................................. 12

3 Site Context and Values ....................................................... 133.1 Site History.............................................................................................. 13

3.2 Landscape Setting .................................................................................. 14

3.2.1 Physical Values....................................................................143.2.2 Biological Values ................................................................. 143.2.3 Cultural Values.....................................................................153.2.4 Landscape Values and Vistas............................................. 15

4 Issues and Opportunities ..................................................... 174.1 Review of Study Area Issues and Opportunities................................... 17

4.1.1 Signage – University Reserve............................................. 184.1.2 Usage/Activity - University Reserve.................................... 194.1.3 Indigenous Vegetation Management and HabitatConservation...................................................................................... 234.1.4 Fire Management................................................................. 294.1.5 Access, Community Links and Trail Networks ................... 314.1.6 Scenic Value (Regional/City Context) ................................ 344.1.7 Safety and Risk Management............................................. 374.1.8 Stormwater and Site Hydrology .......................................... 39

4.2 Review of Precinct Issues and Opportunities........................................ 41

4.2.1 Precinct 9 – Horticultural Research Precinct...................... 414.2.2 Lower ‘Rifle Range’ Creek Conservation Precinct –Precinct 10a ....................................................................................... 444.2.3 Precinct 10b – Proctor’s Gully (Proctor’s Catchment) ....... 454.2.4 Precinct 11- University Reserve Bushland ConservationPrecinct484.2.5 Precinct 12 - Mt Nelson-Bend 7 Residential Precinct ........ 524.2.6 Precinct 13 - Olinda Grove Recreation Precinct ................ 55

5 Landscape Management Practices...................................... 585.1 Directions for Landscape Management ................................................. 58

5.2 Landscape Management Policies .......................................................... 59

5.2.1 Bushland Management and Habitat Conservation Policy .605.2.2 Irrigation Policy – Olinda Grove .......................................... 62


Prepared by Urban Initiativesiii

5.2.3 Site Hydrology and Stormwater Management Policy -Upper Campus & University Reserve............................................... 635.2.4 Environmental Weeds Policy- University Reserve............. 645.2.5 Fire Management Policy...................................................... 655.2.6 Community Access Policy................................................... 66

6 Implementation Plan ............................................................. 67

7 Bibliography ............................................................................ 1Appendix 1. List of Environmental Weeds.................................................. 2

Appendix 2. Talloires Declaration ............................................................... 4

1 Introduction

Urban Initiatives Pty Ltd, Landscape Architects and Urban DesignConsultants were engaged by the University of Tasmania to prepare aLandscape Subject Plan for the lower section of the Sandy Bay Campus inHobart.

The Sandy Bay Lower Campus Landscape Subject Plan contained in thisreport (henceforth, the Landscape Subject Plan) builds on the policies andplanning principles established by the Sandy Bay Framework Plan 2000. TheLandscape Subject Plan is intended to provide a strategic basis for theongoing development and maintenance of the non-building elements of theCampus and to direct and encourage viable landscape and urban designsolutions which build on existing strengths and assets, and improve thevitality and amenity of the Campus.

The report was compiled by Urban Initiatives Pty. Ltd, under the guidance ofUniversity Architect, John Webster. Three site visits were conductedbetween April 2002 and June 2003 to assess and review existing issues onthe Campus. A further two site visits were made in February and June of2004. Acknowledgement is also made for the valuable input of Tom Beattie,the Sandy Bay Campus Grounds Liaison Officer, and other UniversityAcademic and Asset Services staff who contributed to this Report.

1.1 Study Area

The Sandy Bay Campus is the largest of the three main campuses of theUniversity of Tasmania. It is located 3 km south of the CBD in Hobart andcovers an area of approximately 118 ha, including sports grounds, buildings,open space and bushland. This Landscape Subject plan is the 1st of twovolumes with the lower section of the Campus (approximately 15 ha)bounded by Sandy Bay Road and Churchill Avenue to the north and south,and Alexander Street and Earl Street to the east and west, respectively andthe Faculty and Student Facilities Precincts immediately above ChurchillAvenue, including Upper Campus Residential Precinct ‘Christ College’ (thestudy area, figure 1) comprising volume 1. The Lower Campus is thefunctional core of the Sandy Bay Campus with the majority of school/facultybuildings and teaching centres, as well as several major lecture theatres andpublic venues. It also contains student administration for the southernCampuses, and the central Administration for the University, and as suchplays an important role in the context of the University as a whole.

The Student Union buildings and associated services and facilities (includingbar, bookshop, post office, doctors surgery, bank and refectory) are locatedacross Churchill Avenue to the west are also considered.

The Sandy Bay Campus extends across Churchill Avenue to the south andrises up toward Mt Nelson including a large tract of bushland reserve (theUniversity Reserve), and sports grounds at Olinda Grove, Mt Nelson. Theextent of the Upper Campus including Research Field Facilities, Rifle RangeCreek gully, Hytten Gully and University Reserve including Olinda GroveSporting Facilities comprise volume 2.


Prepared by Urban Initiatives 2

Figure 1 – Study Area Location



1.1.1 Precincts

For the purpose of the current Landscape Subject Plan, the study area hasbeen divided into thirteen precincts, which correspond to distinct geographicalareas with consistency of functionality and landscape management issues.These precincts are shown on figure 2 and include:

1.University Frontage (Churchill Avenue/Dobson Road).2.Central Mall & Gathering Places.3. Grosvenor Crescent & Clarke Road Precinct4.Lower Campus Precinct.5a.Herbarium Precinct5b.TUU Precinct6.College Road South- East Precinct7.French Street South-East Precinct8.Student Residential Precinct9.Horticultural Research Precinct10(a) Lower Rifle Range Creek Conservation Precinct

(b) Proctor’s Gully Precinct11. Reserve Bushland Precinct12.Mt. Nelson – Bend 7 Residence Precinct.13.Olinda Grove Recreation Precinct

1.1.2 Site Overview

Figure 3 provides an overview of the current layout of the study area, themain roads and buildings and a generalised review of existing surfacecoverage (paved, lawn or garden bed). More detailed review of the featuresof the study area are found in section 4 above.

1.1.3 Imminent Future Works

While this Subject Plan deals with the existing situation, some proposedchanges to the layout and functioning of the study area are sufficientlyimminent to beconsidered as part of the current Landscape Subject Plan. These include:

• relocation of the Main Entrance to the intersection of ChurchillAvenue and French Street with installation of a new roundabout (inassociation with Hobart City Council), and alterations to vehicularflow in the upper sections of the study area; and

• redesign of the layout of the Grace Street carpark to improve vehicleand pedestrian circulation, increase the number of carparking spacesand enhance landscaping.

• Construction of new student residences above Economics andCommerce and adjacent to Christ College and John Fisher College.



Figure 2 – Precinct Plan



Figure 3- Site Plan



1.2 Planning Framework

1.2.1 Review of Previous Plans

A range of reports and plans have contributed to the development of the SandyBay Campus of the University of Tasmania. These plans are detailed in anappendix to the Sandy Bay Framework Plan and include:

• the initial plan for the layout of buildings at the Sandy Bay siteproduced by Wilkinson in 1944 (the Wilkinson Plan);

• reviews of the Wilkinson Plan by Stephenson in 1954 (the StephensonPlan) and the Public Works Department in 1956 (PWD Plan), the latterprovided the final locations for most buildings in the study area; and

• further revisions to the campus-wide plans by Stephenson in 1972which recommended expanding the campus uphill to the south.

While the legacy of these plans is evident in building layout and structure of theCampus, much of the development of the Campus has been piecemeal,responding to ad hoc funding availability.

In 1995 Jackson, Teece, Chesterman, Willis & Partners Architects completed aDevelopment and Strategy Plan (known as ‘the Chesterman Plan’) aimed atuniting development and maintenance with a strategic direction for the twomain Campuses of the University: at Newnham in Launceston, and at SandyBay in Hobart. The report identified a range of challenges across bothCampuses that resulted from the legacy of piecemeal development and set outfive key objectives to redress these issues, namely:

• ensuring that the campuses function well and efficiently;

• providing stimulating and aesthetically pleasing settings for work, studyand visits;

• improving accessibility to and ease of movement on the campuses.

• promotion of environmental sustainability; and

• enhancement of the University’s image and standing in the community.

The Chesterman Plan provides a useful policy direction for addressinglandscape issues. However, it does not provide for the easy interpretation intothe detail necessary to plan and design for on the ground works. Despite thePlan being adopted by the University Council, improvements and maintenanceof the existing landscape has continued to occur on a piecemeal basis,responding to specific issues and needs as they arise.

1.2.2 The Sandy Bay Framework Plan 2000

The Sandy Bay Framework Plan produced in 2000 (the Framework Plan)provides the current planning basis to guide the development and maintenanceof the University’s buildings and grounds at the Sandy Bay Campus. While thebroad thrust of objectives and principles of the Chesterman Plan arerecognised (and, where appropriate integrated), the Framework Plan redefines



and structures the strategic development of the campus under a ‘Framework-Planning’ approach. This approach sets out values to define a philosophicalposition which underpins development decisions; goals to encapsulate thevisions for the Campus’ development; and principles and policies to govern theplanning process and define the means of applying the values.

This Framework Planning approach outlines the need to develop: Action AreaPlans, for defined zones or precincts within the Campus; Subject Plans, toprovide for the detailed treatment of a particular planning aspect; and DesignStandards, for design elements for Campus-wide application. It is envisagedthat Design Policies, Operational Policies and Project Briefs then flow from thepreparation of these documents. This type of tiered approach to campusmasterplanning aims to ensure that improvements are implemented in a stagedand well-considered manner as funds become available.

The framework planning structure is described on chart 1 below. The chart hasbeen adapted from the Sandy Bay Framework Plan to include a new level (1a)for masterplanning of the landscape and building elements of the Campus.This proposed adjustment allows the issues, objectives, and key directions tobe determined at a general ‘masterplanning level’ such that detail standardsand plans can flow from these in a directed fashion.

Chart 1 – Revised Framework Planning Structure for the Sandy Bay Campus

Included in the revised framework is provision for the Design Standards andthe compilation of a suite of ‘Technical Notes’ to guide the day-to-day activitiesand management of the Campus. These Technical Notes would expand theproposed Design Standards to cover a range of issues including outdoorfurniture elements, pavements and surfaces, lighting, and civil engineeringelements such as kerbs, steps and drainage pits.



1.2.3 Purpose of this Landscape Subject Plan

The Landscape Subject Plan fits within the Campus Framework-Planningapproach of the Sandy Bay Framework Plan by defining strategies for thefuture development and maintenance of the non-building elements of theCampus. These strategies aim to build on the values, goals and principlesoutlined in the Framework Plan as they apply to the University Reserve sectionof the Sandy Bay Campus.

In particular, the Subject Plan:

• outlines principles behind the landscape masterplanning of theCampus;

• addresses the need to consider the core campus-wide landscapeissues (legibility, public presentation, vehicle and pedestriancirculation etc.);

• defines a precinct-based approach for addressing issues andopportunities for the University Reserve; and

• develops policies and recommendations which respond toidentified issues and opportunities, and guide future works andmanagement.

The Landscape Subject Plan provides guidance for consultants and theUniversity’s management staff in dealing with issues related to the Bushlandassets of the University. However, this Subject Plan does not attempt toaddress major structural changes to the site layout (e.g. demolition orconstruction of new buildings) nor modifications to existing buildings. Instead, itis recommended that a separate Building Subject Plan be prepared providedirection for future requirements for building and structural planning on theCampus. Since the nature and extent of provision of vehicular access andparking is a major issue for urban bushland, this volume of the LandscapeSubject Plan will review carparking requirements for the facilities within theReserve as the nature and provision of vehicular access has a direct impact onthe issues within the Reserve.

1.2.4 Objectives

The University Strategic Plan outlines the University’s commitment to “manageand improve its buildings landscape and infrastructure to provide anenvironment for academic and related social, cultural and community use…”.

The objectives of the current plan reflect this commitment and focus on the roleof landscape planning, management and works in achieving a functional,attractive and environmentally sustainable Campus. Based on the Sandy BayFramework Plan this Landscape Subject Plan aims to:

• maintain landscape assets;

• recognise the importance of bushland assets to the Universitycommunity and regional landscape;

• provide guidelines for appropriate management of habitatcharacteristics, species populations especially the protection,



restoration and enhancement of critically important vegetationtypes.

From this basis, the objectives of this Landscape Subject Plan are to:

Establish clear Bushland Management priorities and objectives for HabitatConservation.

Define Fire Management principles (a comprehensive Fire Management Plan shouldbe undertaken for the University)

Resolve issues impacting on the health of vegetation communities of the Reserve.(Particularly those poorly reserved elsewhere)

Address site planning issues within and on the periphery of the Reserve which haveimpacts on the Reserve, integrating solutions with the sustainable management of theReserve.

Identify areas where further study, research and monitoring can provide the basis forimproved management/ conservation outcomes.

Identify research, study or projects that could immediately developed / implementedunder the direction of this Landscape Subject Plan



1.3 Structure of this Plan

The Landscape Subject Plan is structured in the following sections:

• This general introduction to the study area, planning context, andpurpose and objectives of the Plan (section 1)

• Establishment of a philosophical basis for landscape masterplanningof the Campus (section 2);

• Background to the site context and values (section 3);

• Discussion of issues and opportunities across the whole study areaand within each Precinct, providing the basis for development of moredetailed issues plans, and Action Area Plans in the future (section 4);

• A suite of Landscape Management Strategies for implementationacross the study area and Campus (section 5); and

The document is supported by Appendices:

• Appendix 1. Section 6 – Implementation Plan- An Action Plan,summarising the opportunities and key directions detailed in thepreceding sections.

• Appendix 2. Environmental Weed List

• Appendix 3. Weed Management Guidelines

• Further appendices to be confirmed



2 Philosophical Basis

2.1 Philosophical Context

In conceptualising the study area as a subject of masterplanning, this reportconsiders three tiers of setting and function for the Lower Campus:

The first recognises the study area as a landscape, biological componentand catchment of a greater landscape of the lower Derwent Estuary, andHobart City.

The second considers the study area as a whole, and its role as theadministrative and symbolic centre of the entire University.

Finally, the third recognises the study area as a functional spacecomprised of distinct local areas used for movement and access,meeting and gathering, and recreation and activity.

The issues, opportunities and directions detailed in the following sections of thereport have been derived from an appreciation of these layers of context.

To a large extent, this volume of the Sandy Bay Campus Subject Plan isconsidered within the first tier context. It is considered through the landscapeand historical/cultural context given in section 2 above.Nonetheless, the implications of the role of the study area within a broaderlandscape extend to a range of issues considered in the following sections,including the public address and presentation of the Campus.Landscape masterplanning also has a role to play in such issues on-siteenvironmental management (including waste and stormwater management)and the conservation and enhancement of habitat conditions.

The role of the study area as a significant natural catchment and biologicallandscape within the greater landscape of the lower Derwent Estuary andHobart City is considered in section 4.1.

In section 4.2 Precinct level identification of issues and opportunities present asite specific summary of issues considered within their immediate context anda role for each sub-precinct within the whole Campus is articulated.



2.2 Principles of Landscape Masterplanning

“Universities exist in a social and educational dynamic thathas to be experienced by both students and staff whotogether determine its academic merit and signify its culturalsubstance. The role of each generation of planners andadministrators is to ensure that the imagination involved isexpressed, and that the soul of the place remains identifiableand memorable”.1

Campus masterplanning is an ongoing strategic process that aims to facilitatedecision-making, promote efficiency in the utilisation of physical infrastructureand uphold the quality of that infrastructure.

Both the Issues and Opportunities sections of the report draw strongly fromsome basic Principles that relate to the conservation and management of urbanbushland remnants.

2.2.1 Principles

Biodiversity:As a principle of Landscape Masterplanning the Biodiversity of the subject areais of primary importance. Given the recognized natural values of the site2 as asignificant tract of urban bushland and as a catchment including riverine as wellas terrestrial ecosystems the site has considerable value to the localcommunity as well as the site of species which are not well reserve elsewherein the state or on mainland Australia.A strategic vegetation policy has been prepared for the Hobart metropolitanCouncils Association under the Urban Forests Initiative. This initiative wasaimed at ‘Greenhouse gas’ mitigation by re-afforesting cities. In Hobart, wheremuch natural vegetation remains, the emphasis is to protect and extendexisting vegetation cover. This policy also addresses the national BiodiversityStrategy (1996) and the national Ecologically Sustainable DevelopmentStrategy (ESD) (1992) and the Tasmanian Threatened Species Act 1995.The site also presents a valuable contribution to the research of Australianmainland and Tasmanian biodiversity and issues concerning the managementand conservation of Urban Bushland.

Regional Landscape:Consideration of the regional landscape is critical principle of LandscapeMasterplanning. This recognizes that human presence and human interactionwith the landscape is an important part of it’s physical composition. The city ofHobart is a uniquely ‘regional’ city. The city’s innate character is established bythe steepest and highest transect from sea level to alpine, in Australia. Thisurban basin features largely forested ridges and spur lines where the buildableterrain is limited by topography. The University Reserve represents animportant component of the visible forested skyline of the Hobart City region

1 Daryl Jackson Architect, University of Melbourne. Masterplan 20002 North Barker and Associates, ‘Flora and Fauna Habitat Identification and Assessment Process’Unpublished report to HCC (in preparation – May 2004.)



and the unique Bushland character of Hobart, itself an important contribution tothe Economic and Scenic value for the community of Hobart.

3 Site Context and Values

This section briefly describes the context for the study area by describing itshistorical development, and setting within the landscape. From this context,particular values and constraints can be inferred, which have relevance tolandscape planning issues, policies and recommendations contained in thefollowing sections. Information is drawn from a review of secondary sourcesand background reports; site visits and observation; and discussion withUniversity staff.

3.1 Site History

The Sandy Bay site was chosen for the development of the University Campusin 1944 by the Wilkinson Plan (see diagram). Prior to the establishment of theUniversity Campus, the study area was used as part of a larger rifle rangewhich had operated on the site since the early 1900s.

Piecemeal construction and development of buildings and open spaces tookplace throughout the 1950s until the official opening in 1961, by which timemost of the buildings in the upper part of study area were complete.

Volume Two of this study focuses on the extent of the site that remainedpredominantly Native Bushland following the transition of the site to theUniversity of Tasmania.

As with the development of the Lower Campus, change to the landscape of theUpper extent of the site have generally occurred gradually or associated withthe development of new buildings. With the density of the lower campus limitingthe size of new development on the more moderate slopes of the LowerCampus, below Churchill Avenue, development has increasingly been built onthe steeper slopes of the Upper Campus and University Reserve.These developments have had a markedly greater impact on the Landscapevalues since the visible impact of buildings in the Landscape increases with thegreater slope and increased elevation. Visual sensitivity issues will bediscussed in greater detail in Section 2.2.4 Landscape Values and ScenicSensitivity and Section 4, Issues and Opportunities.

The Upper Campus is predominantly remnant indigenous vegetation althoughthe construction of the Residential Colleges, Medical Science, Faculty of LifeScience, Hytten Hall, Economics and Commerce buildings, Library andInformation Science, CSIRO facility and Sports Facilities has introduced grounddisturbance and exotic plant species into this part of the Campus as well aschanging the physical character of parts of the Campus from a predominantlyvegetated to a built one.

A significant factor, which has altered the physical, biological and landscapevalues of the site, is the presence over time of various fire events. Evidence ofanthropological fire of this site in particular is limited. Although there is generalacceptance that decreasing seasonality of fire in some landscapes since thearrival of Europeans (in South Eastern Australia) has been succeeded by



infrequent but more intense fire events. Recent Informed opinion 3 claimshowever that this may only be the case for Grassy Woodlands on undulatingtablelands, western slopes and clayey soils of drier coastal valleys all of whichwould account the presence of these records of fire in early European settlersaccounts of the landscape. The Significant fires that have occurred have hadtransforming effects on the landscape values of the site include 1995, 1998 andthe catastrophic Hobart fires of 19674.

3.2 Landscape Setting

3.2.1 Physical Values

Whilst similar in respects to the Lower Campus many physical features alter, ortransform with the transition from Lower Campus across Churchill Avenue tothe Upper Campus and University reserve. Generally grades increase on theUpper Campus. Grades increase from an average of 1:10 within the Lowerarea to an average of 1:5 , areas between 1:5 and 1:3 and some areas withinthe University Reserve greater than 1:3. Drainage courses deepen with HyttenGully to the north-west boundary of the site, and the main catchment watercourse of the site, Rifle Range Creek deepening within the reserve with edgesof the creek gully steeper than 1:3. Also combined with this steeply risingtopography is changing geological conditions tertiary dolerite derived soilscovering much of the lower Campus to Jurassic dolerite derived shallow stonysoils above 50 M above Sea Level and considerable areas of rock outcropexposed. Elevation increase to above the 250 M above Sea Level. Othergeological types within the study site include Mudstones in the South Westcorner of the site.A considerable extent of the catchment is in relatively natural condition drainingtoward Rifle Range Creek through most of the site extent or toward Proctor’sGully to the North West. Proctor’s Gully then becomes channelised betweenFrench street and the rear of the Student Union building, becoming pipedunderground prior to Churchill Avenue. Rifle Range Creek is piped underCollege Road however otherwise continues in relatively natural condition untilChurchill Avenue.

3.2.2 Biological Values

The Upper Campus remained relatively undisturbed bushland until recently.With steep slopes and poor soils it was not subject to clearing for farming byEuropeans like the Lower Campus area and as an Army Rifle Range wasrestricted to public until management of the land was transferred to theUniversity in 1944 and since then has been protected from the residentialdevelopment that much of Mt Nelson has be John Fischer College, LifeSciences, Hytten Hall and later the Economics and Commerce School, andCSIRO facility have continued the urbanisation of the Upper Campus site whilstplanning of this development has maintained an essentially ‘modernist’approach of isolated buildings within a landscape or (in this instance) bushlandsetting. The environmental cost of this and residential development at the topof the Rifle Range Creek catchment has been a cumulative decline of natural

3 "The nature of pre-European native vegetation south-eastern Australia" (condensed from J.S. Benson andRA. Redpath, Cunninghamia, 5(2) December, 1997)

4 Some remnant Eucalyptus. globulus in the wet forest in the lower section of the reserve is ofconservation significance as one of the few stands to escape the widespread fires of 1967.



values and biological systems. Even so, conservation value of the remainingUniversity Reserve remains high and the site remains botanically, biologicallyimportant to the reserve system of Greater Hobart, Tasmania and Importanthabitat for nationally threatened species.

3.2.3 Cultural Values

The Aboriginal people of the South West Tribe have been the traditionalowners of the land on which the Sandy Bay Campus of the University ofTasmania now sits. There remains debate as to whether the site of the UpperCampus was subject to the type of seasonal burning by the traditional peopleas was observed and recorded in some regions of Tasmania by earlyEuropean arrivals. Although the cultural value of the site is diminished by it’suse as a Rifle Range and Reserve and no specific sites of Aboriginal CulturalSignificance have been observed,5 there has been no systematic assessmentof Aboriginal heritage within the University precinct. In the Sandy Bay Area, theonly Aboriginal Sites that have been recorded have been along the immediatecoastal strip. Middens can be found up to 1.3 kilometres inland, but aregenerally within 500 metres of the high tide mark. Consequently it is likely thatany middens in the area have been either destroyed of covered up by thedevelopment of the Campus. It is likely that member’s of the South East Tribeinhabited the Sandy Bay Area and that parts of the University Reserve wereutilised by people of the South West Tribe until their displacement by Europeaninvasion. Areas of particular archeological sensitivity include, undisturbedbanks of major creeks, historical or unsealed tracks, level or gently slopingareas facing north or south east.

3.2.4 Landscape Values and Vistas

The Sandy Bay Campus of the University is an important part of the visualcatchment of the City of Hobart. The University Reserve provides a significantpart of the vegetative backdrop to the City due to it’s steep slopes, aspect andrelatively intact vegetation. The Upper Campus is highly visible from the lowerDerwent Estuary. The natural of the vegetated skyline is unique amongAustralian Cities and gives Hobart much of it’s unique character. As a result thedevelopments in the University Reserve have had a markedly greater impacton the Landscape values since the visible impact of buildings in the Landscapeincreases with the greater slope and increased elevation.

The University is in a unique situation to contribute to the protection of thevisual quality of the Hobart City ‘region’ as a land manager responsible foralmost an entire catchment from near the top of the Catchment of Rifle RangeCreek to where it emerges under Sandy Bay Road.

The level of assessment of visual sensitivity in this study is limited to a broadassessment of the sites profile and potential impact of development within thereserve and impact of previous development. A comprehensive analysis similarto that undertaken for Forestry areas under the State Forest Visual PlanningProcess is beyond the scope of this project. A number of plans prepared byHCC have been reproduced in this study that indicate the view sheds andsensitivity of the site under a process based upon the State Forest VisualPlanning Process.The bulk of the study area is in a cover of natural vegetation and composed ofsteep slopes, ridges and crests. As such it forms a unique forested backdrop to 5 Aboriginal Heritage Office,Department of Tourism Parks, Heritage and the Arts, Tasmania



the City’s regional setting with the natural areas forming a continuum with theslopes and foothills of Mt Nelson and Mt Wellington. This setting can beclassified as a ‘Wilderness View Field’6.

6 As classified under the ‘Visual Management System’ (VMS) Forestry Tasmania. A systemdeveloped to provide theoretical principles for assessing visual values and their implications fordevelopment. Increasingly being used to evaluate other land uses within Tasmania.



4 Issues and Opportunities

4.1 Review of Study Area Issues and Opportunities

A number of issues and conditions observed through the Upper Sandy BayCampus and University Reserve are shared by the Lower Campus Area of thisStudy (ref:University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay Campus Landscape SubjectPlan; Volume one ). These relate to generic issues, such as signage,functional relationships between Facilities, Schools and Campus / StudentFacilities, accessibility and equity of access, traffic management, landscapeand vegetation management.

For a significant portion of it’s extent, the Upper Campus presents a number ofdistinct issues such as;

• Indigenous Vegetation and Habitat Management and Conservation.

• Fire Management

• Access, Community Links and Trail Networks

• Scenic Value (Regional/City Context)

• Safety and Risk Management

• Stormwater and Site Hydrology

This section presents a background to the importance of each issue, detailsthe existing conditions and issues, provides a policy statement andpresents a strategic approach to addressing these challenges though keydirections. In general, key directions will be restricted to policy prescriptionsaimed at better planning and management of the Lower Campus, orrecommendations of general application. More detailed issues andopportunities are presented for each Precinct in the following section.



4.1.1 Signage – University Reserve

B A C K G R O U N D

High quality, well installed legible signage improves the functionality andappearance of the Campus. Direction, identification, Information, parking andemergency signage are all important components of the effective functioning ofthe Campus.

In the University Reserve effective well installed, legible signage has potentialas an important management tool.

E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S / I S S U E S

• The University Standard Facility signage could be further improved byintroduction of a more legible hierarchy and a consistent design formore substantial or ‘sculptural’ signage elements for majordestinations, key public addresses and entrances, incorporating basicinformation and simple interpretive signage of the University Reserveaimed at improved connections and responsible access of thecommunity within the reserve.

• The informal ‘no signage’ policy for the Upper Campus areas includingUniversity Reserve is an attempt to avoid the University’s responsibilityfor casual and public access to the University’s bushland and informaltrails. This however is also an opportunity for more effectivemanagement of access for Habitat & Fauna management andconservation, to identify areas of conservation value, to communicatethese values to the Campus community, visitors and public. Welldesigned legible signage is an important tool to identify sites ofconservation significance and identify management zones such as;

- BUFFERS; to activity or types of usage- EXCLUSION ZONES; to activity known to have

negative impacts on habitat values and- INTERVENTIONS; where rehabilitation,

restoration or other work is being carried out tostabilize, improve habitat conditions in an areawhere a population or sensitive habitat is at risk.

Photo 1

Signage at entry to OlindaGrove sports facilities.



P O L I C Y S T A T E M E N T

Provide clear information to staff, students, visitors and special needs groupsvia a series of high quality, legible signs which improve the functionality andappearance of the Campus.

K E Y D I R E C T I O N S

Continue to implement and update Standard Signs Manual. The SignsManual provides a strong basis for the ongoing provision of building signage atthe Campus and should be continually implemented. Make provision within theManual for more substantial ‘landmark’ signage at the Main Entrance and keypublic addresses. A technical note for the development of interpretive signsshould be appended to the Manual.

Plan for landscaping according to a hierarchy of entry points: Thelandscape treatment of each entrance will be defined by its relative importanceto the presentation of the Campus as a whole.

Improve ‘sense of arrival’ signage and landscaping at all vehicleentrances to the study area: Priority should be given to upgrading thelandscaping and signage that identifies the ‘University Reserve’ and criticalhabitat areas within the reserve.

4.1.2 Usage/Activity - University Reserve

B A C K G R O U N D

A number of usage types / activities occur in the University Reserve which areatypical for a university campus and are significantly different to typical usagetypes within the Lower Campus.


Since the establishment of the campus in particular the Schools of Geographyand Environmental Studies and Zoology, the upper campus reserve has beenused as a site for case study, biological/botanical survey techniques as well apost graduate field study.Other faculty use includes the School of Agricultural Science, horticultural andanimal compounds.

Photo 2

Connections to Mt NelsonCommunity not defined



An EDM Calibration Base provides reference points for the Surveyingcommunity. The university also has a seismic recording station in isolatedbushland within the reserve.

• A major sewer line runs close to a contour across the hillside.

• A range informal recreational activities occur which include walking,bike riding, dog walking, orienteering, Hash House Harriers. As wellRock climbers use the former Quarry at Proctors Road. Booking arerequired and gate access is managed by Security.

• The lighting of facilities within the Upper Campus and UniversityReserve can have significant impact upon habitat values in theadjacent bushland areas. The sportsfields at Olinda grove and the newresidential development on Mt Nelson and adjacent to Christ Collegegenerate significant amounts of nightime luminance which can haveundesirable impacts on critical breeding / nesting sites


Present the Upper Campus and University Reserve as important natural andcritical habitat and educational resource of significance locally, regionally andto Tasmania Highlight the role of the University in the management andconservation of the reserve.


Develop policies for the design and location of lighting which limitspollutant luminence adjacent to Habitat conservation zones.

Photo 3

Lighting of facilities within theUpper Campus and UniversityReserve can have significantimpact upon habitat values inthe adjacent bushland areas

Photo 4

Furniture associated with picnicfacilities near Rifle RangeCreek ‘Wet Gully’



Develop clear policy which defines and limits access of domestic animalsin areas of critical Habitat sensitivity.

Develop policies for services reticulation which limits pollutants anddisturbance within the University Reserve and Habitat conservation zones.



Fig 4



4.1.3 Indigenous Vegetation Management and HabitatConservation

B A C K G R O U N D

The study area consists substantially of remnant eucalypt dominated grassywoodland on the upper slopes. The lower sections adjacent to Churchill avenueand the lower campus have been substantially cleared with smaller isolatedpockets of indigenous vegetation. The smaller of these remnants are subject toweed infestation and continues to be a major issue of landscape managers andcontractors.The forest is predominantly grassy woodland characterised by Eucalyptusglobulus, Eucalyptus pulchella and Eucalyptus ovata. The understorey iscomprised of some larger woody shrubs such as Allocasuarina verticillata.Banksia marginata and Acacia dealbata on drier slopes with Bayeria viscose,Pomaderis apetela and Bedfordia salicina in wetter areas.The Eucalyptus globulus wet Forest of the lower Rifle range gully is of highconservation status as one of the few stands that escaped the 1967 bushfires.The upper slopes are dominated by Eucalyptus ovata and Eucalyptuspulchella. Surrounding the Horticulture compound to the south east are dense(almost impenetrable) stands of Allocasuarina verticillata.Across the Upper areas the Grassy understorey is dominated by Themedatriandra and Poa rodwayii

Vegetation in the lower part of the site is a mixture. The Rifle range Gullyremains an important remnant while much of the planting around buildings is amixture of Tasmanian species, mainland native plants and exotics. In recentyears a concerted effort has seen the establishment of number of plantingareas with Tasmanian indigenous species (particularly grasses and groundcovers)

Data on the habitat, movement and breeding of indigenous animals birds andfish within the reserve continues to be gathered by staff and students of theSchool of Zoology and School of Geography and Environmental Studies.Critically affected species within the reserve include Eastern Barred Bandicoot(Perameles gunni) listed as ‘vulnerable’ under the Commowealth ‘EndangeredSpecies Act’ 1992, and Swift’s Parrot (Lathanus discolor) that is listed as‘endangered’ under the Threatened Species Act 1995 and the Commowealth‘Endangered Species Act’ 1992.

A major issue remains the impact on habitat of ‘incremental creep’ of buildingsand other campus development and the combined effects of this developmenton the vegetation extents and quality through the reserve.Similar impacts are also identified from adjacent residential developmentincluding indigenous vegetation clearance, higher velocity run-off and theimpacts on water quality and in-stream habitat of increased nutrient levels andurban stormwater pollution.

Other recognised threats to the biodiversity of the reserve include the effects ofpredation on birds and small mammals by introduced dogs and cats and FireWildfires pose considerable threat to habitat, diversity of species and risk ofweed establishment within the University Reserve and surrounding areas. Thenature of this threat is discussed in section 4.1.15 Fire Management.




VegetationToo frequent fires and long term exclusion of fire both have the potential to leadto changes in plant community structure.The Eucalyptus globulus dominant Wet Forest should not be burned, as fuellevels make this activity dangerous and fie is not needed for ecological health.Communities dominated by Allocasuarina verticillata also do not need to beburned for ecological health. Other vegetation types within the reserve wouldlikely benefit from fire intervals of 2 –20 years.7

VertebratesThreatened Species likely to be found in the University Reserve include;Eastern Barred Bandicoot (Perameles gunni) and Swift’s Parrot (Lathanusdiscolor)Other Significant Macrofaunal species include;

Species Conservation status Habitat / comments

Long nosed Potoroo, Potoroustriactylus

Identified, Ferris, Symesand Hawkins, (1992)

Tasmanian (Eastern) Betong,Bettongia gaimardi

Extinct on mainland.Patchy distribution onTasmania. Should bemonitored in the studyarea.

Identified Ferris, Symesand Hawkins, (1992)

Tasmanian Pademelon,Thylogate Billardierri


Brushtailed Possum,Trichosurus vulpecula


Brown Bandicoot, Isoodonobesulus


Little Pygmy Possum.Cercartetus lepidus

Eastern Swamp Rat, Rattuslutreolus (Wet Gully)


Forty Spotted Pardalote,Pardalotus quadragintus

Endangered, State andnationally. Sensitive toloss of foraging habitat.

Potential foraginghabitat exists. Nestingcolony exists in MtNelson vicinity.

Little Bat, Eptesicus vulturrnus Ferris, Symes andHawkins, (1992)

Broad Striped Ghost Moth,Fraus latistria

(this species only foundin Tasmania and knownfrom five locations)8

Reptiles including; Blue tongueLizards, She-Oak Skink, Skinks,Whipsnakes + other

7 Kirkpatrick. J: 2004, pers. Comm..8 Brereton, R, Fauna and Habitat Overview, Ridgeway Local Area Planning Provisions. 2000



Invertebrates and In-stream habitatIn-stream habitat is particularly sensitive to adjacent residential developmentincluding indigenous vegetation clearance, higher velocity run-off and theimpacts on water quality and in-stream habitat of increased nutrient levels andurban stormwater pollution.9

It should be noted that the University stream (the stream flowing in the gullybetween Hytten Hall and the upper campus) has an aquatic invertebrate faunaof a community composition largely in common with other nearby Hobartstreams10 (such as Lambert Ck, Cartwright Ck), dominated numerically by:

• Hydrobiid snails of the genus Austropyrgus and the introduced speciesPotamopyrgus antipodarum;

• Crustaceans of the order isopoda (family Phreatoicidae) and of theorder amphipodae (especially Parameletidae and Eusiridae);

• Chironomid (midge) larvae;• Freshwater worms (Oligochaetae);• Beetle larvae for the families Elmidae and Psephenidae.

Such a fauna is indicative of a stream with generally good to moderate waterquality but impacted by urban development (e.g. sediment inputs). Nothreatened species have been recorded from University stream.

The fish fauna of the University stream is limited to very low densities ofshortfin eels (Anguilla australis), and the exotic goldfish (Carassius auratus)has also been recorded – probably related to release from aquaria. Theconversion of the original stream course to urban piped stormwater drainagedownstream of the Churchill avenue now prevents native fish from migrating infrom the Derwent estuary and maintaining a population in the University stream(Rifle Range creek). Galaxias truttaceus for example if present in LambertCreek and Sandy Bay Rivulet, while G. maculatus is also present in Sandy BayRivulet. Both species would be have maintained populations in the Universitystream under natural conditions. The opportunity to restore these fishpopulations, though the potential for restoring fish passage by the installation ofBiobaffles® in the culverts downstream of the Churchill Avenue should beexplored.

The following surrounding development has impacted or has potential impacton he natural values of the reserve.

Christ College;Developed in the 1970’s, has had relatively low impact however with the recentexpansion of residential development to the east combined with considerablenew impervious pavement road surfaces has potential to generate higherconcentration of Stormwater pollutants and concentration of high velocity run-off. Will require monitoring and possible stormwater treatment /retention /managed dispersal of generated stormwater

Mt Nelson residentialThe development of this low density residential development on the edge of theUniversity Reserve has led to a number of impacts on the management of thebushland and maintenance of habitat within the reserve. Undeveloped externallandscape is compacted increasing stormwater velocity, turbidity, resulting inpollution and erosion.The clearing of bushland required for bushfire prevention continues the erosionof vegetation extent, and habitat. The noise, activity and unrestricted access

9 ‘Waste Management and Environment 2001’ in Sandy Bay Rivulet Catchment Management Plan200110 Davies, P. 2004. pers comm..



into the reserve has potential impact of native animal/ bird nesting andbreeding areas, including the endangered Swift Parrot.The location of un-grated open fire places adjacent to the reserve increases therisk of bushfire considerably.

Oberon St/ Proctor’s RoadIncreased run-off diverted from the recent development in Oberon St. has ledto weed establishment within the reserve. Road access to the edge of thereserve has led to dumping of garden waste in the reserve.

French Street and rear of Alexander Street.An established residential precinct adjacent to the Proctor’s Catchment (HyttenGully), exotic garden plants have established in the gully. This section of thegully is relatively restricted and has considerable potential as an urbanbushland regeneration project.

Proposed Tangara Road developmentThe present portion of privately owned bushland at the upper edge of theUniversity catchment is an existing weed source point. It is currently in a highfuel condition after previous fuel reduction burning 18 months ago and poses apotential fire source point adjacent the reserve. A proposed development onthis site however would have impacts on the downstream habitat includinghigher nutrient run-off, weeds, erosion of adjacent habitat vegetation andintroduced animals. Also, efforts to establish access to parts of this propertyfrom the University Reserve are another potential ‘edge effect’ that would bedetrimental to the Reserve.

Photo 5

Visible flow-path of stormwaterfrom residential subdivisionadjacent to the Universityreserve.

Photo 6

Visible erosion and weedestablishment downstream ofOberon crt subdivision.




Manage the Reserve, it’s vegetation and populations such a way that maintainsand enhances the indigenous biological diversity of the site and catchment.


Prepare a detailed Bushland Fire /Habitat Management Plan. The Planshould identify common transects, quadrates including a schedule ofcoordinates for maintaining ongoing data base, consistent up-dating of surveydata and for targeting Faculty research and monitoring. The plan should bebased on an adaptive model and include ‘triggers’ for on ground managementactions

Prepare detailed Habitat Management Brief for University Reserve andUpper Campus Bushland Areas in order to short list contractors with specificbackground and expertise in Bushland Management and Restoration Ecology.Identify those contractor best suited to specific elements of the LandscapeTasks required rather than assume a single landscape contractor is capable ofthe broadest scope of tasks.

Develop policies for the design and location of lighting which limitspollutant luminence adjacent to Habitat conservation zones.

Develop options/ policies to deal with development of adjacent land whichlimits the fragmentation of University managed bushland and limits furtherdemands on the University to undertake fuel reduction clearance to a greaterextent.

Photo 7

Evidence of excess run-off fromirrigation of Olinda Grovesports fields. (note: phototakenFebruary 2004)



Figure 5 & 6



4.1.4 Fire Management

B A C K G R O U N D

Aims of Fire Management

Minimise the Bushfire/wildfire threat to;• Life and property

• Ecological diversity

• Sustainability of natural systems

• Maintenance of cultural and aboriginal values

It should be noted that it is not possible to eliminate the threat of wildfire withinthe Upper Campus however it is the objective of fire management to enablethese fires to be suppressed when small and accessible and prevent fires thatmay start in the Campus from travelling to adjoining lands and furtherthreatening life and property.

Fire hazard Reduction

The fire threat to infrastructure and built assets can be reduced by creating abuffer zone around the asset where ‘fine fuel loads’ are maintained at lowlevels.

Use of Fire in Sustainable Management of Bushland

Progressive and sometimes irreversible changes in indigenous plantcommunities, including a loss of biodiversity can be caused by inappropriateseason, intensity and frequency of fires.However, the identification, prescription and implementation of an appropriatefire regime11 can be used to

• Manage indigenous flora and fauna habitats in a sustainable way

• Maintain biodiversity

• Control selected weed species and promote natural regeneration in dryforest communities.


Presently Modified Fuel Buffer Zones, (fire breaks) are maintained with theneighbouring Mt Nelson residential property, Oberon Crt and built areas in theUpper Campus including clearance of woody shrubs, slashing of native grassyunderstorey removal of hanging bark and clearance of tree limbs below 2.5Mfor a distance of 20M from the property boundary. The width of the MFBZ’s wasincreased following wildfires in 1998.

11 ie; a fire management plan such as the Fire Management Plan for Ridgeway Park, 2003Unpublished report to HCC, by AVK Environmental Management, IFERM P/L




Minimize the threat of Wildfire in such a way that maintains and enhances thebiological diversity of the site and catchment


Develop a comprehensive Fire Management Plan for the University Reserveand appropriate schedule for monitoring and review.

Photo 9

Follow-up and pre-burn weedmanagement critical to anintegrated fire and habitatmanagement approach

Photo 8

Fire trails in UniversityReserve, when well plannedand constructed can becomeeffective management edges.

Photo 10

Managed burning can be usedto maintain habitat values andvegetation mosaic in theUniversity bushland areas



4.1.5 Access, Community Links and Trail Networks

B A C K G R O U N D

There are numerous points of pedestrian / walker access to the UpperCampus, University Reserve, however the primary address is via ChurchillAvenue.Other secondary vehicular access include the Christ College via Proctor’sRoad and service access off Bend #3 from Mt Nelson, the small residentialarea at the top of the Reserve is accessed off Bend #7 from Mt Nelson and thesporting facilities at Olinda Grove.A range informal recreational activities occur within the University Reserveforms an important part of the network of walking trails across the GreaterHobart Region.


Specific issues for the entrances and frontages at the University Reserveinclude:

• The residential areas are accessed directly from carparks with littledefinition of pedestrian access or presentation of entry.

• Minor entrances, service entrances and entrances along the Mt Nelsonfrontage are not consistently presented.

• Signage and associated landscape at entrances does not present ahigh level of visual impact/ clarity.

• Informal pedestrian access points surrounding the University Reserveare not identified of controlled.

• There has been no definition of hierarchy of entry points

• Access from Mt Nelson residential area Extremely steep 1:5 – 1:10ramped steps along boundary. Links Mt. Nelson residential area, withLower campus via most direct route.


Present the Upper Campus and University Reserve as important natural andcritical habitat resource of significance locally, regionally and to TasmaniaHighlight the role of the University in the management and conservation of thereserve.


Develop links with the community and Bushcare representatives of thearea to increase awareness of issues affecting the University Reserve andsurrounding bushland areas,

Identify opportunities for further information and knowledge developmentto aid management and conservation objectives for the University Reserve andsurrounding bushland areas,



Assist identification and programming of ongoing management andconservation works within the University Reserve and surrounding bushlandareas.



Figure 7



4.1.6 Scenic Value (Regional/City Context)

B A C K G R O U N D

The University reserve provides a significant part of the vegetative backdrop tothe City of Hobart due to it’s steep slopes, aspect and relatively intactvegetation. Development has increasingly been built on the steeper slopes ofthe Upper Campus and University Reserve.These developments have had a markedly greater impact on the Landscapevalues since the visible impact of buildings in the Landscape increases with thegreater slope and increased elevation.The recent Planning Guidelines for Urban Skylines and Hillfaces12 developedby the Urban Skylines and Hillfaces Committee recognises the value of NaturalUrban Skylines and their importance in the circumstances of the steeptopography if a city like Hobart


• Some recent development on the upper slopes of the reserve prior tothe development of Urban Skylines and Hillfaces guidelines have hadan impact on the regional skyline.

12 Urban Skylines and Hillfaces Committee, Department off Primary Industries, Water andEnvironment, report and Guidelines, February 2000.

Photo 12

View of University skyline fromSandy Bay

Photo 11




Acknowledge the value of the University Reserve to the scenic catchment ofthe Hobart region


Review the implications for existing facilities within and on the peripheryof the Reserve of the Urban Skylines and Hillfaces Committee planningguidelines for the Hobart City region.

Develop recommendations to limit the impact on scenic sensitivity ofexisting facilities in the reserve.

Develop tree inventory. Include / survey significant tree assets adjoiningrecent building developments including new residences. Monitor tree health.



Figure 8 & 9



4.1.7 Safety and Risk Management

B A C K G R O U N D

Safety and Risk management relates to the Universities responsibility as aproprietor to provide access to it’s services and facilities in a safe and relativelyharm-free environment and to exercise a ‘duty of care’ in it’s operations anddevelopment.There are Safety and Risk management issues that need to be addressed inthe Upper campus. Many of these relate to the steepness of the sitestopography and provision of access. Some of these relate to the managementof the Reserves’s Bushland, and Fire Management.


• Steps adjacent carparks which do not provide adequate clearances-ad-hoc placement- which places pedestrians in conflict with vehicular/service traffic present significant public risk

• no path development/ access around residential area on Mt Nelson.Completely undeveloped.Rocky uneven terrain that must be negotiatedto access entrances.

• Open, ungrated wood fire BBQ’s sited opposite bushland reserve- atMt Nelson Residences

• Insensitive siting and design of facilities and associated access

• Remote services, security issue particularly when facilities are not litbut need access in nighttime hours.

• External access to Change-room Buildings at Olinda Grove notdeveloped, steep batters and loose surface. Considering heavy usagethis site poses significant public risk.

Photo 13

A typical risk issue wherepedestrian and vehicle zonesare undefined at a buildingentry.




Ensure that all works within the reserve including concurrent and project workscomply with OH&S standards, BCA requirements and relevant AustralianStandards and minimize risk to public safety.


Develop recommendations to ensure all contract works in the reserve arecompleted and comply with BCA requirements and relevant AustralianStandards and minimize risk to public safety

Ensure all building works contracts include provision for safe externalaccess and circulation prior to completion.

Photo 14

A risk issue, existing disusedquarry. Is fenced but requiresmonitoring.



4.1.8 Stormwater and Site Hydrology

B A C K G R O U N D

A catchment comprises a river /stream it’s floodplain and all tributaries and isrecognised as a single functioning ecological unit, yet each possess it’s ownindividual characteristics which give a stream its unique nature.These characteristics include permeable /impermeable surface extents/ratios,vegetative character, human population, operational industries and humanbehaviours are a few. Human Behaviour however is having considerableimpact on stream health and water quality that is a major issue through outmainland Australia and Tasmania.

Much of the Upper Campus retains relatively intact stormwater andhydrological characteristics. The developed areas to the north of ChurchillAvenue typically have much less permeable surface and concentration ofstormwater flows. Proctor’s Stream (Hytten Gully) is channelised betweenCollege Road and Churchill Avenue.

The catchments in the upper slopes of the reserve can expect to collect areasonable annual total rainfall. (typically a range of 830-1160mm). Catchments with relatively steep, long profiles over short lengths, (150M over 600M,equivalent to 200M fall to the base of the Lower Campus/1km) with reducedupper catchment permeability characteristics (dolerite) and experiencingreasonably high local distribution of annual and storm rainfall volumes can beexpected to have relatively active runoff characteristics. In this situation theretention of forest cover on these upper catchment slopes is important to bufferstorm generated run-off. The removal or loss of critical patches of slope orriparian vegetation can aggravate bed stability, initialising changes that maytake decades to stabilize.

With the increased development of facilities on the lower slopes of thiscatchment the consequence may be measured in cost to public safety andbuildings.Lower down in the floodplain the geomorphology of the University Stream istypical of lowland streams originating from the Wellington range and it’sfoothills. Though ‘flatter’ than the stream higher in the catchment, the riparianmorphology is still defined by it’s bedrock nature though with a slightly widerchannel and a greater preponderance of pool-riffle sequences. Thesesequences are often disturbed and shortened (typically when development islocated on lesser slopes and foothills to where these sequences occur). Thissteepening of the overall grade can lead to increased upstream bed and bankerosion.Where appropriate, existing hazards may be mitigated or reduced in alreadycompromised or threatened areas by provision of environmentally designedriparian improvements. Constructed wetland systems can mitigate storm flows,smaller scale infiltration/evaporation beds can be constructed to retain localstormwater run-off before discharging to a drainage line. Well defined buffers ofindigenous vegetation should be established to the nearest cultivated gardenzone where fire clearance lines allow.




Acknowledge the value of the riparian systems within the University Reserve tothe catchment management objectives for the Hobart region


Develop recommendations to restore / reconstruct naturalized wetlandlower down in the floodplain as a critical improvement in stream and riparianmorphology

Mitigate or reduce existing hazards in already compromised or threatenedareas by provision of environmentally designed riparian improvements, such astrash filters, storm-surge filters and artificial fish passage improvements suchas Biobaffles

Establish guidelines and corresponding ‘Technical notes’ to retain andfilter local stormwater run-off before discharging to a drainage line.

Establish a cooperative program between University of Tasmania, Hobart CityCouncil and private landowners to guide restoration of the riparian corridorin the lower Proctor’s Catchment. This program could be established underdirection of the proposed University Reserve Committee of Management.

Photo 15

Proctor’s Gully adjacent toResidential area. A degradedriparian site with potential forecological restoration. Definedmanagement edges and cleardemarcation of property edgesoffer good opportunity forsuccessful riparian restoration.

Photo 16

A downstream section ofProctor’s Gully has beenchannelised. Better stormwaterretention and re-cyclingcombined with installation oftrash filters have immediatepotential to improve waterquality.



4.2 Review of Precinct Issues and Opportunities

This section builds on the broader Campus-wide landscape issues identifiedabove and details issues and opportunities across each of the identifiedprecincts. This approach allows the landscape masterplanning for each area torespond to the specific issues and assets of each locale, but also to its rolewithin the overall presentation and functioning of the Campus.

In order to define objectives and address specific issues at a local level, theUniversity Reserve and significant bushland areas site has been divided into 5precincts, which are sufficiently different in location, assets, issues and featuresto warrant detailed review and analysis. Volume two comprises precinct no,s9-13, These are:

9. Upper Field Facilities and Research10. (a)Lower ‘Rifle Range Creek’ (University Stream) Conservation Zone

(b)Hytten Gully (Proctor’s Gully)11. University Reserve Bushland Conservation Zone12. Mt. Nelson Residence Area.13. Olinda Grove Recreation Zone

Within each sub-precinct, the key roles within the presentation and functioningof the Campus have been identified and specific issues that prevent therealising of these roles are articulated. The location of these issues are givenon accompanying figures. In response, a range of opportunities have beenoutlined for each sub-precinct, including a number of ‘key action areas’, whichare priority areas for substantial landscape works or improvements. It isenvisaged that these key action areas become the focus of Action Area Plans,which would provide specific design and landscaping recommendations.

Summary figures for each precinct are provided at the beginning of Section 6 –Implementation Plan

4.2.1 Precinct 9 – Horticultural Research Precinct

Horticulture Compound. The use of this site for agricultural trials, andmaintenance of this site has a number of conflicting issues with that of it’ssurrounding environment.Key roles for this precinct are;Special Use– research and field trials.


1. High levels of irrigation and resultant run-off is providing conditions forexotic weed emergence within the bushland of the downstreamcatchment,

2. Nutrient/ fertilizer rich run-off is providing conditions for exotic weedemergence within the bushland of the downstream catchment,

3. Poor soils of the area are not ideal for land-use of site for field trials. (long-term viability this facility may be better located in an area matched to highquality agricultural/horticultural production)

4. Rear above Med. Science/ below CSIRO CRC. Excellent remnant ‘Grassy Woodland’ featuring Themeda aust, Dichelachne crinita,Astroloma h?. Dodonia cuneata. – Has had recent services works andsignificant ground disturbance.



O P P O R T U N I T I E S

• Opportunity to clarify vegetation management of ‘Bushland edge’ forCSIRO facility. Presently remnant vegetation is maintained in acompromise manner. Review existing treatment and vegetationcondition. Consider partial removal of woody shrub-storey vegetationwith restoration of indigenous ground storey, maintaining existingcanopy

• Review vegetation composition and fire management clearance zonearound CSIRO. Guidelines for maintenance to be established inCampus Fire Management Plan and monitored consistently.

• Opportunity to review vegetation management of area surroundingHorticulture compound. Review irrigation requirements and flow-path ofexisting run-off. Consider measures to contain irrigation run-off on siteand potential re-use. Review fertilizer use and consider on-sitecontainment of run-off.

Photo 17

Irrigation of Horticulturecompound

Photo 18

New services provision hascreated new flow path andpossible weed source point



Fig # – Existing conditions- Horticultural research Precinct



4.2.2 Lower ‘Rifle Range’ Creek Conservation Precinct – Precinct 10a

This area consists substantially of remnant Wet Eucalyptus globulus Forest/Bedfordia salicina- Beyeria viscose wet sclerophyll forest13, and is refered to inthe HCC vegetation mapping as ‘Blue Gum Wet Forest (Code WET-GLOB0100). Under a classification developed and detailed by North and Freeman(1996) and North (1997-98) the HCC’s vegetation mapping identifies Blue GumWet Forest as an ‘Urgent’ conservation priority within the HCC area. Otherstudies (Kirkpatrick et al. 1994 identifies the community as having statewidelevel of conservation significance for being ‘poorly reserved’. As an area thatescaped the Wildfires of 1967, the site is of importance to the study of firehistory and the effects of fire on vegetation community composition andcomplexity. The site has value as a ‘baseline’ site to compare other morerecently burnt areas.

Key roles for this precinct are;

Habitat Significance;The Tasmanian Blue Gum is the preferred habitat for the nationallyendangered Swift Parrot. The Swift Parrot breeds only in Tasmania and isdependant on nectar from flowering blue gums Eucalyptus globulus duringbreeding season. As a remnant site of old growth Eucalyptus globulus the RifleRange Creek gully is of high (Urgent) conservation status.

Access and Gathering;The Rifle Range Creek gully contains two paths that directly form part of thecampus circulation linking buildings or facilities. One which links the Library andInformation Science building and Riawunna Centre to the road to Researchhouse and the Lower Campus. The path is bitumen but does not meet disabilityaccess standards adopted by the University. The second path links developedeast side or the Upper Campus including Hytten Hall with the schools andfacilities on the south / east side of the gully, starting from the Library andInformation Science carpark, dropping down a flight of deteriorating timbersteps into the gully , past the BBQ area, bridges the creek then along a gravelpath to another flight of timber steps which emerge on College road.


1. Stormwater contaminants effecting instream habitats of Wet Gully,include debris and contaminants such as litter, oils and heavy metals,nutrients, pesticides, herbicides, hydrocarbons.

2. Increased SW run-off particularly increased nutrient rich run-off fromadjacent ‘Urbanised’ or developed sites such as recent residentialdevelopment has impacted on stream quality.Species richness (biodiversity) is impacted by urbanisation of astreams catchment (Foley 98) identified as correlation betweenreduced species richness (fewer taxa) and the higher number ofStormwater outlets in a catchment. Also identified increased systematicpressures on community types on lower sections of the urban streamsin the Hobart region.14

13 Johnson, DJ 1994, Kirkpatrick et al, 199814 Foley A. 1998, Bio Assessment of Streams in the Hobart Region.,Honours Thesis, School ofZoology, University of Tasmania.



3. Importance as an educational and Research site;Biological monitoring streams is increasingly important methodologyused to determine/ monitor stream health. As such the UniversityReserve stream habitats are an important research site as both areference and test sites.An increasing problem encountered in research using biologicalmonitoring and establishment of biological monitoring protocols (Foley98) is the fewer water bodies which have not been subject to theanthropogenic influences of urbanisation.

6. Fragmentation/Isolation. The gradual fragmantation and isolation of theWet Gully is typical of many urban bushland remnants. In spite of beinga part of a much larger bushland catchment, the Wet Gully has beenisolated by College Road, Churchill Avenue and development onwestern edge of it’s catchment and the Eastern Developed Precinct.The recent development of residential colleges on land on the upperwest edge of it’s present extents has removed the last directconnection to other remnant vegetation of the reserve.


• Opportunity to define management edge by establishing ‘primary path’to Hytten Hall and link to new residences. Establish new path link onfire break edge where possible.

• Remove grass from picnic area within the Rifle Range CreekConservation Zone including BBQ area and other potential ‘edgeeffects’, establishing clear unambiguous management edges.

• Opportunity for on-site stormwater retention and re-use, reducingnutrified run-off to the Wet Forest.

4.2.3 Precinct 10b – Proctor’s Gully (Proctor’s Catchment)

This area consists substantially of degraded Wet Eucalyptus globulus Forest.The site borders HCC managed reserve on the north west slopes of it’scatchment that are significantly degraded by weed species. Other boundariesabut established residential areas.

Key roles for this precinct are;

Entry and Circulation;An important pedestrian link follows the spur line from the Christ Collegeresidence down to Hytten Hall and lower campus areas. This pathpragmatically establishes the edge of this management precinct.

Habitat Significance;Riparian environments are critical habitat within urban areas since naturallyoccurring riparian and marsh habitats have typically been drained, piped orfilled during the process of achieving buildable areas within the urbanized area.Though degraded, this precinct has potential for restoration as a small riparianreserve with valuable hydrological and habitat function.




1. College Rd. app. Hytten Hall

Important link with Lower Campus via edge of Gully. Multiplepaths converge at stairs confusing. Base of stairs does not alignwith medians in road. Medians in low/poor visibility corner ofroad.

2. Adjoining HCC managed reserve.Heavy weed infestations existing adjoining HCC managedreserve.

3. Upper south slopes are densely vegetated with Allocasuarinaverticilata closed shrub forest. This edge is subject to further‘edge effects’ following recent development of residential collegeson spur-line above.

4. Gully /stream is piped above Student Union

5. Increase SW run-off particularly increased nutrient rich run-offfrom adjacent ‘Urbanised’ or developed sites.


• Opportunity to define management edge by establishing ‘primary path’to Christ College and link to new residences. Establish new path linkon Fuel Modified Buffer edge where possible.

• Remove weeds within the Proctor’s Creek Conservation Precinct.Formalise carpark edges and other potential ‘edge effects’,establishing clear unambiguous management edges.



Figure # - Existing conditions – Lower Rifle Range Creek/ Proctor’s Gully(Proctor’s Creek)



4.2.4 Precinct 11- University Reserve Bushland ConservationPrecinct

The study area consists substantially of remnant dry Eucalypt dominant grassywoodland on the upper slopes. (excluding Wet Eucalyptus globulus Forest)

Key roles for this precinct are;Habitat Significance;The site’s natural values and substantial area are of relatively highconservation value / status. Areas of Eucalyptus ovata dominant grassywoodland have recently been re-classified under the HCC vegetation mappingand classification system as Eucalyptus pulchella which is classified‘Important’15 The Eucalyptus globules dominant wet forest of the lower RifleRange creek gully is not well represented in the Hobart area have been given‘Rare’ status under the RFA,16 . This community is dicussed in more detail insection; 4.2.6 Lower ‘Rifle Range’ Creek Conservation Zone Other areas suchas Eucalyptus. puchella dominant grassy woodland and Allocasuarinaverticilata scrub forest are valuable habitat and important to a number ofThreatened, endangered and significant fauna.There are a number of significant issues and threats to the conservation ofhabitat and faunal values in the reserve and surrounding portions of publiclyowned bushland.

Educational;A secondary role to that described above, the sites educational value issignificantly derived from it’s context within the University property and close tothe faculty of Life Science. It has specific value as an area of urban bushland tothe Schools of Geography and Environmental Studies and Zoology. It hassome educational value as the site of the existing horticulture compound,though the land capability is not critically suited for the purpose of horticulture.


1. Environmental impacts from adjacent land owners including weed sourcepoints and fire management/ fuel issues particularly land at TangaraRoad

2. Public use/ reserve interface- community attitude to use of reserve, dogwalking reflects the University’s unofficial policy to neither cater for nordeny public access to the Reserve.

3. Access from Oberan Crt has issues with dumping of waste anduncontrolled access into reserve

4. Above Christ college has become dumping area for garden waste. Thishas impact on natural vegetation, integrity of University Reserve’sLandscape value. Environmental weeds include;

• Blackberry

• Hawthorn

15 North Barker and Associates, ‘Flora and Fauna Habitat Identification and Assessment Process,’Unpublished report to HCC (in preparation – May 2004.)16 PLUC (1996) Environment & Heritage Report. Background report part C vol1-V for Tasmanian –commonwealth Regional Forestry Agreement. Tasmanian Public Land Use Commission



• Box Thorn

• Scotch Thistle

• others17

5. Number of informal tracks associated with entry from Oberon Crt.Numerous woody weeds.

6. Major run-off from Houses on Oberon Crt. Along fire break/ fire trail. Firetrail partly acts as a cut-off swale. At one point the Fire trail diverges fromcut-off swale. From here swale becomes steep, the increased run-offvelocity resulting in erosion/ weed infestation.

7. Above cut-off/ fire trail less weed infest. Good native grassy understorey.8. Fire trail along contours of spur below Rifle-range Creek and French’s

Creek is effective cut-off swale. Low velocity/ low grade. Bluestone Rockcut-off drains across track seems to work well.

9. Major weed infestations occur on land adjacent to the reserve, including,10. Gorse – Proctor’s Road Reserves, HCC11. Blackberry - Proctor’s Road Reserves, HCC12. A number of plant species occur within the reserve are listed under the

Threatened Species Act 1995, include;

• Gahnia rodwayi - (rare)

• Vittadinia Muelleri - (rare)

• Danthonia popinensis - (endangered)

• others18

17 List not exhaustive. A detailed weed survey and mapping by a qualified Consultant Botanist maywell identify others.

Photo 19 & 20

Environmental impacts fromadjacent land owners includingweed source points anddumping of garden waste




• the protection of significant habitats and sites from development anddisturbance, including, (but not limited to);

o Swift Parrot sites and habitat

o Broad Striped Ghost moth habitat

o Eastern Barred Bandicoot

o Long Nosed Potoroo sites and habitat

o Old Growth Forest – range of community types

o Eucalyptus globulus dom. Wet Forest

• controls on the clearing of bushland include. Ground vegetation, leaf &ground-litter, fallen timber, shrubs and trees, particularly habitat trees.These controls will need to consider fire protection requirements.

• Establish restrictions on the movements / access of dogs and cats thatconsider wildlife breeding/mating seasonal cycles within the reserveand critical habitat sites/ corridors.

• Establish containment of run-off and garden waste from residences.

• Fire management planning which considers the requirements of faunaand maintains habitats.

18 List not exhaustive. A detailed botanical survey and mapping by a qualified Consultant Botanistmay well identify others.



Fig # Existing conditions- University Reserve Bushland ConservationPrecinct



4.2.5 Precinct 12 - Mt Nelson-Bend 7 Residential Precinct

This area presents a number of issues specific to it’s site and context.It is residential in nature but low density located in an area of the Universityreserve adjacent to the residential development of Mt Nelson but remote fromall University facilities. Residential development is at odds with natural /conservation values of the University reserve as well as conflicting with HCC /Dept.Primary Industries, Water & Environment policy regarding developmenton urban skylines and hillfaces19

Key roles for this precinct are;Residential Use;


1. Has little useable open space for a residential site. Undeveloped with littleamenity.

2. Very poor pedestrian access to the majority of Campus facilities,

3. no path development/ access. Completely undeveloped.

4. Rocky uneven terrain that must be negotiated to access entrances.

5. Open, un-grated wood fire BBQ’s sited opposite bushland reserve- posean unacceptable risk

6. Insensitive siting and design

7. Remote services, security issue particularly when external areas are not litbut need access in night-time hours.


• Site requires site planning and development that is sensitive toBushland site context.

• Consider options for low impact sustainable site development andaccess improvements.

• Minimise points of access to Bushland/ University Reserve.

• Remove all external wood fuel BBQs from site.

• Divert site stormwater to existing carpark. Remove discharge points toBushland/ University Reserve.

• Opportunity for the University and Precinct managers to establish a‘bench –mark’ for sensitive site development bordering urban bushlandand appropriate site development in bushfire-prone areas.

19 Urban Skylines and Hillfaces Committee, Department off Primary Industries, Water andEnvironment, report and Guidelines, February 2000.



Photo 22

Little useable open space for aresidential development with nodefined pedestrian access.

Photo 21

Poor siting and design. Directoutfall of stormwater into theadjacent reserve (fire breakzone).



Fig # - Existing conditions - Mt Nelson- Bend 7 Residence Precinct



4.2.6 Precinct 13 - Olinda Grove Recreation Precinct

The function and maintenance of this site has a number of conflicting issueswith that of it’s surrounding environment. A highly developed sporting facility onone of the highest elevations of the University reserve bushland. The growth inpopularity of Soccer in Hobart has seen continuing heavy scheduling of gamesat the Olinda Grove facility and increasing importance of the facility to therecreational resources of the City. The planning and site development of thefacility has not kept pace with the increased use of the facilities and hasresulted in car-parking and site circulation which is underdeveloped or in someinstances incomplete. With the heavy use of the facility by the community andin particular children’s competition, some emphasis needs to be placed uponplanning improvements to the access and circulation of the site and facilities.

Key roles for this precinct are;Open Space/ Active Recreation Use – the soccer fields provide access to allusers and individual clubs for competition use.


1. High levels of irrigation (possibly excessive) and resultant run-off isproviding conditions for exotic weed emergence within the bushland ofthe downstream catchment,

2. With the pressure to sustain the growth of the turf surface increasedlevels of fertilizer is being utilized. Nutrient/ fertilizer rich run-off ispotentially providing conditions for exotic weed emergence within thebushland of the downstream catchment,

3. High level of visual/ light pollution at night conflicts with conservationpolicies for endangered Swift parrot, and other significant species. (ref:section 4.1.14 Indigenous Vegetation Management and HabitatConservation).

4. In-frequent, high level of sound pollution from competition use conflictswith conservation policies for endangered Swift parrot, and othersignificant species. (ref: section 4.1.14 Indigenous VegetationManagement and Habitat Conservation).

5. Parking is un-defined, causing congestion, in-efficient parking and poorvehicle circulation at peak use / event times.

6. Site rehabilitation/ external works following building works at clubroomsnot adequate. External circulation poor/ non-existent/ public risk. Fencingpoor or ineffective, (should at minimum retain soccer balls and keep outrabbits.\


• Establish run-off controls within zone defined by fire access tracks.

• As part of Campus-wide Irrigation masterplan, opportunity to reviewirrigation requirements including options for reducing water-use andlow water-use turf management.



• Opportunity to formalize carparking within site incorporating run-offcontrols from sportsfields.

• Site Planning to increase sports field number may be a potentialsolution to existing sports field maintenance issues. Increased fieldnumbers (without expanding into bushland reserve) may potentiallyincrease length of rotation of grounds and reduce use of fertilizer. Anassessment of feasibility needs to consider the effects of suchdevelopment on the issues, sustainability and water resourcesdemanded by an increased field area, edge effects on the BushlandReserve and habitat pressures. A feasibility review also needs toconsult Hobart City Council and jointly assess the sustainability of theincreased participation and popularity of Soccer against the presentfield resources.

Photo 23

High level of visual/ lightpollution at night conflicts withconservation policies forendangered Swift parrot, andother significant species.

Photo 24

un-defined in-efficient parkingand poor vehicle circulationcausing congestion,



Fig # - Existing Conditions Olinda Grove Recreation Precinct



5 Landscape Management Practices

5.1 Directions for Landscape Management

A key recommendation of this Report is that landscape management andmaintenance across the University should be unified and standardised under aDesign Standards and Technical Notes. This Manual would:

• Provide a sound framework for landscape management, reducing thead hoc nature of decision making.

• Provide grounds staff / contractors / landscape consultants with a suiteof policies specifically suited to site conditions or issues.

• Reduce problems within the landscape areas and improve publicsafety and

• Reduce time taken advising or resolving on issues for individualprojects.

Consistent with the approach to landscape management and maintenanceacross the University and set out in the Universities ‘Framework Plan’, a seriesof Design Standards and Technical Notes would be developed for the UpperCampus and University Reserve areas. The Technical Note series for theUpper Campus will provide a guide to maintenance practices within theUniversity’s bushland and remnant habitat areas that is consistent with themaintenance of habitat and faunal values and conservation of rare andendangered species.

The other major direction for Landscape Management within this report is therecognition of the value of the University’s Bushland and habitat assets with theestablishment of a ‘Committee of Management’ for University Reserve andother bushland assets. The purpose of the ‘Committee of Management’ wouldbe to;

• Provide conduit for information resources and knowledge baseregarding the values and management of the reserve- the reserve’smanagers are fortunate to be able to benefit from years of postgraduate research undertaken within Schools of Geography andEnvironmental Studies, Zoology, and Geographical InformationSystems.

• Develop links with the community and Bushcare representatives of thearea to increase awareness of issues affecting the University Reserveand surrounding bushland areas,

• Identify opportunities for further information and knowledgedevelopment to aid management and conservation objectives for theUniversity Reserve and surrounding bushland areas,

• Assist identification and programming of ongoing management andconservation works within the University Reserve and surroundingbushland areas.

• Investigate the opportunity to develop a National CRC for UrbanBushland Management at the University of Tasmania’s Sandy BayCampus.



• Committee members would typically involve; Asset Services, School ofGeography and Environmental Studies, School of Zoology, School ofPlant Science, Tasmanian Fire Service, Hobart City Council-Development and Environmental Services, and report to the ViceChancellor or other appropriate representative of the UniversityAdministration.

5.2 Landscape Management Policies

In working towards a manual for landscape maintenance, for the LowerCampus, a suite of policies for five key elements of landscape practices arepresented in volume one. These cover:

• sustainable landscape practices;

• existing trees;

• grass and lawn areas;

• irrigation;

• stormwater management; and

• weeds. (‘Campus’ landscape issues)

The policies establish a strategy and recommended methods of treatment foreach element within the Lower Campus.For the Upper Campus and University Reserve there are a further six policies.Contained in volume two;

• Bushland Management and Habitat Conservation

• Irrigation Policy- Olinda Grove

• Stormwater and Site Hydrology Management

• Environmental Weeds (specific to Large area ‘BushlandIssues)

• Fire Management

• Community Access

These are intended to remain at a broad and strategic level and provide thepolicy framework for the preparation of more detailed guidelines through theproposed Design Manual and Technical sheets.

The sustainable landscape practices policy is presented in volume one isconsistent with the Habitat and Vegetation Conservation based policiesestablished in this volume.



5.2.1 Bushland Management and Habitat Conservation Policy

C O N T E X T

Maintenance of Faunal Values

To maintain faunal values within the reserve the following measures need to beconsidered and actions to be undertaken as part of scheduled maintenance ofthe reserve.

Maintenance of Biodiversity/ Habitat Values

Buffer Zones; are an attempt at offering a provisional level of protectionhowever are a prescription only. These need to be observed, monitored foreffectiveness and underlying assumptions reviewed and revised as necessaryto achieve maintenance/improvement of Habitat/Faunal values. The monitoringschedule itself should be considered and up-dated.

Exclusion Zones; need to be able to be defined, enforced/monitoredInterventions; in circumstances where significant decline or risk to viability ofpopulation is recorded interventions may be considered to stabilize habitat orconditions.

Monitoring Schedules; The most important management tool will be the abilityto monitor conditions and populations over time, to track vegetation conditionsand population health, size and movement. Effective monitoring will largelydetermine the effectiveness of other management methods such as BufferZones and Exclusion zones

Planning Direction Action / Schedule1. the protection of significant habitats

and sites from development anddisturbance, including;• Swift Parrot sites and habitat• Broad Striped Ghost moth

habitat• Eastern Barred Bandicoot• Long Nosed Potoroo sites and

habitat• Old Growth Forest• Eucalyptus globulus dom. wet

Forest

Establish ‘Committee of Management’ forUniversity Reserve and Bushland tooversee ongoing management andconservation of the natural values of theCampus’ Bushland assets;Establish ‘Document Register’ for Assetsand Life Sciences to cataloguedocuments, studies and reports pertainingto the management / conservation for theCampus’ Bushland assets;

2. controls on the clearing of bushlandinclude. Ground vegetation, leaf &ground-litter, fallen timber, shrubsand trees, particularly habitat trees.These controls will need to considerfire protection requirements.

Commission / prepare brief for detailedFlora & Habitat Assessment.Develop and define management edges,buffer, restriction and exclusion zones

3. Establish restrictions on themovements / access of dogs andcats that consider wildlifebreeding/mating seasonal cycleswithin the reserve and critical habitatsites/ corridors.

Education and community awareness ofthe presence/ threat of weeds to bushlandreserve/habitat values.In cooperation with HCC officers, developaccess policy for dog walking/ pet owners.Develop and define dog/pet restrictionand exclusion zones.

4. Establish containment of run-off andgarden waste from residences.

Education and community awareness ofthe presence/ threat of weeds to bushlandreserve/habitat values.Develop and define management edges,buffer, control and retention zones.

5. Fire management planning which Commission a detailed Fire Management



considers the requirements of faunaand maintains habitats

Plan and incorporate into the appendicesof this study. Also incorporate into theDocument Register for the Reserve.



5.2.2 Irrigation Policy – Olinda Grove

C O N T E X T

Currently, sports fields at Olinda Grove are the only grass areas irrigated in theUpper Campus apart from the irrigation of the trial plots in horticulturecompound. While irrigation to these important areas does ensure they remaingreen / productive all year, they require significant volumes of water to maintainand may be out of scale with the extent of demand / use of these facilities. Themanagement of lawns in the Upper Campus and University Reserve hasexisting and potential impacts on the conservation values of the site.

Specific issues with the existing lawn and grass on the Upper Campus include:

• There appears to be over irrigation of the sports fields at Olinda Grove.Although there has been substantial investment in buildings andinfrastructure at this site, demand seems moderate

• Irrigation of horticultural trials within the Horticulture Compound hasencouraged the ground cover dominance of exotic pasture grassesand weeds. This irrigation has impacts for conditions in adjacentBushland remnants and downstream habitats (particularly the LowerRifle Range Creek)


The University should aim to reduce the amount of irrigation water used anduse water within landscape efficiently and in an environmentally sustainableway. Recognize land uses within the reserve that are reliant on irrigation areincompatible and develop strategies to minimize water use and run-off.

D I R E C T I O N S

It is recommended that the University undertake the following:

1. Engage a specialist consultant to prepare an IrrigationMasterplan as proposed on volume one of this study. The Sportfields at Olinda Grove should be considered within this brief.

2. Consider the development of on-site retention and buffer zoneswhere irrigation water run-off is having impacts on Indigenousvegetation values review seasonal irrigation regimes for opportunitiesfor reduced watering.

3. Promote the use of grass species mixes which have a low waterdemand. (including indigenous plants). More sustainable grass andturf management practices should be explored across the Campus,including:

- limiting the use of fertilizers;



5.2.3 Site Hydrology and Stormwater Management Policy - UpperCampus & University Reserve

C O N T E X T

Stormwater and Water Quality; Much of the University Reserve retainsrelatively intact stormwater and hydrological characteristics.

It is crucial that the Upper Campus and University Reserve retains and activelymanage the forest cover on these upper catchment slopes of the Sandy BayCampus Catchments, including University Catchment (Rifle Range Creek) andProctor’s (Hytten Gully), and minimize impermeable surfaces associated withexisting and future building /campus development.Any increase in non-permeable surfaces (including roads, pavements, roofsetc.) has a consequence of increased peak flow of stormwater as well as thecollection of pollutants.

Hydrology and Stability of SlopesDue to the steep slopes and long profiles over relatively short lengths and poorpermeability characteristics (dolerite) of the upper slopes the campus canexpect relatively active runoff characteristics. Consequently the removal or lossof critical patches of slope or riparian vegetation can create ‘bed’ instability andlead to changes that may take decades to stabilize. With increaseddevelopment of facilities on the lower slopes of the catchment theconsequences of this potential instability may be measured in cost to publicsafety as well as buildings.It should be remembered also that the loss of permeability at the lower areas ofthe site can have impacts for the site hydrology above.


Improve the management of stormwater on the Campus to reduce on-siteproblems such as erosion, pooling and flooding; and minimize off-siteimpacts which result from increased flow, siltation, and discharge of litterand pollutants (among others).Maintain the natural Boulder/Bedrock nature of the stream channels.

D I R E C T I O N S

In general, an integrated wholistic approach needs to be taken for sitehydrology and stormwater issues across the campus including UpperCampus and University Reserve. Methods for reducing stormwater velocity,improving water quality and replenishing groundwater should be exploredacross the Campus. Each Action Area Plan, new building, civil or landscapeproject should consider possibilities for WSUD solutions to that replenishgroundwater systems and minimise urban run-off should. These might include:

• the use of permeable pavements and drainage systems;

• installation of stormwater retention wetlands; and

• rainwater collection and reuse, among others.

• The combination of these measures have potential to improve sitehydrology in the Upper Campus and University Reserve.

The University should consider the following in order to improve stormwatermanagement in the study area:



1. Developing technical notes encourage the installation offeatures that are more stormwater sensitive such as littertrap inserts, drainage swales, soakage pits, recharge strips,etc.

2. Existing hazards may be mitigated or reduced in alreadythreatened areas by establishing environmentallydesigned (including WSUD) riparian restoration,constructed wetland systems at source points, trashfilters and storm-surge filters and installation ofBiobaffles into culverts downstream of Churchilll Avenue.

3. Any future geological / geotechnical survey in the site studyarea should consider site hydrology survey as a criticalcomponent of the survey and identify at risk sites forfuture/ongoing monitoring.

4. Establish a cooperative program between University ofTasmania, Hobart City Council and private landowners toguide restoration of the riparian corridor in the lowerProctor’s Catchment. This program could be establishedunder direction of the proposed University ReserveCommittee of Management

5.2.4 Environmental Weeds Policy- University Reserve

C O N T E X T

Environmental weeds are a far greater threat to the landscape values of theUpper Campus than those of the highly modified/urbanised Lower Campus.

Planning Direction Action / Schedule1. Identify and map type and extent of

existing weed species infestation.Identify and map existing andpotential weed nutrient sourcepoints.

Commission detailed Flora & HabitatAssessment. It is likely that this can becarried out by in house faculty staffincorporating work already carried out byHCC, Life Sciences and Assets. Liaise/co–ordinate with Friends / Bushcaregroups

2. Control the transfer of exotic plantsfrom surrounding residential areas.

Reduce levels of plant nutrients such asphosphorus and nitrogen which contributeto weed invasion by retaining stormwaterrun-off inside buffer zones.Education and community awareness ofthe presence/ threat of weeds to bushlandreserve/habitat valuesLiaise /co –ordinate weedremoval/reduction programs with Friends /Bushcare groups

3. Fire management planning whichconsiders the requirements of faunaand maintains habitats. Coordinatefuel reduction burns with seasonbased weed removal works, pre-burnand post burn weed removaltreatments

Commission a detailed Fire ManagementPlan which considers measures whichmanage recruitment of weeds which donot rely on chemicals and incorporate intothe appendices of this study. It is likelythat this can be carried out by in housefaculty staff. Also incorporate into theDocument Register for the Reserve.




As a significant land owner and manager, the University has an obligation tocontrol recruitment and prevent the planting of environmental weeds on allareas of the Campus.

D I R E C T I O N S

Effective weed management requires landowners and managers to workclosely to jointly determine weed control methods, strategies andpriorities. The University should work with the Hobart City Council, theDepartment of Primary Industries Water and Environment (DPIWE) and otherlandowners to develop a district wide approach to weed management.

Any plants that are included on this list should not be planted or allowed topersist on the Campus.

An updated weed list has been compiled from a range of sources including theexisting Grounds Contract for the Sandy Bay Campus, the DPIWE web siteand handbook- Weed Control Guidelines for Native Bushland Areas. This isprovided in Appendix 4.

5.2.5 Fire Management Policy

C O N T E X T

The Fire management Policy outlined here is based upon the maintenance ofhabitat values and conservation of vulnerable and threatened communities andspecies. It recognises the importance of fire management in the reduction ofrisk of wildfire and fire threats to persons and property, however a detail FireManagement Plan is beyond the scope of this study.

Planning Direction Action / Schedule1. Fire management planning which

considers the requirements of faunaand maintains habitats

Commission a detailed Fire ManagementPlan and incorporate into the appendicesof this study. Also incorporate into theDocument Register for the Reserve.

2. A comprehensive survey of thedistribution of vegetation types isrequired to determine firemanagement categories in terms ofthe fire frequency thresholds requiredto maintain that vegetation type.

Commission detailed Flora & HabitatAssessment.Appoint/invite senior Botanist to proposed‘Committee of Management’ for UniversityReserve and Bushland. Develop anddefine management edges, buffer,restriction and exclusion zones

3. Minimise the risk of wildfire byremoving or limiting as manypotential causes of fire as possible

Reduce external sources of fire in linewith Fire Management Plan. Better controlpublic access to reserve.

4. Maximise ability of fire suppressionagencies to detect and control anywildfires that do start

Maintain and manage building protectionzones’ and ‘defendable space’ within FireManagement Plan.



5.2.6 Community Access Policy

C O N T E X T

Present policy is to neither encourage nor exclude pubic and local residentsusing the university reserve. In the Upper University Reserve tracks exist butare un-developed and some are relatively difficult to negotiate. Fire trails aremore accessible but have controlled access points.

Planning Direction Action / Schedule1. Manage access which considers the

requirements of fauna and maintainshabitats

Educate community to the importance ofthe Reserve as habitat, particularlyspecies which are at risk.Encourage Bushcare/ Friends ofUniversity Reserve, involvement with‘Committee of Management’

2. Develop access strategy whichcontrols access to dogs and cats.

Educate community /dog & cat owners toobserve access controls.



6 Implementation Plan

This section summarises the key directions and recommendations from thepreceding sections of the report. It is divided into two parts:

• The first (table 6.1) summarises key directions associated with issuesthat apply across the study area, provides a preferred timeframe forimplementation and outlines responsibility for implementation within theUniversity20.

• The second (table 6.2) outlines the main elements of the key actionareas identified within each precinct, and suggests a timeframe forcompletion.

In the tables, the following schema has been used to designate timeframe:

• U – Recommendations which require immediate or urgent action dueto potential safety and/or security risks.

• S – Recommendations which require short term funding and action(within 12 months), or which are already commenced or imminent.

• M – Recommendations which may be more substantial, or arecontingent on the completion of other recommendations and are to becompleted in the medium-term (i.e. 1-3 years).

• L – Large-scale, longer term projects which require substantialfunding and are likely to be completed in greater than 3 years.

• O – Recommendations which are ongoing and continuous in nature.

Figure 15 – Opportunities 9a/9b

Figure 16 – Opportunities 10a/10b

Figure 17 – Opportunities 11




20 In this draft responsibility for implementation of projects has not been assigned. Rather it isexpected that the breakdown of responsibility between different sections and departments of theUniversity will be a major outcome of consultation and discussion over this draft Subject Plan.



Table 6.1 - Summary of policy statements and key directions that apply acrossthe study area.

Table 6.1 Issue Key Directions TimeFrame

Responsibility

• Continue to implement andupdate Standard SignsManual.

S-M

• Plan for landscapingaccording to a hierarchy ofentry points: The landscapetreatment of each entrancewill be defined by its relativeimportance to thepresentation of the Campusas a whole.

M-L

University ReserveSignage

Provide clear informationto staff, students, visitorsand special needs groupsvia a series of highquality, legible signswhich improve thefunctionality andappearance of theCampus

• Improve ‘sense of arrival’signage and landscaping at allvehicle entrances to the studyarea: Priority should be givento upgrading the landscapingand signage that identifies the‘University Reserve’ andcritical habitat areas within thereserve, including‘management’ zones andlimits to activity.

M-L

• Develop policies for servicesreticulation which limitspollutants and disturbancewithin the University Reserveand Habitat conservationzones. Identify commontrenching opportunities.

S-M

• Develop clear policy whichdefines and limits access ofdomestic animals in areas ofcritical Habitat sensitivity

S

• Undertake review of all trailaccess within the Reserveincluding survey of Fire trailsas part of Fire ManagementPlan. Incorporate planning formaintenance of assets,stormwater management andweed control.

S-M

University ReserveUsage / Activity

Present the UpperCampus and UniversityReserve as importantnatural and critical habitatand educational resourceof significance locally,regionally and toTasmania. Highlight therole of the University inthe management andconservation of thereserve.




Responsibility

• Prepare a detailed BushlandFire /Habitat ManagementPlan.

• The Plan should identifycommon transects, quadratsincluding a schedule ofcoordinates for maintainingongoing data base, consistentup-dating of survey data andfor targeting Faculty researchand monitoring.

• The plan should be based onan adaptive model andinclude ‘triggers’ for on groundmanagement actions

S/O

• Prepare detailed HabitatManagement Brief forUniversity Reserve and UpperCampus Bushland Areas inorder to short list contractorswith specific background andexpertise in BushlandManagement and RestorationEcology.

S/O

Indigenous VegetationManagement andHabitat Conservation

Manage the Reserve, it’svegetation andpopulations such a waythat maintains andenhances the biologicaldiversity of the site andcatchment.

• Develop policies for thedesign and location of lightingwhich limits pollutantluminence adjacent to Habitatconservation zones

S/O

• Develop options/ policies todeal with development ofadjacent land which limits thefragmentation of Universitymanaged bushland and limitsfurther demands of theUniversity to undertake fuelreduction clearance to agreater extent

S/O

• Develop a comprehensiveFire Management Plan for theUniversity Reserve andappropriate schedule formonitoring and review.

S/OFire ManagementMinimise the threat ofWildfire in such a waythat maintains andenhances the biologicaldiversity of the site andcatchment




Responsibility

• Develop links with thecommunity and Bushcarerepresentatives of the area toincrease awareness of issuesaffecting the UniversityReserve and surroundingbushland areas,

M

• Identify opportunities forfurther information andknowledge development toaid management andconservation objectives forthe University Reserve andsurrounding bushland areas

L

Access, CommunityLinks and TrailNetworks

Present the UpperCampus and UniversityReserve as importantnatural and critical habitatresource of significancelocally, regionally and toTasmania Highlight therole of the University inthe management andconservation of theReserve.

• Assist identification andprogramming of ongoingmanagement andconservation works within theUniversity Reserve andsurrounding bushland areas.

O

• Review the implications forexisting facilities within and onthe periphery of the Reserveof the Urban Skylines andHillfaces Committee planningguidelines for the Hobart Cityregion.

U

• Develop recommendations tolimit the impact on scenicsensitivity of existing facilitiesin the reserve works.

S

Scenic Value (Regional/City Context)

Assist identification andprogramming of ongoingmanagement andconservation works withinthe University Reserveand surrounding bushlandareas.

• Develop tree inventory.Include / survey significanttree assets adjoining recentbuilding developmentsincluding new residences.Monitor tree health.

S

• Develop recommendations toensure all contract works inthe reserve are completedand comply with BCArequirements and relevantAustralian Standards andminimise risk to public andworker safety

OSafety & RiskManagement

Ensure that all workswithin the reserveincluding concurrent andproject works comply withOH&S standards, BCArequirements andrelevant AustralianStandards and minimizerisk to public safety

• Ensure all building workscontracts include provision forsafe external access andcirculation prior to completion.

S




Responsibility

• Develop recommendations torestore / reconstructnaturalised wetlands lowerdown in the floodplain as acritical improvement in streamand riparian morphology

M-L

• Mitigate or reduce existinghazards in alreadycompromised or threatenedareas by provision ofenvironmentally designedriparian improvements.

S-M

Stormwater & SiteHydrology

Acknowledge the value ofthe riparian systemswithin the UniversityReserve to the catchmentmanagement objectivesfor the Hobart region

• Establish guidelines andcorresponding ‘Technicalnotes’ to retain localstormwater run-off beforedischarging to a drainage line.

S

• Any future geological /geotechnical survey in the sitestudy area should considersite hydrology survey as acritical component of thesurvey and identify at risksites for future/ongoingmonitoring

S/O



Table 6.2 - Key Action Areas

Table 6.2 Precinct Key Action Area Main Elements TimeFrame

Precinct 9 9a. CSIRO / ForestryCRC- Existing frontageLandscape

• Review existing landscapemanagement.

• Consider partial removal of woodyscrub storey vegetation andrestoration/ maintenance of anindigenous understorey

• Maintain and monitor existingadjacent Canopy trees

S-M

9a. CSIRO / ForestryCRC- Bushland Edge

• Review existing vegetationcomposition and modified fuelbuffer zone.

• Guidelines for Modified FuelBuffer Zone to be established inCampus Fire Management Planand monitoring to be scheduledas part of Fire Management Plan

S-M

9b. Horticulture Precinct • Review vegetation managementsurrounding Horticulturecompound.

• Consider the development of on-siteretention and buffer zones whereirrigation water run-off andadditional nurient is havingimpacts on Indigenous vegetationvalues

• review seasonal irrigation regimes foropportunities for reducedwatering.

S-M

Precinct 10 10a. Proctor’s GullyPrecinct. (Proctor’sCreek)

• Education and communityawareness of the presence/ threatof weeds to bushlandreserve/habitat values.

• Develop and define managementedges, buffer, control andretention zones.

• In cooperation with HCC officers,develop access policy for dogwalking/ pet owners. Develop anddefine dog/pet restriction andexclusion zones.

S/O




• Opportunity to definemanagement edge byestablishing ‘primary path’ toChrist College and link to newresidences. Establish new pathlink on Fuel Modified Buffer edgewhere possible.

• Remove weeds within the HyttenCreek Conservation Zone.

• Formalise carpark edges andother potential ‘edge effects’,establishing clear unambiguousmanagement edges.

• Establish a cooperative programbetween University of Tasmania,Hobart City Council and privatelandowners to guide restoration ofthe riparian corridor in the lowerProctor’s Catchment. Thisprogram could be establishedunder direction of the proposedUniversity Reserve Committee ofManagement

S

S/O

S

S/O

Precinct 10(cont.)

10b. ‘Rifle Range’ Creek

Wet Forest • Develop and define managementedges, buffer, restriction andexclusion zones.

S

• Divert specific Stormwater flowsfrom adjacent pavements anddevelopments to existingStormwater pipe system, divertingflow away from University Stream(Rifle Range Creek), eg; fromabove Churchill avenue to thesystem below Churchill Avenue.

S-M

Precinct 11 University Reserve • Commission a detailed FireManagement Plan andincorporate into the appendices ofthis study. Also incorporate intothe Document Register for theReserve

U

• Commission / prepare brief fordetailed Flora & HabitatAssessment.

S

• Develop and define managementedges, buffer, restriction andexclusion zones.

S

• Establish ‘Committee ofManagement’ for UniversityReserve and Bushland to overseeongoing management andconservation of the natural valuesof the Campus’ Bushland assets:

U/O




• Education and communityawareness of the presence/ threatof weeds to bushlandreserve/habitat values.

• Develop and define managementedges, buffer, control andretention zones.

• In cooperation with HCC officers,develop access policy for dogwalking/ pet owners. Develop anddefine dog/pet restriction andexclusion zones.

M/O

U/O

S/O

Precinct 12 Mt Nelson-Bend 7Residential Precinct

• Develop site plan for externalspaces / access.

• Develop options for sustainablesite development consistent withnatural site values.

• Minimise points of access toUniversity Reserve bushland

S

• Divert site stormwater to existingcarparks.

• Prevent stormwater discharge toBushland / University Reserve.

S-M

Precinct 13 Olinda Grove RecreationPrecinct

• Establish run-off controls withinzone defined by fire accesstracks. Review drainage patternsto determine options for diversionaway from Rifle RangeCreek/University Catchment.

• As part of Campus-wide Irrigationmasterplan, opportunity to reviewirrigation requirements includingoptions for reducing water-useand low water-use turfmanagement.

S

Olinda Grove Facilities • Develop integrated site planincluding;

• formalise carparking within siteincorporating run-off controls fromsportsfields.

• Repair / re-instate fencing toappropriate standard.

• Establish defined, safe access toall facilities to BCA, Australianstandards.

U

S

U

U



7 Bibliography

• Brereton, R, Fauna and Habitat Overview, Ridgeway Local AreaPlanning Provisions. 2000

• Beattie, T., 1996. ‘Management Report of the University Reserve.’ Anunpublished report, Department of Geography and EnvironmentalStudies, University of Tasmania

• Cronin, F., 1996. ‘Management Report of the University Reserve.’ Anunpublished report, Department of Geography and EnvironmentalStudies, University of Tasmania

• DPIWE Weed Information web site:http://www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/SLEN-5PC4SC?open

• Davies, P., 2004. pers comm.

• Fensham, 1991; Fire Management in Hobart’s Bushlands. Unpublishedreport for HCC

• Fire Management Plan for Ridgeway Park, 2003 Unpublished report toHCC, by AVK Environmental Management, IFERM P/L

• Johnson, DJ 1994, ‘Mapping the Vegetation of Hobart’, Masters ofEnvironmental Studies Thesis, University of Tasmania

• Kirkpatrick, J., Gilfedder, L., and Fensham, R.,1988. ‘City Parks andCemeteries, Tasmania’s Remnant Grasslands and GrassyWoodlands’, Tasmanian Conservation Trust.

• Kirkpatrick, J., 2004. pers comm

• "The nature of pre-European native vegetation south-eastern Australia"(condensed from J.S. Benson and RA. Redpath, Cunninghamia, 5(2)December, 1997)

• North Barker and Associates, ‘Flora and Fauna Habitat Identificationand Assessment Process,’ Unpublished report to HCC (in preparationMay 2004)

• PLUC (1996) Environment & Heritage Report. Background report partC vol1-V for Tasmanian – commonwealth Regional ForestryAgreement. Tasmanian Public Land Use Commission

• Inspiring Place Pty Ltd; ‘Rifle Range Creek / Thomas Crawford TrailMaster Plan’ unpublished report for University of Tasmania, January2002

• Urban Skylines and Hillfaces Committee, Department of PrimaryIndustries, Water and Environment, report and Guidelines, February2000.

• University of Tasmania, Draft Strategic Plan 2003-2005.

• University of Tasmania, 2000. Sandy Bay Framework Plan. Anunpublished report prepared by the University of Tasmania

• ‘Waste Management and Environment 2001’ in Sandy Bay RivuletCatchment Management Plan 2001



Appendix 1. List of Environmental Weeds

The Landscape Management Plan includes a policy to guide weedmanagement on the lower Campus. To assist in the definition of which plantsare considered as weeds under this policy, the following list of weed specieshas been compiled. This list has been generated from a number of sourcesincluding the existing Maintenance Contract, the Department of PrimaryIndustry Water and Environment (DPIWE) handbook- Environmental Weeds inBushland Areas and the DPIWE environmental weed list (including DeclaredWeeds under the Weed Management Act 1999).

Any plants that are included on the following list should not be planted orallowed to persist on the Campus. Other similar plants that produce volunteerseedlings or suckers and have the potential to spread widely should also not beplanted.

More information on environmental weeds, including weed control and revegetation strategies, and weed information sheets refer to the DPIWE website:

http://www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/SLEN-5PC4SC?open

ENVIRONMENTAL WEED SPECIES

Botanical name(Declared Weeds under the WeedManagement Act 1999 marked *)

Common name

Acacia baileyana Cootamundra WattleA.decurrens Early Black WattleA.floribunda White sallow WattleA. howitittii Sticky WattleA. longifolia Sallow WattleAcacia pycanantha Golden WattleAcer pseudoplatanus SycamoreAgapanthus praecox AgapanthusArtemisia absinthum WormwoodAlbizzia lophantha Cape WattleAsparagus asparagoides* Bridal CreeperCalluna vulgaris HeatherCarex albula* New Zealand Sedge

Carex buchananii* Leather leaf Sedge

Carex flagellifera* New Zealand Sedge

Carex testacea* New Zealand SedgeChamaecutisus Tree lucerneChrysanthemoides monilifera* Boneseed, Bitou BushClematis vitalba Old Man’s BeardCoprosma repens Mirror BushCoprosma robusta KaramuCortaderia spp* Pampas GrassCotoneaster spp CotoneasterCrataegus monogyna HawthornCrocosmia crocosmiiflora MonbretiaCupressus macrocarpa Monterey CypressCuscata species*Cynara cardunculus Artichoke ThistleCytisus palmensis Tree LucerneCytisus scoparius* English BroomDigitalispurpurea Foxgloves

Echium candicans Pride of MadeiraEchium plantagineum Paterson’s curseEgeria densa Egeria



Elodea canadensis Canadian pond weedEquisetum speciesFoeniculum vulgare* FennelErica Arborea Tree Heath

Erica Baccans Berry Flowered heath

Erica lusitanica* Spanish Heath

Erica scoparia Besom heath

Erigeron karvinskianus FleabaneFuschia magellancia FuschiaFraxinus excelsior Ash TreeGenista monspessulana* Montpellier BroomGrevillea ssp. GrevilleasHedera helix English IvyHieracium species* HawkweedHypericum (introduced spp)H. perforatum is *

St Johns Wort, Tutsan

Ilex aquifolium HollyLantana camara** LantanaLavandula stoechas Spanish lavenderLeycesteria formosa Elisha’s TearsLycium ferocissimum* African boxthorn

Marrubium vulgare* Horehound

Myriophyllum aquaticum* Parrot’s featherOxalis pes-capre SoursobParaserianthes lophantha Cape Leeuwin WattlePassiflora mollissima Banana PassionfruitPennisetum villosum* FeathertopPinus radiata Radiata PinePittosporum spp PittosporumPolygala spp Sweet Pea BushPrunus lusitanica Portugal LaurelPrunus spp PlumPsoralea pinnata Blue Butterfly BushPyracanthus spp Firethorn, for exampleRanaculus repens Creeping ButtercupRibes sanguineum Flowering CurrantRosa rubiginosa Briar RoseRubus fruticosus sp agg.* BlackberrySalix species* Willow

Salvinia molesta* SalviniaSambucus nigra ElderberrySanguisorbia Salad BurnettSollya heterophylla Blue Bell CreeperSorbus aucuparia Rowan treeSparaxis tricolor Harlequin FlowerTradescantia spp Wandering JewUlex europaeus* GorseVinca major Blue periwinkleWatsonia ssp. WatsoniaZantdeschia aethiopicum White arum lily



Appendix 2. Talloires Declaration

sandy bay campus landscape subject plan · landscape subject plan volume 2- university reserve...

Documents