This development was first brought to our attention in 2019 at which time we investigated with both the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning and the Minister for Environment what was possible to save this habitat.

The Minister for Infrastructure advised that due to the age of the development application (19 December 2011) he does not have the power to call in or otherwise change the development. At that stage the development still required Noosa Council approval for vegetation clearing and earthworks associated.

The Minister for Environment sent a lengthy response covering the background, state referrals and the current Environmental Offset Policy 2014. Their response is included below in italics:

Background:

  • The status of the Glossy Black Cockatoo in Queensland is ‘vulnerable’ under the Nature Conservation Act 1992. 
  • The site in question was zoned urban in the Noosa Shire Planning Scheme when the Blue Care application was made to Noosa Shire Council in 2008. During this time, Noosa Shire Council was in the process of amalgamating into the Sunshine Coast Regional Council.
  • At the time, the Noosa Shire Council had the ability to develop planning scheme policies to mitigate and offset impacts for the Glossy Black Cockatoo through conditions of an approval.
  • Sunshine Coast Regional Council gave Blue Care permission to develop the facility in 2011 but the development was not commenced at that time. The approval currency period was extended by the Noosa Shire Council in 2017 after it was de-amalgamated from the Sunshine Coast Regional Council.
  • The site was mapped with a biodiversity overlay under the planning scheme.
  • The Glossy Black Cockatoo feeds on the cones of mature Allocasuarina trees. The development will impact on these trees and also species in wallum woodland on the site.
  • Conditions on the approval require an offset program so that eight feed trees are propagated for every one Allocasuarina tree removed, and these are being delivered within an appropriate Nature Refuge property nearby.
  • The offset program is expected to provide beneficial habitat for the Glossy Black Cockatoo in perpetuity.
  • The approval also contains conditions requiring the planting of koala food trees in the landscape areas of the development, and maintenance of buffers consistent with the State’s recommendations.

State Referral

  • As part of the development assessment under the then Integrated Planning Act 2016, the development was referred to the State’s former Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) because of native vegetation, wetlands, conservation estate and koalas. 
  • DERM did not require conditions for offsets but did condition that the open space boundaries be maintained and that no clearing occurred within them, that koala trees be retained within them, and that koala habitat is rehabilitated in accordance with the landscape plan, vegetation management plan and bushfire report.
  • DERM also recommended buffers be maintained from wetlands and the conservation estate, and that the revegetated buffer use species representative of the preclearing regional ecosystem.

Current – Environmental Offset Policy 2014

  • The requirement for a planting at a ratio of 1:8 is a better outcome for the Glossy Black Cockatoo than what would be achieved under the current framework.
  • In July 2014, the Environmental Offsets Act 2014 (EO Act) was introduced.

Under section 95(B) of the EO Act the proponent has the option to amend an existing authority to align with current requirements of the EO Act (which could involve potentially decreasing the offset ratio to 1:4), allow a financial payment; or remove a requirement that is not a significant impact.

There is no argument that all levels of government need to do more to protect our environment, including vulnerable species, within it’s Environment Acts and Planning Schemes.

Spencer, and all advocates who have worked tirelessly since 2019, have done an incredible job in securing an outcome that is above current policy. The question now, and focus, is how a similar situation can be prevented in future development cases by:

a.    Firstly, the avenues available for local Government and community when extensions of approvals are sought. This is when any new environmental issues on sites can be identified under current regulations/legislation/etc. Although as per the response from the Minister for Environment, in this specific situation, this may not have gained an improvement, hence these frameworks need reviewing at more regular intervals and amended as needed.

b.    Secondly, is that future development approvals could be identified and revisited to seek:

  1. An agreement from Councils that fast-tracking of approval extensions will not be granted without a full review of the environmental issues and values;
  2. Councils to undertake a review of existing approvals that haven’t been enacted to ascertain what environmental values exist on the site;
  3. Councils to undertake an audit of vacant land (not residential) that has existing zonings that allow for major investments to ensure that environmental values can be protected in the future and that future proponents are fully aware of the requirements for developing the land before undertaking expensive design processes.

State planning legislation is drafted and enacted with the belief that Councils across Queensland will have appropriate procedures and protocols in place to recognise the appropriate land uses within their areas that will protect whilst delivering sustainable development incorporating social, economic and environmental outcomes and benefits. This would have been incorporated in the Noosa Council Plan after community consultation, with the future opportunities for local residents and community groups to have their input.

We empathise that this is not the information sought in order to protect this site, however can only present the facts provided and a way forward given we have not been able to find a state government mechanism that provides intervention for this specific development.

If you have any specific concerns surrounding QLD state legislation or its environmental strategy and would like us to investigate, please send through details via noosa@parliament.qld.gov.au. Your input is appreciated as we continue to advocate for much needed improvements to Queensland’s environmental legislation, strategies and policies.