sta tem entofexpertevidence - vpa · 3.3 stu dy area the study area is located 35 kilometres north...

[64 2 80 4 2 :1 5 862 3 2 5 _1 ]

MELBOURNE: 292 Mt Alexander Road Ascot Vale VIC 3056 GEELONG: PO Box 8048 Newtown VIC 3220BRISBANE: Level 22, 127 Creek Street Brisbane QLD 4000 ADELAIDE: 22 Greenhill Road Wayville SA 5034

CANBERRA: PO Box 6067, O’Connor ACT 2602 SYDNEY: Level 5, 616 Harris Street, Ultimo, NSW, 2007www.ehpartners.com.au | (03) 9377 0100

Sta tem entofExpertEvidence:M itchella nd W hittlesea Pla nning Schem e A m endm entG C 28

D onnybrook / W oodstock PrecinctStructure Pla n

Prepared for:

Boral

May 2016

Ecology and H eritage Partners Pty Ltd

Aaron Organ

Statement of Expert Evidence: Mitchell and Whittlesea Planning Scheme Amendment GC28 2

DOCU M EN T CON TROL

As s es s m entStatement of Expert Evidence: Mitchell and Whittlesea Planning Scheme Amendment GC28

Donnybrook / Woodstock Precinct Structure Plan

O u rp roject nu m b er 8109

Rep ort au thor(s ) Aaron Organ (Director / Principal Ecologist)

Docu m ent review er Andrew Hill (Director / Principal Ecologist)

File nam e 8109_EHP_Donnybrook_WoodstockPSP_EWS_05052016.docx

Client Boral

Bioregions Victorian Volcanic Plain

CM A Port Philip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority

Cou ncil City of Whittlesea

Copyright © Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd

This document is subject to copyright and may only be used for the purposes forwhich it was commissioned. The use or copying of this document in whole orpart without the permission of Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd is aninfringement of copyright.

Disclaimer

Although Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd have taken all the necessarysteps to ensure that an accurate document has been prepared, the companyaccepts no liability for any damages or loss incurred as a result of reliance placedupon the report and its contents.


1 AU TH OR’SEXPERTISE

This Statement of Expert Evidence has been prepared by Mr Aaron Organ, Director/ Principal Ecologist of

Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd, of 292 Mt Alexander Road, Ascot Vale, Victoria. It is based on the

findings of investigations by staff at Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd.

Aaron has over 21 years’ experience in the environmental field, including 16 years in an environmental

consultant capacity. Aaron has a broad working knowledge of flora and fauna throughout Victoria and has

either managed or played an important role in providing environmental advice on a number of large

infrastructure projects such as proposed pipelines, and road and rail developments, and numerous urban

development projects (residential, industrial and commercial).

He has also been a lead author and/ or co-author for over 450 project reports and has provided expert

advice to a range of private and government clients. Some of these projects include a large number of

proposed wind farms in Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania, long-term flora and fauna monitoring

throughout the Illawarra escarpment of New South Wales, and various residential developments across

Victoria (including many projects in north east Victoria). Aaron has provided expert advice and represented

clients at several Precinct Structure Plan panel hearings, including Truganina South, Wollert, Ballan Road,

Craigieburn R2 and 489-555 Robinsons Road South, Truganina.

2 AU TH OR’SSTATEM EN T

I, Aaron Organ of Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd, have prepared this Statement of Expert Evidence

pertaining to the ecological values and considerations in the Donnybrook / Woodstock PSP. The proceeding

statement is based on a literature review, a brief site assessment, and expert knowledge of the ecological

values within the PSP and broader northern Melbourne growth corridor.

I have made all the inquiries that l believe are desirable and appropriate and that no matters of significance

which l regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Panel.


3 IN TRODU CTIO N

3.1 Backgrou nd

I have been engaged by Boral to review several matters relating to Conservation Area 22 (CA22), designated

under the Biodiversity Conservation S trategy (BCS) for M elbourne’s Grow th Corridors (DEPI 2013a).

Conservation Area 22 is located within the proposed Donnybrook/Woodstock Precincts (Precinct Structure

Plans [PSPs] 1067 and 1096). Part of Conservation Area 22 is categorised as ‘open space’. It is understood

that the Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) are resurveying land

categorised as open space, with the potential to reclassify land as developable.

We undertook surveys in the proposed conservation area on Boral’s land to document the ecological values

present and to provide responses against the specific criteria established for adjustment to the boundary of

designated conservation areas, as outlined in the ‘Guidancenote:Im plem enting theBiodiversity Conservation

S trategy forM elbourne’sGrow thCorridors’ (DELWP 2015).

This statement of evidence aims to assist the Panel through the provision of accurate information relating to

the key ecological considerations under Commonwealth [e.g. Environm ent P rotection and Biodiversity

Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)] and State legislation that are present within the study area, with the

primary aim of adjusting the conservation boundary.

3.2 O b jectives

I have been instructed to undertake the following to inform the proposed adjustment to the conservation

area boundary:

1. A review of time-stamped vegetation data across the study area;

2. An assessment of the presence and extent of EPBC Act listed Grassy Eucalypt Woodland of

the Victorian Volcanic Plain (GEWVVP) ecological community;

3. Determination of the presence or absence of the EPBC Act-listed Matted Flax-lily Dianella

am oena, Curly Sedge Carex tasm anica, Adam’s Blown-grass L achnagrostisadam soniiand

Golden Sun Moth S ynem onplana; and,

4. Provision of advice relating to the specific criteria outlined in the BCS Guidance Note

(DELWP 2015) that pertain to the boundary adjustment of open space areas.

3.3 Stu dy Area

The study area is located 35 kilometres north of Melbourne’s Central Business District on Boral Land, within

the Donnybrook/Woodstock precincts (north of Donnybrook Road). CA22 covers an area of approximately

207 hectares.

The study area is approximately 23.43 hectares and is owned by Boral (Figure 1). A gas easement runs

through the western section of the site, in close proximity to Merri Creek. Conservation Area 34 (Growling

Grass Frog conservation) separates the north-western boundary of the study area from Merri Creek (Figure


2). The study area forms part of the eastern section of CA22 which is categorised as ‘open space’ in the BCS

(DEPI 2013a) (p. 93) (see Table 1 below).

Open space is defined by the BCS as:

‘Areasthathavebeenzonedunsuitableforurbandevelopm ent,partly orprim arily forlandscapevalues

and w illbefurthersurveyed to determ inetheboundariesofareasrequired forbiodiversity protection’

(DEPI 2013a).

Figure 1. Location of the study area (red circle).

3.4 Des crip tion ofCons erv ation Areas 2 2

The following information relating to CA22 is documented within the BCS (DEPI 2013a):

‘T henorthern(Hum e,W hittleseaand M itchell)grow thcorridorhassignificantbiodiversity values,w ith

large num bersof rem nant R ed R iver Gum sscattered acrossthe landscape and the threatened

com m unitiesN aturalT em perateGrasslandandGrassy EucalyptW oodlandalsooccurring.

A num berofthreatened floraand faunaspeciesoccur.M erriCreekisam ajornorth-south biodiversity

corridorproviding im portanthabitatandconnectivity throughthegrow thcorridor.’ (p. 93, DEPI 2013a)


Tab le 1 . Summary of ecological values: CA22, Bald Hill, Donnybrook (DEPI 2013a, p. 93)

Selection Criteria Matter as shown in BCS (DEPI 2013a)

Total area and boundary 207.18 hectares

Management Category Nature conservation (majority of site)

Open Space (eastern section containing predominantly scattered trees)

Key rationale for protection of area Protects high quality native grassland that contains a range of biodiversity values

of national significance within a practically manageable area

Biodiversity values of national significance

High quality Natural Temperate Grassland of Victorian Volcanic Plain (NTGVVP)

Grassy Eucalypt woodland

Matted Flax-lily population within high quality habitat

Curly Sedge population within high quality habitat

Adamson’s Blown-grass population (not confirmed recently)

Growling Grass Frog within high quality habitat

Grassland Earless dragon population (not confirmed recently)

High persistence habitat for Golden Sun Moth (population not confirmed)

Habitat for Striped Legless Lizard (population not confirmed)

Biodiversity values of state significance

Western (Basalt) Plains Grasslands Community

Western Basalt Plains (River Red Gum) Grassy Woodland Floristic Community 55-04

Matted Flax-lily

Curly Sedge

Adamson’s Blown-grass population (not confirmed recently)

Growling Grass Frog

Grassland Earless Dragon population (not confirmed recently)

Golden Sun Moth Habitat

Striped Legless Lizard habitat

Tough Surf-pea

Rye Beetle-grass (not confirmed)

Contribution of area to achievement of

conservation outcomes in the program

report

Contributes to ensuring functioning sustainable populations of Growling GrassFrog with connectivity between populations

Contributes to the target to protect 80 percent of GEWVVP within the 2010 UrbanGrowth Boundary

Contributes to ensuring no substantial negative change to known populations ofCurly Sedge


Selection Criteria Matter as shown in BCS (DEPI 2013a)

Further actions

Protect conservation area through the following actions:

o Apply appropriate planning provisions to the land depending on thecircumstances (may include a Rural Conservation Zone, an EnvironmentalSignificance Overlay or another statutory mechanism) to be determined bythe State Minister for Planning

o Prepare conservation management plan and ensure planning provisions forimplementation and funding are in place

o Establish management agreements with landowners under section 69 of theConservation Forests and Lands Act 1987 and/or transfer land to Crownwhere an appropriate public land manager is available

3.5 Su m m ary ofO p inion

The proposed adjustment to CA22 meets the criteria outlined in the BCS application criteria for proposed

adjustments to the boundary of a conservation area, and therefore should the adjustment to the boundary

occur and the area subsequently developed, this will result in habitat compensation obligations totalling

approximately $441,731.92 9 (excl. GST). These funds can be directed into the purchase and management of

others areas within CA22 or conservation reserves set aside as part of the BCS.


4 M ETH ODS

4 .1 N om enclatu re

Common and scientific names of vascular plants follow the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (VBA) (DEPI 2014) and

the Census of Vascular Plants of Victoria (Walsh and Stajsic 2007). Vegetation community names follow

DELWP’s Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVC) benchmarks (DELWP 2015a). The names of aquatic and

terrestrial vertebrate and invertebrate fauna follow the VBA (DELWP 2015b).

4 .2 Backgrou nd Review

Relevant literature, online resources and numerous databases were reviewed to provide an assessment of

ecological values associated with the study area. The following information sources were reviewed:

The DELWP Biodiversity Interactive Map (DELWP 2016a) for the extent of historic and current

Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs) and time-stamped vegetation;

The Native Vegetation Information Management (NVIM) Tool (DELWP 2016b) for modelled

biodiversity data, including time-stamped remnant native vegetation;

The VBA (DELWP 2015b), Flora Information System (FIS) (Viridans 2013a) and Atlas of Victorian

Wildlife (AVW) (Viridans 2013b) for previously documented flora and fauna records within the

project locality;

The Commonwealth Department of the Environment (DoE) Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST)

for matters of National Environmental Significance (NES) protected under the EPBC Act (DoE 2016);

The DELWP Planning Maps Online to ascertain current zoning and environmental overlays (DELWP

2016d);

A review of the exhibited PSP;

Amendment GC28 documentation, including;

o exhibited planning scheme provisions

o exhibited zoning and overlay maps

o explanatory report

Guidance Note on Implementing the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (working document

February 2015) (DELWP 2015c);

Aerial photography of the study area;

Relevant environmental legislation and policies; and,

Previous assessments undertaken by Ecology and Heritage Partners, including:

o Vegetation and Targeted Golden Sun Moth Survey Report, Donnybrook Road, Donnybrook,

Victoria (Ecology and Heritage Partners 2012).


4 .3 As s es s m ent of the Pres ence of EPBC Act-lis ted EcologicalCom m u nities

Detailed site surveys were undertaken to assess the presence and extent of GEWVVP. As outlined in ‘Advice

to theM inisterfortheEnvironm ent,Heritageand theArtsfrom theT hreatened S peciesS cientificCom m ittee

(the Com m ittee) on Am endm ent to the list of T hreatened EcologicalCom m unitiesunder the EP BC Act’

(Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2008) several criteria are used to define whether remnant

vegetation qualifies as the EPBC Act-listed ecological community (as summarised in Table 2).

With reference to the desk-based assessment, a site assessment to locate and identify patches of GEWVVP

was undertaken on 14 January 2016 by qualified botanists.

Tab le 2 . Classification criteria for GEWVVP and NTGVVP under the EPBC Act (p. 7, TSSC 2008).

Criterion Donny b rook/W oods tock PSPs

Ecological Vegetation

Class

Presence of Plains Grassy Woodland (EVC 55_61) and Stony Knoll Shrubland (EVC 649) may indicate the

presence of GEWVVP

Bioregion The study area is located within the Victorian Volcanic Plain bioregion

Size of Patch The minimum patch size for the listed ecological community is 0.5 hectares

Species coverOne or more of the following native grass genera accounts for at least 50% of the perennial ground layer

cover: T hem eda, R ytidosperm a,Austrostipa, P oaand/or M icrolaena

Condition Thresholds

If native grasses

account for less

than 50% of the

perennial ground

layer cover, then

the patch is either:

A valuable wildflower site where at least 50% of the ground layer vegetative cover

is represented by native forbs (including geophytes) during spring-summer (i.e.

September to dryland February inclusive but noting that the ground layer may be

sparse in some situations); OR,

Not heavily invaded by perennial weeds such that perennial weeds comprise less

than 70% of the ground layer vegetative cover; OR,

If perennial weeds comprise more than 70% of the ground layer vegetative cover,

then the patch must have more than ten native perennial species per 100 m2

AND a density of at least three big trees per hectare. Big trees are defined here as

trees with at least 70 centimeters diameter at breast height (DBH) for eucalypts

and at least 40 cm DBH for non-eucalypt species.

Additional

Characteristics

The conservation value of a patch of the ecological community is enhanced if it shows any of the

following features:

• A high native plant species richness;

• Large patch size or connectivity with a large patch of remnant vegetation;

• Minimal weed invasion;

• Presence of threatened plant and/or animal species;

• Diversity of habitat e.g. Tree hollows, fallen logs, natural exposed rock outcrops.


4 .4 Targeted Threatened Flora Su rvey s

Targeted Matted Flax-lily surveys were undertaken on 28 January 2016 by qualified botanists. As detailed in

the targeted survey methods for Matted Flax-lily in the Biodiversity Precinct Structure Planning Kit (DSE

2010), all potential habitat was surveyed using five metre transects, with the location of any plants detected

recorded with a GPS (Figure 2b).

Targeted surveys for Adamson’s Blown-grass L achnagrostisadam soniiand Curly Sedge Carex tasm anica

were also conducted on 8 February 2016.

4 .5 Targeted Golden Su n M oth Su rv ey s

Targeted surveys for threatened species (e.g. Golden Sun Moth) were also undertaken on 16 and 23

December 2015. Incidental records of any other EPBC Act-listed species were also documented. Targeted

survey methods for Golden Sub Moth followed the prescriptions provided in the S ignificant Im pact

GuidelinesfortheCritically EndangeredGoldenS unM oth (DEWHA 2009), specifically:

Surveys were conducted by ecologists experienced in the detection and identification of Golden Sun

Moth;

Surveys took place during the species’ flight season;

Surveys were undertaken during weather conditions suitable for detecting the species; and,

Surveys were conducted using 25 metre wide parallel transects with two observers.

Given the seasonal constraints (i.e. the latter part of the species flight period) the study area was surveyed

on two separate occasions (rather than the recommended four surveys), with one week between surveys.


5 RESU LTS

5.1 Backgrou nd Review

A summary of the planning history and previous ecological surveys relating to the Boral landholding, and

more specifically the land comprising CA22 is provided below:

2009 – Land first identified for potential biodiversity purposes due to its location within the

‘Melbourne North’ Investigation area in 2009 as part of the Developing M elbourne’sN ew est

S ustainableCom m unities(DMNSC) investigation (otherwise known as the Program Report).

2012 – The (former) Growth Areas Authority (GAA) announced plans for the Northern Growth

Corridor.

May 2012 – Ecology and Heritage Partners was commissioned by Boral to undertake vegetation

mapping and two targeted surveys for Golden Sun Moth at Donnybrook Road, Donnybrook,

including CA22.

2013 – Management criteria listed specifically for Conservation Areas 22 and 34 in the BCS (DEPI

2013a)

February 2015 – Guidance N ote: Im plem enting the Biodiversity Conservation S trategy for

M elbourne’sGrow th Corridors(DELWP 2015) outlines specific criteria under which DELWP deems

native vegetation to be retained and exempted from habitat compensation obligations. It is stated

that conservation area boundary adjustments, such as those proposed for CA22, are required to be

approved by the Commonwealth Minister.

November 2015 – DELWP revises the boundary adjustment application criteria. Threshold amounts

of native vegetation or habitat for matters of NES no longer apply. Instead, “any land proposed to

be retained must contain, or be demonstrated as having potential for restoration to, a community or

habitat for a matters of NES”.

November 2015 – PSP exhibited for the Donnybrook/Woodstock precincts.

5.2 Previou s As s es s m ents

Previous time-stamping surveys undertaken across the study area recorded Stony Knoll Shrubland and Plains

Grassy Woodland (Ecology and Heritage Partners 2012). Nationally listed (EPBC Act) ecological communities

were not previously recorded, and are not detailed in the draft Donnybrook-Woodstock PSP.

5.3 Cu rrent Vegetation As s es s m ent

A total of 7.52 hectares of remnant native vegetation was recorded within the study area, comprising:

3.53 hectares of Plains Grassy Woodland (EVC 55);

0.42 hectares Plains Grassland (EVC 132_61); and,

3.57 hectares of Stony Knoll Shrubland (EVC 649)


5.4 EPBCAct-lis ted EcologicalCom m u nities

5.4 .1 Condition thres holds and ex tent ofm ap p ed GEW VVP

Three patches, totalling 0.79 hectares, of the EPBC Act-listed GEWVVP were mapped within the study area

(Figure 2a). No other EVCs present in the study area meet the condition thresholds to constitute the EPBC

Act-listed GEWVVP, NTGVVP or Seasonal Herbaceous Wetlands (Freshwater) of the Temperate Lowland

Plains.

5.5 EPBCAct-lis ted Sp ecies

5.5.1 EPBCAct-lis ted flora

Matted Flax-lily, Curly Sedge, or Adamson’s Blown-grass were not detected within the study area during the

targeted surveys (Figure 2b, 2c).

Detection of Matted Flax-lily may have been suppressed due to the time of year the surveys were

undertaken and the lack of recent rainfall. For example, plants at a nearby reference site had ceased

flowering and aboveground shoots were difficult to locate. However, given the highly modified nature of the

vegetation, the high visibility across the site (i.e. open understorey, low biomass), the lack of high quality

stony rises, and the ongoing grazing pressure, Matted Flax-lily is expected have a low likelihood of

occurrence within the study area.

Curly Sedge typically grows in seasonally moist to waterlogged sites (Carter 2010; Leigh and Briggs 1992),

while Adamson’s Blown-grass is generally associated with slow moving creeks, swamps, flats, depressions or

drainage lines that are seasonally inundated or waterlogged (Murphy 2010; DPI 2011; Walsh 1994). The

quality of potential habitat within the study area for both of these species is very low, and it reasonable to

conclude that both species are unlikely to be present.

5.5.2 Golden Su n M oth

No Golden Sun Moths were detected during through targeted survey. The species has also not previously

been recorded within the study area (Ecology and Heritage Partners 2012). However, potential habitat is

present and one male individual was detected near Grants Road (approximately two kilometres south of the

study area) during the associated time-stamping assessment which informed the establishment of CA22

(Ecology and Heritage Partners 2012).

While Golden Sun Moths were observed flying on 23 December 2015 at other sites in northern Melbourne

(Tom Schmidt, Ecology and Heritage Partners, pers. comms.), their emergence during December was patchy

and unpredictable. Further, only two of the four surveys, required under the Biodiversity P recinctP lanning

Kit(DSE 2010) were undertaken due to the time in which we were engaged to commence the surveys.


5.5.3 Other s ignificant flora and fau na s p ecies

Flora

The VBA contained records of six nationally significant and 23 State significant flora species previously

recorded within 10 kilometres of the study area (DELWP 2016c) (Figure 3). The PMST nominated an

additional eight nationally significant species which have not been recorded in the locality but have the

potential to occur (DoE 2016).

Based on the modified nature of the study area, landscape context and the proximity of previous records,

significant flora species are no likely to occur within the study area.

Fauna

The VBA contained records of 13 nationally significant, 38 State significant and 13 regionally significant fauna

species previously recorded within 10 kilometres of the study area (DELWP 2015c) (Figure 4). The PMST

nominated an additional four nationally significant species which have not been recorded in the locality but

have the potential to occur (DoE 2016).

Based on the modified nature of the study area, landscape context and the proximity of previous records,

significant fauna species are not likely to occur within the study area as residents or visitors on a regular

basis.

5.6 Criteria to Adju s t the Bou ndaries ofCons erv ation Areas 2 2

The BCS states that the boundaries of CA22 may be reviewed at the precinct structure planning stage (DEPI

2013a; p.105). Boral have proposed an adjustment to the boundaries of CA22 that shifts the southern

boundary northward to legitimately increase the extent of the total developable land. Changes to the land

identified for conservation and its associated ecological values under this proposed adjustment are outlined

below (Table 3). A response to the specific criteria relating to the proposed adjustment of the boundary of

CA22 is also outlined (Table 4).

The Guidance Note states:

“ Foropenspacearea,theCom m onw ealth approvalsprovideflexibility fortheVictorianGovernm entto

m ake changesto the boundariesof[BCS] conservation areasto m axim ise theirdesign and function.

T hisallow sthe Victorian Governm ent to determ ine w hen changesare appropriate,including w hen

changesthatm ay im pactthesevaluesareacceptablebasedontheirnecessity” (p. 13, DELWP 2015)

While the Guidance note indicates that it is intended for the boundaries of CA22 not to change, other

conservation areas “generally categorised as open space” can be adjusted “provided that there is no net loss

of area” (p. 7, DELWP 2015).

Adjustment of the boundary for nature conservation and open space within CA22 must be considered and

endorsed by DELWP prior to referral to the Commonwealth Minister for approval.


Tab le 3.Proposed changes to CA22 and associated ecological values (current extent of remnant native vegetation,listed ecological communities, and significant species) under proposed boundary adjustments.

Cu rrent Know n Land and EcologicalValu es Pres ent

Cu rrent ex tent ofecologicalvalu esChange in ecologicalvalu es u nder

p rop os ed b ou ndary adju s tm ent

Total area of CA22 207.18 hectares Reduced by 11.91 hectares (5.75 % of CA

22)

Study area size 23.43 hectares 11.91 hectares (remnant vegetation and

non-native vegetation)

Remnant vegetation A total of 49.06 hectares across the entire

CA22 with a total of 7.52 hectares in study area

comprising:

o 3.53 hectares of Plains Grassy Woodlando 0.42 hectares of Plains Grasslando 3.57 hectares of Stony Knoll Shrubland

The remaining area of the study area (15.91hectares) consists of introduced vegetation(pasture grass and thistles), and embeddedrock

Reduced by 3.38 hectares (6.89% of total

remnant vegetation in CA22) comprising:

o 0.35 hectares of Plains GrassyWoodland

o 0.42 hectares of Plains Grasslando 2.61 hectares of Stony Knoll

Shrubland

Scattered trees 46 scattered trees comprising:

o 8 VLOT

o 22 LOT

o 10 MT

o 7 ST

High abundance of River Red-gums (recruits)

that do not qualify as scattered trees (<3

metres)

Four trees excluded from CA22

comprising:

o 1 VLOT

o 3 LOT

Nationally significant GEWVVP 0.79 hectares (approximate only) No reduction

State significant PGW 3.53 hectares (equivalent to Plains Grassy

Woodland)

Reduced by 0.53 hectares

Nationally significant Growling Grass Frog

habitat

CA 22 is intersected by CA34 Growling Grass

Frog Conservation Area. CA 22 is a buffer for

the GGF corridor

No suitable habitat within the study

area, and therefore no change in extent

under adjustment.

Nationally significant Golden Sun Moth

habitat

All native and exotic vegetation (23.43

hectares)

No individuals detected or considered

likely to occur.

Nationally significant Striped Legless

Lizard habitat

All remnant and degraded vegetation (23.43

hectares)

Non-native habitat also present in areas of

embedded rock and bare ground

No suitable habitat within the study

area, and therefore no change in extent

under adjustment.


Cu rrent Know n Land and EcologicalValu es Pres ent

Cu rrent ex tent ofecologicalvalu esChange in ecologicalvalu es u nder

p rop os ed b ou ndary adju s tm ent

Nationally significant Matted Flax-lily

habitat

All remnant and degraded vegetation (23.43

hectares)

No individuals detected or considered

likely to occur.

Nationally significant Adamson’s Blown-

grass habitat

Wet depressions (seasonal) No individuals detected or considered

likely to occur.

Nationally significant Curly Sedge habitat Wet depressions (seasonal) No individuals detected or considered

likely to occur.

Notes: GEW VVP - Grassy Eucalypt Woodland of the Victorian Volcanic Plain; and, W BP GW - Western Basalt Plains (River Red-gum)

Grassy Woodland as described by the FloraandFaunaGuaranteeAct1988 (FFG Act) Scientific Advisory Committee (2013). Ecological

values that are ‘Nationally significant’ are listed under the EPBC Act while ‘State significant’ ecological values are listed under the FFG

Act.


Tab le 4 . BCS application criteria for proposed adjustments to the boundary of a conservation area classified as themanagement category ‘open space’

Criterion # Cons ideration Com m ents

1 The proposed adjustment must be necessary to addressone or more of the following site specific issues. Thesecriteria have been determined in consideration of therequirements in the BCS that adjustments may only bemade if necessary and associated with further planningwork at the precinct structure planning stage and thebroader context of the Program Report.

To exclude areas of low biodiversity value formatters of national environmental significance onthe basis of new surveys, as provided for insection 5 of the BCS for conservation areas 10(buffer only), 18, 20, 28, 33 and 35

CA22 is also listed in Table 1 of the GuidanceNote and p. 93 of the BCS as ‘open space (partonly)’,

To address issues associated with theconstruction and operation of any urbaninfrastructure shown in the Growth CorridorPlans (GAA, 2013) or existing or proposed newinfrastructure of state significance, where nofeasible alternatives are available. DELWP willrequire confirmation from the MPA indetermining whether this criterion has been met.

To address issues necessary to meet the urbanplanning objectives of a precinct structure plan,such as appropriate urban form or theconstruction of roads, bridges, watermanagement and other infrastructure, where nofeasible alternatives are available. DELWP willrequire confirmation from the MPA indetermining whether this criterion has been met.

To exclude existing buildings or majorinfrastructure that are located on or near theboundary of a conservation area.

To allow access to land made inaccessible as aresult of a conservation area, where no feasiblealternatives are available.

The proposed boundary adjustment would reduce the

conservation area by 11.91 hectares.

The proposed boundary adjustment avoids patches of

nationally-listed GEWVVP. The ecological community will

remain protected within CA22.

Additional considerations within Criteria 1 are not applicable.

2 The proponent must obtain the written agreement of alllandowners who are materially affected by theproposed adjustment (e.g. the adjustment reduces thearea of developable land on their property).

Given that remnant vegetation accounts for a small

proportion of the total area of CA22, any future application to

adjust CA22 boundaries will need to be agreed by DELWP and

possibly DoE. The proposal to adjust the conservation

boundary will not have any material impact on adjacent

landholders.

3 The proposed adjustment must meet the relevantcriteria for revising the conservation area boundaryspecified in the relevant table of Section 5 of the BCS(these criteria are specified for conservation areas 10(buffer only), 18, 20, 28, 33, and 35).

CA22 is also ‘open space’ (part only) p. 49, BCS.

No criteria have been specified for the revision for CA22 within the

BCS.



4

The proposed adjustment must maintain thebiodiversity values of the conservation area. Inconsidering this criterion, DELWP will take into accountthe impacts of the proposed adjustment in relation to:

Large patches of high quality native vegetationcontaining populations of matters of nationalenvironmental significance.

There is no formal definition with regard to size thresholds for

the determination of a ‘large patch’ within the BCS. However,

the largest patch of Plains Grassy Woodland (northern section

of the study area) is 1.25 hectares. With the exception of two

degraded patches of Stony Knoll Shrubland (0.97 and 0.73

hectares, all other native vegetation patches are highly

degraded and less than one hectare in size.

Large patches of high quality vegetation are retained under

the proposed adjustment, including GEWVVP remnants.

Nationally listed ecological communities are restricted to

three patches (total of 0.79 ha) of GEWVVP.

Other than the potential for Golden Sun Moth (albeit low to

moderate likelihood), no nationally significant flora and fauna

species are expected to be present.

The eastern section of CA22 provides connectivity with the

Merri Creek corridor (CA34).

The Category 1 habitat for Growling Grass Frog that along

Merri Creek will not be impacted by the proposed boundary

adjustment (i.e. it is excised from CA22). The buffer along

Merri Creek is designed to offer protection for a variety of

additional national and state listed threatened species such as

Latham’s Snipe and Lewin’s Rail.



5The proposed adjustment should not result in a net loss in

the amount and quality of native vegetation or habitat for

matters of national environmental significance in the

conservation area. Where there are no feasible

alternatives to the proposed adjustment and a net loss

would occur, a net conservation gain elsewhere in the

Melbourne Strategic Assessment area in the amount and

quality of native vegetation and habitat for matters of

national environmental significance must be achieved.

The boundary adjustment will not result in a net loss in the amount

and quality of native vegetation or habitat for MNES within the

conservation area, given that less than 1% of the western section of

CA22 corresponds to an EPBC Act-listed community.

There is an opportunity to identify additional areas of GEWVVP

outside of the MSA area or on adjoining properties as part of the

proposal to adjust the conservation area boundary. In addition,

should the boundary amendment occur, habitat compensation

payments is likely to be required and these funds can be used to

acquire and manage other sites supporting ecological values.

Notes: BCS – Biodiversity Conservation Strategy; DoE – Commonwealth Department of the Environment; EPBC Act Environm ent

P rotection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; GEWVVP - Grassy Eucalypt Woodland of the Victorian Volcanic Plain; GSM –

Golden Sun Moth; MNES Matter of National Environmental Significance; MSA – Melbourne Strategic Assessment


6 OFFSETS U N DER TH E BIODIVERSITY CON SERVATION

STRATEGY

6 .1 Biodivers ity Cons ervation Strategy

In June 2009 the Victorian Government entered into an agreement with the Commonwealth Government to

undertake a Strategic Impact Assessment (SIA) under the EPBC Act (DSE 2009). The SIA Program Report (DSE

2009) is the primary document identifying potential impacts of the proposed program of urban development

on matters of National Environmental Significance. The Program Report includes a commitment to develop

and implement a Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Melbourne’s Growth Areas which would inform the

preparation of Growth Corridor Plans and precinct structure plans.

The BCS (DEPI 2013a) and associated sub-regional species’ strategies (DEPI 2013b; 2013c) identify

conservation outcomes and offset consolidation strategies for Victoria’s native vegetation and matters of

National Environmental Significance, including mechanisms for how these outcomes will be delivered.

6 .1 .1 H ab itat com p ens ation u nder the Biodiv ers ity Cons ervation Strategy

Habitat compensation fees associated with removal of native vegetation and significant flora and fauna

habitat under the BCS are based on the HabitatCom pensation undertheBiodiversity Conservation S trategy

(DEPI 2013d), and are calculated with the following considerations:

N ativevegetation:

Habitat compensation for patches of native vegetation will be based on the Time Stamping data

extent, with all native vegetation considered to be Very High conservation significance. Clearance

of native vegetation will invoke an offset fee $95,075.00 (excl. GST) per hectare cleared.

S piny R ice-flow er:

All native vegetation patches within the western and north-western growth areas and the Outer

Metropolitan Ring Transport Corridor will invoke a compensatory habitat fee of $7,937.00 (excl.

GST) to cover the cost of securing and managing conservation reserves for Spiny Rice-flower. This is

additional to the abovementioned offset for clearance of native vegetation.

Grow ling GrassFrog:

Habitat mapped as Category 1 habitat in the Sub-regional Species Strategy (DSE 2011a) has been

designated for retention and may not be cleared. Habitat mapped as Category 2 will invoke a

compensatory habitat fee of $7,529.00 (excl. GST) per hectare cleared or impacted (e.g. drained) to

cover the cost of securing and managing Growling Grass Frog corridors identified in the species’

sub-regional strategy.

GoldenS unM oth:

All habitat within the northern, north-western and western growth areas and the Outer

Metropolitan Ring Transport Corridor (native and non-native grassland and woodlands) and

excluding any areas identified as Growling Grass Frog habitat will be deemed to be “confirmed


habitat”. However only non-native habitat will invoke a compensatory habitat fee as fees for native

habitat have been built in to the price of native vegetation habitat compensation. All non-native

habitat cleared will invoke a compensatory habitat fee of $7,914.00 (excl. GST) per hectare cleared.

O therConsiderations:

Fees listed above do not include potential additional costs associated with the salvage and translocation of

significant flora (e.g. Spiny Rice-flower).

6 .1 .2 H ab itat com p ens ation as s ociated w ith the dev elop m ent ofthe s tu dy area

Based on the offset rates per hectare outlined above, the total habitat compensation payment that may be

required as a result of the adjustment of CA 22 in the study area and the subsequent development of 23.43

hectares is outlined below (Table 5).

Tab le 5. Estimated habitat compensation fees required under the BCS if an adjustment of CA22 and development ofthis area occurs.

M atter ofN ES Totalarea p rop os ed to b e offs ets H ab itat com p ens ation am ou nt (ex cl.GST)

Native Vegetation 3.38 hectares X $95,075.00 per hectare (excl. GST) $321,353.50

Golden Sun Moth 8.53 hectares X $7,914.00 per hectare (excl. GST) $67,506.42

Scattered remnant trees Four trees X $13,218.00 per tree (excl. GST) $52,872.00

Total estimated habitat compensation amount $441,731.92

Note: A conservative estimate has been applied for non-native vegetation in that Golden Sun Moth ($7,914.00 per hectare) has been

used rather than Growling Grass Frog ($7,529.00 per hectare).


7 CON CLU SION

The proposed boundary adjustment will lead to an 11.91 hectare reduction of CA22 (i.e. comprising both

remnant native vegetation and non-native vegetation). Of which, 3.38 hectares (6.89% of total remnant

vegetation in CA22) is proposed to be removed, comprising:

0.53 hectares of Plains Grassy Woodland;

0.42 hectares of Plains Grassland; and,

2.61 hectares of Stony Knoll Shrubland

Five trees are also present within the area proposed to be excluded from CA22. However, based on the

results of the detailed ecological investigations undertaken within the study area (in accordance with

DELWP’s survey requirements), the proposed adjustment to the CA22 boundary will not lead to the loss of

any habitat for EPBC Act-listed species and ecological communities (i.e. GEWVVP).

The proposed adjustment to CA22 meets the criteria outlined in the BCS application criteria for proposed

adjustments to the boundary of a conservation area (Table 4), and therefore should the adjustment to the

boundary occur and the area subsequently developed, this will result in habitat compensation obligations

totalling approximately $441,731.92 (excl. GST). These funds can be directed into the purchase and

management of others areas within CA22 or conservation reserves set aside as part of the BCS.


REFEREN CES

Carter, O. 2010. National Recovery Plan for the Curly Sedge (Carex tasm anica). [Online}. East

Melbourne, Victoria: Department of Sustainability and Environment. Available from:

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publication/recovery/carex-

tasmanic.html.

DELWP 2016a. Biodiversity Interactive Map [WWW Document]. URL

http://mapshare2.dse.vic.gov.au/MapShare2EXT/imf.jsp?site=bim. Victorian Department of

Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

DELWP 2016b. Native Vegetation Information Management Tool [WWW Document] URL

http://nvim.depi.vic.gov.au/ Victorian Department of Environment and Primary Industries.

DELWP 2016c. Victorian Biodiversity Atlas. Sourced from: “VBA_FLORA25” and “VBA_FLORA100”.

January 2016, Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

DELWP 2016d. Planning Maps Online [www Document]. URL

http://services.land.vic.gov.au/landchannel/jsp/map/PlanningMapsIntro.

DELWP 2015. Guidance note:Im plem enting the Biodiversity Conservation S trategy forM elbourne’s

Grow th Corridors. W orking docum ent – February 2015,M elbourne S trategic Assessm ent.

Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

DEPI 2013a. Biodiversity Conservation S trategy for M elbourne’sGrow th Corridors. Victorian

Government Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Melbourne, May 2013.

DEPI 2013b. S ub-R egionalS peciesS trategy for the Golden S un M oth. Victorian Government

Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Melbourne, May 2013.

DEPI 2013c. S ub-R egionalS peciesS trategy forthe Grow ling GrassFrog. Victorian Government

Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Melbourne, May 2013.

DEPI 2013d. Habitat Com pensation under the Biodiversity Conservation S trategy: M elbourne

S trategic Assessm ent. Victorian Government Department of Environment and Primary

Industries, Melbourne, August 2013.

DoE 2016. Protected Matters Search Tool: Interactive Map [WWW Document]. URL

http://www.environment.gov.au/arcgis-framework/apps/pmst/pmst.jsf. Federal Department

of Environment, Canberra.

DPI 2011. Victorian Resources Online- Adamson’s Blown-grass, Victoria Department of Primary

Industries. [Online]. Available from:

http://vro.dpi.vic.gov.au/dpi/vro/vrosite.nsf/pages/water_sss_adamsons_blown_grass.

DSE 2009. Delivering M elbourne’sN ew est S ustainable Com m unities.S trategic Im pact Assessm ent

R eport for the Environm ent P rotection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Victorian

Government Department of Sustainability and Environment, October 2009.


DSE 2010. Biodiversity Precinct Structure Planning Kit. Victorian Government Department of

Sustainability and Environment, May 2010.

Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd 2012. Vegetation and Targeted Golden Sun Moth Survey

Report, Donnybrook Road, Donnybrook, Victoria. Unpublished report on behalf of Boral Property

Group.

Leigh. J.H & Briggs (Eds) 1992. Threatened Australian Plants. Overview and Case Studies. New South

Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service.

MPA 2015. Donnybrook/Woodstock Precinct Structure Plan. Metropolitan Planning Authority,

November 2015.

Murphy, A. 2010. National Recovery Plan for Adamson’s Blown-grass L achnagrostisadam sonii.

[Online]. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, Victoria. Available from:

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/lachnagrostis

-adamsonii.html

TSSC 2008. Advice to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts from the Threatened

Species Scientific Committee (the Committee) on an Amendment to the List of Threatened

Ecological Communities under the Environm ent P rotection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

1999 (EP BC Act).Threatened Species Scientific Committee.

Viridans 2013a. Flora Information System. Viridans Biological Databases.

Viridans 2013b. Victorian Fauna Database. Viridans Biological Databases.

Walsh, N.G 1994. Poaceae. In: Walsh, N.G. & Entwisle, T.J, eds. Flora of Victoria. 2:356-327. Inkata

Press, Melbourne.


8 REQU IRED IN FORM ATION

N am e and Addres s

This report has been prepared by Aaron Organ, Director of Ecology and Heritage Partners, 292 Mt

Alexander Road, Ascot Vale, Ph: (03) 9377 0100, [email protected]

Area ofEx p ertis e

Aaron Organ is an expert ecologist, with skills in all the major ecological environments of south-

eastern Australia. He has particular expertise in the workings of ecological systems, both under

natural conditions and when affected by unnatural disturbance regimes such as weed invasion and

impacts of development projects. He has also considerable experience in the application and

practical implementation of current Commonwealth and State environmental legislation and

Government Policy.

Ex p ertis e to m ake the Rep ort

Aaron Organ has considerable knowledge of the native flora and fauna throughout south eastern

Australia, including areas across western Victoria. A selection of past VCAT and Panel appearances

include:

2015: Statement of Expert Evidence: Amendment C187 to the Whittlesea Planning Scheme.

Wollert Precinct Structure Plan (PSP 1070) – (Panel).

2015: Yaringa Boat Harbour Expansion, Yaringa, Victoria – (Panel).

2015: Proposed residential development at 134-166 Aspinall Street, Golden Square, Victoria

– (VCAT).

2015: Amended Permit Associated with the use and development of the land for the

purpose of a Place of Worship – 171 – 197 Harkness Road, Melton West, Victoria – (VCAT).

2014: Proposed Development Plan Overlay and Planning Permit Applications for a Proposed

Residential Development at 370A Riddell Road, Sunbury, Victoria – (VCAT).

2014: Kilmore – Wallan Bypass – (Panel).

2014. Proposed residential development at 107 Gipps Street, Port Fairy (VCAT)

2014: NBN Fixed Wireless Telecommunications Facility at 49D Eddy Avenue, Mt Helen,

Victoria – Clayton Utz Lawyers (VCAT)

2014: Proposed residential development at 10 Fullarton Drive, Paynesville, Victoria – Hall &

Wilcox Pty Ltd (VCAT)

2014: Proposed residential development at 95 Wests Road, Langwarrin South – Planning

and Property Partners Pty Ltd (VCAT)


2014: Amendment C101 to the Manningham Planning Scheme and Proposed Eastern Golf

Course Development Plan – Mirvac Doncaster Pty Ltd. (Panel)

2014: Princes Highway duplication, Winchelsea to Colac – HWL Ebsworth Lawyers Pty Ltd.

(Panel)

2014: Proposed Commercial Development, Federation Drive, Melton – Best Hooper Lawyers

Pty Ltd. (VCAT)

2013: Statement of Expert Evidence: 1 Hobbs Road Wyndham Vale, Victoria. Amendment

C171 - Ballan Road Precinct Structure Plan (PSP 40)

2013: Statement of Expert Evidence: Review of time stamped data for Amendment C172 -

Ballan Road, Wyndham Vale (PSP 92)

2013: Statement of Expert Evidence: 305-315 Craigieburn Road East, Wollert, Victoria.

Wollert Developments Pty Ltd. (VCAT)

2013: Proposed Planning Scheme Amendment C164 - 275 Racecourse Road, Sunbury –

Hume City Council (Panel)

2013: Western Highway Duplication - Section 3, Ararat to Stawell, Victoria – DLA Phillip Piper

(Panel).

2013: Cherry Tree Wind Farm – Maddocks Lawyers (VCAT).

2012: Western Highway Duplication - Section 2, Beaufort to Ararat, Victoria – DLA Phillip

Piper (Panel)

2012: Proposed Peninsula Link Freeway Service Centres, 83 Sages Road Baxter, Victoria –

Rigby Cook Lawyers Pty Ltd (VCAT)

2011: Western Highway Duplication - Section 1, Burrumbeet to Beaufort, Victoria – DLA

Phillip Fox (Panel)

2011: Old Warrandyte Road, flora and fauna review and Panel hearing, Donvale – Norton

Rose Australia Pty Ltd. (Panel)

2010: Marquands Road and Leakes Road (Lot 9), Truganina, Truganina South Precinct

Structure Plan – Stockland (Panel)

2010: Proposed Eastern Golf Course relocation to ‘Windsor Park’, 215–217 Victoria Road,

Yering, Victoria – for Best Hooper (VCAT)

2010: Truganina South Community Precinct Structure Plan – for Central Equity and Stockland

Limited (Panel)

2010: Craigieburn R2 Precinct Structure Plan – for Peet Limited (Panel)

2010: Proposed Mortlake Wind Farm – for Accionia Oceania Limited (Panel)

2009: Grenda Vehicle Storage Depot, Springvale Road, Keysborough - for Urbis Pty. Ltd.

(VCAT)


2009: 1280 Boneo Road, Cape Schanck, development a proposed barn – for Hansen Planning

Services (VCAT)

2009: Melton Planning Scheme Amendment C65 – 489-555 Robinsons Road South Precinct

(Marksx Property), Truganina (Panel)

2008: Donald Mineral Sands Panel and associated works. Donald Mineral Sands project

(Panel)

2008: Amendment C88 to the Bass Coast Shire Planning Scheme - Silverleaves, Phillip Island

(Panel)

2008: Proposed medium density development located on the corner of 1587-1589 Point

Nepean Road and 1-1A Chatfield Avenue, Rosebud – for Fulcrum Town Planning Pty. Ltd.

(VCAT)

2008: Residential development at 2 Rowe Street, Alphington – for Rob Wignall Architects

(VCAT)

2008: Officer Service Centres, Officer – for Clayton UTZ Pty. Ltd. (VCAT)

2007: Anglesea Golf Club proposed Amendment C32 – for TGM Group Pty. Ltd. (Panel)

2007: Medium density housing at 2 Ramptons Road, Eltham – for Nillimbik Shire Council

(VCAT)

2007: Medium density unit development in Frankston (adjacent to Kananook Creek) – for

Gary Testro Lawyer (VCAT)

2007: Single dwelling development at 683 Great Ocean Road, Eastern Views, Victoria – for

SJB Planning Pty. Ltd (VCAT)

2006: Construction of a dwelling at 8 Charlotte Court, Warrandyte - for Glossop Town

Planning Pty. Ltd. (VCAT)

2005: Dollar Wind Farm, Gippsland – for Freehills Lawyers (Panel)

Author’s Declaration

I, Aaron Organ, have made all the inquiries that l believe are desirable and appropriate and that no

matters of significance which l regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the

tribunal.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 09/05/2016

Donnybrook

Darebin Creek

Merri Creek

Hume

Fwy

Epping Rd

Mer r iang Rd

Donnybrook Rd

Glenburnie Rd

Grants Rd

Mount Ridley NatureConservation

Reserve

WOODSTOCK

KALKALLO

DONNYBROOK

WOLLERT

MICKLEHAM

CRAIGIEBURN

BEVERIDGE

EDENPARK

7663_Fig01_StudyArea 26/02/2016 MElsley

¹ 0 1,000500

Metres

Figure 1Location of the study areaEcological assessments forparts of the Boral Land inDonnybrook

VicMap Data: The State of Victoria does not warrant theaccuracy or completeness of information in this publicationand any person using or relying upon such information doesso on the basis that the State of Victoria shall bear noresponsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults,defects or omissions in the information.

_̂

!(

Donnybrook

Melbourne

Whittlesea(C)

LegendStudy AreaConservation Area 22Growling Grass FrogConservation Area 34RailwayFreewayMajor RoadCollector RoadMinor RoadMinor WatercoursePermanent WaterbodyLand Subject to InundationParks and ReservesCrown Land

!

! !

!!! Localities

nm

nmnm

nm nm

nm

nm

nmnm

!(

nm

nm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

!(

!( !(

!(

nm

nm

nmnm

nm nm

nm

nm nmnm

nm

!(

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

Merri Creek

8109_Fig02a_EcoFeat_fr7663 9/05/2016 melsley

¹ 0 10050

Metres

Figure 2aEcological featuresEcological assessments forparts of the Boral Land inDonnybrook


_̂

!(

Donnybrook

Melbourne

Whittlesea(C)

LegendStudy AreaConservation Area 22Growling Grass FrogConservation Area 34Proposed boundaryadjustment (11.91 ha)

nm Scattered Tree!( Large Old Tree in Patch

Ecological Vegetation ClassesPlains Grassy Woodland (55)Plains Grassland (132)Stony Knoll Shrubland (649)

EPBC Act listed vegetationcommunity

Grassy Eucalypt Woodlandof the Victorian VolcanicPlain

nm

nmnm

nm nm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

nm

nm nm

nm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm nm

nm

nm nmnm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nm

nmnm

nmnmnm

nm

nm

nmnm

nm

nm

Merri Creek

7663_Fig02b_MFLTargSurv 21/03/2016 Melsley

¹ 0 10050

Metres

Figure 2bMatted Flax-lily TargetedSurveysEcological assessments forparts of the Boral Land inDonnybrook


_̂

!(

Donnybrook

Melbourne

Whittlesea(C)

LegendStudy AreaConservation Area 22

nm Scattered TreesSurvey tracks

22/01/201628/01/2016

Merri Creek

7663_Fig02c_CR_ABg_TargSurv 21/03/2016 Melsley

¹ 0 10050

Metres

Figure 2cCurly Sedge and AdamsonsBlown-grass TargetedSurveysEcological assessments forparts of the Boral Land inDonnybrook


_̂

!(

Donnybrook

Melbourne

Whittlesea(C)


Survey tracks08/02/2016

GFGFGF

GFGF

GF

GFGF

GFGF

GFGFGF

GF

GF

GFGF

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")")

")

")

")")

") ")")

") ") ")")")")")") ") ") ")")

")

") ")")

")

")")

")")")

")")")

")")")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

Beveridge

Donnybrook

Merri Creek

Darebin Creek

Hume

Fwy

Epping Rd

Mer ri angR d

GlenburnieRd

Grants Rd

Mt Ridley Rd

Donnybrook Rd

Old Sydney Rd

BeveridgeBushlandReserve


Reserve

201120112011

2011

2011

20122012

20112011

20112011

2009

20082008

2008

1984 1984

2007

2012

2006

20051990

2011

2011201120112011

2009

2005

2008

2013

2009

1992

1992

1990

1992

2009

19922010

20092009 20101991

19922009

2008 2009

2009 2009 2009

2009 2009 20092009 2009 2009 2009

2009 20092009

20092009

200920092009

20092009 2009

2009

2011

1990

1992

1992

1996

7663_Fig03_SigFlora 9/05/2016 melsley

VBA 2015. Vic torian Biodiversity Atlas. // Sourc ed from : ‘VBA_FLORA25’ and ‘VBA_FLORA100’, June 2015 © T h eState of Vic toria, Departm ent of Environm ent, Land, Water and Planning. Rec ords prior to 1949 not sh ow n.Ec ology and Heritage Partners rec orded spec ies h ave been subm itted to but are not yet inc luded in th e VBA as atOc tober 2014.Vic Map Data: T h e State of Vic toria does not warrant th e ac c urac y or c om pleteness of inform ation in th is public ationand any person using or relying upon suc h inform ation does so on th e basis th at th e State of Vic toria sh all bear noresponsibility or liability w h atsoever for any errors, faults, defec ts or om issions in th e inform ation.

_̂

!(

Whittlesea (C)

Melbourne

Donnybrook

0 1.50.75

Kilom etres¹

Figure 3Previously documented significantflora within 5km of the study areaEcological assessments for parts of theBoral Land in Donnybrook


Significant flora!( Basalt Pepperc ress!( Basalt T ussoc k -grass!( Curly Sedge!( Matted Flax -lily!( Plum p Swam p Wallaby-grass!( Purple Blow n-grass") Slender T ic k -trefoil") Sm all Sc urf-pea") T ough Sc urf-pea") Winged Water-starwort") Yarra Gum") Yellow Star

Ecology and Heritage Partners recordsGF Basalt T ussoc k -grassGF Large-flower Crane's-billGF Matted Flax -lilyGF Native Couc hGF Slender BindweedGF Slender T ic k -trefoilGF South ern Blue-gum

¥¦¥¦

¥¦¥¦

¥¦¥¦¥¦¥¦

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")") ")")")")")") ") ")")")")") ") ") ")")") ")") ") ")") ")")")") ")")")")") ")")")")")")

")

#*

#* #*

#*#*#*#*

#*#*#*

#*

#*#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

#* #*#*#*#*

#*#*

#*#*#*

#*#*#*#*

#*#* #*#* #*#*#*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*

#* #*#*#*#*#*#* #*

#*

#*#*

#*#*#*#*

#*#*#*#*#*#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#* #*

#*#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF

GF GF

GF

GF

GF

GFkjkj

kj

kj

kjkj

kj

Beveridge

Donnybrook

Merri Creek

Darebin Creek

Hume

Fwy

Epping Rd

Mer ri angR d

Glenb urnieR d

Grants R d

Mt R id ley R d

Donnyb rook R d

Old Syd ney R d

BeveridgeBushland Reserve


Reserve

20122012

20122012

2012

1993

2005

199119941988

1994

1988

2007

1989

1988

1988

1991

1988

19911988

19731973

2005

1962

1991

19881988

1988

19881988

1991

1991

1991

1989

1983

1991

2008 20082008 2008

200820082008

2009

1988

1991 1991

200220022002

2002 2002

2002

200220022002

1995

1993

2003

20091988

2002 20022010

2010

2010

20102002200220022002

20092009

20022002 20092002 2002 20022006 20022006 2002

1993

20022006

2009 20022002

1991

1988

1991

19881989

1983

1991

1991

1991

1994

2002

1983

1983

1989

1990

1997

1962

1966

1962

1988

1976 1988

1988

19501990

1988

2007

19891995

1995

7663_Fig04_SigFauna 9/05/2016 melsley

VBA 2015. Victorian Biod iv ersity Atlas. // Sourced from : ‘VBA_FLOR A25’ and ‘VBA_FLOR A100’, June 2015 © Th eState of Victoria, Departm ent of Env ironm ent, Land , Water and Planning . R ecord s prior to 1949 not sh own.Ecolog y and Heritag e Partners recorded spec ies have b een sub m itted to b ut are not yet inc lud ed in th e VBA as atOctob er 2014.VicMap Data: Th e State of Victoria does not warrant the ac c uracy or com pleteness of inform ation in th is pub licationand any person using or relying upon suc h inform ation d oes so on the b asis that th e State of Victoria sh all b ear noresponsib ility or liab ility wh atsoever for any errors, faults, defects or om issions in th e inform ation.

_̂

!(

Whittlesea (C)

Melbourne

Donnybrook

0 1.50.75

Kilom etres¹

Figure 4Previously documented significantfauna within 5km of the study areaEcological assessments for parts of theBoral Land in Donnybrook

LegendStudyConservation Area

Significant fauna!( Australasian Bittern!( Australasian Shov eler!( Azure King fish er!( Bark ing Owl!( Blac k Falcon!( Blac k -eared Cuc k oo!( Blue-b illed Duc k!( Brown Toad let")Brown Treecreeper(south-eastern ssp.)

")Brush -tailedPh ascog ale

") Com m on Dunnart") Diam ond Firetail") Eastern Great Eg ret") Fat-tailed Dunnart") Frec k led Duc k") Golden Sun Moth

#*Grassland EarlessDrag on

#* Growling Grass Frog#* Hard h ead#* Latham 's Snipe#* Lewin's R ail#* Little Button-quail#* Mask ed Owl#* Musk Duc kGF Nank een Nig h t HeronGF Plains-wand ererGFR ed -c h ested Button-quail

GF R oyal Spoonb illGF Southern Toad letGF Spec k led Warb lerGF Spotted HarrierGF Striped Leg less Lizardkj Superb Parrotkj Swift Parrotkj Tussoc k Sk inkkjWh ite-throatedNeed letail

Ecology and HeritagePartners records

¥¦ Golden Sun Moth

sta tem entofexpertevidence - vpa · 3.3 stu dy area the study area is located 35 kilometres north...

Documents