BIODIVERSFY CONSERVATION Strategy: AN INDUSTRY BRIEFING BY CHAD BROWNING [CONSULTANT ZOOLOGIST]

IN JUNE, Ecology and Heritage Partners sponsored with Maddocks at the UDIA industry briefing on the recently released final Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS).

The session focused on the implications of the BCS on urban development throughout Melbourne's Growth Corridors and provided a preliminary overview of the Reforms to Victoria's Native Vegetation Permitted Clearing Regulations, with presentations delivered by Peter Betson (executive director, environment programs, Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI)), Warrick McGrath (director, regulatory strategy and design, DEPI), Peter Graham (director, economic branch, DEPI) and Aaron Organ (director/principal ecologist, Ecology and Heritage Partners).

The BCS provides an overarching framework for the long-term protection and management of biodiversity within and outside of the revised Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), while providing certainty for the development industry across Melbourne's Growth Corridors.

The primary objective of the BCS is to 'strike a balance' between the key elements of sustainable development through the delivery of environmental, social and economic benefits.

The strategy forms part of the Melbourne Strategic Assessment which was initiated in June 2009 through agreement between the state and commonwealth governments to undertake a Strategic Impact Assessment (SIA) under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) - the first of many SIAs currently being developed in Australia.

The SIA report, released in October 2009, was designed to address the cumulative loss of ecological values resulting from urban development across the four growth corridors, with emphasis on matters of National Environmental Significance (NES). The report aimed to deliver ecological benefits through the consolidation of environmental offsets and security of conservation areas, while providing certainty to the development industry in the following ways:

24 urbanAFFAiRs I JULY13

Removes the prescriptions under the SIA and the need for-individual project referrals under Part 9 of the EPBC Act (single environmental approval).

Avoids duplication of assessment processes under the EPBC Act and State regulations (reduced timelines).

Reduces information costs (i.e. requirement for site as-sessments and surveys) and administrative burden.

Provides upfront information regarding offset obligations and costs.

Establishes the responsibility of the State Government to administer the cost recovery process rather than developers having to source offsets which can often be time consuming.

The BCS addresses a commitment identified during the SIA process to develop an overarching conservation strategy that provides high level guidance and specifically: informs the preparation of Precinct Structure Plans (PSPs), outlines the delivery of conservation outcomes, identifies conservation areas for long term protection, and details associated management commitments. The strategy provides for the following environmental outcomes:

The establishment of 36 conservation reserves within the UGB comprising about 5700 hectares, including about 3000 hectares of land along major waterways to protect and restore habitat for the growling grass frog Litoria raniformis.

The establishment of 1600 hectares of new conservation reserves outside the UGB across rural Victoria.

• The establishment of a 15,000 hectare Western Grass-lands Reserve extending from Mt Cottrell, south east of Melton to north of Little River, west of Werribee.

The creation of a 1200 hectare grassy woodland conser-vation reserve.

✓ ✓ ✓

The development of sub-regional species strategies and/ or protection targets for species including the growling grass frog, golden sun moth synemon plane, southern brown bandicoot Isoodon obesulus obesulus, spiny rice-flower Pimelea spinescens subsp, spinescens and the matted flax-lily Dianella amoena.

Over the course of the briefing session, the expert panel summarised the broader context of the BCS, and explored specific issues and implications relevant to the urban development industry, including the costs associated with offsetting ecological values under the BCS. During his presentation, Aaron Organ outlined the BCS pricing model and triggers for offsets within each of the four growth corridors, as summarised below.

BCS OFFSET TRIGGERS AND PRICING MODEL

While several matters were addressed by the panel, it is clear

that industry has several outstanding questions that require

further clarification, and this will be achieved through further

consultation with industry during the implementation of the

BCS. •

It is important to note that the BCS is currently being

assessed for approval by the Commonwealth Department

of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and

Communities (SEWPaC). The following opportunities exist for

the development industry and key stakeholders to contribute

to the BCS and its implementation:

• Provide submissions to SEWPaC during the assessment

process.

Native ve • etation

Scattered Trees

Malted Flax-lily

Spiny Rice-- lower

Golden Sun Moth

Growling Grass Frog

cological

alues

Applicable Growth

Area

W NW N

✓ ✓ ✓

✓ ✓ ✓

✓

,/ ✓

,/

✓ ✓ ✓

SE

✓

✓

Southern Brown Bandicoot

Striped Legless Lizard

Note: W = Western growth area (Melton and Wyndham); NW = North-western growth area

(Sunbury); N = Northern growth area (Hume, Whittlesea and Mitchell): SE = South-Eastern

rowth area Case and Cardinia

Price

Unit

$95075 Per hectare of native vegetation removed Per tree considered removed $13218 Per hectare of native vegetation

$11196 removed Per hectare of native vegetation

$7937 removed Per hectare of non-native vegetation removed, excluding areas identified as $7914 Category 2 Growling Grass Frog habitat Per hectare of non-native vegetation

$7529 removed, identified as Category 2 habitat Per hectare of native and non-native

$4015 vegetation removed Per hectare of native and non-native vegetation removed, where vegetation

$350

has been identified as habitat for Striped Legless Lizard (based on a site-specific assessment b an ecolo• ist

Provide feedback to DEPI

regarding the cost recovery

process, including the Draft

Habitat compensation under

the Biodiversity Conservation

Strategy document released

by DEPI.

When released, review and

respond to DEPI's Land Ac-

quisition Strategy, Growling

Grass Frog Masterplan, final

Southern Brown Bandi-

coot Sub-regional Species

Strategy, and online habitat

compensation administration

system.

• Provide input into the revision

of Conservation Areas and

Growling Grass Frog corridor

boundaries during the PSP

process.

A panel session following the presentations prompted a discussion of a number of issues regarding the implementation of the BCS, some of which are outline below:

Will the provisions of the BCS account for the findings of additional surveys and research, particularly in relation to the future revision of the extent of Growling Grass Frog Category 1 habitat along waterways?

• What are the opportunities and processes for landowner compensation for areas that have been designated as Conservation Areas under the BCS (it is understood that the Valuer-General will determine the value of land; how- ever will there be opportunities to contest the amount)?

• What are the appeal rights, if any, associated with 'Works in Kind' and staged payments under the government's habitat compensation process?

• What are the additional incentives for the protection of large old trees and scattered trees during the PSP process, and what control will local councils have with respect to the further protection of trees under local tree protection policies?

Following the release of the final BCS, it is important for

industry to be aware that there are three legislative processes

protecting matters of NES under the EPBC Act in and around

Melbourne: 1) the existing 28 precincts within the 2005 UGB

for which a planning scheme amendment to introduce a PSP

was approved prior to 1 March 2012, 2) the BCS, and 3) Part

9 referrals under EPBC Act where the SIA does not apply.

Each approval pathway provides a different approach for the

protection and offsetting of impacts to ecological values, with

offset costs and approval timelines varying between the three.

Ecology and Heritage Partners has played a lead role working

with the development industry and government (Growth

Areas Authority, DEPI) during the preparation of the BCS and

PSP process over the past five years. We thank the UDIA

for the opportunity to contribute to the briefing session and

inform industry of these key changes, and we look forward

to continuing to provide value for our clients and their projects

across Melbourne's Growth Corridors during these times of

change.

JULY13 I urbanAFFAies 25