BRISBANE REGION ENVIRONMENT COUNCIL

DRAFT OBJECTION

October 5, 1998


Objection to Material Change of Use for

(i) relating to land at 4 Station Av Darra

and escribed as Lot 2 on R.P. 91161,Lot 1 on R.P. 296730, Lots 2-7 on R.P. 217851, Lots1,8-18 and 51-63 on R.P. 42019, Lots2 and 3 on R.P. 113711, Lot 130 on M.3155, Lot 1 on R.P.108025 AND Lot 2 on R. P. 223199, Parish of Oxley;

(ii) relating to land at 531 Seventeen Mile Rocks Road , Seventeen Mile Rocks,

described as Lot 201 on Plan M.3184, Lots 1 and 3 on RP 69819, Lot 2 on RP 209098, Lot 200 on RP 811574 and Lot 7 on RP 882949, Parish of Oxley; and

(iii) relating to land at 19 Bellwood St Darra and described as Lot 1 on RP 29797, Lots 1-4, 6, 7, 10-12, 18-26 and 28 on RP 29795, Lot 1 on RP 111506, Lot 1 on RP 110155, Lot 1-4 on RP 101809, Lot 63 on RP 52388, Lot 2 on RP 81014, Lot 1 on RP 111560 and Lot 1 on RP 111559, parish of Oxley.


 

Objector: The Web Incorporated's Brisbane Region Environment Council

We object to the material changes in use proposed for the above lands for the following reasons:

1) The proposal fails to retain and enhance significant habitat values of the area consistent with the Brisbane Greenspace System.

2) The proposal will have a ngeative effect on an regionally vulnerable ecosystem "Forest red gum - Paprbarked tea-tree - Swamp mahagony Open Forest on Coastal lowlands" both from clearing, disturbance and water pollution.

3) The proposal fails to minimise environmental impacts in the area consistent with the Brisbane Greenspace System by having inappropraite density of housing development.

4) The current proposal fails to detail measures for the minimisation of the adverse impacts of urban and industrial runoff on the values of the waterways and other Qld waters .

5) The proposal fails to detail adequate measures to control the adverse environmental impacts of the operational works.

6) The assessment manger has failed to refer this application to Government Departments and Agencies with legal carriage for Environmental Protection, Nature Conservation, water quality and watercourses. The proposal intends to impacts on a regionally vulnerable ecosystem, several watercourses and the Brisbane River. We believe that the DoE( Conservation Division, Development Assessment, BRMG, Waste Management Divison ), DNR(water resources) should have been referred this application. As they have no been referred to we cannot accept the environmental/ecological assessments made by the assessment manager.

7) The proposals vegetation and fauna study was inadequate and failed to identify rainforest communities, some eucalypt species and herbaceous species. The fauna study failed to identify at least two additional macropod species ( Agile wallably and Swamp wallaby) which have been observed on site. The fauna study failed to sample on a long enough basis (ie over 1 full year) to obtain a representitive sample of the fauna. The fauna study failed to sample or identify fauna in each precinct and has relied on vague aggregated data.

8) The Proposal will have a negative impacts on the Natural Scenic Values identified in the Brisbane Greenspace system by breaking the integrity of several of the viewsheds.

9) The proposal has failed to map or clearly identify the negative impacts of their proposal such as runoff pollution loads, structural overfolws and tree clearing. In the absence of any clear summary we believe that the precautionary principle should apply until such information is provided.

10) the proposal has inadequate habitat core areas and linkages to achieve the ecological sustainablity of ecosystems on this area.

11) The developments as proposed even with impact mitigation techniques will have an unacceptable impact on flora, fauna and waterways and should be rejected.

ends