Appendix N - NTEPA · Nicholls, Silvano Jung Dianne Bensley - Senior Heritage Adviser Cultural heritage management - Agreed with report's assessment of level of significance, and

Appendix NConsultation Register

N

Consultation Register

Noonamah Ridge

Consultation Register

Client:

Intrapac Projects

Date:

23 November 2015

Contact: Martin Klopper

[email protected] 0406 955 766

Darwin

08 8946 0600

Wharf One, Building One

First Level

C 108 / 19 Kitchener Drive

Darwin NT 0801

www.elton.com.au [email protected]

Sydney | Canberra | Darwin ABN 56 003 853 101

Prepared by Martin Klopper

Reviewed by

Date 23 November 2015

Document name Noonamah Ridge-Consultation Register.docx

Version 8

1 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 4

1.1 Department of Lands, Planning & the Environment 4

1.1.1 Heritage Branch 4

1.1.2 Lands Planning (executive, strategic planning, economic development/major projects, development assessment services) 5

1.1.3 NT Planning Commission 7

1.2 Department of Land Resource Management 8

1.3 Power & Water Corporation 12

1.4 Litchfield Council 13

1.5 Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority 14

1.6 Department of Transport 17

1.7 Department of Health 19

1.8 Department of Education 21

1.9 Volunteer Fire Brigade 21

2 POLITICAL STAKEHOLDERS 22

Contents

4 Noonamah Ridge Elton Consulting

Early consultation with relevant Departments and other key stakeholders commenced in 2013. The

intent of the consultation was to:

» Ensure all departments and stakeholders were aware of the Noonamah Ridge Project

» That the Noonamah Ridge Project team understood the respective stakeholders’ requirements,

particularly in terms of addressing concerns and to inform the content of specialist and technical

reports.

» To test project findings, and ensure that information to a sufficient level of detail was provided.

» To identify key concerns, and respond to this in the relevant technical reports and by fine

tuning the development master plan.

1.1 Department of Lands, Planning & the Environment

The following sections of the Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment were engaged:

1.1.1 Heritage Branch

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative

Meeting/Consultation

Notes

Implications for the

development

29/04/15 Glen

Ewers,

Paul

Nicholls,

Silvano

Jung

Dianne Bensley -

Senior Heritage

Adviser

Cultural heritage

management - Agreed

with report's assessment

of level of significance,

and agreed that medium

and low significance

artefacts can be

collected packaged and

buried elsewhere on site

in a location determined

by Heritage branch. This

is an accepted and

established process.

» Identified heritage

areas have been

incorporated in the

development open

space network.

» Commitment to

protect and

enhance key

heritage and

archaeological

features.

1 Stakeholder Consultation

This section outlines consultation undertaken with key Departments and other Service

Authorities.

Noonamah Ridge Elton Consulting 5

1.1.2 Lands Planning (executive, strategic planning, economic development/major projects, development assessment

services)

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

22/07/2013 Paul

Nicholls

Max

Shifman

Laurence

Ah Toy

Martin

Klopper

John Coleman

Gary Nairn

» Introduction to the

project vision and

background.

» Outline of process

» Advice provided by

Chief Executive and

Chairman Planning

Commission to follow

a significant

development

application process

» Advice

considered, and

significant

development

application

process

followed.

22/08/2013 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Mark Meldrum,

Del Batton,

James The


project vision,

planning approach

and outline of next

steps

» Emphasis placed on

the need to engage

the community


the need to provide a

good masterplan


the need to

demonstrate service

availability and land

capability /

suitability.

» Noted, and

incorporated

into

consultation

approach.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

20/02/2014 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Simon

Byrne

Sheryl Murray

Graeme Finch

Adam Hill

» Outline of project

vision

» Outline of services

availability, and how

to provide services

» Discussion on the

importance of

coordinated regional

delivery of

infrastructure


potential for

developer

contributions

» Undertaking by the

Department to take

the development into

account within the

Regional

Infrastructure

Strategy.

» Emphasis

placed on

identifying

appropriate

engineering

solutions.

5/08/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Glen

Ewers

Jeff

Richardson

Martin

Klopper

Douglas Lesh

Del Batton

» Discussion on the EIS

terms of reference,

to ensure that the

requirements of

Development

Assessment Services

are adequately taken

into account.

» Agreement to

attend a

meeting with

the EPA.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

18/02/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Mark Meldrum

Del Batton

Richard Horton

» Update on progress,

technical

documentation and

process.

» Suggestions made in

relation to approach

to the specific use

zone, and

incorporation of a

master plan that can

be revised at each

stage.

» Agreement in relation

to incorporating

environmental

commitments into

the specific use zone.

» Ideas used to

structure the

rezoning

application, and

the specific use

zone.

» Concerns in

relation to

community

response taken

into account.

Note that additional consultation with the Lands Planning Division was undertaken in conjunction

with meetings with the Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority, and Department of

Transport. This is addressed in Section 1.5 and Section 1.6 respectively.

1.1.3 NT Planning Commission

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

15/11/2013 Martin

Klopper

Paul

Nicholls

Max

Shifman

Laurence

Ah Toy

Gary Nairn

James Teh

Introduction on the

project vision, land use

breakdown and

background to the

project.

Suggested that a

significant development

application would be the

most appropriate

planning pathway.

» Recommendation

to follow a

significant

development

application route

taken on board.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

18/03/2014 Martin

Klopper

Max

Shifman

Paul

Nicholls

Wendy

Smith

Gary Nairn

James Teh

Jane Fairnington

Peter McQueen

Dr Brian Reed

Dr Bill Freeland

Stuart Duncan

Denys Stedman

Dr Ken Johnson

David McHugh

Nicole Wheeler

Graham Bailey

Mark Meldrum

A presentation in

response to the

Significant Development

Application lodged with

the Minister and referred

to the NT Planning

Commission.

Outline of project vision,

components, approach

and timeframes.

Questions raised in

relation to land

capability, incorporation

of an employment area,

and clarification on lot

sizes and makeup.

» An enterprise

area was

incorporated into

the proposal to

make provision

for local

employment.

1.2 Department of Land Resource Management

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the

development

31/08/13 Paul

Nicholls

Ann

Grattidge

Martin

Klopper

Jeff

Richardson

Luis da Rocha

Nicholas Cuft

Lakshman

Rajartnam

Ian Smith

Bill Cumberland

Robyn Delaney


project vision and

background.


» Discussion

environmental

approach, concerns

and content of the

NOI

» Advice

incorporated

into NOI and

planning

approach.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the

development

28/08/2014 Glen Ewers

David van

den Hoek

Flora Division

Ian Cowie

Nick Cuff

» Advice on surveying

for threatened flora:

all species listed need

to be surveyed for.

» Best times and ID

hints were provided.

» Show survey tracks

to demonstrate

survey effort.

» Are confident in DvH

capacities as

surveyor.

» Flora survey

advice

determined

approach to

and content of

final flora and

fauna report.

27/11/2014 Glen Ewers Fauna Division

Brydie Hill

» Presentation of the

proposed fauna

survey methodology

and target species.

» Confirmation that

they were

appropriate.

» Recommendations on

how to best

incorporate camera

traps into the

surveys.

» Fauna survey

advice

determined the

approach to

and content of

final fauna

report.

12/02/2015 Mike Welch

Jeff

Richardson,

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Land Assessment

Unit

Jason Hill, and

representatives

from other

divisions

» LSA meeting.

» Instructed to

undertake LSA as per

how we planned to

(not their concern as

to whether 1:10K for

whole site or just

some),

» S4 category isn't a

show-stopper if there

are engineering

solutions.

» Noted, and

incorporated

into study

approach.


19/02/2015 Jeff

Richardson

Dane

Trembath

Biodiversity

Division

Graeme Gillespie

Dave Liddle

» To update on survey

status and seek

advice on managing

population –

» Showed sampling

history and outcomes

and discussed

method.

» Asked about

mitigation, DL said

that elsewhere they

used 250m buffer

around Howard

Springs sand sheet

for plants (e.g.

Typhonium and

Utricularia.

» GG said that for the

frog they want a

500m buffer around

the calling site as the

frog might go into

the woodland for the

dry season. GG

suggested that if the

dry season location

was studied it may

be that only 250m is

required. DL noted

that the 250m buffer

includes the main

Typhonium

populations.

» Much talk about

hydrology of this

population and need

to also protect and

buffer flows.

» GG said that due to

the knowledge gaps

in U. daviesiae we

should look at as

many different

habitats as possible

and at minimum, visit

each three times

during the wet

season for a frog call

survey.

» Survey

approach

adapted

» Proposed

buffer areas

incorporated

into the

concept

masterplan

» Environmental

Investigation

Areas defined,

and

parameters

placed on

further

investigation

before

incorporating

these areas

into a

subdivision

area.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the

development

» GG also said he did

not think the call

loggers would work

well and said if they

were a proven

method, he would be

more comfortable

with them.

1/05/2015 Jeff

Richardson

Glen Ewers

Flora Division

David Liddle

» Triage of Typhonium

- Described surveying

done, prioritisation

and development

plans.

» DL like to see survey

methods/coverage,

as well as

management and

buffers. Said

translocation is

possible but a

distraction.

» Tully Grass is big

threat.

» Noted and

Environmental

Investigation

Areas defined,

and

parameters

placed on

further

investigation

before

incorporating

these areas

into a

subdivision

area.

04/06/2015 Tom Reilly Fauna Division

Brydie Hill

» Site familiarisation

visit to point out

important habits and

extent of fire

disturbance

throughout the site.

» Further input

into final report

outcomes and

conclusions.


1.3 Power & Water Corporation

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

13/08/2013 Paul

Nicholls

Simon

Byrne

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Martin

Klopper

Peter Butcher » Introduction to the

project vision and

background.


» Discussion on service

availability and

implications for the

development.

» Advice

incorporated into

engineering

services report.

25/06/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Susannah

Boer

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Stanley Kwan

Ian Jong

» Discussion on water

supply and

availability

» Advice

incorporated into

engineering

services report.

Additional consultation was undertaken through formal review of the engineering services reports

by the various sections. A schedule outlining the suggestions and changes to the engineering

services reports is attached to each respective report.


1.4 Litchfield Council

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

28/08/2013 Martin

Klopper

Paul

Nicholls

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Simon

Byrne

Miguel Alaracon

Graeme Francis

Russell Anderson

Allan McKay

Introduction on the

project vision, land use

breakdown and

background to the

project.

Outline of the planning

process.

Discussion on aspects of

importance to Council:

» Open Space

(generally supportive)

» Use of rural road

standards across the development and

need to work with

Council in relation to subdivision

standards.

» Indicated that Council has a new

urban rates structure, and that

this would apply to

aspects of the development.

» Undertaking to

work with Council

regarding

subdivision

standards, in

particular in

relation to roads

and stormwater

management.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

12/08/2015 Martin

Klopper

Paul

Nicholls

Jenny

Rudolph

John

Gleeson

Ben Dornier

Frank Crawley

Graeme Francis

Update on the project

vision, land use

breakdown and

background to the

project.

Questions raised in

relation to land

capability, incorporation

of an employment area,

and clarification on lot

sizes and makeup.

Questions raised in

relation to upgrades to

road infrastructure.

Update on Consultation

outcomes and next step.

Generally indicated that

taking on board open

space is within Council’s

vision.

» In response to a

concern relating

to the long term

management of a

specific use zone,

the application

was amended to

include

normalisation of

lot zoning

following

construction of

each subdivision

stage.

1.5 Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

22/07/2013 Paul

Nicholls

Max

Shifman

Laurence

Ah Toy

Martin

Klopper

John Coleman

Gary Nairn


project vision and

background.


» Advice provided by

Chief Executive and

Chairman Planning

Commission to follow

a significant

development

application process

» Advice

considered, and

significant

development

application

process

followed.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

1/05/2014 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Ann

Grattidge

Jeff

Richardson

Natalie Calder

David Rhind

Lisa Bradley


assessment process,

timeframes and

expectations.

» Advice taken

into account for

the preparation

of the EIS terms

of reference

and the

rezoning

application.

6/08/2014 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Jeff

Richardson

Ray Hall

Natalie Calder

Lisa Bradley

David Rhind

» Discussion and

review of Terms of

Reference

» Agreement of level of

detail in relation to

the type of

development versus

a typical resources

project

» Noted and

incorporated

into terms of

reference.

5/12/2014 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Glen

Ewers

Jeff

Richardson

Lisa Bradley

Natalie Calder

David Rhind

» Review and

discussion of final

terms of reference.

» Final Terms of

Reference

agreed on.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

18/02/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Glen

Ewers

Jeff

Richardson

Susannah

Boer

Alex

Lawton

Lisa Bradley

Natalie Calder

Richard Horton

(DLPE)

Del Batton

(DLPE)

Peter Vasel

Doug Lesh

(DLPE)

» To discuss the

relationship between

the EIS and the DA

processes as they

relate to the

Noonamah Ridge

Estate Project, and to

clarify the level of

detail and type of

information required

in the EIS.

» Explanation of how

this relates to the

planning and

Development

Application process

» Showed draft plan

including dam and

aquifer

replenishment;

» Discussed initial

typhonium and

toadlet results, and

mentioned bomber

site concerns re

pillaging

» Discussed meeting

with Graham Finch re

utilities provision

» Outlined upcoming

consultation

» Revision to the

terms of

reference

» Agreement on

the process

moving forward

» Agreement to

keep the

location of the

bomber site

confidential.

21/05/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Glen

Ewers

Jeff

Richardson

Rod Johnson » Outline of

background and

vision

» Very supportive of

approach to EIS.

» Information

only.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

6/11/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Glen

Ewers

Jeff

Richardson

Martin

Klopper

Alana Mackay

David Rhind

Del Batton

» Review of EPA

comments and

discussion on detail

required

» Explanation that

detailed Erosion and

Sediment Control is

no required at this

stage (Del Batton)

» Agreement on

outstanding

information and

finalisation of

EIS.

1.6 Department of Transport

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

22/08/2013 Paul

Nicholls

Simon

Byrne

Martin

Klopper

Culann McKeown

Geoff Horni

Del Batton

Annarie Visser

Aftab Abro

Garry Fischer


project vision and

background.


» Discussion on road

infrastructure an

implications

» Explanation of scale

of the project and

timeframe, and

incremental upgrades

to infrastructure over

time.

» Advice

considered.

» Advice taken into

account for

preparation of

traffic impact

assessment

» Undertaking to

work with

network planning

and public

transport division

to provide

infrastructure as

the development

grows.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

22/08/2013 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Mark Meldrum,

Del Batton,

James The


project vision,

planning approach

and outline of next

steps


the need to engage

the community


the need to provide a

good masterplan


the need to

demonstrate service

availability and land

capability /

suitability.

» Noted, and

incorporated into

consultation

approach.

20/02/2014 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Simon

Byrne

Sheryl Murray

Graeme Finch

Adam Hill

» Outline of project

vision

» Outline of services

availability, and how

to provide services


importance of

coordinated regional

delivery of

infrastructure


potential for

developer

contributions

» Undertaking by the

Department to take

the development into

account within the

Regional

Infrastructure

Strategy.

» Emphasis placed

on identifying

appropriate

engineering

solutions.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

18/02/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Mark Meldrum

Del Batton

Richard Horton

» Update on progress,

technical

documentation and

process.

» Suggestions made in

relation to approach

to the specific use

zone, and

incorporation of a

master plan that can

be revised at each

stage.

» Agreement in relation

to incorporating

environmental

commitments into

the specific use zone.

» Ideas used to

structure the

rezoning

application, and

the specific use

zone.

» Concerns in

relation to

community

response taken

into account.

1.7 Department of Health

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

12/2/2015 Glen

Ewers

Mike

Welch

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Josh Heath » Discussion to outline

Land Capability

Assessment and soil

testing approach.

» Advice

considered.

» LCA and soil

testing

undertaken in line

with Department

of Health

recommendations.

18/05/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Peter Rogers

Jonathon

Burcher

» Discussion in relation

to the use of package

treatment plants and

requirements

» Outcomes

included in the

engineering

services report for

the development.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

17/06/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Norberto

Ayala-

Samalea

Peter Rogers » Onsite sewerage

treatment systems

currently used and

now available in the

NT discussed.

» Alternate approach

considered that

considers water,

power and sewerage

all working together

as a power plant.

» Importance to reuse

systems that we are

hoping to consider.

» Department

enthusiastic about us

becoming a water

and power utility and

could see the

massive benefits.

» Dept Health

reviewed Byrne

Design reports

and made

comments which

were incorporated

into the final

reports for the

EIS.


1.8 Department of Education

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

29/01/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Leanne Taylor » Outlined project

vision and

background.

» Discussed Ministers

request for schooling

to be provided.

» Provided information

on current school

capacities and

expansion potential.

» Discussed alternate

school models,

including “schools in

shops”

» Committed to

working together in

delivery, to ensure

education needs are

met in the region.

» Schooling to be

provided in

consultation with

the Department,

considering

growth in the

region and other

developments.

1.9 Volunteer Fire Brigade

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

2/06/2015 Glen

Ewers

Dianne Tynam » Outlined the burning

regime exercised on

the project site and

explained the

capacities of existing

firefighting services.

» Advice

incorporated into

the proposed fire

management

approach.


Early consultation with relevant political stakeholders commenced in 2013, and has been ongoing

throughout the process. The intent of the consultation was to:

» Ensure relevant political stakeholders were aware of the project

» That the Noonamah Ridge Project team understood the respective stakeholders’ perspectives,

particularly in terms of addressing concerns held by their constituents.

» To test project findings, and ensure that information to a sufficient level of detail was provided.

» To identify key concerns, and respond to this in the relevant technical reports and by fine

tuning the development master plan.

Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

25/6/2013 Paul

Nicholls

Max

Shifman

Martin

Klopper

Minister Peter

Chandler

(Minister for

Lands, Planning

& the

Environment;

Minister for

Education)

Lawson Broad

» Introduce the project

and project vision.

» Discuss potential

planning approach.

» Received advice that

a significant

development

application approach

should be followed.

» Requested that

provision be made

for a new school /

schools within the

development.

» Advice

considered.

» Significant

development

application

followed.

» Provision made

for school sites

within the

development

master plan.

2 Political Stakeholders

This section outlines consultation undertaken with key political stakeholders.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

18/11/2014 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Jenny

Rudolph

Michael Gunner

(MLA), Shadow

Minister for

Planning

» Introduce the project

and project vision.

» Discuss potential

planning approach.

» Discussed the fact

that NT Labor’s vision

is for Weddell.

» Noted that this

development is not

intended to replace

Weddell, but is a

rural character

development.

» Requested to

continue to receive

updates.

» Advice

considered.

» Commitment to

continue

consultation.

19/02/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Maxwell

Shifman

Minister David

Tollner (Minister

for Lands,

Planning and the

Environment)

Racheal Curtain

» Update on project

progress

» Update on planned

community

consultation

» Outline and

discussion on

alternatives to

service delivery and

infrastructure /

utilities provision.

» Consideration to

be given to

alternate

approaches to

service delivery

and the potential

to become a

utilities provider.

30/01/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Michael Gunner

(MLA), Shadow

Minister for

Planning

Gerry Wood

(MLA)

Independent

Member for

Nelson

» Site visit to explain

the project vision.

» Concern that the

development is too

dense

» Should be structured

around a village

centre with some

smaller lots, and

predominantly 2ha

beyond.

» Concerns noted,

and incorporated

into master plan.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

25/05/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Minister Peter

Chandler

(Minister for

Education)

Samuel Burke

Michelle Leonard

Lynda Sing

» Update on project

progress.

» Discussion on

findings of social /

demographic profiling

and alternatives in

relation to providing

schooling within the

development.

» Ongoing

commitment to

provide schooling

in the

development.

9/7/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Minister David

Tollner (Minister

for Lands,

Planning and the

Environment)

Racheal Curtain

» Update on project,

and outcomes of

community

consultation, and

changes made in

response to

community concerns.

» Suggestion that

additional

consultation be

undertaken before

lodging the rezoning

application.

» Committed to

undertaking a

further round of

community

consultation

before lodging the

rezoning

application.

9/7/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Gerry Wood

(MLA)

» Update on project,

and outcomes of

community

consultation, and

changes made in

response to

community concerns.

» Ongoing concerns

relating to density

and community

expectation.

» Emphasis on

buffers and lot

sizes included into

the development

master plan.


Date Project

Team

Member

Stakeholder

Representative


Notes

Implications for

the development

16/10/2015 Paul

Nicholls

Martin

Klopper

Gary Higgins

(MLA), Daly

Electorate

» Outlined project

vision and

background.

» Reflected on

constituents concerns

on development in

the rural area.

» Noted that

development should

retain a rural

character and

predominant lot sizes

over 1ha in extent.

» Concerns noted,

and taken into

account in

rezoning

application and

revised master

plan.

» Commitment to

continue

community and

stakeholder

consultation.

In addition to the above, all members were invited to the two community information sessions held

in Humpty Doo. These were attended by Gerry Wood and Kezia Purick.


Documents

Appendix N - NTEPA · Nicholls, Silvano Jung Dianne Bensley - Senior Heritage Adviser Cultural heritage management - Agreed with report's assessment of level of significance, and