Phase 1 Hamlet Location - 14.05.2015 · 2019. 2. 19. · Carbunup Hamlet Phase 1 - Hamlet Location APPENDICES (CD in rear folder) Appendix 1 Level 2 Flora and Vegetation Assessment,

CARBUNUP HAMLET PHASE 1 - HAMLET LOCATION

PREPARED FOR TOPSOUTH HOLDINGS PTY LTD AND MR RON BEACHAM

14/05/2015

14139

DOCUMENT CONTROL

14139

Issue Date Issue Details Author Checked Approved

Rev 0 14/05/15 Seeking Council Adoption L Guise G Barbour G Barbour

COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE

All intellectual property rights, including copyright, in designs developed and documents created by TME Town Planning Management Engineering Pty Ltd remain the property of this company. Any use made of such design or document without the prior written approval of TME Town Planning Management Engineering Pty Ltd will constitute an infringement of the rights of the company which reserves all legal rights and remedies in respect of any such infringement. The information, including any intellectual property, contained in this proposal is confidential and proprietary to the Company. It may only be used by the person to whom it is provided for the stated purpose for which it is provided and must not be imparted to any third person without the prior written approval of the Company. The Company reserves all legal rights and remedies in relation to any infringement of its rights in respect of its confidential information.

Calibre Consulting Level 1, Unit 5 53 Victoria Street BUNBURY WA 6230 Ph: (08) 9791 4411 © 2015

Carbunup Hamlet Phase 1 - Hamlet Location

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose Of Phase 1 Report ........................................................................................... 1

2 Strategic Locational Considerations .......................................................................................... 3

2.1 State Planning Strategy ................................................................................................. 3 2.2 State Sustainability Strategy .......................................................................................... 3 2.3 South West Planning And Infrastructure Framework ..................................................... 2 2.4 State Planning Policy No. 6.1 - Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge ........................................... 2 2.5 Local Rural Planning Strategy ....................................................................................... 2 2.6 Urban Settlement Study ................................................................................................. 7 2.7 Local Planning Strategy ................................................................................................. 7

3 Site Selection Criteria ............................................................................................................. 10

3.1 Relationship To Existing Settlement And District Roads .............................................. 10 3.2 Strategic Minerals And Basic Raw Materials ............................................................... 10 3.3 Flora And Vegetation ................................................................................................... 11 3.4 Fauna .......................................................................................................................... 14 3.5 Landform And Soils ..................................................................................................... 18 3.6 Water Management ..................................................................................................... 21 3.7 Preliminary Servicing Consideration ............................................................................ 23 3.8 Bushfire Hazard Assessment ...................................................................................... 24

4 Proposed Carbunup Hamlet .................................................................................................... 29

4.1 Agency Submissions On Hamlet Strategic Location .................................................... 29 4.2 Proposed Hamlet Location .......................................................................................... 30 4.3 Land Ownership ........................................................................................................... 32 4.4 Preliminary Hamlet Concept ........................................................................................ 32

5 Conclusion And Next Steps .................................................................................................... 34

TABLES

Table 1 Extract from Urban Growth Area Framework .......................................................... 7 Table 2 Land Ownership ..................................................................................................... 32

FIGURES

Figure 1 Location Plan .......................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 South-West Urban System ....................................................................................... 4 Figure 3 SPP 6.1 Land Use Strategy Plan ............................................................................. 6 Figure 4 Carbunup Study Area, Urban Settlement Study (1996) ........................................... 8 Figure 5 Draft City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy ....................................................... 9 Figure 6 Site Access Considerations ................................................................................... 11 Figure 7 Vegetation Types, Condition and Complexes ........................................................ 13 Figure 8 WRP Observations ................................................................................................. 16 Figure 9 Habitat Trees (DBH >50cm) ................................................................................... 17 Figure 10 Landform and Soils ............................................................................................... 19 Figure 11 Preliminary Site Classifications .............................................................................. 20 Figure 12 Preliminary Groundwater Depth Map (August 2014) .............................................. 22 Figure 13 Bushfire Prone Land .............................................................................................. 25 Figure 14 Carbunup River Hamlet Bushfire Hazard Assessment ........................................... 27 Figure 15 Carbunup River Hamlet Preferred Location .......................................................... 31 Figure 16 Carbunup River Hamlet Concept Plan ................................................................... 33


APPENDICES (CD in rear folder)

Appendix 1 Level 2 Flora and Vegetation Assessment, Lot 1, 2 and Portion of 1490, Wildwood Road, Carbunup (Eco Logic Environmental Services Pty Ltd, November 2014) Appendix 2 Fauna Assessment Lots 1, 2, 1490 and Reserve 20554 Wildwood Road Carbunup (Greg Harewood, Zoologist, November 2014) Appendix 3 Report on Preliminary Geotechnical Study – Proposed Carbunup River Hamlet, Carbunup, City of Busselton (Galt Geotechnics, March 2015). Appendix 4 Carbunup Hamlet - Bushfire Hazard Assessment (Calibre Consulting, April 2015)

1


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND The small and historic settlement of Carbunup River (commonly referred to as Carbunup) is situated south-west of Vasse where the Bussell Highway passes over the Carbunup River. Its proximity to prime horticultural and viticultural land, popular recreational attractions within the Geographe Bay and Leeuwin-Naturaliste area, and tourism towns of Busselton, Dunsborough and Margaret River means that Carbunup River is strategically well placed to develop as a Hamlet.

Figure 1: Location Plan identifies the site of the proposed Hamlet.

The site’s attributes have been acknowledged in a number of regional plans and policies, most notably in the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) State Planning Policy No 6.1 Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge (SPP 6.1) in which Carbunup is identified as a ‘Hamlet’ and in the draft City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy where the settlement is identified as a ‘Village’.

Both of these planning documents envisage Carbunup growing to a permanent population of approximately 500 people. Encouraging innovative planning approaches (such as servicing) is a common theme within these documents.

1.2 PURPOSE OF PHASE 1 REPORT

The purpose of this Phase 1 report is to seek a resolution from the Busselton City Council adopting the Carbunup Hamlet Location. Such resolution will provide the landowners with the confidence to proceed with the Phase 2 investigations necessary to inform a rezoning amendment and Local Structure Plan.

Town Planning Management Engineering Pty Ltd trading as Calibre Consulting (Aust) is acting for local landowners with a keen desire and strong vision to see Carbunup River achieve its potential as a unique and sustainable Hamlet. This report outlines a planning rationale for developing Carbunup as a Hamlet and identifies a preferred location based on sound planning principles.

It is recommended that Council resolve to:

1. Adopt Figure 15: Carbunup River Hamlet Preferred Location as the preferred location and structure plan area for the Carbunup River Hamlet;

2. Refer the Phase 1 report to the WAPC for noting/endorsement;

3. Provide in-principle support for the proponent to prepare a proposed rezoning amendment and Local Structure Plan for Council consideration.

2


Figure 1 : Location Plan

3


2 STRATEGIC LOCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

This section addresses the principal policy framework that influences the strategic locational considerations of the proposed Carbunup Hamlet.

2.1 STATE PLANNING STRATEGY

The State Planning Strategy (WAPC, 1997) vision for the South-West Region states:

In the next three decades, the South-West Region will become a model for environmental and economic Management offering a wide and complex array of residential lifestyles, tourist experiences and economic opportunities. In particular, the region will have intensive agricultural industries, major downstream processing projects and protected coastal, riparian, heritage and natural environments within a well-developed integrated intra-regional and inter-regional transport network.”

The Strategy outlines a South-West Urban System to be developed “as a means of actively preparing for urban growth and providing a framework to improve the effectiveness of planning, by minimising adverse environmental impacts, supporting social objectives and providing a basis for the stages expansion of infrastructure”. Figure 2: South-West Urban System is a schematic representation of the South-West Urban System.

The Strategy goes on to say that the South-West Urban System should be implemented to:

Provide nodal development with local employment opportunities

Identify distinctive environmental breaks and alternative ways of protecting landscapes

Identify land required for long-term urban expansion

Provide a more definitive framework for the provision of transport infrastructure.

Identification of Carbunup River as a Hamlet is consistent with the principles of the State Planning Strategy and the indicative “Direction of Growth” between Busselton and Margaret River.

2.2 STATE SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY

In 2003, the State Government adopted the State Sustainability Strategy. The purpose of the Strategy is to identify how the State Government will respond to the ‘sustainability agenda’, particularly in relation to adopting a sustainability framework and implementation of those actions highlighted across all spheres of government.

To achieve sustainability in the planning and development industry, the State Sustainability Strategy identifies the process as:

Discovering a strategic vision for the future which is the desired outcome for the majority of the community, based on common good principles

Establishing practical steps that integrate economic, social and environmental outcomes relevant to the vision and which can be utilised through every element of development

Incorporating these in statutory and strategic processes and procedures (where appropriate) to make a significant contribution to the implementation of the desired Strategy.

The Strategy acknowledges that planning needs to better incorporate sustainability principles into statutory planning, especially natural resource management, integrated land use and transport planning.

The Carbunup River Hamlet concept aims to put sustainability principles into practice through initiatives such as focussing development on already cleared land, avoiding prime agricultural land, adopting water sensitive urban design, protecting existing conservation areas, adopting energy efficient built form, encouraging walkability, developing a community focus, and pursuing sustainable servicing solutions, and creating local employment opportunities.

4


Figure 2 : South-West Urban System

2


2.3 SOUTH WEST PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK

The vision of the draft South-West Regional Planning and Infrastructure Framework (WAPC, March 2014) is:

“for a region that generates high standards of social amenity, diverse economic activities and high quality food, supported by effective and efficient infrastructure and at the same time preserving and enhancing the natural environment”.

The Framework is intended to represent an agreed government position on the broad future planning and infrastructure requirements for the South-West and guide the preparation of local planning strategies and local planning schemes.

The Framework includes a settlement hierarchy which promotes planned and staged development in existing settlements in the South-West. Being a region-wide Framework, the hierarchy extends from Regional Centres to Villages, but not to Hamlets – which are of more significance at the local planning level. Nonetheless, the Carbunup Hamlet should embrace the relevant Framework themes and objectives.

2.4 STATE PLANNING POLICY NO. 6.1 - LEEUWIN-NATURALISTE RIDGE

The WAPC’s State Planning Policy SPP No 6.1 Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge is arguably the most relevant regional planning policy affecting Carbunup Hamlet. Having first been adopted in 1998 following an extensive technical and consultative process, SPP 6.1 has subsequently been reviewed and found to still be relevant and appropriate for the Leeuwin-Naturaliste sub-region. The only changes resulting from the review were in the vicinity of Smiths Beach. Today, the policy remains a principal reference document for the WAPC and other State-level agencies, local government and the community.

The settlement strategy in SPP 6.1 identifies Carbunup as a ‘Hamlet’ with potential to accommodate approximately 500 permanent residents. Hamlets are

characterised as having the function of a rural service centre with a focus on rural living and tourist facilities, and providing convenience services and a community focus.

A key aspect of the policy is consideration being given to innovative alternatives to conventional reticulated water, sewerage and power servicing solutions.

Figure 3: SPP 6.1 Land Use Strategy Plan is an extract from SPP 6.1 showing Carbunup as a Hamlet surrounded by Principal Agriculture (Horticulture and Grazing) and lying at the intersection of two Strategic Roads – Bussell Highway and Wildwood Road.

Policy LUS 1.11 of SPP6.1 states that:

“Hamlet development at Carbunup River will provide a rural service centre for the nearby intensive agricultural industry but the form and size of urban development must remain separated from and not compromise the primacy of the horticultural industry”.

LUS 1.12 refers to a vegetated reserve adjacent to the Carbunup settlement and states that:

“Ecological communities on Reserve 38582 will be protected”.

2.5 LOCAL RURAL PLANNING STRATEGY

The Shire of Busselton Local Rural Planning Strategy (2006) identifies Carbunup within the western end of the Abba Plain land system which comprises well drained flats with sandy grey-brown gradational soils and red-brown sand and loamy Marybrook soils. Consequently, the hinterland of Carbunup with its valuable soils for agriculture, complimented by good water resources, is well-suited to prime agriculture.

The strategy divides the Shire into eight rural precincts. The subject land is included in the western portion of Precinct 1 Primary Rural which covers most of the Abba Plain extending well east of Busselton. Challenges for the precinct include the following:

6


Figure 3 : SPP 6.1 Land Use Strategy Plan

7


Table 1: Extract from Urban Growth Framework

Pockets of soils suitable for horticulture and viticulture where water is available

Surface and groundwater needs to be protected and managed

Pockets of remnant vegetation need to be conserved to benefit groundwater and landscape outcomes.

The vision for Precinct 1 is:

“That the lower lying land is secured for grazing and dairy uses and that higher, better drained land be used for more intensive agricultural uses where suitable, and that remnant vegetation be conserved”.

The strategy also investigated additional rural residential development within rural areas of the Shire. It was found that traditional forms of rural residential development were a relatively inefficient use of the land due to the high associated infrastructure and servicing costs, the State policy framework, and the availability of undeveloped lots and un-subdivided land. As such, the strategy does not support the development of additional or expanded rural residential areas.

Development of Carbunup Hamlet as a rural service centre serving the surrounding areas of prime agriculture and utilising a consolidated settlement pattern is consistent with the Shire of Busselton Local Planning Strategy.

2.6 URBAN SETTLEMENT STUDY

As part of the preparation of SPP 6.1 Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge, an Urban Settlement Study (Landvision, 1996) was undertaken which addressed settlement opportunities within the policy area. This study identified Carbunup as having the potential for a “consolidated fully serviced and sensitively planned

community” … which “would serve the intensive agricultural and tourist industry and offer options for homebuyers from Busselton generally”.

The report identified the preferred location for the Carbunup settlement being west of Bussell Highway and south of Wildwood Road, a settlement pattern which focussed on a multiple use corridor encompassing vegetation protection and enhancement and that may include trails, service corridors and recreation areas (refer Figure 4: Carbunup Study Area, Urban Settlement Study).

Proposals contained in this Hamlet concept are consistent with the recommendations of the Urban Settlement Study and SPP 6.1.

2.7 LOCAL PLANNING STRATEGY

The City of Busselton is progressively preparing a Local Planning Strategy that draws together a number of other strategies and plans. A 2013 working draft of the Local Planning Strategy included a Settlement Framework and an Urban Growth Framework.

Taken from the working draft, Figure 5: Draft City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy identifies Carbunup River Hamlet as a ‘Medium Term Urban Growth Area’. Similarly, Table 1: Extract from Urban Growth Area Framework is an extract from the draft strategy identifying Carbunup River as an Urban Growth Area with a medium term timeframe and an approximate potential population of 500 people.

The strategy text refers to the exact location of the settlement expansion as needing to be subject to further detailed planning. This Phase 1 report provides the necessary information to identity and justify the preferred location of the proposed Hamlet.

8


Figure 4: Carbunup Study Area, Urban Settlement Study

9


Figure 5: Draft City of Busselton Local Planning Strategy

10


3 SITE SELECTION CRITERIA

This section discusses the key criteria for selecting the actual location of the Carbunup Hamlet.

Site context is a key consideration. A location immediately north or east of the existing settlement was excluded by the previous Urban Settlement Study. Likely reasons for this exclusion include the substantial areas of established vines and additional horticultural/viticultural potential in those areas, and avoiding the growing settlement from straddling Bussell Highway or the Carbunup River. It was also considered inappropriate to locate the Hamlet within adjoining Reserve 38582 which is almost fully vegetated and contains flora of ecological significance.

3.1 RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING SETTLEMENT AND DISTRICT ROADS

The existing Carbunup River settlement is situated immediately west of the bridge where Bussell Highway crosses the Carbunup River. It is desirable that the Hamlet at Carbunup be located in proximity to the existing settlement and situated on the same side of the highway and the river to assist with access, legibility and safety. Furthermore, it is appropriate that the Hamlet be situated near Wildwood Road as this is a major east/west district road serving a tourist and agricultural function. Figure 6: Site Access Considerations depicts these road alignments and the Carbunup River.

Reserve 38582 situated immediately south-west of the existing Carbunup settlement has been identified as

having high conservation value needing protection. This necessitates a permanent ‘green belt’ separating the main Hamlet from the small, historic settlement, but suggests the Hamlet should provide for physical and social linkages wherever possible. Given Wildwood Road adjoins the existing settlement, it will be an advantage for the proposed Hamlet to have good access to Wildwood Road to provide convenient vehicle, cycling and pedestrian linkages.

The planned Busselton Outer Bypass proposes a re-alignment of Bussell Highway from south of Vasse to south-west of Carbunup River. In the longer term, this will create a more direct route to Margaret River. This will significantly reduce passing traffic at the existing Carbunup River settlement, hence increasing the importance of a new hamlet ‘village’ centre.

To the west of the existing Carbunup settlement, Lennox Road connects Wildwood Road to the Bussell Highway in a north-south direction. Apart from a short section in the south, Lennox Road is un-constructed and the road reserve contains stands of remnant vegetation. Given uncertainty about construction and possible realignment of Lennox Road, the primary access for the Carbunup Hamlet is expected to be Wildwood Road although provision for a future Lennox Road link should be maintained.

3.2 STRATEGIC MINERALS AND BASIC RAW MATERIALS

The Carbunup River locality is not constrained by strategic mineral sands resources. The Geological Survey of Western Australia (GSWA) mapping Titanium-Zircon Mineralization for the Busselton-Clairault area

11


Figure 6: Site Access Considerations

shows that there are no strategic mineral sands resources nearby.

Previous comment was made by the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) that there is a possibility of coal resources at depth. These resources would form part of the Vasse Coal Resource that extends from near the coast of Geographe Bay south to Rosa Brook near Margaret River. However, in recent years the State Government has made a decision not to permit exploration and mining of coal resources in the southern part of the resource area in the Margaret River region. Accordingly, in 2014 when providing comments to the City of Busselton on the Carbunup Hamlet strategic location, DMP did not raise the matter of coal resources as a constraint.

GSWA, on behalf of DMP, assessed the Hamlet proposal and noted that there is regionally significant basic raw material for sand in the area. Given the

scarcity of sand in the region, the GSWA strongly encourages maximum use of this sand resource within the proposed development area. There are no current Extractive Industry Licenses in the area but it is important that the preferred Hamlet location avoids sterilizing the available sand resource.

It is the express intention of the Hamlet proponents to utilize the sand resource as part of the development.

3.3 FLORA AND VEGETATION A Level 2 flora and vegetation assessment has been carried out (refer to Appendix 1: Level 2 Flora and Vegetation Assessment, Lot 1, 2 and Portion of 1490, Wildwood Road, Carbunup, Eco Logic Environmental Services November 2014). The adjoining portion of Lot 115 forming part of the proposed Hamlet location is virtually fully cleared and used for grazing purposes.

Eco Logic’s site assessment in October 2014 (refer to Figure 7: Vegetation Types, Condition and Complexes) identified 7 discrete vegetation types comprising:

1) Open Forest of Eucalyptus marginata, Corymbia calophylla, Agonis flexuosa and Allocasuarina fraseriana

2) Open Forest of Corymbia calophylla, Agonis flexuosa and Eucalyptus patens

12


3) Open Woodland of Agonis flexuosa with scattered trees of Melaleuca

4) Woodland/Scattered trees of Agonis flexuosa (planted), Melaleuca nesophila (planted) and Melaleuca lanceolata

5) Open Woodland of Agonis flexuosa and Corymbia calophylla

6) Closed Shrubland of Pteridium esculentum with scattered Corymbia calophylla and Agonis flexuosa

7) Closed Shrubland of Pteridium esculentum

In addition, Eco Logic identified:

Scattered Trees Isolated Trees with understorey Isolated Trees in completely degraded condition Planted trees in completely degraded condition Road Reserve

Areas of planted trees include:

Blue gum trees (Eucalyptus globulus) Olive Trees Macadamia trees Mix of planted Eucalyptus species and Peppermint

trees Planted Garden Trees and Shrubs

The condition of the vegetation across the study area was recorded to be in a generally degraded state.

The eastern portion of the study area consists of blue gum plantations, macadamia and olive plantings, planted Eucalyptus species and Peppermint trees (Agonis flexuosa) and garden trees and shrubs surrounding the existing dwellings. There were small pockets of remnant vegetation, however these areas have been highly modified through past clearing, stock grazing and general disturbance to be in a Degraded to Completely Degraded condition.

The western portion of the study area contains larger areas of remnant vegetation including an Open Forest adjacent to the Shire Reserve, scattered remnant native trees and riparian Open Woodland vegetation along the

creekline. The remnant vegetation has been significantly altered by obvious signs of disturbance including stock grazing. The understorey is dominated by introduced pasture grasses and herbs, with few native shrubs or groundcover species recorded. The vegetation was recorded to be in a Degraded to Good condition.

The remnant vegetation within the study area is associated with several Abba Vegetation Complexes, which have been extensively cleared and modified by agricultural activities. The majority of the vegetation associated with the Abba (AB) and (Aw) vegetation complexes is associated with the creekline and remnant vegetation adjacent to the Shire Reserve in the north-west of the property. This vegetation is currently in a Degraded to Good condition.

The Abba (Aw) vegetation complex in the south-eastern corner of the study area was recorded to be in a Degraded to Completely Degraded condition along the minor creekline. The Abba (Ad) vegetation complex in the south-eastern section of the study area is no longer representative of any remnant vegetation. It has been highly modified and contains planted trees. The Abba (Af) vegetation complex in the central area of the study area contains some patches of remnant scattered and isolated mature native trees in paddocks in a Completely Degraded condition. Eco Logic recommends these trees should be retained and incorporated into the lot design, wherever possible.

A Threatened and Priority Flora Database search and a Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs) search was undertaken to identify significant flora/vegetation that could potentially occur within the study area. Of the TEC/ PEC vegetation communities listed in the DPaW and DoE database within a 10km radius of the study area, none were recorded on site.

In addition, DPaW’s listed Threatened Ecological Community (TECs) and Priority Ecological Community (PECs) were reviewed in relation to the vegetation types recorded from the study area - which do not appear to be representative of any the listed TECs and PECs.

13


Figure 7: Vegetation Types, Condition and Complexes

14


A total of 50 flora species from 23 families were recorded from the study area during the assessment. This included 20 native species and 30 introduced species. The dominant families represented were the Poaceae (Grass family one native and eight introduced species), Myrtaceae family (six native and three introduced species) and Papilionceae (Pea family- two native and three introduced species).

No Threatened (Declared Rare) species, as listed under Section 23F of the Western Australian Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 or under the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC) were recorded within the study area during the site assessment, the timing of which was considered optimal for the majority of significant rare flora that could potentially be in the area. In addition, no priority-listed species were recorded during the site assessment.

From the results of the flora and vegetation assessment, Eco Logic concluded that there are no significant constraints to the proposed development of the study area.

The remnant vegetation in the north-western corner of Lot 1490 also extends into the adjoining Reserve 20554. The vegetation in the reserve was not part of the Eco Logic assessment, but aerial photography indicates the vegetation to be in a Degraded to Good condition. Disturbance including a former quarry, vehicle access and grazing appears to have occurred in the past. Nonetheless, the proposed Hamlet provides an opportunity to increase the amount of remnant vegetation protected in public reserves, including vegetation adjoining Reserve 20554.

Vegetation in Reserve 38582 adjacent to the Carbunup River settlement was also not included in the Eco Logic assessment. However this reserve is well known for its conservation values being a reserve for flora conservation in which rare and endangered species have previously been identified. It is expected that development of the proposed Hamlet will need a suitable setback from the reserve to help protect its integrity.

3.4 FAUNA A Level 1 fauna assessment has been undertaken for Lots 1, 2 1490 and Reserve 20554 Wildwood Road - refer to Appendix 2: Fauna Assessment Lots 1, 2, 1490 and Reserve 20554 Wildwood Road Carbunup (Greg

Harewood, Zoologist, November 2014). Because some listed threatened species (i.e. western ringtail possums [WRP] and several species of black cockatoo) are known to occur in the general area, the scope of the survey work was expanded to include targeted assessment of the site’s significance to these particular species.

The assessment included a desktop study and a series of site surveys. Daytime field survey work at the site was carried out on 13 October and 4 November, 2014. A nocturnal WRP survey was carried out on the 4 November, 2014. The vegetation communities identified during the vegetation survey of the site carried out by Eco Logic (2014) were used as the basis for a classification of broad fauna habitats types. This information was supplemented with observations made during the fauna assessment for habitats/areas not covered by the botanical assessment.

Harewood found that overall fauna habitat values and biodiversity at the study area has been severely compromised by the total or partial clearing of native vegetation, historical and ongoing livestock grazing, dieback and weed invasion. Most areas lack any natural attributes and are now only utilised by generally common and widespread fauna species with non-specific requirements which allow them to persist in highly disturbed habitats.

Despite the area’s history of disturbance the site does however still provide suitable habitat for a range of species, some of which are of conservation significance though the extent of the better quality habitat units are limited. The best quality habitat is contained with Reserve 20554 and along Lennox Road. These areas contain the densest vegetation with good canopy connectivity though their quality is compromised to a certain extent by their shape (i.e. Lennox Road - long and narrow) and/or some historic clearing (i.e. gravel extraction within Reserve 20554) despite some natural regeneration occurring.

A total of 51 native fauna species were observed (or positively identified from foraging evidence, scats, tracks, skeletons or calls) within the study area during the two day time surveys. Signs of four introduced species were also seen. Evidence of three listed threatened species was observed (forest red-tailed black cockatoo (chewed marri fruits) and Baudin’s black cockatoo (chewed marri fruits, flying overhead) and

15


western ringtail possums (scats, dreys and individuals). The rainbow bee-eater (migratory) was also observed. No evidence of any DPaW priority fauna species utilising the site was found.

In total nine WRP dreys were observed during the day survey. None were confirmed as being occupied at the time of the survey and four appeared to be deteriorating, suggesting no recent use. Fifty two trees containing hollows were observed though not all are likely to be suitable for WRPs to utilise.

Four WRPs and nine common brushtail possums were observed during the nocturnal survey of the site. The locations of various possum observations made during the site surveys are shown Figure 8: WRP Observations.

The nocturnal observations suggest that WRPs are favouring habitat along Lennox Road and within Reserve 20554, areas which contain the densest, most continuous vegetation. The north-west section of Lot 1490 also appears relatively good habitat though canopy connectivity is discontinuous which lessens its value. Vegetation along much of Mary Brook is also marginal in quality due to the dominance of only shrubs and some gaps at various points.

Within Lots 1 and 2 WRP utilisation appears to be low with individuals relying largely on small areas of planted peppermint. At the time of the nocturnal survey WRPs appeared to be absent from these areas but given the presence of some dreys they are at times present, albeit in low numbers.

The location of the potential black cockatoo breeding trees (using Department of the Environment criteria i.e. any suitable tree species with diameter at breast height of DBH> 50cm [SEWPaC 2012]) observed within the fauna study area is shown in Figure 9: Habitat Trees (DBH >50cm).

The assessment identified a total of 185 trees with a DBH of >50cms within the fauna survey area as a whole. The majority (133, ~72.0%) of the trees were not observed to contain hollows of any size. Forty eight (~26.0%) of the trees contained one or more “small” hollows considered by Harewood not to be suitable for black cockatoos to use for nesting purposes. Four trees were identified as containing hollow/s that appeared big enough to possibly allow the entry of a black cockatoo

into a suitably sized and orientated branch. No evidence was however observed to suggest these trees had ever been used (in the past or presently) for nesting by black cockatoos.

Foraging evidence observed within the study area was represented by several examples of chewed marri fruits. These were attributed to foraging Baudin’s and forest red-tailed black-cockatoos. No evidence of Carnaby’s black-cockatoo foraging was observed.

The extent of quality black cockatoo foraging habitat within the study area is primarily represented by those areas containing marri and jarrah which would be the primary food sources for all three cockatoo species in this area. The majority of the foraging habitat is represented by the vegetation in the north-west corner of Lot 1490, Lennox Road and Reserve 20554. There are also a number of isolated marri and jarrah trees in paddocks which contribute to the total potential foraging resource to a small degree. A small number of pine trees within Lot 1 may also be utilised by Carnaby’s black-cockatoo.

No existing roosting trees (trees used at night by black cockatoos to rest) were identified during the survey period. The location and extent of clearing required for the proposed development is currently unknown however given that most of the existing freehold lots (Lots 1, 2 and 1490) are already almost totally cleared and large lots are planned for the more densely vegetated areas, clearing is likely to be minimal. Based on this presumption and other factors such as habitat quality, the degree of fragmentation and the retention of vegetation within Lennox Road and Reserve 20554, likely impacts on species of conservation significance previously recorded in the general area has been assessed by Harewood, including a summary table (refer to Appendix 2).

With respect to fauna in general, Harewood anticipates no substantial impacts as a consequence of development at the site. In cases where some impact is anticipated, the degree of the impact is only expected to be low and relates to the loss of very small areas of generally degraded habitat. Harewood found that this, coupled with the fact that most species are common and widespread, meant that no overall change in their conservation status is anticipated, despite a possible, very localised reduction in habitat extent.

16


Figure 8: WRP Observations

Figure 8: WRP Observations

17


Figure 9: Habitat Trees (DBH >50cm)

18


The assessment did however indicate that any considerations required during ongoing development planning are most likely to be related to the presence of habitat used or potentially used by some threatened fauna species, in particular those listed under the EPBC Act, namely WRP and to a lesser extent all three species of black cockatoo which appear to utilise vegetation onsite as a foraging resource. Harewood observed that the extent of likely habitat loss will be very low in both instances and impacts are, at this stage, not anticipated to be significant given the planned retention of most existing natural habitat.

A series of recommendations aimed at mitigating and minimising potential impacts on fauna and fauna habitat in general were provided. Harewood recommends these be considered for implementation as part of any required management plans where determined to be reasonable and practicable.

Information obtained as part of the Harewood fauna assessment report will be used in conjunction with other environmental investigations to guide project planning and will also be used in the formulation of management plans, both of which will aim to minimise potential environmental impacts.

3.5 LANDFORM AND SOILS Figure 10: Landform and Soils is an extract from Agriculture WA’s Land Agmaps Series and shows the area west of Carbunup having a variety of Abba soils from wet vales and flats to gentle slopes and deep sandy rises.

The moderately drained JD1 unit (Jindong flats) situated north of Wildwood road, south west of Reserve 38582 and west of Lewis Road comprise good quality soils and as a result these areas have well-developed horticulture and viticulture operations. The proposed Hamlet location should avoid these areas wherever practical.

The higher land of the ABd unit (Abba deep sandy rises) and the AB2 unit (Abba gentle slopes) are more sandy and elevated than the Carbunup hinterland and better suited to urban development given their drainage characteristics and undulating landscape.

The ABwv unit (Abba wet vales) contains two drainage lines running south to north through the area. The most significant of these two drainage lines is the Mary Brook. The ABwv unit has poorly drained flats and depressions with wet and semi-wet soils. Both drainage lines are generally cleared of natural vegetation and there is an opportunity to rehabilitate these corridors as part of open space areas within the Hamlet development.

A preliminary Geotechnical Study (Galt Geotechnics, 2015) has been undertaken over Lots 1, 2 and 1490 Wildwood Road (refer to Appendix 3: Report on Preliminary Geotechnical Study – Proposed Carbunup River Hamlet, Carbunup, City of Busselton [Galt Geotechnics, March 2015]).

The findings indicate that the site is generally underlain by silty sand and sand overlying clayey sand/sandy clay, as well as localised areas of laterised material.

The site can be broadly separated into two typical areas, as shown on Figure 11: Preliminary Site Classifications. The majority of the site is “Class S”, with typical soil profiles comprising Silty/Clayey Sand present from the surface to depths of between 0.5m and 1.9m overlying Clayey Sand / Sandy Clay extending to the maximum depth of investigation of 3.0m.

The Western and Southern Central portion of the site is “Class A” typically comprising Sand/Silty Sand to depths of between 0.1m and 1.7m overlying Laterite - Gravelly Sand / Sandy Gravel / Clayey Sandy Gravel extending to the maximum depth of investigation of 3.0m.

19


Figure 10: Landform and Soils

20


Figure 11: Preliminary Site Classifications

21


Improvement of the whole site to “Class A” is possible with importation and placement of up to 1.0m of inert sand (or gravel) fill to produce a total thickness of about 1.5m overlying clayey material.

3.6 WATER MANAGEMENT Groundwater investigation has been undertaken by Calibre Consulting to determine the peak winter groundwater levels likely to be present on the subject land – Lots, 1 2 and 1490 Wildwood Road and portion Lot 115 Bussell Highway to help determine the preferred Hamlet location and draft concept plan.

Onsite Effluent Disposal

The investigations included determining areas where there is adequate separation to groundwater for onsite effluent disposal. The Department of Health’s Draft Country Sewerage Policy recommends that a separation between the natural surface and groundwater is to be a minimum of 0.5m, where on site effluent disposal is proposed. As a conservative approach, the investigation has identified areas where there is at least 0.6m of separation.

To determine peak groundwater levels on the site, 17 monitoring bores were installed across the central portion of the site and groundwater level readings were taken from 2010 to 2014. The levels recorded in August 2014 were used to determine the peak groundwater level.

LiDAR information was obtained for the subject land and surrounds. This was converted into 0.5m contours. A model of the groundwater depth was developed using a combination of the LiDAR contours and monitoring bore readings from August 2014. The two creeklines running through the site were also incorporated into the model, to tailor it to the actual site conditions. The results of the modelling are mapped in Figure 12: Preliminary Groundwater Depth Map (August 2014).

The recommendation based on groundwater investigations and mapping is that the areas proposed for development have adequate separation to groundwater for onsite effluent disposal as determined by the Department of Health’s Draft Country Sewerage Policy.

Areas shown as purple and blue shading have groundwater levels greater than 0.6m below natural ground level. Groundwater depth across much of the site is greater than 1.2 m below ground.

The low-lying foreshore areas associated with the two creeklines shown as orange and yellow shading have shallow groundwater levels (higher than 0.6m below ground) which may not be suitable for onsite effluent disposal. Subject to more detailed investigation, these areas should generally be excluded from development of urban lots, but provide opportunities for conservation, public open space and drainage reserves as part of a Hamlet.

For the areas shown as “Inferred Areas” in the south and east of the site, groundwater depths were extrapolated from the adjacent measured bores, creeklines, topography and soil type information. These inferred areas will require further groundwater investigation to verify depths.

22


Figure 12: Preliminary Groundwater Depth Map (August 2014)

23


Surface Water Drainage & Waterways

Two small ephemeral creeks flow through the subject land in a south to north direction. The foreshore area of these creeks is mostly cleared, with some Peppermint/Marri trees and native sedges along the creeklines themselves. The western most creek (Mary Brook) meanders through a winter wet depression. This watercourse begins at Yelverton approximately 10km to the south west and continues northwards to discharge into Geographe Bay.

These creeklines and their associated foreshore/wetland areas should be conserved with within suitable POS/Drainage reserves in the Hamlet. Foreshore management and enhancement of the creekline areas should be addressed in the Hamlet design and subsequent detailed subdivision design.

Water Sensitive Urban Design features should be incorporated into the Hamlet design to capture and treat runoff before it reaches the waterways.

Advice from DoW (Geographe District Office) is that there is currently no flood mapping of the Mary Brook catchment. The risk of flooding of proposed development areas is considered negligible due to large cross sectional area within the proposed foreshore areas - that will allow flood flows through. There is approximately a 3m vertical separation from the top of the water banks to the residential areas. The feeding catchments are not considered large enough to generate significant flood waters to reach this height however more detailed modelling will be undertaken as part of future works.

Soil Types & Permeability

Through test pits constructed across the site, the major soil types found was Sand and Silty/Clayey Sand overlying laterite gravel. Sandy Clay was found underlying the surface sands in the central north of the site. Sub-surface soil permeability was tested at four locations and was found to range from 26.5 m/day in the central south of the site down to 0.25 m/day in the central north. The sandy and silty sand soils present in the top of the soil profile are considered suitable for onsite effluent disposal. In areas where sandy clay,

laterite or other low permeability soils occur close to the surface, effluent disposal systems may be raised within sand fill and bunded to allow for adequate infiltration.

The preliminary geotech investigation (Galt, March 2015) classified the south west and south-central areas of the site as Class A which is suitable for onsite stormwater disposal in soakwells or infiltration basins. The area of clayey sands in the north west of the site was tested at 0.25 m/day infiltration which is not suitable for in-situ stormwater infiltration without modifications.

Phosphorous Retention Index

PRI was tested at four locations as part of the preliminary geotech investigation. PRI in sandy soils ranged from 1-16 mL/g and silty and clayey sands ranged from 20-140 mL/g. This indicates that soils with clayey sands are suitable for standard onsite effluent systems. The sandy soils may require nutrient retentive systems. The laterite gravel found underlying much of the southern areas of the site will likely have high PRI, although this was not tested.

3.7 PRELIMINARY SERVICING CONSIDERATION

A preliminary servicing assessment has been undertaken to assist in determining the water supply and effluent disposal requirements and estimated costs for the proposed Carbunup Hamlet development.

The assessment estimated the cost to supply the Hamlet with reticulated water and sewer would be $6.7 million, which is prohibitive for a development of a Hamlet of this size.

The above costs include the provision of a Type 10 Sewer Pump Station and approximately 7.5km of pressure main pumping back to the existing sewers at Vasse Newtown with significant loss of vegetation on the road reserve. An alternative may be a pressure main to the Dunsborough waste water treatment plant, but this would also be an expensive option.

It has been suggested through discussions with the City of Busselton that alternate servicing options may be

24


suitable for this site; for example the use of a ‘closed system’ (water tanks, anaerobic sewerage systems, reuse of grey water on gardens). This will also assist to achieve the innovative planning and sustainability objectives for the Hamlet.

The preliminary geotechnical study (Galt, March 2015) concluded that the sandy and silty sand soils at the top of the soil profile (generally present from surface to depths of between 0.5m and 1.9m) are suitable for conventional effluent disposal systems. However, conventional effluent disposal is not recommended within deeper soils due to the clayey nature of the soil. Additionally, conventional effluent disposal is not recommended in areas of shallow laterite, generally located towards the south-western end of the site. In these areas it is recommended that alternative effluent disposal systems (i.e. Aerobic Treatment Units) be utilised.

The preliminary servicing assessment indicates that on-site effluent disposal on suitable size residential lots may be appropriate and more cost-effective than reticulated sewerage. If a ‘village centre’ and a cell(s) of smaller residential lots are proposed, then consideration should be given to suitable effluent disposal options.

Further investigations and discussions with the City of Busselton and relevant agencies will need to be undertaken to determine the most suitable, sustainable and achievable servicing options for the preferred Hamlet site.

3.8 BUSHFIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT

Calibre Consulting has undertaken a bushfire hazard assessment for the subject land (Appendix 4). The assessment utilises the flora and vegetation survey (Eco Logic 2014).

Draft State Planning Policy 3.7 Planning for Bushfire Risk Management (draft SPP3.7) has been advertised by the Western Australian Planning Commission and is considered to be a seriously entertained planning proposal.

The draft SPP 3.7 and the revised draft Planning for Bushfire Risk Management Guidelines have been prepared to strengthen bushfire risk management measures in the planning and development process.

Specifically, the documents address the land use planning elements arising from the Keelty Inquiry into the Perth Hills Bushfire in February 2011.

The key measures in the framework are:

1) Elevating bushfire issues to be addressed in the highest level of planning policy available;

2) Emphasising the need to consider bushfire management measures in strategic level policy documents; and

3) Seeking to achieve the consistent implementation of bushfire risk management measures across the community.

SPP 3.7 applies to all planning proposals located in bushfire-prone areas. A bushfire-prone area is an area that is:

Designation on the proposed State Bushfire Prone Maps; or

Identified on a local government bushfire prone map; or

Land within 100m of an area of bushfire-prone vegetation equal to or greater than one hectare.

In summary, the SPP requires that:

a. Planning or development applications within bushfire-prone areas are to undertake a bushfire hazard assessment, in accordance with the methodology set out in the Planning for Bushfire Risk Management Guidelines;

b. Planning proposals for land that has a bushfire hazard level greater than low are to comply with the policy measures;

25


c. Development is to be designed so as to apply construction standards at or between BAL-12.5 and BAL-29. Development in an area that has an extreme bushfire hazard level, and/or requires construction standards of BAL-40 or BAL-FZ, will not be supported unless it can be demonstrated that the risk can be reduced; and

d. Any planning proposal or development application to which this policy applies shall be accompanied by a Bushfire Management Plan.

Council adopted Local Planning Policy No 9 Environment and Heritage Conservation Policy in 2010. This was subsequently amended in 2013 to include bushfire provisions and local bushfire prone mapping. Figure 13: Bushfire Prone Land is based on Council’s mapping.

Clause 2.1 of the Policy stipulates that any amendment on bushfire prone land shall be accompanied by a bush fire hazard assessment consistent with guidance

statement A1 of the Guidelines, and, depending on the findings of that assessment and the nature of the proposal, may need to be accompanied by a fire management plan.

The Policy also varies the provisions of the Guidelines by requiring:

A 25m building protection zone; A minimum Bushfire Attack Level rating of BAL19; A public road or, where that is not practicable, fire

service access route shall be provided around the perimeter (either on, or in close proximity to, the boundary of the site) of all subdivisions,

All fire service access routes to be provided as a reserve for bush fire protection and pedestrian access, with a minimum width of 8.0 metres and vested with the City at time of subdivision; and

Figure 13: Bushfire Prone Land

26


That emergency access ways are not greater than 100 metres in length unless they are designed as fire service access routes.

Figure 14: Carbunup River Hamlet Bushfire Hazard Assessment has been prepared base upon the existing site conditions and the vegetation and flora report (Eco Logic, 2014). It applies the methodology for determining bushfire hazard as set out in Appendix 1 of the Planning for Bushfire Protection Guidelines which classifies vegetation based on tree height and the percentage of canopy cover.

The characteristics of the different hazard categories are:

1. Low hazard areas will generally be:

areas devoid of standing native vegetation (less than 0.25 ha cumulative area);

areas which due to climatic or vegetation (eg rainforest) conditions, do not experience bush fires;

inner urban or suburban areas with maintained gardens and very limited native standing vegetation (less than 0.25 ha cumulative area); or

pasture or cropping areas with very limited native standing vegetation that is a shrubland, woodland or forest.

2. Moderate hazard areas will generally be:

areas containing pasture or cropping areas with slopes in excess of 10°;

open woodlands;

open shrublands;

low shrubs with slopes of less than 10° or flat land; or

suburban areas with some native tree cover.

3. Extreme hazard areas will generally be forests; woodlands or tall shrubs.

Figure 14 Carbunup River Hamlet Bushfire Hazard Assessment shows the bush fire hazard rating for the subject land based upon the above classifications.

The uncleared areas within and adjoining the site are classified as having an extreme fire hazard rating; and

The cleared areas are classified as having a low hazard rating. This will occur where the grasslands / paddock area are managed by cropping, grazing or slashing prior to the fire season so that the grasses do not exceed 100mm in height.

The cleared areas which are within 100m of the areas with an extreme or moderate hazard rating are to be assigned a moderate hazard rating to reflect the increased level of risk.

As the majority of the subject land has a moderate or extreme bushfire hazard rating it is necessary under both SPP 3.7 and Council’s Policy to ensure that permanent hazard reduction measures be implemented to ensue that development only occurs in areas with a low or moderate hazard rating or bush fire attack levels between BAL- Low and BAL- 29.

As an example, the Hamlet proponents intend harvesting and removing the blue gum plantation area to ensure permanent hazard reduction.

Where bushland areas are intended to be retained or where revegetation and landscaping occurs it will be necessary to provide appropriate separation distances to the development. Where these distances are less than 100m then residential development will have to be constructed in accordance with AS3959 Construction of Buildings in Bushfire Prone Areas.

The Building Code of Australia (BCA) does not apply AS3959 to non-residential classes of buildings including commercial or industrial buildings. Where such buildings are proposed in the development and if they are closer than 100m to classified bushfire prone vegetation then it will be necessary for the amendment or structure plan to provide a statutory means of applying bushfire construction standards.

There are two areas of remnant bushland immediately adjacent to the site being:

Reserve 20554 on the north western corner of the subject land; and

Reserve 38582 on the eastern boundary.

Reserve 38582 (Carbunup Reserve) is subject to a formal management plan as it has very high regional conservation values. It has an area of approximately 30

27


Figure 14: Carbunup River Hamlet Bushfire Hazard Assessment

28


hectares. The management plan notes that the reserve poses a significant threat to the town’s residents and their property in the event of an unplanned, summer wildfire.

It is recommended that any amendment or structure plan for the subject land:

1) Incorporate appropriate bushfire protection measures in accordance with SPP3.7, the Planning for Bushfire Protection Guidelines and Council’s Local Planning Policy.

2) That the fire management plan be prepared in conjunction with any structure plan to ensure that the spatial requirements for bushfire management are included in the design.

3) That any subdivision be designed to ensure that

development can be provided with a maximum BAL29 rating.

4) That the design of public open space areas and landscaping recognise fire management requirements including the provision of hazard separation zones and low threat vegetation as required by any fire management plan.

5) That a strategic low fuel zone and increased separation distance be provided along the eastern boundary of the development adjacent to Reserve 38582.

6) Include statutory provisions to ensure that any non-residential buildings are developed with appropriate bushfire construction measures as the BCA only applies AS3959 to Class 1, 2, 3 and 10 buildings.

7) That the inclusion of any vulnerable or high risk land uses within the development will require detailed fire management provisions.

29


4 PROPOSED CARBUNUP HAMLET

4.1 AGENCY SUBMISSIONS ON HAMLET STRATEGIC LOCATION

In 2014, the City of Busselton referred a preliminary document entitled Carbunup Sustainable Development Concept (TME, January 2014) to State Government agencies for comment. The City subsequently provided a schedule of submissions which was supplied to the proponents.

Following is a summary of the main points raised:

Department of Water

A District Water Management Strategy (DWMS) would be required (to support rezoning and structure planning for the Hamlet).

Water courses traversing the subject land discharge into Geographe Bay, hence consideration should be given to the Vasse-Wonnerup Wetlands and Geographe Bay Water Quality Improvement Plan 2010 for guidance and management strategies to reduce nutrients and/or pollutants from adding to the loads already being delivered to the bay.

The site appears to include areas of palusplain that are typically waterlogged, which may require particular attention to drainage.

The area has a moderate to low risk of Acid Sulphate Soils occurring within 3 metres of the natural soil surface that could be disturbed by land development activities.

The area has no current reticulated water supply or sewerage service. In the absence of a reticulated water supply, strategies for private water supplies will be needed. In the absence of a reticulated sewerage system, DoW’s preference is for the installation of ATU’s in lieu of conventional septic tank and leach drain systems.

The area is located within the Busselton-Capel Groundwater Area. Groundwater availability is limited and an allocation is not guaranteed. Any groundwater abstraction is subject to licensing by DoW.

Department of Agriculture and Food

The Department does not object to the proposed site selection for the expanded Hamlet.

Appropriate buffers should be planned for in the preparation of a Development Guide Plan (DGP)

If roof catchments and tanks are used for potable water, the Department of Health guidelines for buffers are very important to ensure that the potable water is not contaminated.

Department of Fire and Emergency Services

Preparation of a comprehensive Fire Management Plan is warranted to determine the specific level of bush fire risk and to demonstrate that this risk can be appropriately mitigated.

DFES recommended that this plan be produced concurrently with the Phase 1 Strategic Location report (although the City of Busselton’s response was that a Fire Management Plan will need to inform the scheme amendment and DGP.

Water Corporation

No concerns with the approach proposed for the development of the Hamlet.

Supportive for a development of this size and location to have on-site landowner environmentally sensitive water supply and wastewater systems.

Department of Mines and Petroleum

The Geological Survey of Western Australia (GSWA), on behalf of DMP, has assessed this proposal with respect to access to mineral and petroleum resources, geothermal energy and basic raw materials.

GSWA notes that there is regionally significant basic raw material for sand over a portion of the proposal area and within 500m. Given the scarcity of sand in the region, the GSWA strongly encourages maximum use of this sand resource within the proposed development area.

GSWA has no record of current Extractive Industry Licenses (EIL) for sand but notes that the development has the potential to constrain access to strategic sand resources in the adjoining area.

DMP is aware that there was an EIL nearby on Lot 222 Wildwood Road and, if this or other EILs are current, recommends the maximum EPA guidance separation of 500m between current and planned extraction areas and any new, planned sensitive land use.

Department of Health

30


Proposed developments are required to comply with the provisions of the draft Country Sewerage Policy. Accordingly, residential developments should not exceed R10 density and lot sizes are required to be a minimum 1,000 m².

Such developments/subdivisions are subject to site suitability for on-site effluent disposal and demonstrated via a site specific geotechnical report of the preferred site under winter conditions.

Potable water quality must be of a standard specified under the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 2004.

Planning for the Hamlet expansion should take into account mosquito management.

The City also sought comment from the Department of Environment Regulation and the Department of Indigenous Affairs; however no responses were received at that time. From the initial agency submissions it is apparent that no objections to the proposed Hamlet concept nor fatal flaws were raised. The agency comments have been taken into account in preparing the Preferred Hamlet Location and preliminary Concept Plan, however the majority of comments relate to the subsequent rezoning and structure plan stages once the preferred location has been adopted.

4.2 PROPOSED HAMLET LOCATION

The proposed location of the Carbunup Hamlet is shown in Figure 15: Carbunup River Hamlet - Preferred Location.

The preferred location responds to the strategic location and site-specific criteria set out in this Phase 1 report.

In summary, the preferred Hamlet location:

Conforms with adopted State, regional and local planning policy.

Avoids conflict with strategic mineral resources and provides an opportunity to utilize the regionally significant basic raw material (sand) resource (partially located on-site) within the development.

Avoids prime agricultural land and has sufficient area to incorporate suitable buffer areas.

Has ready access to regional roads, whilst minimizing the need for traffic and pedestrian crossings of Wildwood Road, the Bussell Highway and the Carbunup River.

Has good connectivity with the existing Carbunup settlement for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians.

Is ‘bookended’ to the east and west by Reserves 38582 and 20554 whilst also benefiting the existing Carbunup historic settlement to the east and the Anniebrook Flower Emporium and winery to the west.

Uses land that is largely cleared and in which the condition of the remaining vegetation is in a generally degraded state. Wherever possible, the small areas of remnant vegetation in better condition can be incorporated into the proposed POS (including expansion of Reserve 20554) and landscape features of the site and supplemented with re-vegetation.

Is anticipated to have no substantial impacts on native fauna.

Exhibits landform, soil and geotechnical conditions suitable for urban development including the option of on-site effluent disposal and utilizing Water Sensitive Urban Design.

Is an appropriate size to accommodate a population of approximately 500 people consistent with the adopted policy framework.

Is located on four land parcels owned by three parties, in which three parties own some 90% of the site and whom are actively pursuing its development, while the forth party is understood to be generally supportive of the project.

CA

RB

UN

UP

RIV

ER

MA

RY

BR

OO

K

BUSSE

LL

HIG

HW

AY

WILDWOOD ROAD

LENNO

X

RO

AD

12.13ha

190.0

597.0

105.6

98.8

655.4

15.45ha

277.5

589.8

98.9

94.2

114.4

74.58ha

231.9

49.285.7

381.1

173.7

443.9

176.7

33.154.463.4

37.5

9.0

517.5

26.0

1297.8

30

30

25

25

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

15

15

15

25

25

25

30

30

30

30

LEWIS

RO

AD

RO

AD

CH

AIN MA

RY

BR

OO

K R

OA

D

39863986

252

2

2858

1

334

1575

1490

115

114

21

16

Reserve 38582

17

19

Reserve 38582

1

15

3

11

6

8

2196

2196

531

151

19

Reserve 38582

2

10

11

3

38582Reserve

115

20554Reserve

WHATSOEVER IS PROHIBITED.UNAUTHORISED USE OF THIS DOCUMENT IN ANY FORM THE TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT FOR THE COMMISSION. WHICH IT WAS COMMISSIONED AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DOCUMENT MAY ONLY BE USED FOR THE PURPOSE FOR TME TOWN PLANNING MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING PTY LTD. THIS DOCUMENT IS AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF COPYRIGHT

DESCRIPTION DRAFTER DATEREVISION

B

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

A

0

LANDGATE

MGA

Nearmap 2012

23.01.2015

KS

LG

TME Town Planning Management Engineering Pty Ltd Trading As Calibre Consulting (AUST) (08) 9791 4411 www.calibreconsulting.coAREAS, CONTOURS AND DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE SUBJECT TO SURVEY.

THIS PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES.

PREFERRED LOCATION

CARBUNUP RIVER HAMLET

TOPOGRAPHIC DATA:

CADASTRAL DATA:

AERIAL DATA:

CREATED DATE:

ORIGINAL DRAFTER:

ORIGINAL PLANNER:

100m 250 500m

ALL DISTANCES ARE IN METRES1 : 5 000 @ A1 or 1 : 10 000 @ A3

C

Modification to Subject Land

Modification to Subject Land

Modification to Subject Land KS

KS

KS 28.01.2015

03.02.2015

13.04.2015

14139P-MP-01C

LEGEND

EXISTING CADASTRE

SUBJECT LAND

(5m INTERVALS)

CONTOURS

RIVER

S

W E

N

Kylie

Text Box

Figure 15: Carbunup River Hamlet - Preferred Location.

32


4.3 LAND OWNERSHIP The table below details the tenure of the primary land holdings within the preferred Hamlet location.

In addition, portion of Lot 115 Bussell Highway comprises portion of the proposed Hamlet location. The owner of Lot 115 (Credaro) has been consulted and, as mentioned previously, is supportive of the Hamlet concept.

4.4 PRELIMINARY HAMLET CONCEPT

It is premature to detail a land use and subdivision layout for the proposed Hamlet. There is still significant investigation required to address appropriate servicing, to define form and function of the settlement and to develop a suitable response to the environment and landscape.

However a preliminary design has been prepared to demonstrate a possible land use concept and to demonstrate an understanding of the constraints and

opportunities. It also confirms that the site area of the proposed Hamlet has capacity to accommodate the recommended population of approximately 500 residents.

Figure 16: Carbunup River Hamlet Concept Plan depicts residential and special residential cells, POS/landscape buffers and drainage areas, and a ‘village’ or Hamlet activity centre that will provide the social, commercial and tourism hub of the community. Adjoining the centre an effluent disposal and fire management area is identified to provide for innovative on-site effluent disposal – possibly serving a cell of strata-titled smaller lots as well as the activity centre.

The location of the special residential areas (e.g. 4000m2 lots), fringing roads and the adjacent POS/landscape areas provide a transition to the surrounding rural areas and will help provide buffers to intensive agricultural pursuits.

The concept should be seen as no more than a starting point for focusing the next phase of work required.

Lot Description Certificate of Title Ownership

1490 Wildwood Road 1155‐361 Ronald Leslie Beacham

Lot 1 Wildwood Road 1515‐996 PAF Superannuation Fund

Lot 2 Wildwood Road 1515‐997 Topsouth Holdings Pty Ltd and Holly‐Anne

Locke

Table 2: Land Ownership

33


Figure 16: Carbunup River Hamlet Concept Plan

34


5 CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS

This Phase 1 report has provided an analysis of the policy framework, strategic location criteria, and preliminary site investigations which justify identification of a preferred location for the Carbunup Hamlet.

Accordingly, a resolution of the Busselton City Council is respectfully sought to adopt the proposed Carbunup Hamlet Location. Such resolution will provide the landowners with the confidence to proceed with the Phase 2 investigations necessary to inform a rezoning amendment and Local Structure Plan.

It is recommended that Council resolve to:

1. Adopt Figure 15: Carbunup River Hamlet Preferred Location as the preferred location and structure plan area for the Carbunup River Hamlet;

2. Refer the Phase 1 report to the WAPC for noting/endorsement;

3. Provide in-principle support for the proponent to prepare a proposed rezoning amendment and Local Structure Plan for Council consideration.

Documents

Phase 1 Hamlet Location - 14.05.2015 · 2019. 2. 19. · Carbunup Hamlet Phase 1 - Hamlet Location APPENDICES (CD in rear folder) Appendix 1 Level 2 Flora and Vegetation Assessment,