Tweed Shire Council Planning Committee Meeting 4th September

RECOMMENDED that Development Application DA14/0013 for a boundary adjustment at Lot 2 DP 1130911 No. 707 Limpinwood Road, Limpinwood; Lot 136 DP 755724; Tyalgum Road, Tyalgum –

BE REFUSED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:

1. The development is not considered to be consistent with clause 4 – The aims of the Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2000;

2. The development is not considered to satisfy Clause 8(1)(b) – Consent Considerations of the Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2000 as the development is considered not to be in accordance with the aims and objectives of the plan relevant to the development;

3. The development is not considered to satisfy Clause 8(1)(c) – Consent Considerations of the Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2000 as the development is considered to have an unacceptable cumulative impact on the community, locality and catchment;

4. The development is not considered to satisfy Clause 39A(2)(d) – Bushfire Protection of the Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2000 as the development is considered to have an unacceptable bushfire risk;

5. The development is not considered to satisfy Clause 7.10(e) – Essential Services of the Draft Local Environmental Plan 2014 as the development fails to provide suitable vehicular access to proposed Lot 2;

6. The development is not considered to satisfy the aims of Section A2 – Site Access and Parking Code of the Tweed Development Control Plan 2008 as the proposal does not provide safe, convenient and equitable access to development land for pedestrians, cyclists, motorists and public transport users;

7. The development is not considered to satisfy Section A5 – Subdivision Manual of the Tweed Development Control Plan 2008 as the proposal does not provide access to a public road that is readily upgraded to all weather two wheel drive standard and is not safe from bushfire;

8. The development is not considered to satisfy Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997 as the proposal does not provide access that can comply with Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006; and

9. Landowners consent has not been provided for the proposed access through proposed Lot 1.

The Motion was Carried.

FOR VOTE – Voting – Unanimous
ABSENT. DID NOT VOTE – Cr C Byrne, Cr M Armstrong

http://calderaenvironmentcentre.org/?p=1998  http://calderaenvironmentcentre.org/?p=2074

Native Vegetation Act 2003

Native Vegetation Regulation 2013

NCLLS NVA General information – North Coast Local Land Services – Information about administering the Native Vegetation Act 2003

OEH – List of current RAMAs – Office of Environment and Heritage – Routine Agricultural Management Activities

OEH – Rural Infrastructure RAMAs buffer distances – Office of Environment and Heritage – Clearing Buffer Distances

Nina Lucas Proposed NSW government changes to the rules governing the clearing of native vegetation on private land could undermine the current ban on broadscale clearing.

Native vegetation plays a vital role in supporting biodiversity and ecosystems which is particularly important in the northern rivers as one of Australia’s most biologically diverse regions.Vegetation clearing is a major contributing factor to biodiversity loss, soil erosion, salinity and climate change.

The Native Vegetation Act 2003 has been in force for over a decade to regulate native vegetation on privately owned rural land. The act has dramatically reduced the extent of land clearing approved in NSW and, in doing so, has saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of native mammals, as well as protecting forests and woodlands.

Under the act, a landholder requires either development consent or a property vegetation plan (PVP) to clear remnant native vegetation or protected regrowth. ‘Clearing’ does not just mean cutting down trees. It also includes thinning, removing native vegetation (eg with a bulldozer), clearing groundcover (eg by ploughing), poisoning (eg by herbicide spray drift), ringbarking, uprooting, or burning native vegetation.

Consent required

A rural landholder who wishes to carry out land clearing or engage a contractor may either apply for development consent or negotiate a property vegetation plan (PVP) with Local Land Services. A PVP will identify which areas of land may be cleared, which vegetation must be kept as an offset, and what sort of farming practices can continue to be carried out on the land subject to the PVP. PVPs are voluntary, but once made they are binding and legally enforceable. A landowner who carries out clearing in breach of their PVP is committing an offence.

There are, however, some exemptions that permit clearing without the need for a development consent or PVP. For example, routine agricultural management activities (RAMAs) are permitted. RAMAs include the construction and maintenance of fences, dams, bores and farm roads, collecting firewood, and lopping for stock fodder.

Ineffective monitoring

However under the proposed new regulations there will be self-assessable codes for certain types of clearing, including: thinning native vegetation, clearing isolated paddock trees in a cultivated area and clearing invasive native species. These codes would allow a scale of clearing which goes far beyond what was originally envisaged under the current law. In EDO NSW’s opinion they are also not capable of being effectively applied, monitored and enforced.

EDO NSW lodged a submission on the changes, which, along with other public submissions, is currently being considered by the NSW Government. It is important to note that the codes are still in draft form and until they are implemented, the existing laws apply.

More staff

In order to ensure that the act continues to effectively prevent broadscale clearing, the NSW government should improve the current PVP process by providing more resources and more staff for Local Land Services, rather than experimenting with self-assessable codes, This would allow PVPs to be put in place much faster, whilst not compromising the environmental objectives of the current regulatory system.

In urban areas, land clearing is regulated under local environmental plans (LEPs) and development control plans (DCPs) which specify when development consent is required for clearing. Tree preservation orders (TPOs) are designed to protect trees in urban areas. You can find out if your urban property has protected trees under a TPO by contacting your local council.

Nina Lucas is the Outreach Solicitor at EDO NSW (Environmental Defenders Office NSW) in Lismore. For more information or help about this or any other environmental law issue, please call 1300 369 791 or email edonr@edonsw.org.au.