Nelson Wills is a founder and managing director of New Ground and is actively involved with projects as a Project Director. Nelson has a particular professional interest in environmental offsets and associated policy. Nelson has 20 years’ experience in environmental and ecological planning, impact assessment and management. Over this period, Nelson has been involved at …
In Queensland, clearing of koala habitat is regulated by all three levels of Government: Federal Government; State Government; and Local Government. The jurisdiction of a given level of Government in relation to vegetation clearing varies depending on a range of factors including: the nature of the vegetation cleared; the purpose of the clearing; the scale …
As we learned earlier in this course, the KPPs are broadly relevant to much of Queensland, most of which is divided up into Koala Districts A-C as defined by the Nature Conservation (Koala) Conservation Plan 2017 (the ‘Koala Plan’). Consistent with Part 3 of the Koala Plan, any clearing of koala habitat trees in Koala …
Nature Conservation (Koala Conservation) Plan 2017 Read More »
John’s badminton instructor, Matt has looked up his property (‘Property A’, refer image below) using Queensland Globe following the process overviewed in an earlier lesson. Matt would like to subdivide his property into small lots. The image below presents the mapping designations relevant to Property A. As shown in the above image, much of Property …
Case Study – Development outside a KPA interfering with a KHA Read More »
Stream 3 relates to assessable development outside a KPA that proposes interference with KHA. Schedule 10, part 10, division 3, section 1 of the Planning Regulation 2017 prescribes that such development is assessed against the State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAP). Section 2, Division 3 defines development that is not subject to the assessment provisions of …
Joan’s bungy-jumping partner, June has looked up her property (‘Property Z’, refer to image below) using Queensland Globe following the process overviewed in an earlier lesson. June’s neighbours have subdivided their properties into small lots and she would like to do the same. The image below presents the mapping designations relevant to Property Z. As …
Case Study – Development within a KPA and IKBHA interfering with KHA Read More »
Joan’s neighbour, John has looked up his property (‘Property Y’, refer image below using Queensland Globe following the process overviewed in an earlier lesson. Like Joan, John believes that the site is suitable for subdivision into small residential lots. The image below presents the mapping designations that John discovers are relevant to Property Y. As …
Case Study – Development within a KPA not interfering with KHA Read More »
This assessment stream relates to assessable development within a site that is in the KPA and is partially mapped as KHA; however, does not propose assessable interference with KHA. Schedule 10, part 10, division 5 of the Planning Regulation 2017 prescribes that such development is assessed against the assessment benchmarks of schedule 11, part 2 …
Case Study 1 – DEVELOPMENT PROPOSING INTERFERENCE WITH KHA IN A KPA: Joan has looked up her property (‘Property X’, refer image below) using Queensland Globe following the process overviewed in an earlier lesson. Joan’s property is in a rural residential zone and is immediately adjacent to urban-zoned areas. Joan believes that the site is …
Case Study – Prohibited Development within a KPA Read More »
In short, assessable development which requires interference with KHA in a KPA is prohibited. Schedule 10, Part 10, Division 2 of the Planning Regulation 2017 describes what constitutes Prohibited development as follows: Development is prohibited development to the extent thedevelopment involves interfering with koala habitat in an areathat is both— a koala priority area; and …
