Coffs Harbour€¦ · the private car and less use of bikes and public transport. The development of the Integrated Transport Plan and implementation the Sustainable Transport Action

2

Coffs Harbour State of the Environment

Comprehensive Report 2009

October 2009

Acknowledgements

This report has been prepared by Council Staff with contributions and assistance from State Agencies, Community Groups and representatives.

Acknowledgement of Shearwater on front cover and front of Biodiversity title page Escapism Photography Images

- Executive Summary -

3

Condition declining

Condition improving

pressure decreasing

pressure steady

pressure increasing

Condition

steady

information unavailable or inadequate

Condition or trend

uncertain

Executive Summary Comprehensive State of the Environment (SoE) Reports are required to be prepared by local governments in New South Wales every four years, following a Council election. This report has been prepared for the Coffs Harbour local government area (LGA). It updates a range of environmental performance indicator data from previous years and discusses broader changes relevant to the environment and its management since the previous comprehensive report. Councillors, Council staff and the community are encouraged to read this document to inform themselves about the state of the environment in Coffs Harbour and to understand what the Council is doing to protect and enhance the environment. Several new indicators of environmental trends have been introduced in this report since the comprehensive reports of 2000 and 2004. Indicators provide a simplified picture or a snapshot of outcomes of complex interactions with the environment, or of success or failure in achieving specific environmental performance standards over a period of time. They also tell us something about the impact of our current activities or about whether pressures on the environment are increasing or reducing. If measured over time, they also can tell us something about our attempts to improve conditions (or reduce pressures) and measures for doing so. Note that trends have been assessed in terms of direction, not scale, meaning that even where there is an apparent improvement trend being shown, no comment has been made concerning how much improvement is still needed to create a satisfactory outcome. In the case of a steady trend, the condition may not be clearly changing, but the data may represent a consistent level of pressure or actual negative environmental impact, rather than no pressure or impact. Indicators of declining conditions (or increasing pressures) suggest those areas

in which particular attention should be paid by Council and the community. The development of management and planning actions for arresting and reversing these trends need to be determined by Council and the community in a manner suitable to the scale of the problem. Council should consider whether it has core responsibilities for addressing such issues due to legislative requirements and if so, needs to act to core fund relevant management actions. If there are not core responsibilities in relation to these issues, Council should still consider the need to act in advance of likely further degradation of conditions as a matter of due diligence. Where indicators show a steady trend, consideration should be given as to whether intervention by Council and/or community groups is appropriate if the indicator suggests an unchanging yet unacceptable condition. Where they occur, Council should ensure continued support for efforts resulting in positive trends, unless it can be demonstrated that they are not legislative requirements or that no further effort is needed.

Where there is insufficient information about a particular indicator (Condition Uncertain), or about trends in relation to that indicator (Trend Uncertain), Council should consider how to overcome these knowledge gaps so that it is possible to


4

know how to best manage performance in relation to these issues. Key issues are summarised below in relation to each of the key themes or chapters as discussed in this report. Chapter 1 – Towards Sustainability Council has been working towards the development of the Strategic Sustainability Plan (the Coffs Harbour 2030 Plan) for the whole of the local government area. There is increasing pressure on sustainability within Coffs Harbour on our environment, our social systems and our economy. Council (and the community) are responding to these pressures in a number of ways. Council continues to run the local produce markets in the CBD. As well as securing grant funding to run sustainability initiatives such as the Ambassadors Program, Coffs Coast Local Food Futures Alliance and Our Living Coast Regional Sustainability Initiative. These programs will assist in improving the sustainability of the region. The sustainability assessment in all Council reports and the use by staff of a ‘Triple Bottom Line’ (TBL) decision-making tool in report preparation has continued. The rollout of the sustainability/TBL program continues, with Council assessing its procurement policy and practices in order to continue to reduce impacts through its consumption patterns and preferences. Chapter 2 - Biodiversity There are a range of human-induced pressures that have detrimental impacts on biodiversity values within the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area (LGA). The main sources of pressure include activities such as land clearing and development, climate change, fire regimes, noxious weed infestation and feral animals. There has been an improvement in regional coordination of biodiversity management through a serious of initiatives. Also through Council’s efforts it would be fair to assume that the environmental pressure associated with a lack of knowledge in the Coffs

Harbour LGA is likely to have been reduced. A significant pressure continues on biodiversity in particular to threaten species, populations and ecological communities from invasive weeds and human induced impacts such as development. Chapter 3 - Atmosphere Climate change will place the most significant pressure on our environment, including socially and economically. Dust, burning off and vehicle emissions continue to place pressures on air quality locally and globally. Work continues on road sealing, while Council officers assess development applications for potential problems and respond to individual complaints. Increasing population has added to greenhouse gas emissions through vehicle and electricity consumption. Council and the community continue to reduce greenhouse gases with the installation of energy efficient technology, the use of Greenpower, diversion of waste from landfill and the introduction of landfill gas extraction. Chapter 4 - Land The use of land for urban activities, agriculture, transport and recreational activities exerts a range of pressures and can have a range of impacts on the natural environment, the use of resources and public health. The review of the Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and the single Development Control Plan (DCP) will aim to address adaptation to global warming through more energy efficient housing, streetscape and landscape design, transportation alternatives and travel distances to local conveniences and employment opportunities. Water efficiency, waste & water management and the protection of significant biodiversity habitats are also to be addressed in the DCP. Flooding placed a significant pressure on the environment in Coffs Harbour and the


5

surrounding areas, from soil erosion through to stormwater contamination from Council’s sewerage infrastructure. Many flooding studies and projects have been implemented over the past 10 years with the most recent project being the Bakers Road Detention Basin. Council continues to enforce the Protection of the Environmental Operations (POEO) Act 1997 to ensure sediment and erosion control measures are in place. Chapter 5 - Water The major pressures on our waterways are from increased population and associated development, climate change, provision of town water supplies, water diversion for irrigation and stock uses through harvestable water rights, domestic stock rights, aquatic weed infestation, erosion (sediments), nutrients and pollution incidents, as well as bacterial contamination from sources such as failing septic tanks and animal faeces. Ecological health assessments of coastal creeks and inland rivers vary from fair to excellent, while beaches are generally in good condition from the point of view of recreational water quality guidelines. The Orara River Restoration Project continues to make excellent progress in repairing the damaged riverbed, weed eradication and riparian vegetation. Also the adoption of the Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy and the continued enforcement of the POEO Act will continue to assist in reducing the pressures on our waterways. There are increasing numbers of on-site sewage management systems approved within new developments. Overflows from some on-site systems continue to occur. Chapter 6 - Heritage Increasing population and the demand for housing and commercial development are key pressures on heritage of all forms. There has been a significant increase in the registering of aboriginal sites and in licences being issued to either destroy, damage or collect aboriginal sites.

One item of European heritage significance has been damaged or destroyed in the last year. Also the inclusion of Red Rock and Corindi heritage items has occurred during 2009. Chapter 7 - Human Settlements Many of the pressures on the environment arise from population growth and the need to meet the housing, employment and recreation needs of this population. Our Living Coast (OLC) Settlement Strategy envisages that by 2031 the population in the Coffs Harbour LGA will be in the order of 99,000 people which will require up to an additional 15,499 residences. Coffs Harbour is a car dominated community, with car oriented development. This necessitates the use of the Pacific Highway to provide a number of daily north / south trips to service local needs. The current settlement pattern has led to a high use of the private car and less use of bikes and public transport. The development of the Integrated Transport Plan and implementation the Sustainable Transport Action Plan will encourage and promote an increased use of sustainable transport options in the wider community. Levels of solid waste generated continues to be high, however diversion rates away from landfill are also increasing. Per capita water consumption is low compared with state averages, but relative to the local catchment there is continued need to maintain significant community education effort, water restrictions and efficiency programs including rebates.


6

Trend Indicator

• Effectiveness of the formal reserve system in accordance with its comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness within the region (Consistent Indicator 12)

• Regional Coordination of Biodiversity Management • Lack of knowledge of Biodiversity Management • Electricity consumption by Coffs Harbour City Council • Sewerage Overflow Incidents Reported to the EPA 2008-09 • Percentage of Primary/Secondary/Tertiary Waste Water

Treatment (Consistent Indicator 4) • Number and Nature of Aboriginal Sites (Consistent Indicator

18A) • Number and Nature of European Heritage Sites (Consistent

Indicator 18A)

• Water Consumption per capita (Consistent Indicator 5) • Volumes and Percentages of municipal waste disposed to

landfill and recycled (Consistent Indicator 17) • Greenhouse Gas emissions by Coffs Harbour City Council • Licensed Air Emissions (Consistent Indicator 13A) • Extent and Degree of Change of Native Vegetation: Area

subject to voluntary conservation agreements (Consistent Indicator 7C)

• Contaminated Lands (Consistent Indicator 9) • Acid sulphate soils indicators (Consistent Indicator 8) • Point source discharges (Consistent Indicator 1) - A • Extent and degree of change of estuarine habitat types

(mangroves, salt marshes and seagrasses (Consistent Indicator 20)

• Point source discharges (Consistent Indicator 1) - B • Complaints to Council Regarding Water Pollution • Number of Existing & New On-Site Sewage Management

Systems (Consistent Indicator 2) • Number of Heritage Items Altered/Demolished/ Destroyed

(Consistent Indicator 18B)

• Development Pressure on biodiversity • Threatened Species, Populations and Ecological

Communities (Consistent Indicator 11A, 11B, 11C) • Weed Management Effort • Number of vehicle registrations in Coffs Harbour Local

Government Area • Kilometres Travelled by Council’s Lease Fleet • Number and Type of Complaints Regarding Air Pollution

(Consistent Indicator 13C) • Number of ‘Clean up’ and ‘Prevention’ notices issued under

the Protection of the Environment Operations Act (POEO) • Number of licences issued under the National Parks and

Wildlife Act 1974 to destroy, damage or collect in Aboriginal sites (Consistent Indicator 18B)

• Population growth rates & population numbers (Consistent Indicator 15)

• Ground Water Allocations • Noise Complaints received by Council (Consistent Indicator

14)

Condition

steady

Condition declining

Condition improving


7

• Total Extent of Woody Vegetation • Greenhouse Gas Emissions produced within the LGA each

year and change over time • Number and Type of Complaints Regarding Odour • Percentage Exceedances of ANZECC Water Quality

Guidelines (Consistent Indicator 3) • Presence or absence of riparian vegetation (Consistent

Indicator 19) • Exceedances of ANZECC Water Quality Guidelines

(Consistent Indicator 3)

• Number and area of rural residential lots approved and rate of uptake (Consistent Indicator No.16)

Trend uncertain

- Table of Contents -

8

Table of Contents 1 TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY ............................................................................................................................. 14

1.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................14 1.2 THE COFFS HARBOUR 2030 PROJECT – STRATEGIC PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABILITY .....................14 1.3 PRESSURES ON SUSTAINABILITY......................................................................................................15

1.3.1 Community Sustainability ...........................................................................................................15 1.3.2 Council Sustainability.................................................................................................................16

1.4 STATE OF SUSTAINABILITY ..............................................................................................................16 1.4.1 Community Sustainability ...........................................................................................................16 1.4.2 Council Sustainability.................................................................................................................17

1.5 RESPONSES TO SUSTAINABILITY ......................................................................................................17 1.5.1 Community Sustainability ...........................................................................................................17 1.5.2 Council Sustainability.................................................................................................................18

2 BIODIVERSITY....................................................................................................................................................... 22 2.1 WHAT IS BIODIVERSITY? .................................................................................................................22

2.1.1 Why is Biodiversity Important? ..................................................................................................22 2.1.2 Biodiversity in the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area .......................................................22

2.2 PRESSURES ON LOCAL BIODIVERSITY..............................................................................................22 2.2.1 Habitat Loss and Fragmentation ................................................................................................23 2.2.2 Weed and Pest Species................................................................................................................23 2.2.3 Pest Animals (Terrestrial Vertebrates only) ...............................................................................25 2.2.4 Ineffective Regional Coordination..............................................................................................25 2.2.5 Lack of Knowledge .....................................................................................................................26

2.3 STATE OF LOCAL BIODIVERSITY......................................................................................................26 2.3.1 Biodiversity Indicators................................................................................................................26 2.3.2 Habitat Removal and Fragmentation .........................................................................................27

2.4 WEEDS AND FERAL PESTS ...............................................................................................................29 2.4.2 Regional Coordination of Biodiversity Management .................................................................30 2.4.3 Lack of Knowledge .....................................................................................................................31

2.5 COUNCIL RESPONSES TO BIODIVERSITY PRESSURES........................................................................31 2.5.1 Habitat Protection and Rehabilitation........................................................................................31 2.5.2 Weeds and Pest Management .....................................................................................................32 2.5.3 Regional Coordination of Biodiversity Management .................................................................33

3 THE ATMOSPHERE ............................................................................................................................................... 38 3.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................38 3.2 THE ENHANCED GREENHOUSE EFFECT - PRESSURE.........................................................................38

3.2.1 Transportation ............................................................................................................................39 3.2.2 Agricultural Stock.......................................................................................................................39 3.2.3 Electricity Consumption .............................................................................................................39 3.2.4 Landfill Gases.............................................................................................................................39

3.3 THE ENHANCED GREENHOUSE EFFECT – STATE ..............................................................................39 3.3.1 Greenhouse gas emissions by the community .............................................................................41 3.3.2 Greenhouse gas emissions by Council........................................................................................41

3.4 THE ENHANCED GREENHOUSE EFFECT – RESPONSE........................................................................42 3.4.1 Cities for Climate Protection Program.......................................................................................42 3.4.2 Greenhouse Action Strategy .......................................................................................................43 3.4.3 Energy Saving Action Plan .........................................................................................................44 3.4.4 Rigby House Solar Photovoltaic Project ....................................................................................44 3.4.5 Energy Efficient Street Lighting Project.....................................................................................44 3.4.6 Greenpower ................................................................................................................................44 3.4.7 Walkways and Cycleways ...........................................................................................................44 3.4.8 Landfill Emissions ......................................................................................................................45 3.4.9 Climate Consensus Project .........................................................................................................45 3.4.10 Residential Rebate Program uptake by LGA to 30 June 2009 ...............................................45

3.5 AIR QUALITY – PRESSURE ...............................................................................................................46 3.5.1 Diffuse Air Pollutants .................................................................................................................46 3.5.2 Solid Fuel Stoves and Heaters ....................................................................................................46 3.5.3 Ozone Depleting Substances.......................................................................................................47 3.5.4 Airport Emissions .......................................................................................................................47


9

3.6 AIR QUALITY - STATE......................................................................................................................47 3.6.1 Vehicle Emissions .......................................................................................................................47 3.6.2 Fuel Consumption through Vehicle Use by Council...................................................................48 3.6.3 Burning Off .................................................................................................................................48 3.6.4 Licensed Air Emissions...............................................................................................................49 3.6.5 Legionella ...................................................................................................................................49 3.6.6 Visual Amenity ............................................................................................................................49

3.7 AIR QUALITY - RESPONSE................................................................................................................50 3.7.1 Air Quality Actions .....................................................................................................................50 3.7.2 Integrated Transport Plan ..........................................................................................................50

3.8 ODOUR – PRESSURE.........................................................................................................................50 3.8.1 Sewage Treatment Plants/Infrastructure ....................................................................................50

3.9 ODOUR – STATE...............................................................................................................................50 3.10 ODOUR – RESPONSE.........................................................................................................................51

3.10.1 Sewage Treatment Plants/Infrastructure................................................................................51 3.10.2 Reduce impacts of landfill odours ..........................................................................................51 3.10.3 Odour Actions ........................................................................................................................51

4 LAND ....................................................................................................................................................................... 55 4.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................55 4.2 LAND USE CHANGE - PRESSURE ......................................................................................................56

4.2.1 Urban Settlement ........................................................................................................................56 4.2.2 Transport corridors ....................................................................................................................57 4.2.3 Recreational land use .................................................................................................................57 4.2.4 Rural Settlement..........................................................................................................................57 4.2.5 Primary Industries ......................................................................................................................57 4.2.6 Mineral Resource Extraction......................................................................................................57 4.2.7 Forestry ......................................................................................................................................57

4.3 LAND USE CHANGE - STATE ............................................................................................................58 4.3.1 Private Land Reserved for Conservation Purposes ....................................................................58

4.4 LAND USE CHANGE – RESPONSE .....................................................................................................58 4.4.1 Planning Controls.......................................................................................................................58 4.4.2 Amendments to Local Environmental Plans ...............................................................................59 4.4.3 Urban Settlement Strategies .......................................................................................................59 4.4.4 Rural Residential Strategy ..........................................................................................................60 4.4.5 Industrial Lands Strategy............................................................................................................61

4.5 SOIL EROSION – PRESSURE ..............................................................................................................62 4.6 SOIL EROSION – STATE ....................................................................................................................62 4.7 SOIL EROSION – RESPONSE ..............................................................................................................62

4.7.1 Water Sensitive Urban Design....................................................................................................62 4.8 ACID SULFATE SOILS– PRESSURE ....................................................................................................63 4.9 ACID SULFATE SOILS– STATE..........................................................................................................63 4.10 ACID SULFATE SOILS– RESPONSE....................................................................................................64 4.11 CONTAMINATED LAND – PRESSURE.................................................................................................64 4.12 CONTAMINATED LAND – STATE ......................................................................................................64 4.13 CONTAMINATED LAND – RESPONSE ................................................................................................65 4.14 FLOOD PRONE LAND - PRESSURE.....................................................................................................66 4.15 FLOOD PRONE LAND - STATE...........................................................................................................66 4.16 FLOOD PRONE LAND - RESPONSE ....................................................................................................67

5 WATER .................................................................................................................................................................... 71 5.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................71 5.2 FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM HEALTH – PRESSURE .............................................................................71 5.3 FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM HEALTH – STATE...................................................................................71

5.3.1 Water Quality..............................................................................................................................71 5.3.2 ANZECC Water Quality Standards ............................................................................................72 5.3.3 Riparian Vegetation Cover .........................................................................................................72

5.4 FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM HEALTH – RESPONSE.............................................................................75 5.4.1 Riparian Vegetation Protection ..................................................................................................75 5.4.2 Orara River Rehabilitation Project ............................................................................................75 5.4.3 Orara Valley Primary Schools WaterWatch Program ...............................................................75

5.5 COASTS AND ESTUARIES – PRESSURE ..............................................................................................76


10

5.6 COASTS AND ESTUARIES – STATE....................................................................................................76 5.6.1 Licensed Point Source Pollution Sources ...................................................................................76 5.6.2 Beachwatch.................................................................................................................................78 5.6.3 Council’s Water Quality Monitoring Program...........................................................................78

5.7 COASTS AND ESTUARIES – RESPONSE..............................................................................................80 5.7.1 Draft Coastal Hazards Definition Study.....................................................................................80 5.7.2 Estuary Management ..................................................................................................................80 5.7.3 Beachwatch Program .................................................................................................................81

5.8 STORMWATER – PRESSURE ..............................................................................................................82 5.9 STORMWATER – STATE ....................................................................................................................82 5.10 STORMWATER – RESPONSE..............................................................................................................83

5.10.1 Urban Stormwater Management Plan....................................................................................83 5.10.2 Enforcement of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act .......................................83 5.10.3 Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD).................................................................................84 5.10.4 Gross Pollutant Trap..............................................................................................................84

5.11 EFFLUENT MANAGEMENT – PRESSURE ............................................................................................85 5.11.1 Onsite Sewage Management Systems .....................................................................................85 5.11.2 Reticulated Sewerage System .................................................................................................85

5.12 EFFLUENT MANAGEMENT – STATE..................................................................................................85 5.13 EFFLUENT MANAGEMENT – RESPONSE............................................................................................88

5.13.1 On-Site Sewage Management Strategy...................................................................................88 5.13.2 Reticulated Sewerage System .................................................................................................88 5.13.3 The Sewerage Strategy ...........................................................................................................88 5.13.4 Sewage Overflows ..................................................................................................................89

6 HERITAGE............................................................................................................................................................... 93 6.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................93 6.2 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE - PRESSURE................................................................................................93 6.3 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE - STATE......................................................................................................94 6.4 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE – RESPONSE ...............................................................................................96

6.4.1 Aboriginal Heritage Preservation ..............................................................................................96 6.4.2 Yandaarra - Coffs Harbour City Council’s Aboriginal Consultative Committee......................96

6.5 NON ABORIGINAL HERITAGE - PRESSURE........................................................................................97 6.6 NON ABORIGINAL HERITAGE - STATE .............................................................................................97

6.6.1 The National Estate Register ......................................................................................................97 6.7 NON ABORIGINAL HERITAGE - RESPONSE .......................................................................................98

6.7.1 Planning......................................................................................................................................98 6.7.2 Management ...............................................................................................................................98 6.7.3 Promotion ...................................................................................................................................99

7 HUMAN SETTLEMENTS..................................................................................................................................... 103 7.1 OVERVIEW .....................................................................................................................................103 7.2 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS – PRESSURE................................................................103

7.2.1 Release of Future Urban Settlement Areas...............................................................................104 7.3 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS – STATE......................................................................104 7.4 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS – RESPONSES..............................................................105

7.4.1 Our Living City (OLC) Settlement Strategy..............................................................................105 7.4.2 Rural Lands Strategic Plan.......................................................................................................105 7.4.3 Mixed Use Zones.......................................................................................................................106 7.4.4 Coffs Coast Growers Markets...................................................................................................106

7.5 DRINKING WATER QUALITY AND CONSUMPTION – PRESSURE ......................................................107 7.5.1 Quality ......................................................................................................................................107 7.5.2 Consumption.............................................................................................................................107

7.6 DRINKING WATER QUALITY AND CONSUMPTION – STATE ............................................................108 7.6.1 Quality ......................................................................................................................................108 7.6.2 Consumption.............................................................................................................................109 7.6.3 Ground Water Extraction .........................................................................................................110

7.7 DRINKING WATER QUALITY AND CONSUMPTION – RESPONSES ....................................................111 7.7.1 Quality ......................................................................................................................................111 7.7.2 Conservation.............................................................................................................................111

7.8 TRANSPORT – PRESSURE................................................................................................................114 7.9 TRANSPORT – STATE......................................................................................................................114


11

7.10 TRANSPORT – RESPONSES..............................................................................................................115 7.10.1 Sustainable Transport Action Plan.......................................................................................115 7.10.2 Active Transport Modes .......................................................................................................115 7.10.3 Peak Oil................................................................................................................................116 7.10.4 Rail Working Group .............................................................................................................116

7.11 WASTE MANAGEMENT – PRESSURE...............................................................................................116 7.12 WASTE MANAGEMENT – STATE ....................................................................................................116 7.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT – RESPONSES.............................................................................................118

7.13.1 Landfill Environmental Management Plan (LEMP) ............................................................118 7.13.2 Coffs Coast Resource Recovery Facility ..............................................................................118 7.13.3 Midwaste ..............................................................................................................................118 7.13.4 Coffs Harbour Oil Recycling Initiative ................................................................................118 7.13.5 Waste Education Activities ...................................................................................................118 7.13.6 NSW Government Waste and Environment Levy..................................................................119 7.13.7 Landfill Gas Extraction and Disposal Project .....................................................................119

7.14 NOISE – PRESSURE.........................................................................................................................119 7.15 NOISE – STATE...............................................................................................................................120 7.16 NOISE – RESPONSES.......................................................................................................................120

8 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................... 122

12

- Towards Sustainability -

14

1 TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY

1.1 Overview Ecologically sustainable development (ESD) has emerged as the key concept and goal underpinning environmental protection in NSW and Australia. Sustainable living involves the efficient and equitable use of all resources and the proper management of pollution and waste. It can only be achieved through the cooperation and support of people at local, national and global levels. ESD aims to reduce our negative impact on the environment, with the ultimate goal being that each generation has a net zero negative impact on the environment. Council is also legally obliged to consider the principles of ESD in all its activities under the charter set out in the Local Government Act 1993.

1.2 The Coffs Harbour 2030 Project – Strategic Planning for Sustainability

Since 2008 the Coffs Harbour community and City Council have been working towards the development of a Strategic Sustainability Plan (the Coffs Harbour 2030 Plan) for the whole of the local government area. This Plan will, over the next year, become the driving document for Council as part of a new Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework. The Plan outlines the vision of the Coffs Harbour community and seeks to map the strategies that we need to implement as a community to move us towards a more sustainable society (see Box 1). The first stage of this project involved the community agreeing on their vision for Coffs Harbour to 2030 and beyond.

Box 1: What do we mean by “sustainability” and a more

“sustainable society”?

'Sustainable development, sustainable community, sustainable industry, sustainable agriculture. You may have heard these words used in many different ways, but what does "sustainability" really mean and how can you tell if your community is sustainable? Sustainability is related to the quality of life in a community -- whether the economic, social and environmental systems that make up the community are providing a healthy, productive, meaningful life for all community residents, present and future.'

Sustainable Measures (2005) What is Sustainability, anyway?

Internationally, sustainability has been defined as:

'improving the quality of human life while living within the carrying capacity of supporting eco-systems.'

IUCN/UNEP/WWF (1991, p.6) Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/UNEP/WFF.

Whilst it is hard to define, there are a number of key goals of sustainability. These include:

• Living within our environmental limits and applying the precautionary principle

• Acknowledging intergenerational equity in all that we do i.e. that future generations have the same opportunities that we have

• Implementing principles of social justice including equality of access , participation and rights

• Fostering social and economic progress while developing a quality of life for all


15

This vision outlines five key vision themes being:

• Looking after our Environment: Our natural environment is protected and conserved for future generations

• Looking after our Community: Our communities are healthy, informed and engaged

• Moving Around: We are moving around easily, safely and sustainably

• Learning and Prospering: We are a prospering and learning community

• Places for Living: Our built environment connects us and supports us in living sustainably

The Community Vision 2030 and the 5 themes have driven the development of the Coffs Harbour 2030 Plan. Over the next year (2010) a Sustainability Indicators Framework will be collaboratively developed by the stakeholders of the Coffs Harbour 2030 Plan. These Indicators will be used to review and report on progress in the implementation of the 2030 Plan. At a Council level, Coffs Harbour City Council will be using the strategies within the 2030 Plan to develop its 4 year Delivery Plan and yearly Operational Plan.

1.3 Pressures on Sustainability There is increasing pressure on sustainability within Coffs Harbour. This is being driven in particular by an increasing population (which is also increasingly aged), existing consumption and climate change. Pressures exist on our environment, on our social systems and on our economy. Some of the pressures and challenges we are facing as a community include:

• increasing demand on our natural resources,

• increased building development and associated environmental impacts including biodiversity loss and loss of agricultural land,

• increased energy use and carbon emissions,

• increased pollution and waste • sea level rise and changing

climate • poverty and inequality within our

community • increasing demand on our health

system • increasing demand on our

education systems • affordable housing • an ageing population • youth moving away due to lack of

opportunities

1.3.1 Community Sustainability As a community, we can consider the fairness or equity of all of our current generation’s access to services and opportunities and take this into account, not just our individual experience. We can take future generations, the ecology of our area and areas outside of our backyards, streets, towns, regions and even nations into account in our decisions and actions. If we do this, we are likely to have a different view of our place in the world and possibly how long our activities can continue as they are. In other words, we can begin to grasp how sustainable our actions are. By doing this, we can begin

The Coffs Harbour Community Vision 2030

Coffs Harbour is a model of sustainable living. We value, respect and protect our natural environment and acknowledge that it sustains us and future generations. We work together to live sustainably. We have respect for, and learn from, our diverse communities of many ages and cultures. We are healthy, caring and actively engaged in our communities. We move around safely, easily and sustainably. Our economy is strong and diverse and our businesses are leaders in innovation and sustainability. We value all people and use the goodwill in our community to build a better future for our children. We think globally and act locally.


16

to act in ways that are better for the sustainability of our community: • now and in the future; • locally and globally; and, • for people and for nature. If we do not do this at work, at home and at leisure, we are adding to the un-sustainability of our actions and contributing to problems in our local environment, the global environment and the social environment. Ultimately, we will leave these problems to be addressed by our children and grand children.

1.3.2 Council Sustainability In relation to the scope of this State of the Environment report, the major pressure on Council’s sustainability performance (or contribution) stems from being able to adequately resource the various demands of local government service provision together with suitable environmental protection. Although an Environmental Levy (an additional levy above general rates) is already used to raise additional funds for some environmental works, it is clear that more funds will be needed to arrest or reverse some of the identified trends. The entrenchment of some ‘traditional’ work practices and a lack of knowledge of more appropriate work practices, may act as an additional source of pressure on the environment. Increasing familiarity with the principles of ecologically sustainable development is occurring as part of Council’s sustainability program. The lack of an environmental management plan for the organisation as a whole also serves as a limiting factor in terms of the overall performance of the Council. A significant level of departmental rather than cross-organisational work focus and management continues to contribute to a reduced level of performance in some areas of Council operations. There have been several instances in the reporting period in which different departments and branches have been working at cross purposes or without coordinated knowledge of the requirements for appropriate levels of environmental assessment. The aim of the

integrated management system (IMS) is to seek and remove barriers to best practice by the organisation as a whole (see below for further discussion).

1.4 State of Sustainability

1.4.1 Community Sustainability No country is sustainable or has come close to becoming sustainable. There is no proven recipe for success. It is actually very difficult to make an assessment of the sustainability of a community. The Sustainability Indicators Framework that will be developed in 2010 as part of the Coffs Harbour 2030 project will form a key tool in assessing Coffs Harbour’s journey towards sustainability and will enable us to better assess how we are progressing in moving towards our Vision for a sustainable future. The fact that it is very difficult to assess if a community is becoming more sustainable or not has led to the realisation that sustainability is essentially an ongoing learning by doing process that actively involves people in creating their vision, and acting and reviewing changes. The Coffs Harbour 2030 project seeks to trigger this process. Clearly many of our current practices are unsustainable, suggesting that to achieve sustainability, we need to challenge the way we think. This involves questioning and reflecting upon current decisions and ways of acting. We need to become a learning community. By actively engaging the community Council is seeking to develop processes that enable us to review our current methods. What is clear from the issues identified is that sustainability encompasses a huge range of issues which are interconnected and complex. For example poor diet is often linked to poverty and poor education. Loss of biodiversity is linked to increased carbon emissions and increased pollution.


17

1.4.2 Council Sustainability There is currently no simple tool for the measurement of Council’s own sustainability, but effort has been made in this report to collect some information on Council’s environmental performance to be used as indicators that can be considered as benchmarks for looking at trends into the future. Note that economic and social performance criteria are considered in separate reports as part of the overall annual reporting process, however, in future it is anticipated that these can be brought together into a single ‘quadruple bottom line’ State of Sustainability Report. • Impacts on the environment may be

related to Council operations as a whole, or to the specific functions of a given department. In order to make an assessment of movement towards sustainability consideration needs to be made in a number of areas. These are considered in other chapters of this document. Table 1.1 is summary of trends of Council’s activities for further information in Chapter 3.

Table 1.1: Summary of council activities and associated trends

Council Activity Trend Electricity consumption Condition Improving Greenhouse gases Condition Improving Vehicle Fleet Condition Declining Resource Consumption Unknown

1.5 Responses to Sustainability

1.5.1 Community Sustainability

1.5.1.1 Local Produce Markets In September 2003, Council’s Streets Ahead Program established a weekly Growers Market, giving local producers an opportunity to bring fresh and value added produce into the heart of the City. It is widely agreed that this has been a very successful initiative, with many vendors reporting that it is an excellent source of income. In addition, the markets have encouraged a lively atmosphere in the City Square, with musicians also performing during the lunch hour on market days. Several businesses

have reported that there are also spin-offs created for other retailers in the city centre.

Source: Advocate, 18 August, 2004 The range of produce includes Bonville grown strawberries, Nana Glen hydroponic tomatoes, local avocados and a broad range of organic vegetables, breads and other produce.

The Growers' Market on the Coffs Coast helps to bring consumption and production closer together and helps to diversify the local economy and to keep money in the local economy, rather than flowing out to the shareholders of global corporations that control the bulk of food supply through supermarket chains. The Market facilitates direct access to the public for product feedback as well as being a fantastic promotional opportunity with the creation of a vendor community to swap business ideas and contacts. It also creates awareness of Coffs Coast Regional Cuisine. It operates primarily as a direct marketing outlet for Coffs Coast Producers of fresh food, plants, flowers, value adding food and animal products that are made on the Coffs Coast from produce grown within the Coffs Coast.

1.5.1.2 Ambassadors Program The Ambassador’s Program is a volunteer interpretive tours scheme. Members of the community are trained in how to design and deliver interpretive tours. They select their location and tour theme. The aim of the program is to increase the


18

community’s sense of place, to share passion and knowledge about our natural and cultural environment as well as learning how it can be better protected. The project is funded by the Environmental Trust and tours are due to start in November 2009.

1.5.1.3 Botanica Green Living Festival The inaugural Botanica Green Living Festival was held in October 2008. The festival is running again in 2009 and the intention is for the festival to become a regular part of the Coffs Harbour event calendar. The aim of the festival is to showcase sustainable living which includes community stalls, sustainable products, demonstrations and talks about sustainable living.

1.5.1.4 Coffs Coast Local Food Futures Alliance In 2008 a group of representatives of various community groups, government agencies and local councils came together to form the Local Food Futures Alliance. The mission of the Alliance is to promote and support the development of a strong local food economy based on sustainable agricultural practices so that all residents of the Coffs Coast have equitable access to affordable, fresh, healthy food into the future. The Alliance has been successful in receiving funding from the Environmental Trust for the next 2 years (to 2011) to develop a Local Food Futures Framework for the Coffs Coast, two educational community garden spaces and a community awareness raising and education project.

1.5.1.5 Our Living Coast Regional Sustainability Initiative Coffs Harbour City Council, Bellingen and Nambucca Shire Councils have been successful in receiving grant funding from the Environmental Trust for a $2 million Regional Sustainability Initiative. The aim of the program is to build regional capacity for sustainability. The program will be delivered during 2010 and 2011.

The program includes

• the development of a Regional Sustainability Framework,

• a series of community and business education programs around sustainable living,

• the development of a regional sustainability online hub,

• a cross council internal sustain-ability project

• a series of on-ground works including upgrades to pathways, interpretive signage and bush regeneration in urban areas.

1.5.2 Council Sustainability Council seeks to lead the community in moves towards sustainability by showing leadership and good governance processes for sustainability. In 2010 Council will be forming a Sustainability Committee and developing an internal Sustainability Plan to focus more strongly on the actions we need to take within the organisation to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and our waste, water, resource and chemical use. Decision making within Council is based on a Triple Bottom Line (TBL) assessment that weighs environmental and social issues alongside economic issues. This TBL framework has been in operation since 2003 however the process is not as effective as it could be. In 2010 Council will be looking at changing TBL reporting to a Quadruple Bottom Line report which adds Governance as a key issue. The existing TBL will be reviewed as part of this process.


19

FURTHER ACTIONS REQUIRED The 2008/09 Comprehensive State of Environment Report identified the following actions that

need to be undertaken to move towards sustainability.

Actions Implemented Continue to integrate Triple Bottom Line (TBL) and Sustainability Assessments into the decision making process.

Develop TBL based Procurement Policy for the organisation as a whole.

Develop education programs for staff awareness to reduce Council’s in-house waste generation and increase separation practices.

Audit energy usage and investigate alternatives across Council operations. Develop a systematic approach to the management of energy consumption by Council.

Continue to develop and implement the Integrated Management System to ensure continuous improvement in all Council operations.

Undertake a review of all herbicides and pesticides used by Council and identify quantities used and viable alternatives available.

Assess which Council buildings could be fitted with rainwater tanks for landscaping, vehicle and plant washing and other uses. Continue to set an example to the broader community in relation to the use of rainwater tanks and to water reuse in building demonstration projects.

Investigate options for sustainability focused demonstration projects at Council managed caravan parks.

Undertake sustainability education programs for community engagement

Ensure that land and water resources and catchments generally, are assessed in terms of their carrying capacity in developing future urban settlement strategies.

Undertake focussed climate change education and awareness raising activities

Build community capacity to take action for sustainable development through support and facilitation of community groups

Develop a targeted internal Council sustainability leadership program

20

- Biodiversity -

21

- Biodiversity -

22

2 BIODIVERSITY 2.1 What is Biodiversity? Biodiversity is a term used to describe the variety of all life forms, the genes they contain and the ecosystems which they inhabit (DECC 2009).

Definitions of Key Biodiversity Terms

The NSW Biodiversity Strategy describes the three levels of biodiversity as follows: Genetic diversity - refers to the variety of genetic information contained in all individual plants, animals and micro-organisms. Species diversity refers to the variety of species on Earth. Species diversity is usually a measure of the number of species (richness) and their relative abundance for a given point in time. Ecosystem diversity refers to the variety of habitats, biotic communities and ecological processes. An ecosystem consists of plant, animal, fungal and micro-organism communities and the associated non-living environment interacting as an ecological unit. Ecosystem diversity has two inter-related components: the diversity of communities of species and the diversity of interactions between community members (processes).

2.1.1 Why is Biodiversity Important? The preservation of biodiversity is necessary to ensure that plant and animal species and systems can adequately adapt to changing environmental conditions, or recover from adverse events such as fire. If genetic diversity is reduced too much within a population, the variety of characteristics in the population is reduced, affecting the chances of the species having those characteristics necessary to adapt to new conditions. The maintenance of ecosystem health is also critical, which depends on adequate protection and representation of all levels of biodiversity. Natural systems are complex and there is still much we do not understand about the interactions between different organisms: a seemingly small change can significantly alter the functioning of a food web, or nutrient cycle in a natural system. There are also impacts on humans associated with the loss of biodiversity through impacts on terrestrial, aquatic and marine ecosystems. These can include costs to future generations in terms of opportunities to undertake ‘ecotourism’, to

develop research for potential medicines or in terms of reduced ability to provide ecological functions or ‘services’ such as clean air and water, natural buffers and aesthetics.

2.1.2 Biodiversity in the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area

A combination of geographic, oceanic and climatic factors has resulted in the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area (LGA) supporting the greatest biodiversity of any LGA in NSW. The Coffs Harbour LGA falls within the ‘Macleay-McPherson Overlap Zone’, an area where a combination of climatic and geographical conditions has resulted in the co-occurrence of both temperate and tropical species. Consequently, the LGA is situated in a region of high biodiversity including genetic diversity, species diversity and ecosystem diversity. Numerous broad terrestrial vegetation types are represented, including rainforest, riparian (creek and river bank) vegetation, open forest, foredune complex, dry/wet heathland/shrubland, sedgeland/rushland complex, mangrove/ salt marsh complex, headland heath and grassland. The East Australian Current has a major influence on the marine area off the coast of Coffs Harbour. It carries a mixture of tropical and subtropical waters from the Coral Sea and Queensland Coast into the temperate area of the NSW Continental shelf. Here the current overlaps the colder northward flowing inshore current resulting in a complex mix of marine species normally associated with habitats from Tasmania to the Great Barrier Reef (CHCC Biodiversity Action Strategy 2002).

2.2 Pressures on Local Biodiversity

There are a range of human-induced pressures that have detrimental impacts on biodiversity values within the Coffs Harbour LGA. The main sources of pressure include activities such as land clearing and development, fire regimes, noxious weed infestation and feral

- Biodiversity -

23

animals. The Coffs Harbour Biodiversity Action Strategy (CHCC 2002) identifies eight key threats to biodiversity in the Coffs Harbour LGA: • habitat loss and fragmentation; • weeds and feral pests; • poor landscape health; • unhealthy waters; • climate change; • fire management; • ineffective regional coordination; and • lack of knowledge. For the purpose of SoE reporting, Council does not have the resources to effectively report on pressures associated with landscape health, climate change or fire management. In addition, environmental issues relating to water quality are addressed in Chapter 5 of this report.

2.2.1 Habitat Loss and Fragmentation Native vegetation clearance and fragmentation remains the single greatest threat to land-based biodiversity in the Coffs Harbour LGA, resulting in habitat loss and population decline. Such habitats become unable to support diverse plant and animal communities and exposure to the elements, weeds, competition, disease and predation increase. Isolated populations are increasingly likely to be susceptible to disease and deformity associated with reduced gene pools. Factors Affecting the Ability of Species to Persist within a Fragmented Landscape Bennett (1998) identifies four variables that make small populations more sensitive to habitat fragmentation than large populations. These are: 1. demographic changes (random variation in

population parameters); 2. genetic changes leading to a loss of genetic

variation (inbreeding depression, genetic drift); 3. changes in environmental processes and

functions (altered temperature, rainfall, food resources, predator/prey relationships and nutrient balances etc); and,

4. natural catastrophes (flood, fire, drought, storms, disease etc).

Ecosystem diversity is correlated with the extent and condition of native vegetation

types. Clearing of native vegetation is listed as a Key Threatening Process under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Land clearance is also listed as a Key Threatening Process under the Commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act, 1999. Habitat loss and fragmentation can also occur in cases where weed removal is undertaken without due consideration of ecological impacts. For example, weed management and bush regeneration efforts can be made in some contexts, with good intentions, but can result in more ‘cosmetic’ rather than ecological benefits.

2.2.2 Weed and Pest Species

Weed Species Many introduced plants have become environmental weeds in the Coffs Harbour LGA, with weed infestation being identified as a major threat to biodiversity in the region. Environmental weeds are plants that pose a threat to natural ecosystems. They invade native plant communities and reduce biodiversity by out-competing native plants and fragmenting and degrading fauna habitat. In some cases they can affect human and animal health and have enormous visual amenity and agricultural productivity impacts. The Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority (NRCMA) recently published the Northern Rivers Invasive Plants Action Strategy 2009-2013. This strategy identifies 51 priority environmental weed species for the Coffs Harbour LGA, six of which are currently listed as Weeds of National Significance (WoNS) (Table 2.1). Many species such as bitou bush, lantana, privet, giant parramatta grass and camphor laurel are well established in the Coffs Harbour LGA and are often the first to invade disturbed land. The most significant environmental weeds currently being dealt with on Council

- Biodiversity -

24

managed lands include groundsel bush, lantana, bitou bush, Chinese celtis, yellow bells and salvinia. Limited information about weeds is available in relation to private lands, and new occurrences of exotic species and native species outside their natural range are continually being noted.

Australian native species of concern in the Coffs Harbour LGA include the cadaghi (Corymbia torrellliana), pink euodia (Mellicope elleryana), umbrella tree (Schefflera actinophylla) and fine-leaved tuckeroo (Lepiderema pulchella).

Table 2.1: Priority environmental weed species for the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Common Name Scientific Name Aquatic Coastal Forest Riparian East Indian Hygrophila Hygrophila polysperma x

Alligator Weed* Alternanthera philoxeroides x Salvinia* Salvinia molesta x

Willow Primrose Ludwigia peruviana x Sagittaria Sagittaria platyphylla x

Parrots Feather Myriophyllum aquaticum x Taro Colocasia esculenta x x

Elodea Elodea canadensis x Cabomba* Cabomba caroliniana x

Dense Waterweed Egeria densa x Water Hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes x

Broad Leaf Pepper Tree Schinu terebinthifolius x x Groundsel Bush Baccharis halimifolia x Singapore Daisy Sphagneticola trilobata x

Cherry Guava Psidium cattleianum var. cattleianum

x

Winter Senna Senna pendula var. glabrata x Umbrella Tree Schefflera actiniphylla x x

Mickey Mouse Plant Ochna serrulata x Broad Leaf Paspalum Paspalum wettsteinii x

Glory Lily Gloriosa superba x Lantana* Lantana camara x x x

Climbing Asparagus Asparagus plumosus x x Siratro Macroptilium atropurpureum x

Painted Spurge Euphorbia cyathophora x Molasses Grass Melinus minutiflora x

Bitou Bush* Chrysanthemoides monilifera x Turkey Rhubarb Acetosa sagitatta x

Ground Asparagus Asparagus aethiopicus x x Mother-of-millions Bryophyllum delagoense x

Five Leaf Morning Glory Ipomoea cairica x x Giant Paspalum Paspalum urvillei x

Kudza Pueraria lobata x x Bridal Creeper* Asparagus asparagoides x Chinese Celtis Celtis sinensis x x

Cats Claw Creeper Macfadyena unguis-cati x x Moth Vine Araujia sericifera x x

Camphor laurel Cinnamomum camphora x x Radiata Pine Pinus radiata x

Japanese Honeysuckle Lonicera japonica x Trad Tradescantia fluminensis x x

Narrow Leaf Privet Ligustrum sinense x x Slash Pine Pinus elliotti x

Madeira Vine Anradera cordifolia x x Broad Leaf Privet Ligustrum lucidum x x

Climbing Nightshade Solanum seaforthianum x Cockscomb Coral Erythrina crista-galli x

Willows Salix spp. x Balloon Vine Cardiospermum grandiflorum x

Blue Morning Glory Ipomoea indica x Mistflower Ageratina riparia x

Coral Berry Rivina humilis x

- Biodiversity -

25

2.2.3 Pest Animals (Terrestrial Vertebrates only)

A vertebrate pest is a higher-order animal that causes more harm than good to a valued resource (Olsen 1998). For the purpose of SoE reporting, the term “vertebrate pest” includes:

• feral pests – domestic animals becoming wild;

• introduced wild – introduced for recreational purposes;

• accidental introductions – e.g. introduced from ships; and

• roaming domestic animals. Vertebrate pests can have significant harmful impacts on biodiversity and productivity. They can have direct effects as competitors and predators, harbour parasites and diseases, cause habitat degradation and damage crops, pastures and capital assets (Environment ACT 2002). Vertebrate pest species known or likely to occur in the Coffs Harbour LGA are listed in Table 2.2. Council recently prepared and approved a Vertebrate Pest Management Strategy, which identifies six high priority vertebrate pest species occurring in the Coffs Harbour LGA. These are cane toad, feral pig, red fox, feral cat, Indian myna and common starling. Two of these species, feral cat and red fox, have well established populations in the Coffs Harbour LGA. Two species, Indian myna and common starling, are emerging pest species whose populations are currently small, but appear to be steadily increasing in the Coffs Harbour LGA. The remaining two species, feral pig and cane toad, have yet to establish self-sustaining populations in the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Table 2.2:: Vertebrate pest species known or likely to occur in the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Class Scientific Name

Common Name

Pest Status

Amphibia Bufo marinus Cane Toad NKTP; SKTP

Mammalia Sus scrofa Feral Pig Declared; NKTP; SKTP

Vulpes vulpes Red Fox NKTP; SKTP

Felis catus Feral Cat NKTP; SKTP

Capra hircus Feral Goat NKTP; SKTP

Oryctolagus cuniculus

European Wild Rabbit

Declared; SKTP

All species Deer (all species)

SKTP; Uncommon Pest

Canis familiaris Wild Dog Declared Mus musculus House

Mouse Common Pest

Rattus rattus Black Rat Common Pest

Lepus capensis

Brown Hare Common Pest

Equus caballus Wild Horse Uncommon Pest

Aves (Bird)

Acridotheres tristis

Indian Myna

Common Pest

Sturnus vulgaris

Starling Common Pest

Anas platyrhynchus

Mallard Common Pest

Streptopelia chinensis

Spotted Turtle-dove

Common Pest

Passer domesticus

House Sparrow

Common Pest

Pycnonotus jocosus

Red-whiskered Bulbul

Uncommon Pest

NKTP – species listed Nationally as a Key Threatening Process (EPBC Act); SKTP – species listed at a State level as a Key Threatening Process (TSC Act); Declared – species declared as a pest by the Minister for Agriculture under the RLP Act.

2.2.4 Ineffective Regional Coordination

Approaches to the management of biodiversity related issues have been evolving and responsibilities have been changing over many years, particularly with respect to weeds, water quality, land clearing and habitat protection. This has meant that an inconsistent and fragmented response to biodiversity protection and management has resulted while negative impacts continue. Given the interconnectedness of ecosystems across administrative boundaries and the breadth of pressures, a holistic approach is required that generates momentum and

- Biodiversity -

26

results which are supported by the broader community. An absence of appropriate biodiversity management is itself a pressure on biodiversity. There is need for more regional cooperation, including better integration with other local governments, improved cooperation with the general community and local industry, as well as State and Federal Government departments. Information/knowledge sharing, complimentary management regimes and strategic investments should be key components of an integrated approach. In part, this is the role of the Catchment Management Authorities, announced in 2003 (see Chapter Land in SOE 2004).

2.2.5 Lack of Knowledge In many cases the loss of biodiversity reflects an inadequate understanding of ecosystem processes and the importance of maintaining biodiversity. Commonly a “bad” decision is made through ignorance rather than intent. Rather than make decisions in the context of a lack of information regarding a particular ecosystem or ecological process, it is important to increase knowledge of ecosystem function, the many values of ecosystem services and the success/failure of past management initiatives. Even where there is available information, there has been a tendency for this information to be poorly applied in decision-making processes. This may indicate that information has not been made available in a format that facilitates sound and pro-active decision-making. Furthermore, the existence and location of information is often poorly communicated to decision-makers. As the knowledge is not accessible and therefore not applied, there is a continuation of biodiversity loss and degradation. There is need to re-evaluate how knowledge is acquired for decision-making and how it can be better integrated into the process. There is a need for better information sharing, distribution and a re-evaluation of the appropriateness and accessibility of knowledge.

Given that most of the ecosystems within the Coffs Harbour LGA occur on lands under private ownership, improved management of biodiversity is dependant on a well-informed community that is motivated to protect and conserve biodiversity. Given the role of climate in influencing the geographic ranges of species and assemblages, managers and decision-makers need to adopt a risk management approach when considering the potential for climate change to trigger shifts in the distributions of habitats and species across the landscape. The potential for such shifts depends in part on the connectivity between habitats and in part on the ecological attributes of the species. Changes in temperature, rainfall or evaporation will have long-term consequences for the Coffs Harbour region, with the impacts of any potential change most likely felt through extreme events such as increases in the number of hot days, bushfires, drought events and intense storms. Conservation connectivity and building resilience will be key strategies to ensure that natural systems have the capacity to adapt to shifting climatic zones. Securing and enhancing critical intact habitats through the LGA is the most important and immediate step we can take to increase ecosystem resilience. Restoring habitat connectivity through restoration and revegetation on private lands and linking with core protected areas will also be an important adaptation strategy in the LGA.

2.3 State of Local Biodiversity

2.3.1 Biodiversity Indicators Council has revised and added to the types of Biodiversity Indicators used for SoE reporting in an attempt to increase the sensitivity of the indicators to changes in pressures at a local level, thus reducing

- Biodiversity -

27

the levels of uncertainty recorded during previous SoE reporting. A total of 10 Biodiversity Indicators have been established to assess the pressures on biodiversity in the Coffs Harbour LGA for the 2009 SoE report (Table 2.3). Each of the key pressures on biodiversity and the associated Biodiversity Indicators is discussed in detail below.

Table 2.3: Biodiversity Indicators selected for monitoring key biodiversity pressures in the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Biodiversity Pressure

Biodiversity Indicators

Consistent Indicator

Number(s) Purpose Habitat Removal

Total extent of forest vegetation in the Coffs Harbour LGA;

n/a To provide a broad measure of development pressure on vegetation and habitat resources;

Number of Development Applications involving vegetation removal processed by Council;

n/a To assess the level of pressure on Council development assessment processes;

Number of threatened species, populations and ecological communities known or likely to occur in the LGA;

11 To provide a course measure of pressure on native species, populations and ecological communities;

Number of key threatening processes known or likely to operate in the LGA;

n/a To identify changes in the extent and types of pressure being applied to biodiversity;

Change in number and size of conservation reserves in the LGA.

12 To assess changes in the extent of formal protection of native vegetation and habitats within the LGA.

Weeds Change in number of declared noxious weeds recorded in the Coffs Harbour LGA;

10 To assess the level of environmental pressure associated with weed invasion in the LGA;

Number of person hours and volumes of chemical usage dedicated to weed control and management measures instigated by Council.

n/a To guage the level and effectiveness of Council responses to environmental weed pressures.

Feral Animals

Abundance of native wildlife injured or killed by feral or roaming domestic animals reported by WIRES.

n/a To monitor environmental pressures caused by feral animals.

Ineffective Regional Coordination

Extent of Council participation in regional resource management committees and groups.

n/a To identify potential communication problems and inconsistencies among public land managers and other key stakeholders.

Gaps in Knowledge

Extent of information collection and dissemination.

n/a To assess Council progress in addressing knowledge gaps and enable identification and prioritising remaining gaps.

2.3.2 Habitat Removal and Fragmentation

Total Extent of Woody Vegetation What this indicator shows Aerial estimates of woody vegetation cover have been prepared for the Coffs Harbour LGA based on data for the years 2000, 2004 and 2007. Woody vegetation cover includes forest or woodland, native or exotic, with over 20% canopy cover. Non-woody vegetation/cleared land encompasses areas with less than 20% canopy cover, which include natural non-woody vegetation such as grasslands, estuary vegetation, heathland, alpine herbland, rock, lakes, swamp, watercourses, dams, reservoirs, built up areas and cleared land. The estimates indicate a possible gradual increase in woody vegetation cover within the Coffs Harbour LGA between 2000 and 2007 (Table 4), which initially suggests that there may have been a reduction in pressure on native vegetation and habitat resources from clearing activities. However, the data should be considered inconclusive due to:

• differences in the data resolution and scale being used between each estimate period;

• inability to delineate between mature native vegetation, native regrowth vegetation and non-native vegetation; and

• inability to detect changes in the extent of native non-woody vegetation types.

Table 2.4: Broad extent and proportion of woody and non-woody vegetation within the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Broad Structural Vegetation Type

2000 2004 2007

Woody Vegetation 59139 ha

(69%)

61230 ha

(71.4%)

61846 ha

(72.2%)

Non-woody Vegetation/Cleared

Land

26569 ha

(31%)

24478 ha

(28.6%)

23862 ha

(27.8%)

It is likely that most of the additional woody vegetation recorded in the 2004 and 2007 estimates is a result of the use of higher resolution data picking up more woody vegetation than the previous estimate. Nevertheless, the data does provide some

Trend uncertain

- Biodiversity -

28

encouragement that Council’s implementation of current planning controls is having a positive impact on the rate of vegetation clearing taking place in the Coffs Harbour LGA. Development Pressure on biodiversity Why use this indicator? Development pressure in the Coffs Harbour LGA has steadily increased each year from 2004 to 2009. This pressure is indicated by the total number of Development Applications processed by Council that have involved removal of native vegetation. What this indicator shows This has increased from 85, in the 2004-05 financial year, to 124 in the 2008-09 financial year (Figure 2.1). Increases in development pressure often coincide with increased rates of habitat removal and fragmentation within the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Development Applications Requiring Vegetation Removal

05

10152025303540

2004-2005 2005-2006 2007-2008 2008-2009

Financial Year

Num

ber o

f DAs Jul-Sep

Oct-DecJan-MarApr-Jun

Figure 2.1: Total annual number of Development Applications processed by Council that require removal of native vegetation (2005-2006 financial year not included due to lack of comparable data). Threatened Species, Populations and Ecological Communities (Consistent Indicator 11A, 11B, 11C)

Why use this Indicator? Conservation status indicates which groups may need special management. The number of species considered extinct, endangered or vulnerable is the best available measure of the loss of species. Endangered or vulnerable fauna species is the best available measure of the loss of species. It measures the impact that changes to the environment are having on species and the irreversible nature of some of these impacts. Table 2.4 shows the Vulnerable and Endangered fauna species listed by National Parks as at October 2003.

The Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 makes provisions for the listing of populations and ecological communities as endangered. The number of such listings is indicative as a surrogate measure of both pressure on, and the state of the significance of biodiversity, in a given area. What this indicator shows Between 2004 and 2007 there have been increases in the listings of threatened species, ecological communities and key threatening processes known or likely to occur or operate in the Coffs Harbour LGA (Table 2.5). Meanwhile, the number of endangered populations listed for the Coffs Harbour LGA has remained steady. Table 2.5: Trends in Threatened Species, Populations and Ecological Communities listings. Biodiversity Indicator

05/06

06/07

07/08

08/09

Pressure Trend Since

SoE 2004 Threatened Flora Species

53 53 60 60 ↑

Threatened Fauna Species

110 110 107 107 ↑

Threatened Ecological Communities

9 9 10 11 ↑

Endangered Populations

2 2 2 2 ↔

KTPs ? ? 29 30 ↑ Source: CHCC; DECCW 2009 * Clearing since 1995. 2005/06 figure represents clearing additional to 2004/05 rates. It is difficult to establish a meaningful trend with this indicator since the data is a function of the amount of effort that is put into understanding fauna in the area. This which is always limited by available resources and under pressure by the continued removal of habitat through vegetation clearing exemptions under state legislation. Furthermore, many of the threatened species, ecological communities and key threatening processes listed on the TSC Act occur, or operate over, extensive portions of NSW. Hence changes in pressures at an LGA level are unlikely to be reflected in the listings. Nevertheless, the overall trend in the listing of threatened species, populations, ecological communities and key threatening processes indicates an increase in pressure on biodiversity for the purposes of SoE reporting.

Condition declining

Condition declining

- Biodiversity -

29

Effectiveness of the formal reserve system in accordance with its comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness within the region (Consistent Indicator 12)

Why use this Indicator? Both the Australian and NSW Biodiversity Strategies together with the National Forest Policy identify the formal Conservation Reserve System as central to the conservation of biodiversity. They establish that the Reserve System should be based on the principles of comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness, defined broadly as:

Comprehensiveness – the degree to which the reserve system encompasses the full range of biological/biophysical diversity and other values;

Adequacy – the capability of the reserve system to maintain biodiversity and ecological patterns and processes and other values, given both natural and human-influenced disturbances; and

Representativeness – the extent to which the areas selected for inclusion in the reserve system sample known biological/biophysical diversity and other values.

What this indicator shows Council currently has insufficient data to assess the local comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness of the existing Conservation Reserve Network within the Coffs Harbour LGA. However, approximately 298 hectares of land has been added to the formal Conservation Reserve system within the Coffs Harbour LGA since the 2004 SoE reporting. Table 2.6 shows both the area and type of reserve under DECCW management and is expressed as a percentage of the total LGA area. It does not include State Forests, a large proportion of which are actively logged for timber. It is notable that there have been significant increases in the amounts of land reserved since 2000, from 8.4% to 12.72% of the Coffs Harbour LGA. This includes consideration of the addition of land in the north of the LGA during the 2004 reporting period.

Table 2.6: Total area of land contained within formal Conservation Reserves in the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Reserve Category

2000 (ha)

% of LGA

2004 (ha) % of LGA

National Park 7,659.84

7.98 12,409.14 10.67

Nature Reserve

392.80 0.41 1,423.40 1.22

State Cons. Area

434.00 0.37

Regional Park*

31.04 0.03 369.00 0.32

Total Reserve

8,084 8.42 14,636 12.58

Total LGA Area

96,019 116,350

Reserve Category

2009 (ha) % of LGA

National Park 12,579.78 10.71 Nature Reserve

1,535.05 1.31

State Cons. Area

434.00 0.37

Regional Park*

385.33 0.33

Total Reserve

14,934.16 12.72

Total LGA Area

117,400

* Area designated only.

2.4 Weeds and Feral Pests

Weed Management Effort It is difficult to identify a clear trend with the available information in terms of the number of types of weeds and the exact threat and costs posed by their invasion and further spread. However, the number of noxious weed species declared for the Coffs Harbour LGA has risen from 47 reported in the 2004 SoE report to 63 species listed in the Northern Rivers Invasive Plant Strategy (NCWAC 2009). Council currently dedicates 7000 staff hours annually to weed control actions irrespective of perceived or actual weed infestation pressures. Consequently, the level of weed control effort has remained constant for several years. The annual volumes of herbicide used by Council for weed control have fluctuated from approximately 29,140 litres in 2006 to 26,000 litres in 2007 to 26,600 litres in 2008. Given that the allocation of Council resources does not appear to correlate directly with the level of pressure associated with weed issues, the change in abundance of noxious weed species reported for the Coffs Harbour LGA remains the only potentially useful indicator of pressure. Consequently, there has been a noticeable increase in noxious weed species recorded in the Coffs Harbour LGA since the

Condition improving

- Biodiversity -

30

2004 SoE reporting period, which indicates a decline in condition. The presence of new and emerging weeds in the landscape also requires constant vigilance. Council has been working cooperatively with Landcare Inc to identify and eradicate potential environmental weeds. In the Orara Valley Cats Claw has virtually been eradicated over the last decade. Recent invasions of white blackberry emphasise the importance of being pro-active before these and other weeds become established in the LGA.

2.4.1.1 Pest Animals The Wildlife Information and Rescue Emergency Service (WIRES) monitor and report on native wildlife known to have been attacked by domestic dogs and cats. This data has been used in previous SoE reporting as an indicator of pressure by introduced predators on native animals. This indicator has been used for the 2009 SoE report. However, it should be noted that the indicator has limited value as it takes no account of the seasonal variability of wildlife populations and gives no consideration of identified priority pest species in the LGA. For example, although we have anecdotal evidence that foxes are having a significant impact on the biodiversity of the LGA there is no data to support this premise. The WIRES data indicates that the number of attacks on native animals from cats and dogs within the Coffs harbour LGA has generally declined since the 2004 SoE reporting period. Cats attacking native birds and dogs attacking native reptiles continue to be the most significant problems. More can be done by pet owners to control their animals. Nevertheless, the WIRES data does indicate that pressure on native wildlife from predation by cats and dogs is decreasing.

Attacks on Native Wildlife in the Coffs Harbour LGA

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Reporting Period

Num

ber o

f Att

acks

Dog Attack

Cat Attack

Unknow n Cause

Total Number of Attacks

Figure 2.2: The number of attacks on native wildlife from cats and dogs as reported by WIRES between 2001 and 2009.

2.4.2 Regional Coordination of Biodiversity Management

Regional Coordination of Biodiversity Management What this indicator shows Council has signed Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with the Solitary Islands Marine Park Authority (SIMP) and Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority (NRCMA) to improve the coordination of resource management within the Coffs Harbour LGA. The MOU with SIMP clarifies Council’s role in compliance and monitoring of water quality above the mean high water mark and in maintaining water quality standards through the implementation of local planning controls. The MOU with NRCMA clarifies Council’s role in the implementation of the Northern Rivers Catchment Action Plan. Council also has a close working relationship with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) as part of their joint management of the Coffs Coast Regional Park. Council is responsible for the management and maintenance of infrastructure within the Park while DECCW manages park visitation and biodiversity values on a day to day basis. Council is represented on the North East Pest Animal Advisory Committee (NEPAAC) and the Mid-north Coast Pest Working Group (MNCPWG). These advisory bodies are composed of representation from key stakeholder organisations including the DPI, DECC, RLPBs, RSPCA, Land & Property Management Authority and the NRCMA.

Condition declining

- Biodiversity -

31

These forums provide opportunities for sharing information and for coordinating cooperative and collaborative pest animal management. Council is represented on the North Coast Weeds Advisory Committee, the primary aim of which is to align the actions and resource allocation of all organisations concerned with weed management in the NRCMA region, toward a common direction. Council contributes resources to a variety of community land management groups such as Landcare, Dunecare, Bushcare, Rivercare and Coastcare groups, to undertake bush regeneration works, weed control and pest management actions. The provision of resources by Council is funded by an Environmental Levy. In conclusion, the above-mentioned initiatives should result in improved coordination of biodiversity management within the Coffs Harbour LGA and wider North Coast Region. Therefore, the condition in relation to this matter should be considered as improving.

2.4.3 Lack of Knowledge Lack of knowledge What this indicator shows Council regularly conducts a variety of community education campaigns aimed primarily at improving community awareness of local Biodiversity issues. Some of Council’s education programs include:

Little Tern monitoring – involves Council coordination of community groups to monitor local breeding colonies of the Little Tern (Sterna albifrons), which is currently listed as a threatened species on the TSC Act;

Koalas in our Backyards – a school

education program that focuses on koala management issues in urban areas. The program is jointly financed and managed by Council, WIRES and DECCW;

Green Schools Program – informs

school students about the importance of biodiversity and encourages schools to regenerate habitats within school grounds.

Ambassadors Program – develops the skills and knowledge of community leaders to educate visitors and locals regarding the biodiversity values of the LGA.

Council prepares media releases to inform the community of current biodiversity-related issues such as Little Tern breeding times and breeding colony locations, periods of increased koala movement and associated risks on roads and requests for community information on pest species (e.g. Indian mynas, cane toads). Therefore, it would be fair to assume that the environmental pressure associated with a lack of knowledge in the Coffs Harbour LGA is likely to have been reduced through Council’s efforts. Nevertheless, large knowledge gaps in the community are still likely to exist. Furthermore, the dissemination of biodiversity information to the general public will remain a perpetual process for Council in order to inform future generations and new residents.

2.5 Council Responses to Biodiversity Pressures

2.5.1 Habitat Protection and Rehabilitation

2.5.1.1 Tree Planting Whilst native vegetation and habitat resources continue to be lost as a result of land clearing, vegetation replanting has been taking place, involving Council, Landcare Groups as well as pro-active residents (Table2.7). Table 2.7: Number of trees planted by Council and Landcare each financial year since 2005.

Environmental Indicator

05/06 06/07 07/08

08/09

Number of trees planted

12,150 26,000 7500 8200

Replanting of native vegetation is a positive step. However replacement planting does not fully compensate for the loss of mature and over-mature trees on a short-term basis in terms of providing habitat, carbon sequestration/sinks, or resilience against weeds and disease,

Condition improving

Condition improving

- Biodiversity -

32

loss of scenic/aesthetic values and broader ecosystem services. Replacement plantings are also vulnerable and may not survive over time.

2.5.1.2 Draft Priority Habitats and Corridors Strategy (PHACS) In response to the development of Environmental layers for the Standard Local Environmental Plan (SLEP), Council has begun work on a Draft Priority Habitats and Corridors Strategy. The Draft Strategy aims to improve or maintain biodiversity and to avoid and minimise impacts on environmental values and to protect Environmentally Sensitive Areas in the LGA. The Draft Strategy aims to achieve this by establishing a linked network of priority habitats and corridors which takes into consideration a long term planning view for the Coffs Harbour LGA. While the life of the Draft Strategy sets the planning framework for the next 20 years, it is expected that it will influence environmental stewardship for 50-100 years to come.

Principles underlying the development and implementation of the Draft Strategy include: 1. An ecosystem approach to biodiversity

conservation to maximise conservation outcomes.

2. Structural connectivity of habitat patches promoted through the identification of Priority Habitats and Corridors. This will allow individual plants and animals and/or genes to disperse between multiple small patches to function as one larger, more resilient population.

3. Natural systems are dynamic, but have a finite capacity to respond to change and conserve their biodiversity. Active management is required in some circumstances.

4. All residents and visitors have a stake in biodiversity and can contribute to its wellbeing.

5. Our efforts to conserve Priority Habitats and Corridors in the LGA will acknowledge and respect the culture, values, innovations, practices and knowledge of the Aboriginal community.

6. The Draft Strategy will align with other relevant Natural Resource Management policy and instruments.

The Draft Strategy incorporates a number of measures to protect native vegetation in the LGA including adoption of the standard ‘Preservation of Vegetation’ clause and a Significant Tree Register. The Draft Strategy was referred to Council for consideration and public exhibition in November 2009.

2.5.1.3 Coffs Harbour Tree Preservation Order Enforcement of Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) has continued, although trees in a large proportion of the Coffs Harbour LGA are not protected under the provisions of the TPO, particularly west of the Pacific Highway and on rural land. Compliance is hampered by a lack of dedicated resources to investigate breaches of the TPO. LEP Amendment 32 Red Rock – Corindi came into effect in July 2009 ensuring that Coffs Harbour now operates under a single TPO ensuring a more streamlined assessment process for residents.

2.5.1.4 Coffs Harbour City Koala Plan of Management (KPoM) Council’s KPoM has recently been revised and updated. Once approved by Council and the Department of Planning, the updated version of the Plan will replace the original Plan adopted by Council in 1999. The updated KPoM includes re-derived mapping of koala habitat and incorporates relevant actions specified in the Recovery Plan for the Koala prepared by the NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water in accordance with the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

2.5.2 Weeds and Pest Management

2.5.2.1 VPMS Council has completed and formally adopted a Vertebrate Pest Management Strategy (VPMS) for the purpose of guiding future management of vertebrate pests within the Coffs Harbour LGA. It is

- Biodiversity -

33

intended that the management actions contained in the VPMS be incorporated into all existing Plans of Management for Community, Operational and Crown lands currently managed by Council.

2.5.2.2 Revised CAMP Council is in the process of reviewing its Companion Animal Management Plan (2004) (CAMP) in order to update it in light of recommendations made in the review of the KPoM and in the VPMS. The main purpose of the CAMP review will be to incorporate any new approaches or technologies relevant to companion animal management and to place greater emphasis on the protection of native fauna and their habitats within the Coffs Harbour LGA.

2.5.2.3 Indian Myna Control Council have contributed to the funding of an Indian myna control officer in conjunction with Landcare and DECCW for the purpose of focussing community actions in addressing the impacts associated with pest species in the North Coast region.

2.5.3 Regional Coordination of Biodiversity Management

Decision making processes and gaps in knowledge can be an impediment to the successful implementation of conservation management across the LGA. Council is working toward improved communication and information sharing, and streamlined processes between Council, agencies, departments and communities to facilitate improved biodiversity conservation. The Draft Northern Rivers Regional Biodiversity Management Plan sets a strong framework for the improvement of coordination across the region.

2.5.3.1 Vegetation Mapping While the Coffs Harbour City Council vegetation mapping has been updated by Council on a needs basis over the past 13 years, no major upgrade of the product has taken place since its completion by Fisher et al. (1996). This mapping, while useful during the early part of its inception, is now inconsistent with the statewide standard used by Catchment Management

Authorities. Additionally, a proportion of the polygons were typed incorrectly as a result of inferior aerial photography and limited ground truthing of polygons, particularly in the west sectors of the LGA. Developed in parallel with this Strategy and the PHACS mapping has been the construction of new vegetation maps. They delineate all Regional Vegetation Communities (RVC) across all tenures. Additionally, new technologies associated with Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) by AAMHatch (2008), have enabled significant improvements in the spatial accuracy of vegetation mapping in the LGA. As a result a total of 45 Regional Vegetation Communities (RVCs) have been identified in the Coffs Harbour LGA. Each polygon in the vegetation layer has been assigned a single RVC and associated accuracy score (‘definite’ – 100%, ‘high’ – 75%, ‘medium’ – 50% and ‘low’ – 25%).

2.5.3.2 Environment Section on Website Council recently added a seperate ‘Environment Section’ to its website to make it easier for developers, planners and the general public to source a range of biodiversity related information in the LGA. The site contains biodiversity guides for ecologists, planners and aborists as well as a wealth of information on threatened species and Endangered Ecological Communities. There are also a number of useful links to related websites.

2.5.3.3 Public education and knowledge gaps in local biodiversity One of the key roles of Council is develop strong partnerships with the community and community leaders in order to raise awareness of the decline of biodiversity at a local level. Council’s Environmental Levy program funds many community based projects which have a strong emphasis on public education. Through partnering with the NRCMA, DECCW and Coffs Harbour Landcare Inc, a broad

- Biodiversity -

34

range of environmental messages are able to be disseminated. The Green Schools Program and Coffs Ambassadors initiative are key areas where Council is working to bridge some of those knowledge gaps in the local community.

2.5.3.4 Ecological Assessment guidelines The primary aim of this Guideline is to provide better management and protection of biodiversity within the Coffs Harbour LGA through improved application of the development assessment process. A secondary aim is to streamline the development assessment process in relation to biodiversity assessment in order to expedite development approvals and reduce the costs of assessment by using standardised procedures. The guideline objectives are to:

• Provide a practical guide to preparing ecological assessments that are undertaken for the purpose of planning and development proposals;

• Establish minimum, scientifically-accepted standards for the collection, analysis and reporting of ecological data;

• Standardise survey methodologies, vegetation classification, data collection and data supply techniques for the benefit of database integrity;

• Simplify consultant briefs for flora and fauna surveys; and

• Promote planning decisions that reflect and incorporate the findings and recommendations of scientifically-based ecological reporting.

2.5.3.5 Development of Additional Biodiversity Indicators Additional Biodiversity Indicators are proposed for inclusion in future SoE reporting once Council’s detailed LGA-wide mapping of vegetation types has been completed. The proposed additional Biodiversity Indicators are listed in Table 2.8.

Table 2.8: Additional Biodiversity Indicators proposed for future SoE monitoring of key biodiversity pressures in the Coffs Harbour LGA. Biodiversity Pressure

Biodiversity Indicators Purpose

Habitat Removal Change in aerial extent of each Regional Vegetation Community within the LGA;

To identify changes in native vegetative cover and associated habitats throughout the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Change in aerial extent of each native vegetation type on Council managed lands;

To assess the effectiveness of Council management in protecting native vegetation and associated habitats.

Formal Reservation of Habitat

Change in the proportion of each native vegetation type contained within formal reserves (e.g. National Parks, Nature Reserves, Flora Reserves, Regional Parks).

To assess changes in the extent of formal protection of native vegetation and habitats within the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Ineffective Regional Coordination

Number and extent of NRCMA PNF PVP agreements issued for areas of high conservation value in the LGA.

To identify communication problems and inconsistencies in land management between NRCMA and Council.

Habitat Fragmentation

Size and extent of isolation of selected vegetation remnants within the LGA.

To detect changes in habitat fragmentation pressures in the LGA.

- Biodiversity -

35

FURTHER ACTIONS REQUIRED The 2008/09 Comprehensive State of Environment Report identified the following

actions that need to be undertaken to halt the decline in local biodiversity. These actions align with the Our Living City Settlement Strategy Interim Document.

Actions Implemented Implement and review the Biodiversity Action Strategy

Seek funding of the itemised strategy over each five-year period

Continue with collaborative studies on species and communities under threat

Investigate environmentally safe methods of pest species control, and monitor their movements within the Coffs Harbour LGA

Undertake enhanced mapping of all natural resource layers

Continue to undertake priority restoration works in conjunction with community Landcare, Dunecare, Rivercare groups.

Work with North Coast Weeds (NCW) in prioritisation of weed management actions and to use the Environmental Levy to achieve more strategic or targeted weed management outcomes.

Continue to amend zoning boundaries in LEP mapping to correspond with location of priority habitats and corridors

Make provisions in the Coffs DCP for all new developments to include plans to enhance and protect the biodiversity of the Coffs Harbour LGA, particularly near waterways

Assess the implementation of the revised Koala Plan of Management and its commitment to the ongoing protection of koalas in the LGA.

Implement actions contained within the Draft Priority Habitats and Corridors Strategy

Devise a system for monitoring the extent of each vegetation type within the LGA and their representativeness in Conservation Reserves at a local and regional level. Ensure that the method enables repeatable measures to allow tracking of vegetation changes over time (e.g. 4 yearly intervals to correspond with SOE reporting periods)

36

- The Atmosphere -

38

3 THE ATMOSPHERE 3.1 Overview Climate, weather and the state of the atmosphere are of prime importance to the economic, social and environmental health of cities, towns and regional areas (Department of Environment & Heritage, 2001). Climate and atmospheric conditions directly influence human health, as well as the agricultural and industrial activities that underpin modern society. Atmospheric health and climate also play the determining role in the health and diversity of natural ecosystems. This occurs through its direct influence on water cycles, nutrient cycles, soil health, weather patterns and plant phoyosynthesis. Changes in the climate and the nature and composition of the atmosphere therefore have the potential to affect not only the nature and viability of human health and activities in the long term, but also the health, diversity and abundance of natural ecosystems. Australia, like other countries, spends a considerable effort on forecasting the weather nationwide, including warnings of extreme events, and in understanding and predicting the global climate and its changes. All Australians face major problems of living sustainably in a climate with extreme and highly variable weather, and a society in which agriculture and industry, population and the built environment all continue to grow (Department of Environment & Heritage, 2001). Atmospheric management issues within Coffs Harbour can be broadly grouped into the categories of Enhanced Greenhouse Effect, Air Quality, and Odour. Coffs Harbour does not yet have the same smog and haze problems that affect many other urban centres. This is due to the light nature of local industry, relatively low numbers of vehicles and the presence of sea breezes that disperse pollutants. However, as the population continues to grow and the number of fossil fuel dependant private vehicles increases, smog

and haze are likely to increase as a local problem. Good air quality is a prerequisite for good environmental and human health and as the city grows, it is likely that local air quality will decline unless significant effort is made to allow for more transport options such as bicycle and walking tracks and more effective public transport solutions that do not involve the combustion of pollution generating fossil fuels. Many of the major pollutants generated locally can cause health problems in people. They are usually related to respiratory problems or irritation of the eyes and mucous membranes in the throat and nose.

3.2 The Enhanced Greenhouse Effect - Pressure

The earth naturally is located within a ‘greenhouse’, whereby water vapour, naturally occurring carbon dioxide (CO2) and other gases such as methane (CH4) trap reflected heat radiation from the earth’s surface causing a warming effect. This maintains the temperature of the planet at a suitable level for life. Without this natural effect, the temperature of the globe would average minus (-) 18 degrees Celsius.

The enhancement of this effect is contributed to by human activity such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. Burning fuels or releasing gases add to the insulating properties of the gaseous atmosphere. CO2 and methane are released through many industrial processes, agricultural practices, waste decomposition, electricity generation and transportation from carbon based fuel combustion.

- The Atmosphere -

39

Vegetation acts as the lungs of the earth, exchanging carbon dioxide from the atmosphere for oxygen. The ongoing removal of vegetation for development and agriculture results in the loss of capacity of the landscape to absorb the additional CO2 created through the above human activities. This therefore adds to the pressure on the atmosphere in providing a natural level of insulation and accelerates global warming.

3.2.1 Transportation Motor vehicles emit both local air pollutants and atmospheric or greenhouse gas pollutants. The issue of transportation is therefore relevant to both local and global atmospheric conditions. However it is discussed in this section as it has great significance for the issue of global warming. Like much of the broader north coast region, the population of the Coffs Harbour area relies on the use of private motor vehicles for transportation. Motor vehicles are the dominant contributor of mobile source emissions within the area. A number of factors contribute to the maintenance of this relatively car centred transportation system, including: • distances between urban centres; • hilly topography of much of the area; • a generally inadequate public transport

system; and, • the absence to date of a response by

the community as a whole which systematically addresses this issue.

Air and water pollution and ecosystem disturbance from boats has not been quantified, but the use of boats in the ocean, rivers and estuaries can be a source of potential pressure on the integrity of coastal and estuarine waters, creating noise and air pollution as well as greenhouse gas emissions.

3.2.2 Agricultural Stock It is widely acknowledged that methane is a significant greenhouse gas and that beef and dairy cattle and other cud chewing livestock are major contributors of methane

to the atmosphere, as well as carbon dioxide. However, the exact contribution of these primary industries in the Coffs Harbour LGA has not been quantified.

3.2.3 Electricity Consumption Although there are no power stations within the Coffs Harbour area, the consumption of electricity from coal fired power stations for heating, cooling and other uses is a major contributor to the total greenhouse gas emissions of the Coffs Harbour community. The growing demand for electricity from a growing poulation adds to the total contribution of the Coffs Harbour LGA to global greenhouse gas emissions. Unless major changes to renewable energy sources are made by both providers and consumers of electricity, this trend will continue.

3.2.4 Landfill Gases Landfills produce methane and carbon dioxide during decomposition, thus contributing significantly to greenhouse gas emissions.

3.3 The Enhanced Greenhouse Effect – State

The 20th century average air temperatures at the earth’s surface have increased by approximately 0.74oC (IPCC, 2007). It is very likely that greenhouse gas emissions generated by human activities caused most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th

century (IPCC, 2007). These temperature increases have also influenced the global hydrological cycle. Precipitation in some regions of the world has increased significantly while more intense and longer droughts have been observed since the 1970s in other regions (IPCC, 2007). Since 1990, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has provided regular comprehensive scientific assessment of past, present and future climate change with four scientific assessments being undertaken to date in 1990, 1996, 2001 and 2007. The most

- The Atmosphere -

40

recent assessment by the IPCC in 2007 made the following conclusions and projections about climate change: - o An increase in the strength of

evidence suggesting that most of the global warming that has been observed over the last 50 years can be attributed to human activities;

o An average warming of 1.1 to 6.4oC by 2090-99 relative to 1980-1999 temperatures;

o An average sea level rise between 0.18 and 0.59 metres by 2090-99 (these figures do not include the full effects of recent accelerated changes in ice flow);

o Increases in the amount of precipitation is very likely in high-latitudes, while decreases are likely in most subtropical land regions and;

o Extreme climate events – hot extremes, heat waves and heavy rainfall – are very likely to become more frequent

In 2004, the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology released a report on behalf of the NSW Government which looked at past and likely future changes to NSW’s climate. The report found that between 1950-2003, NSW became 0.9oC warmer, with more hot days / nights and fewer cold days / nights. Annual total rainfall declined by an average of 14mm per decade, with the largest declines in rainfall near the coast due to an increase in El Nino years since the mid-1970s. Extreme daily rainfall intensity and frequency have also decreased throughout much of the state.

The report predicted that by the year 2030: o NSW is likely to become warmer than

it was around 1990; o There will be more hot days over 35oC

and fewer frost days below 0oC; o Annual rainfall is likely to decline; o Rainfall runoff and stream flow will be

reduced; o Droughts are likely to become more

severe; o The risk of bushfire is likely to

increase;

o Extreme rainfall may become more intense in central and south-east NSW.

In addition to the above the NSW Government through the Department of Environment Climate Change & Water (DECCW) released Floodplain Risk Management Guidelines called Practical Consideration of Climate Change. The guidelines provide the following advice on sea level rise. IPCC 2007 trends indicate that average global sea level rise (ignoring ice flow melt) may be between 0.18m to 0.59m by 2100. Add to this the ice flow melt uncertainty of up to 0.2m and this gives an adjusted global range of 0.18 to 0.79m. IPCC 2007 (0.1m) and recent CSIRO modelling (up to 0.12m) by McInnes et al indicate that mean sea level along the NSW coast is expected to rise by more than the global mean. Combining the relevant global and local information indicates that sea level rise on the NSW coast is expected to be in the range of 0.18 to 0.91m by 2100. Council adopted the following items at the 4 December 2008 Council meeting:-

1. Lobby State and Federal Government to provide direction and leadership plus support for Local Government through professional and technical expertise and funding for climate change issues and initiatives;

2. Continue to be proactive in determining the impacts of climate change and support projects that investigate the risks associated with climate change and the development of adaptation and mitigation strategies;

3. Continue to investigate initiatives for reducing its carbon footprint and energy consumption;

4. Adopt the upper bound sea level rise figure of 0.91m by 2100 and that the figure be reviewed regularly (maximum of 12 months between reviews).

5. Include assessment of climate change impacts as part of Councils strategic plans and LEP review.

6. Develop details of Councils Planning restrictions and controls through the

- The Atmosphere -

41

‘Floodplain Risk Management’ and ‘Coastal Hazard Risk Management’ process; This is to include assessment of a range of sea level rise scenarios and planning periods consistent with an upper limit of 0.91m sea level rise for 2100.

3.3.1 Greenhouse gas emissions by the community

It was determined that in 1995 the Coffs Harbour community collectively emitted nearly 800,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases (known as ‘CO2 equivalent’ as a convenient unit of measure) through various activities and that without changed practices, this figure would grow to nearly 1,200,000 by 2010. The industrial sector was the most significant contributor of these gases in 1995, but transportation is predicted to become the most significant source by 2010 (CHCC GAS 2002). Greenhouse Gas Emissions produced within the LGA each year and change over time Why use this indicator? Knowledge of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced in the LGA and a measure of change of emissions over time allows for an understanding of the extent which the community is contributing to global warming, whether it is meeting its reduction target, and how much effort needs to be made to continue in reducing emissions. What this indicator shows Assessments of the community greenhouse gas emissions were made in 2001 and 2008 which accumulated to 1,007,755 and 855,503 CO2 tonnes, respectively. These figures are based on state averages which do not take into consideration individual’s electricity usage. Therefore these figures do not represent the community greenhouses gases. However, what these figures do highlight is that a significant decrease in carbon emissions from 2001 to 2008 occurred due to the diversion of waste from landfill and recycling (refer to chapter 7). Taking this information, in addition to the data presented below on transportation habits and vehicle ownership, it is suggested that pressures are likely to increase in respect of the issue of global warming through greenhouse gas emissions. This has significant implications for planning, the

implementation of alternative transport options and for the design of new urban patterns that take transportation into account. Increasingly efficient personal motor vehicles are part of the solution, however personal transportation habits will increasingly need to be considered by individuals in the interests of the global climate. It is very hard to assess the trend of greenhouse gas emissions by the community due to the uncertainty and the range of variables. Figure 3.1 shows the amount of CO2 tonnes not entering the atmosphere as a result of abatement measures implemented by Council.

Council Abatement Measures - Summary Graph

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

2000

/200

1

2001

/200

2

2002

/200

3

2003

/200

4

2004

/200

5

2005

/200

6

2006

/200

7

2007

/200

8

To

nn

es C

O2e

CommunityCorporate

Figure 3.1: Council’s and community abatement measures from 2000 – 2008.

3.3.2 Greenhouse gas emissions by Council

Significant amounts of energy are consumed in the running of administration and other Council buildings, plant and other equipment, street lighting, caravan parks and various municipal facilities. Energy consumed across Council activities has been benchmarked as part of Council’s involvement in the Cities for Climate Protection program. Council has become a Greenpower consumer, which is a scheme offered by electricity utilities that allows consumers to pay for energy sourced from renewable sources, such as solar, wind and hydro electricity, as certified by the NSW Government. This scheme allows consumers (individuals and corporations) to directly help to fund more sustainable future energy options through current consumption refer to: www.greenpower.nsw.gov.au

Trend uncertain

- The Atmosphere -

42

Condition

steady

Table 3.1: Coffs Harbour City Council Energy consumption over the past 3 years

2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Energy Consumption KWh

13,761,452 14,232,452 13,887,053

Figure 3.2: Coffs Harbour City Council energy consumption (per resident per day) compared to 50 Local Government Areas with Australia

Figure 3.3: Coffs Harbour City Council greenhouse gas (kg CO2/per resident/per day) compared to 50 Local Government Areas with Australia

Figure 3.4: Coffs Harbour City Council Street lighting energy consumption (per resident per day) compared to 156 Local Government Areas with Australia Electricity consumption by Coffs Harbour City Council What this indicator shows Table 3.1 shows Council’s overall electricity consumption has reduced since the last reporting period. Figures 3.2 and 3.3 show that Coffs Harbour City Council is tracking higher than mean and median compared to 50 other Councils within Australia that operate Water and Sewage Infrastructure. Figure 3.4 shows Coffs Harbour is the best in terms of electricity consumption per resident per day compared to 156 local government areas within Australia. This information has been provided by Planet Footprint P/L. Council’s 10 highest energy using sites within the period of April to June 2009 were as follows:

1. Coffs Harbour Water Reclamation Plant 2. Woolgoolga Water Reclamation Plant 3. Airport 4. Sawtell Treatment Works

5. Karangi Dam 6. Park Beach Caravan Park 7. Karangi Water Treatment

Works 8. Coffs Harbour

Administration Building 9. Cochrans Pool 10. Moonee Water Reclamation Plant

Greenhouse Gas emissions by Coffs Harbour City Council What this indicator shows Council’s Greenhouse gas assessment is based on total electricity usage, streetlights, vehicle fleet. Council needs to put more emphasis on reducing its carbon footprint and continue incorporating more efficient vehicles within its fleet, continue being a Greenpower consumer, and retrofitting buildings with better energy efficient technology. Council continued to purchase green energy for all energy consuming sites. This green energy is made up of 10% accredited green power and 90% from non-accredited green power. This non accredited renewable energy is sourced from facilities that were built prior to 1997 which were already contributing energy to the electricity grid for e.g. the Snowy Hydro. For this reporting period 10% accredited green power for all street lighting and other electricity consumption has avoided the emission of 1696 tonnes of CO2. 3.4 The Enhanced Greenhouse

Effect – Response

3.4.1 Cities for Climate Protection Program

Council resolved to become a member of the Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) program in May 2000. CCP is an internationally recognised program that provides a means of achieving significant environmental benefits as well as raising Council's profile both locally and internationally. CCP Australia is a joint initiative of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and the Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO). The CCP program provides local governments with a strategic milestone framework to reduce greenhouse gas

Condition improving

- The Atmosphere -

43

emissions by assisting them to identify the emissions of their council and community, set a reduction target and develop and implement an action plan to reach that target. In order to become a participant, Council adopted a resolution committing the Council to achieve the five milestones. Council has now successfully achieved all five milestones and was stepping through the CCP Plus program. However, the Australian Government has formally advised ICLEI Oceania that funding for the Cities for Climate Protection Australia program ceased on 30 June 2009. Even though this program has now ceased, Council will continue reducing its carbon footprint and continue to help the community mitigate and adapt against climate change.

3.4.2 Greenhouse Action Strategy In 2009/2010 Council will be developing a Mitigation and Adaption Climate Change Action Plan, based on a review of the Greenhouse Action Strategy (2002). Funding for this project was secured in November 2008 with the Council awarded funds totalling $50,000 under the NSW Government Grant - Coastal Management Program (2008 – 2009) and $50,000 under the Coffs Harbour City Council Environmental Levy. The project will represent the first systematic identification and prioritisation of the nature and severity of potential climate change vulnerabilities facing the region’s economy, community and environment. This risk analysis will be used to develop a mitigation and adaptation action plan that will identify preferred responses to the key climate change risks identified. Upon completion, the project will assist in the management of infrastructure, services and the natural environment in response to predicted climate change impacts for the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area (LGA). Council requires a clear and concise understanding of Climate Change risks to the LGA and threats to its infrastructure and operations. Predicted impacts of climate change include sea level rise, coastal

inundation, coastal erosion, increased storm intensity, salinisation of freshwater & flooding / drainage problems. Through the implementation of the Greenhouse Action Plan and CCP Program, Council has implemented many greenhouse reduction measures over the past 9 years. Some of the measures are as follows:- Corporate • Installed energy efficient lighting in

Council street lights throughout the entire LGA

• Power factor correction units were installed in Council's administration building

• Quantum hot water heat pumps were installed in three Council buildings

• Compact fluorescent lights were installed in Council Chambers

• Level 3 energy audits were undertaken at the Airport, Rigby House and Moonee Water Reclamation Plant and as a result Council has implemented energy saving measures through the4 implementation of the Energy Saving Action Plan.

• 10% accredited and 90% non-accredited Green Power for all Council buildings, public lighting & Water/Sewage.

• Reducing car fleet and trialling alternate fuel cars

• Installation of Variable Speed Drive Pumps within Council sewer system.

Community • Since 2001 Council has enforced a 3.5

Star rating on all new development • Shower Replacement Program • Council provided a free level one energy

audit to 45 homes in the area. • Energy Smart Homes program • Recycling has been occurring in the city

for a number of years. • Collection of green waste including food

waste. • Diversion of up to 50% mixed waste

from landfill. • The development of the Integrated

Transport Plan

- The Atmosphere -

44

3.4.3 Energy Saving Action Plan The NSW Water and Energy Savings Initiatives were introduced by the NSW Government in May 2005. They are administered by the Department of Energy, Utilities and Sustainability (DEUS) who are now a part of the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW). The legislation required certain businesses, government agencies and local councils to prepare Water and Energy Savings Action Plans by 2008. The Coffs Harbour City Council Energy Savings Action Plan (ESAP) was developed by Council staff with the assistance of a consultant, Total Energy Solutions in 2007. The implementation of the ESAP has resulted in the expenditure of $85,930 in cost effective actions. These actions have reduced the organisation’s total energy consumption by 271,111KW*h per year with a saving of $25,086 per year.

3.4.4 Rigby House Solar Photovoltaic

Project Coffs Harbour City Council was awarded $735,000 from the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water under the Climate Change Fund: Public Facilities Program in November 2008. As part of this grant, Council is to install a photovoltaic solar powered system on Rigby House which will generate a minimum of 178MWh per annum.

A key component of the project will be the delivery of an education and communication plan which will educate and raise awareness across the community about the value of implementing energy conservation measures and the key role that PV solar technology can play as part of the energy solution. It will also build capacity within business and industry communities in the area of sustainable buildings and technology through the formation of a Business and Industry Network and the provision of information and workshopping activities.

This project will commence in January 2010.

3.4.5 Energy Efficient Street Lighting Project

During 2001-02, Council worked collaboratively with Country Energy and the Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA) on a project evaluating the potential to implement a complete replacement program of existing low efficiency streetlights (mercury vapour) with high efficiency lights (such as high pressure sodium and high efficiency T5 fluorescent). The Coffs Harbour Energy Efficient Street Lighting Project will enable Council to save $690,000 over ten years and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 650 tonnes by upgrading the 3,500 streetlights in the city to more efficient types. The City was the first Council in Australia to introduce energy-efficient street lighting across its entire LGA area. As part of the project, a model was created that predicts the greenhouse gas emissions and financial savings that can be achieved by upgrading street lighting to more energy efficient types, for use by other Councils.

3.4.6 Greenpower Council has purchased 100% renewable energy for the period of 2007-2010. This renewable energy is broken into 2 parts 10% Accredited Green Power and 90% Non-accredited Heritage Green Power. This energy is provided to all Council energy accounts. Throughout 2007 Council undertook a community Greenpower education program.

3.4.7 Walkways and Cycleways Council continues to build walkways and cycleways which promote healthy lifestyles as well as a means of transport in the local context. Figure 3.5 shows the increase in Council constructed cycleways in the LGA since the 1980s to 2008. Next step will be to link the existing walkways and cycleways to have a complete network.

- The Atmosphere -

45

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

Year

Kilo

met

res

of C

ycle

way

Figure 3.5: Length of Council Constructed Cycleways to 2008 (Source: Coffs Harbour Bicycle Users Group, 2008)

3.4.8 Landfill Emissions Council awarded a contract to AGL Energy Sales and Marketing Limited to construct and operate a landfill gas extraction and disposal system. This system is expected to be completed by the end of 2009, and consists of a network of gas extraction wells constructed into the previously landfilled waste, together with gas pipes and a disposal flare. Landfill gas typically comprises about 55% methane, approximately 40% carbon dioxide and other gases including water vapour, nitrogen, non-methane organic gases, & odorous sulfides. These gases are what give the landfill gas mixture its characteristic ‘rotting’ smell. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, one tonne of which is equivalent to 21 tonnes of carbon dioxide. Without an extraction system, these gases escape from the landfill causing odours, safety risks and greenhouse emissions. By capturing landfill gas, the generation of odour from the landfill will be significantly reduced. In addition the amount of methane emissions released into the atmosphere from the landfill will be reduced by as much as the equivalent of 17,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) per annum. The waste management plant that is operated by BioMass Solutions uses bottled gas, a fossil fuel, to generate the steam needed for its processing operations. Negotiations are in train to use landfill gas instead which would mean further environmental benefits.

Also, given that “waste” is a sector included in the Australian Government’s anticipated Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (carbon-trading scheme), the development of the landfill gas project will also have considerable benefits to Council in terms of reducing its obligations and financial exposure to the anticipated Scheme. This will assist Council to minimise the costs borne by the community for managing their waste.

3.4.9 Climate Consensus Project In November 2008, 14 local residents (over 18 & carefully selected to represent the Coffs Harbour and Bellingen demographic) attended a 2 day forum hosted by Coffs Harbour City Council and funded by the Nature Conservation Council through an Environmental Trust grant. Through a structured, deliberative democracy process, the panel of residents developed a series of recommendations for local, state and federal government in response to the question “How can we work together to respond to climate change?”

Figure 3.3 Community workshop held at the Innovation Centre Southern Cross University

3.4.10 Residential Rebate Program uptake by LGA to 30 June 2009

The Residential Rebate Program is part of the NSW Government's Climate Change Fund, established to help people make their homes more water and energy efficient. It provides rebates for rainwater tanks, climate-friendly hot water systems and water-efficient washing machines.

Table 3.2 shows the total amount of rebates taken up by the community up to 30 June 2009. Coffs Harbour LGA was the 13th highest within the state to utilise residential

- The Atmosphere -

46

rebate program and by calculating the rebates on a percent of population basis, CHCC is among the best resident uptake of NSW Climate Change Rebates. Table 3.2: Total amount of rebates uptaken by the community under the NSW Climate Change Fund

LGA Rain water tank

Hot water

Ceiling Insulation

Washing machine

Total

Coffs 281 1,083 271 235 1,870

3.5 Air Quality – Pressure

3.5.1 Diffuse Air Pollutants The major pressures on air quality in the Coffs Harbour LGA over the 2008/09 period continue to be from sources such as vehicle emissions, backyard burning, state government back burning, smoke from solid fuel stoves and heaters, dust from unsealed roads and extractive and other industries, landfill emissions and emissions from various licensed premises. Some agricultural activities that burn-off, present local pollution problems for some residents, particularly as rural residential districts expand in traditionally agricultural areas. The topography of the area lends itself to temperature inversions which is when cold air flows down from the ranges and leaves a layer of warmer air above. In summer the inversions are likely to be of short duration as they would be broken up by sea breezes. The significance of an inversion is that pollutants produced are trapped in the lower atmospheric layers and accumulate while the inversion remains. This particularly affects the Boambee, Coffs, Korora and Woolgoolga basins which are protected from winter winds. These can trap smoke and other pollutants near the ground and do sometimes cause problems for local residents. Agricultural activities can be a source of airborne pollutants in the form of spray drift from the use of pesticides and herbicides, or from other agricultural applications. Inappropriate use of sprayed chemicals can be the cause of major health problems for some people, while odours from spraying operations may also be considered a pollutant (rather than merely an irritation). Dust frequently becomes a problem for residents in the vicinity of unsealed rural roads or development sites during dry periods. Dust may also be created by certain agricultural operations if soil is exposed to the wind.

3.5.2 Solid Fuel Stoves and Heaters Smoke from wood burning contains a mixture of pollutants including carbon

- The Atmosphere -

47

monoxide, fine particulate matter and volatile organic compounds. Other elements may be present in small amounts, but may become important in the consideration of factors such as odour, toxicity, corrosion and dust fallout. These include Nitrogen, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Chlorine, Potassium and Magnesium. Domestic solid fuel heaters are a significant source of fine particle pollution in NSW in winter. These pollutants can affect human health, especially in older people, children and those with respiratory diseases. Gas or wood stoves that have not been flued properly may allow those pollutants to remain indoors at high concentrations. Solid fuel stoves and heaters are quite common in both old and new residential areas. Inappropriate fuels, weather conditions (mainly during winter months) and poorly located flues can contribute to smoke nuisances and odour problems. Licensed 3.5.3 Ozone Depleting Substances Humans have damaged the ozone layer by adding molecules containing reactive chemicals into the atmosphere. They drift up to the stratosphere, pushed by winds and atmospheric mixing. Since ozone concentrations are higher than most of the reactive chemicals in the stratosphere, the ozone destroyers of concern are those that can participate in a "catalytic cycle"; that is, where one trace catalytic chemical can be responsible for destroying tens to hundreds of thousands of ozone molecules. 3.5.4 Airport Emissions Certain emissions are characteristic of airport operations, including:

• unburnt hydrocarbons;

• fire particle matter;

• volatile organic compounds;

• lead;

• carbon monoxide; • odours; • carbon dioxide; • dust; • oxides of

nitrogen; • chlorofluoroca

rbons; • sulphur oxides; • sulphur

dioxide.

3.6 Air Quality - State Due to the light nature of industry in the local area and wind and climate patterns that act to disperse local air pollutants, Coffs Harbour does not generally suffer from the haze or smog problems that afflict many other urban centres, other than occasional smoke haze across the city from local bushfires.

Issues such as burning off and smoke nuisance continue to arise and are relatively well understood. However, there is no local or regional air quality monitoring program and there are therefore gaps in our knowledge regarding other sorts of air quality issues in Coffs Harbour. 3.6.1 Vehicle Emissions Motor vehicles are a major contributor to air pollution. In urban areas they are responsible for the vast majority of lead emissions, although the proportion of lead free cars continues to increase. Motor vehicles contribute significant amounts of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides. Older passenger cars contribute far more pollution than newer cars (providing they are well maintained).

Particle pollution is also created by vehicle emissions and diesel vehicles contribute a substantial proportion of this pollution.

One indicator of pressure on air quality is the growing number of vehicle registrations in Coffs Harbour. Table 3.5 shows the growing number of vehicles registered by the RTA in 2003, 2006 and 2008.

Table 3.5: Private, Business and Total Number of Vehicles Registered in Coffs Harbour (Source: RTA Research Publication)

Type June 2003

June 2006

June 2008

Passenger Vehicles

25,917 26,893 27,622

Off-Road Passenger Vehicles

3,554 6,137 6,295

Small Buses 530 467 263 Buses 159 145 187 Mobile Homes 180 219 122 Motor Cycles 1,467 1,740 2,165 Light Trucks 6,807 7,573 8,332 Heavy Trucks 708 756 807 Prime Movers 135 158 219 Trailers 9,317 10,888 11,252 Total Size of Vehicle Fleet

48,999 54,976 57,264

- The Atmosphere -

48

Condition declining

Condition declining

Number of vehicle registrations in Coffs Harbour Local Government Area What this indicator shows Since 2003 vehicle fleet size has increased by 8,265 vehicles within 5 years. The proportion of off road passenger vehicles has increased from 12% to 18% of total passenger vehicles between 2003 and 2008. However, on the positive side there was an increase in motor cycle registrations since 2003. While vehicles are becoming more fuel efficient and less polluting, a greater number of vehicles, particularly off-road passenger vehicles, puts greater pressure on the local and global atmosphere.

3.6.2 Fuel Consumption through Vehicle Use by Council

The combustion of fossil fuels is a major contributor to the greenhouse effect and to local air pollution problems. Due to the nature of Council operations, a significant amount of travel is conducted in the course of Council business in a variety of vehicle types. Ethanol fuel E10 will be introduced to Council’s fuel use which releases less greenhouse gases. Indicator – Kilometres Travelled by the Lease Fleet

Why use this Indicator Data on the number of kilometres travelled by Council staff in lease fleet are readily available and provide an indication of trends in travel and therefore trends in emissions from these vehicles. Council staff use lease vehicles for both business and private use. What this Indicator shows Figure 3.3 shows that the number of vehicles within fleet and the kilometres travelled has increased since 2003/04. The implication of this data in terms of Council’s environmental performance is that emissions and other environmental impacts associated with vehicle use have increased relative to previous years.

500,000

700,000

900,000

1,100,000

1,300,000

1,500,000

1,700,000

1,900,000

2,100,000

2,300,000

2003/04 2006/07 2008/09

Year

Tota

l Kilo

met

res

0

50

100

150

No. o

f veh

icle

s

Kilometres Travelled No. of vehicles

Figure 3.3: Council’s number of vehicle fleet and the total kilometres travelled from 2003/04 to 2008/09.

3.6.3 Burning Off Backyard burning refers to the burning of garden refuse and some domestic waste such as newspapers and food wastes. Such burns almost always operate under less-than-ideal combustion conditions and lead to increased production of smoke and other air pollutants. Burning of plastics and other toxic packaging is prohibited. Backyard burning can cause not only smoke haze but also foul odours and occasionally the fallout of ash and other substances. Open air burning of domestic waste and burning of vegetation is prohibited in residential/ commercial/ industrial zones of the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area, under the Protection of the Environment Operations Legislation Amendment (Control of Burning) Regulation 2006. Number and Type of Complaints Regarding Air Pollution (Consistent Indicator 13C)

Why use this Indicator? Through assessment of the number of complaints received by both the Council and the DECCW, the extent of air pollution concerns affecting residents can be assessed at present and over time. This means areas of growing concern may be identified and acted upon, as well as allowing an assessment of current management of air pollution by Council. Table 3.6: Air Quality Complaints Received by Council and the DECCW

06/07 07/08 08/09 Council 44 68 38

EPA 16 78 150

- The Atmosphere -

49

Condition

steady

Condition declining

What this Indicator shows Table 3.6 shows total number of air related complaints received by Council has decreased in comparison to previous years, however air related complaints received by DECCW have almost doubled since the last reporting period. From this information it appears that air quality does remain a significant issue for residents. The greatest number of air pollution related complaints concern smoke, including backyard burning, solid fuel heaters and vegetation burn off.

3.6.4 Licensed Air Emissions Licences for emissions to the atmosphere are regulated by the EPA under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act. Industry is potentially a major contributor to both local and global air quality issues. Licensed Air Emissions (Consistent Indicator 13A)

Why use this Indicator? By viewing the type and number of licensed air emissions in the area, the role of industry as a local source of air pollution can be evaluated. Further, as no monitoring of air quality is carried out in the area, this provides an alternative way to evaluate potential concerns and risks. Table 3.7: Licenses held under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act for Activities that may impact upon Air Quality

Licence Category 2003-04 2008-09Cement Handling Works 1 1 Bitumen Plants 1 1 Ferrous and Non Ferrous Metal Works 2 2 Freeways or Tollway Construction 0 0 Wood Preservation 1 1 Petroleum Industries 0 0 Landfilling 1 1 Composting Activities 1 1 Timber Milling and Processing 4 4 Extractive Industries/Crushing/Quarries 4 4 Concrete Batching Works 4 5 TOTAL 19 20 What this Indicator shows As can be seen in the above table, concrete batching, timber milling and extractive industries (ie quarries) remain the most significant sources of licensed emissions within the city. Landfilling contributes significant greenhouse gas

emissions and other air pollutants including dust and odour. Overall there are few premises that are licensed due to the possibility of negative impacts on local atmospheric quality and this number remains steady.

3.6.5 Legionella There are currently 19 premises with 20 cooling towers or thermostatic mixing valve systems registered in the Coffs Harbour area. Legionella bacteria occurs naturally in water, but can multiply and if turned into a fine mist spray, and can become an airborne source of potential human disease known as Legionnaire’s Disease. Council maintains extensive records on each system that could harbour Legionella in the Coffs Harbour area and each system has a specific maintenance routine designed to minimise the ability of Legionella to grow to problematic levels. In addition to this maintenance, owners of such systems are required to submit reports to Council to ensure the maintenance is being carried out correctly. Any incidences of Legionella growth are identified and treated before they develop into a potential public health hazard.

3.6.6 Visual Amenity Fine airborne particles can be responsible for reducing visibility (due to the scattering and absorption of light) and for soiling and damping buildings. Sources of these particles include:

Human Sources Natural Sources

• motor vehicles • industrial processes • backyard burning • heating and power

generation • hazard reduction

burning/bush fires

• soil • sea salt • bush fires

Photochemical smog is a secondary pollutant, which occurs as a result of reactions between primary pollutants. Ground level ozone is the major component of smog and could be used as an indicator of smog if data were collected.

- The Atmosphere -

50

Whilst haze from air pollutants can occasionally be seen on still winter mornings over the town, this remains uncommon and visual amenity is generally good in Coffs Harbour. However, with a growing population and increased human sources of air pollutants generated, this effect may become more common in future if sources are not reduced or controlled.

3.7 Air Quality - Response

3.7.1 Air Quality Actions Council continues to respond to individual incidents as they arise and there is a pollution control officer available 24 hrs a day for this purpose. Council has a policy in place to restrict burning in land clearing operations and there is an ongoing road-sealing program in an effort to reduce dust. Maintenance reports from potential Legionella bacteria sources continue to be monitored on a quarterly basis.

3.7.2 Integrated Transport Plan Council is currently finalising the Integrated Transport Plan which will be completed in 2010. The Plan identifies the local road hierarchy, has mapped cycleways and pedestrian access routes, and identifies alternative sources of transport including public transport, cycling and options to reduce car dependency. The Plan has been developed in conjunction with local transport providers, consumers, the Ministry of transport, and other government departments as well as across Council's Planning, Engineering and Environmental Departments. The Sustainable Transport Action Plan (STAP) is being undertaken as part of the Cities for Climate Protection Program (CCP). Progress in the STAP is measured by a series of five milestones. Through this structure, Coffs Harbour City Council has committed to:

• Identify priority actions relating to sustainable transport;

• Plan for their successful implementation; and

• Implement and report upon the actions

3.8 Odour – Pressure Odour complaints in respect to animals possibly reflects development patterns in the Local Government Area (LGA) whereby new urban development and rural residential development has occurred in or adjacent to areas that have traditionally and continue to support agricultural activities. Sources of odour from these agricultural activities can include animal effluent produced on site or used along with composts and fertilisers to improve crops or pasture. New residential growth in and adjacent to these areas therefore increases the potential for conflict and the generation of odour complaints.

3.8.1 Sewage Treatment Plants/Infrastructure

Odours may sometimes be associated with sewage treatment or sewage reticulation systems. The odour impact of a treatment plant or reticulation system including pumping stations is measured in odour units (OU). Odour complaints can be expected in the range of 2-10 OU depending on numerous environmental and community factors. The likelihood of receiving an odour complaint increases with the number of people exposed to the odour and the NSW EPA odour performance criteria given in its 1999 discussion paper on stationary odour sources, includes the criterion of 2 OU for urban populations (equal to or above 2000).

3.9 Odour – State Undesirable odours can negatively affect environmental quality through their impact on the quality of life of people. Odour issues in Coffs Harbour tend to include smells arising from agricultural and horticultural activities where these occur in close proximity to residential areas, and unpleasant smells being generated by the activities of neighbours.

- The Atmosphere -

51

Number and Type of Complaints Regarding Odour Why use this Indicator?

Table 3.8 shows the number of complaints received by Council, these complaints range from odour from landfill and burning off and the keeping of poultry. Note that this indicator has not been used previously and it is therefore not possible to comment about trends on this basis at this stage. Table 3.8: Odour Complaints Received by Council

06/07 07/08 08/09 Council N/A N/A 14

3.10 Odour – Response

3.10.1 Sewage Treatment Plants/Infrastructure

Council employs several methods to combat odours in the sewage reticulation system. These include: • Actizime addition • Oxygen addition • Regular cleaning of Sewage Pumping

Stations • Odour scrubbing soil beds • Wet Well Washers to remove build up

on well walls • Trade Waste policy enforcement. With regards to the Water Reclamation Plants, each plant has some method of odour reduction. The new Coffs WRP has a $1.5m Odour Control Unit (OCU, biological and activated carbon), while Moonee and Woolgoolga have biological odour soil beds. The remoteness for these two plants from houses lowers any risk of complaints.

3.10.2 Reduce impacts of landfill odours Council and its contractor BioMass Solutions (Coffs Harbour) P/L (BioMass

Solutions) have been working hard this year to implement new resource recovery and landfilling operations. Aspects of these have generated odours, some of which have been the subject of complaint by adjoining landowners. Both Council and BioMass have been working with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW), who regulate the sites under respective Environment Protection Licences. Council has implemented practices at the “active tipping face” of the landfill to reduce odour generation.

3.10.3 Odour Actions Council continues to respond to individual incidents as they arise and there is a pollution control officer available 24 hrs a day for this purpose.

Trend uncertain

- The Atmosphere -

52


actions that need to be undertaken to protect the atmosphere. These actions align with the Our Living City Settlement Strategy Interim Document

. Actions Implemented

Promote the use of public transport, bicycle use and walkways to reduced reliance on private vehicles.

Continue to enforce measures to ensure greater regulation of burning off, including prohibitions on burning off in urban areas.

Develop mechanisms to raise funds to provide for continued sealing of rural roads as finances permit.

Review the Greenhouse Action Strategy and finalise the Climate Change Action Plan

Continue to promote energy efficient urban designs, including street layout and building design.

Identify where Council operating costs can be reduced through increased energy efficiency measures and better management practices

Develop an understanding of, and manage the effects of, climate change on the coastal strip.

Upgrade GIS to reflect projected sea level, flood lands, storm surge and coastal recession scenarios.

Undertake modelling to ascertain projected impacts on existing infrastructure and development and assess.

Ensure the LEP, planning policies, development control plans and infrastructure design factor in climate change

Investigate the development of a more efficient vehicle fleet.

Continue to implement education programs

Finalise and implement the Integrated Transport Plan

53

- Land -

55

4 LAND

4.1 Overview Land is the fundamental basis for nearly all human activities and natural systems and it is therefore a resource in high demand. Locally land has traditionally been exploited for development in the past with little regard for conservation or the principles of sustainability. The modification of the landscape from its natural state into a more ‘developed’, Europeanised state was historically common practice. Views about the relationship of humans to the landscape have begun to change with the recognition that the original natural landscape has inherent value, economic and social values as well as values associated with animal and plant adaptation to specific climatic, geological and other prevailing conditions. It is increasingly recognised that an intact landscape offers ‘free’ environmental services such as air and water cleaning that are very expensive or impossible to replace. The Coffs Harbour area consists of a narrow strip of fertile coastal alluvial soils which then rises sharply to the Great Dividing Range. This landform has contained most development to the coastal strip, where major land uses include commercial and residential uses, sporting facilities, transport corridors, some conservation lands in the form of National and Regional Parks and other reserves and tourism activities. The range varies to a maximum height of 1,042m at Mt Moombil (SW corner of the LGA) and to the west of the range forms gently undulating plains, used predominantly for forestry and agriculture such as diary farming, bananas, and other fruit, nut and vegetable cultivation. Steep topography, small coastal catchments and high annual rainfall often result in localised flooding. The steepness of much of the land combined with the presence of clay soils produces enhanced erosion potential in much of the area. Soils can be considered a non-renewable resource since

rates of soil formation are far longer than the rates of erosion that are occurring across Australia. Soil erosion therefore creates a permanent change to the landscape and to the productivity of the land. Approximately 7% of the LGA is classified as ‘potential acid sulfate soils’ (PASS). If disturbed through such activities as development or agricultural practices, PASS soils can create significant environmental problems as acid is washed into waterways, killing fish and other aquatic life. The Department of Environment and Climate Change estimated from 2000 data that 69% of the landscape of the (pre-amalgamation) LGA is covered in woody vegetation (ie forest or woodland, native or exotic, with over 20% canopy cover). 31% of the landscape was defined as cleared, (ie has less than 20% canopy cover). This includes natural non-woody vegetation such as grasslands, estuary vegetation, heathland, alpine herbland, rock, lakes, swamp, watercourses, dams, reservoirs, built up areas and cleared land.

- Land -

56

4.2 Land Use Change - Pressure

4.2.1 Urban Settlement The use of land for urban activities such as the development of residential, commercial and industrial properties exerts a range of pressures and can have a range of impacts on the natural environment, the use of resources and public health (see Table 4.1).

Table 4.1. Impacts/Pressures Relating to the Built Environment Generic Type of Impact

Specific Types of Impact

Impact on the Natural Environment

• Sedimentation and soil erosion directly impacts upon estuaries and waterways from unprotected building sites following excavation, installation of drainage and earthworks.

• Pollution of waterways or groundwater is caused by inadequate on -site waste water disposal systems or defective sewer reticulation and failure to connect swimming pool backwash systems to the sewer.

• Building site wastes can be washed into waterways and airborne litter blown into the surrounding natural environment.

• Excessive tree removal is directly associated with the development of subdivisions and subsequent building work.

• Pollution (both long term and short term) results from chemicals associated with construction and use of buildings (eg: Termicide).

• Habitat losses for native flora and fauna. • Development produces small gradual increases in background noise levels. • Detrimental changes to the ground surface infiltration characteristics can create

impacts on downstream catchments during heavy rain. • Extraction of materials for fill and construction works impacts upon the areas

surrounding the quarries. Resource Use

• Use of non-renewable building materials increase with increases in building development.

• The demands for non-renewable energy such as electricity for lighting, power and heating will increase. The generation of ozone depleting and “green - house” gases is directly associated with the production of energy from non renewable sources.

• The demand for reliable supplies of potable water for household use will increase.

• The demand for waste water treatment system capacity and extension of services will increase.

• Demands for solid waste disposal capacity will increase. Public Health

• Increasing risk of infectious disease transmission by inadequate waste water disposal systems or inadequate sewerage treatment systems.

• Increases in occupational deafness from high, unprotected noise levels during construction operations.

• Increases in the “background creep” associated with numerous small additions of noise from traffic, residential premises and entertainment.

• Danger of personal injury or death as a result of illegal / unsafe building work which does not conform to accepted minimum building codes and standards.

• Risks to construction workers and residents associated with unlicensed removal and disposal of asbestos from existing buildings.

• Increasing risks to public health from illegal plumbing connections. • Increasing risks associated with the increasing intensity of electromagnetic

radiation in the community environment. • Increasing risks from the use and storage of hazardous materials.

- Land -

57

4.2.2 Transport corridors Road works associated with urban land uses also exert pressure on the natural environment if not properly planned and managed. Impacts range from the destruction of vegetation, severance of wildlife corridors, increased erosion and surface water discharge, generation of dust, siltation of waterways, to the proliferation of noxious and/or environmental pest species. The road structure and the scattered settlement patterns have not promoted effective public transport within the Coffs Harbour area. Competition between the demands of private vehicle ownership and the public transport needs of the community continue to disadvantage community transport networks, creating increasing air quality and global warming pressures.

4.2.3 Recreational land use Recreational land uses can degrade land, mainly through over use and exploitation and poor management. Seasonal influxes of tourists can exacerbate the range of impacts associated with recreation, placing a greater burden on the natural environment and resources available for its management. Pressures include increased potential for erosion on formal and non formed walking tracks and dunes, increased potential for the ignition of fires, littering, disturbance of vegetation and faunal habitats, disturbance to native fauna by domestic pets and increased pest access into natural areas through the provision of access tracks.

4.2.4 Rural Settlement Declines in the agricultural sector, population growth and increased attractiveness of rural residential lifestyles puts pressure on rural lands as more landholders seek options for rural subdivision and the creation of legal or de facto rural residential areas. Creeping urban sprawl and the impacts of settlement and associated infrastructure on habitat, land and water resources are all pressures associated with rural settlements. In rural areas, the preservation of viable agricultural

land for agricultural purposes is also a significant issue of concern.

4.2.5 Primary Industries Primary industries have always played an important role in the Coffs Harbour region, with early settlers relying heavily on forestry and timber milling, dairying, beef cattle production and fishing. Various pressures on the land are associated with historical and current primary industry activities.

4.2.6 Mineral Resource Extraction Large scale removal of rock and minerals from the landscape has obvious impacts on the integrity of the pre-disturbed landscape and may also add further pressures through increased likelihood of soil erosion, ground instability, air pollution and vegetation removal. Quarried materials are also largely a non-renewable resource, though increasingly, demolition materials are being used as a road base materials in some areas. Further impacts on local resident amenity are commonly associated with quarrying activities due to noise, dust and road degradation.

4.2.7 Forestry Forestry activities are significant in the Coffs Harbour LGA, over 35% of the land area under the control of NSW State Forests. While there are many benefits associated with the forestry industry, some of the impacts or pressures associated with native forest harvest include increased biodiversity impacts, fire hazard, soil erosion and nutrient/biomass loss.

- Land -

58

4.3 Land Use Change - State Coffs Harbour has gained a reputation as a dynamic and expanding economic hub on the Mid North Coast. This is reinforced by the recognition of Coffs Harbour as a “Major Regional Centre” in the Department of Planning’s 2009 Mid North Coast Regional Strategy. As a result the Coffs Harbour LGA is in evolution from a city focused on servicing its hinterland to servicing a rapidly developing region. While recognized as a major tourist destination, Coffs Harbour boasts a $200m Gross Regional Product a year manufacturing sector, varied primary industries and major retail zones. Expansion of urban, predominantly residential, areas into “green field”, former agricultural, sites is the major land use change occurring. Coffs Harbour City is a vibrant city in the process of becoming a major regional capital of the NSW Mid North Coast. It is expected that an additional 32,000 people will live here by 2031. The challenge for Coffs Harbour City Council is to protect the environment while meeting the social and economic needs of this growing population.

4.3.1 Private Land Reserved for Conservation Purposes

The dedication of land to the protection of important vegetation or habitat occurs on private lands in the area as well. The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service administers various programs in relation to conservation reserves on private land, while the Department of the Environment, Climate Change and Waters (DECCW) administers Property Agreements with private landholders.

Table 4.2: Private Land Reserved/Protected for Conservation Purposes Environmental Indicator

2006/07 2007/08 2008/09

Private Land reserved for conservation total (ha)

1,379 1,397 1,397

Extent and Degree of Change of Native Vegetation: Area subject to voluntary conservation agreements (Consistent Indicator 7C) What this indicator shows The table above illustrates the number and area of private land under Voluntary Conservation Agreements, Wildlife Refuges and Land for Wildlife programs, administered by NPWS and Property Agreements under DECCW. Relative to last year there has been no change under the Wildlife Refuge Program, which is assumed to represent a static trend on the assumption that more land falls under deliberate protection for natural environmental values. However, it is difficult to assert that effective management always occurs under these schemes.

4.4 Land Use Change – Response

4.4.1 Planning Controls The Coffs Harbour Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2000 aims to implement a number of actions that assist in maintaining the integrity of lands, including: • requiring consent for works that

disturb acid sulfate soils; • including koala protection measures

to be incorporated into development proposals;

• protection of regionally significant vegetation through environmental protection zones;

• protection of riparian areas through a 50m environmental protection zone buffer on rivers and major creeks in urban areas & a 20m buffer in rural areas;

• prevention of subdivisions that provide additional riparian access rights to streams, creeks, rivers and other waterways;

• requiring consent for major land filling and excavations;

• reducing rural land fragmentation through removal of 10 ha horticultural subdivision provisions and increasing the banana subdivision standard from 4 ha to 6 ha; and,

Condition

steady

- Land -

59

• introducing urban consolidation measures.

Supplementing LEP 2000 is a series of Development Control Plans (DCPs) and Information Sheets providing more detailed information. Coffs Harbour City Council is required to replace Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2000 in accordance with the State Government’s Standard LEP Orders gazetted 31 March 2006. It is proposed that a review translate the current LEP to the Standard Template in addition to incorporating outcomes from various current and forthcoming strategies, policies and projects. The process will comply with the legal requirements enabling Council to formally make a new principle LEP in accordance with the Department of Planning’s prescribed timeframe for completion (March 2011). Council has been given five years from the date of gazettal of the standard LEP orders (31 March 2006) to complete the comprehensive review of the LEP in accordance with the new NSW Standard LEP Template. This process will involve reviewing the entire zone and planning controls that currently apply. Council will also be required to consolidate all Development Controls Plans (DCP) into a single City wide DCP. Council has previously committed to undertaking a number of strategic planning projects, the outcomes of which will inform the review of the Standard LEP.

4.4.2 Amendments to Local Environmental Plans

The Department of Planning advised that priority and effort needs to be directed to strategic planning and the preparation of the new LEP. The Department has also requested that Councils avoid proposing minor amendments to existing LEPs and that for amendments to proceed in the transition period, it should be by exception in which case Council will need to demonstrate a compelling case which meets

given exceptions. As instances arise, Councils may be able to justify preparing a draft amending LEP in advance of the new instrument being prepared. The comprehensive review of the LEP will consider specific provisions for: • Rural and Environmental Zones – rural

production, drinking water catchment, forestry, national parks and reserves;

• Residential Zones – including rural residential and future urban zones;

• Commercial Zones, Industrial Zones and Special / Infrastructure Zones – as employment generating land uses;

• Open Space Zones; and

• All other Zones and provisions – e.g. heritage items, exempt and complying.

The facilitation of the “Our Living City” Settlement Strategy will identify some priority 1 areas suitable for the commencement of investigation concurrent with the finalisation of the Standard Coffs LEP. The single DCP accompanying the Standard Local Environmental Plan (SLEP) aims to address adaptation to global warming through more energy efficient housing, streetscape and landscape design, transportation alternatives and distance to local conveniences and employment opportunities. Water efficiency, waste and water management and the protection of significant biodiversity habitats are also to be addressed in the DCP. The encouragement of a sense of community as well as general safety and amenity are also addressed in DCPs in an effort to develop more interesting and socially cohesive neighbourhoods.

4.4.3 Urban Settlement Strategies The limited supply of regional water coupled with waste issues, infrastructure provision and ongoing loss of biodiversity all indicate the need to re-consider the way by which local landscapes are utilised and managed, particularly for further urban development.

- Land -

60

Council therefore developed its urban settlement strategy – known as the Our Living City – A Settlement Strategy for Coffs City to 2031.

The "Our Living City" (OLC) Settlement Strategy:

Outlines a vision for the future, and a strategy to achieve it;

Sets out a "big picture" approach to guide Council's land use decisions to 2031;

Provides mechanisms to ensure the growing city offers a range of quality styles of living, working and recreating;

Offers a balanced approach to land supply and demand issues; and

Provides a series of policies to tackle transport and urban growth issues.

The OLC Settlement Strategy was endorsed by Council on 5 July 2007. On 12 November 2007, the NSW Department of Planning endorsed an interim agreement to allow some short-term matters contained within the strategy to be progressed.

Council has updated its OLC Settlement Strategy as an Interim Document. The document fully itemises the lands endorsed by the Department of Planning (DoP). No other urban investigation areas as yet have approval from the DoP.

The DoP intends, having finalised the Mid North Coast (MNC) Regional Strategy, to consider the remaining contents of Council's Strategy. Council will progressively amend the OLC Settlement Strategy Interim Document to ensure consistency with the Regional Strategy and published growth areas.

4.4.4 Rural Residential Strategy Council’s existing Rural Residential Strategy was produced ten years ago, in 1999. It did not include the amalgamated lands of Red Rock, Corindi Beach and Corindi Plateau. Much of the advice and information in the 1999 Strategy is outdated, with many of the listed areas now already rezoned.

The Strategy will be used to inform: (i) the Standard Local Environmental

Plan (SLEP), currently being prepared by Council staff; and

(ii) the Agreed Growth Management Strategy to be presented to the Department of Planning (DoP) for endorsement Council, at its meeting of 4 December 2008, resolved to adopt the draft Rural Residential Strategy Review for exhibition purposes and exhibit it for an extended period until the end of February 2009. The strategy identifies: • candidate areas that have had initial

broad assessments based on constraints such as flooding, water resources, ecological significance, bushfire hazard, scenic qualities, land capability, acid sulfate soils, contaminated soils, regionally significant farmland (as based on the DoP’s Farmland Mapping project), and resource protection.

• That a Local Environmental Study (LES) or equivalent study should be prepared for each candidate area identified prior to rezoning.

• That any areas, identified within the candidate area, with significant environmental constraints should be protected by an appropriate environmental protection zone.

• The aim is to provide a balance of rural residential land across the LGA, thereby enhancing housing choice.

• Development Control Plans (DCP) and Section 94 Contributions Plans will need to be prepared to guide development and provide suitable facilities and works within each candidate area.

The draft Strategy is consistent with the objectives of the Our Living City Settlement Strategy (OLCSS) and the DoP’s Mid North Coast Regional Environmental Plan and Mid North Coast Regional Strategy.

The provision of sufficient rural residential land within the LGA to cater for future

- Land -

61

population growth is a priority of Council, the Strategy addresses supply and demand issues to beyond 2023 and recognizes the need to monitor and review the Strategy every five years. Council is yet to adopt the Rural Residential Strategy Plan.

4.4.5 Industrial Lands Strategy The Industrial Lands Strategy has been produced to provide a strategic planning framework to guide the future development of industrial lands within the local government area (LGA). Consultants were engaged in November 2007 to complete the project on behalf of Council. The first draft of the document was received from the consultants in July 2008. Internal staff subsequently workshopped the document several times before providing comment to the consultants. The final revised draft document was received by Council in October 2008. On 6 November 2008 staff progressed the draft Industrial Lands Strategy to Council seeking approval to undertake public exhibition. At that meeting Council resolved to exhibit the draft strategy for an extended consultation period. The document was formally exhibited from 13 November 2008 to 30 January 2009. A community shopfront was held on 11 December to facilitate an opportunity for residents to discuss the draft Strategy with Council staff and their consultants. A total of 12 submissions were received from Government agencies and a further 19 submissions were received from individuals and community groups. The draft Industrial Lands Strategy will at end use comprise a component of the greater Growth Management Strategy being prepared by Council as part of the Standard Local Environmental Plan (SLEP) preparation process. This approach is necessary if Council is to satisfy the requirements of the Mid North Coast Regional Strategy released in March this year and Section 54(4) notification advice received from the Department of Planning in September 2007.

The final strategy was adopted by Council on 9 July 2009.

- Land -

62

Condition declining

4.5 Soil Erosion – Pressure Due to rainfall, topographic and soil characteristics, Coffs Harbour ranks as one of the most erosive areas in New South Wales. Soil loss from exposed and disturbed soils on clearing, earthworks and construction sites has been estimated at 400+ tonnes/ hectare/ year or over 2000 times greater than ‘natural’ rates of erosion in forests (CHCC, 1997). The consequences of this accelerated erosion and sedimentation include blockages of stormwater drainage systems, increased localised flooding, damage to natural bushland, sedimentation and water quality problems of Coffs Harbour creeks and adverse impacts on fishery habitats. Banana plantations can be affected by soil loss due to the combination of steep slopes and heavy rainfall. This is particularly so if the ground is made bare or ripped downhill during the land preparation stage prior to replanting. The other common problem areas in existing bananas are watercourses, gullies and poorly designed and constructed roads. Significant soil loss has occurred over the past couple years due to poor management practices of the land during the period between taking out old bananas and replanting new bananas or planting blueberries. This type of intensive agriculture includes built up rows perpendicular to the contours of the land and leaves large areas of bare earth, increasing sediment loss and erosion.

4.6 Soil Erosion – State Coffs Harbour and surrounding areas have experienced a number of severe rainfall events during the reporting period which has caused significant sediment loss throughout the City. Table 4.3 represents how many Clean up and Prevention Notices have been issued under the POEO Act for sediment and erosion related issues.

Table 4.3: Number of Clean up and Prevention notices issued under the POEO.

2005/06 2007/08 2008/09 No. of POEO

notices 2 8 14

Number of ‘Clean up’ and ‘Prevention’ notices issued under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act (POEO) What this indicator shows The table above illustrates the number of Clean up and Prevention notices issued under the POEO Act. There has been a significant increase in the number of notices issued. This is either due to the significant amount of rainfall Coffs Harbour has had or the community awareness of this issue has increased. While sediment and erosion control is generally a part of consent conditions for developments, in practice, these are not always complied with. Council Environmental Health officers report numerous breaches of controls. In future, greater effort needs to be made to ensure that no sediment materials leave construction sites and that appropriate penalties apply as a deterrent.

4.7 Soil Erosion – Response Development in the City must comply with the NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, Council’s Policy and Code of Practice and Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction (Landcom, 2004) (the“Blue Book”).

4.7.1 Water Sensitive Urban Design Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy was adopted by Council in 2009. Refer to s.5.10.3 for further information.

- Land -

63

4.8 Acid Sulfate Soils– Pressure Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) are sediments deposited under estuarine conditions that contain the sulfidic mineral pyrite. When sea levels rose and inundated land, sulfate in the sea water mixed with land sediments containing iron oxides and organic matter. The resulting chemical reaction produced large quantities of iron sulfides in the waterlogged sediments. When exposed to air, these sulfides oxidise to produce sulfuric acid. Areas such as low-lying swamps, coastal embayments and estuarine floodplains are still being formed today in mangrove and salt marshes, estuaries and tidal lakes. As long as ASS are not disturbed or drained or exposed to air, the sulfidic materials remain relatively harmless and are termed potential acid sulfate soils (PASS, Tulau 1999). PASS can be expected in areas where the surface elevation is less than five (5) metres above mean sea level.

When pyritic sediments are exposed to air through drainage, excavation, dredging and certain cultivation practices, this increases the likelihood that problems with ASS will occur. The oxidation reaction proceeds faster in moist conditions and is catalysed by bacteria. Oxidation of iron sulfide leads to the generation of sulfuric acid. Large amounts of acid can be produced, dissolving clay and releasing toxic concentrations of aluminium and iron into water bodies. Heavy metals may also be dissolved by ASS and then be released into the environment, including waterbodies.

ASS are a particular problem in coastal areas that contain iron sulfide within the soil profile and have been (or are being) cleared and drained or are subject to ongoing land management practices such as further drainage works or cultivation that disturbs iron sulfide layers in the soil. This leads to the production of sulphuric acid and the pH of waters draining from these soils can be as low as 2, causing the release of heavy metals from soil particles and creating aluminium toxicity. Such conditions can lead to major kills of aquatic life and to other serious impacts such as reduced hatching,

survival and growth rates across a wide range of aquatic species. Acid sulfate soils are a significant constraint since their disturbance for development can: • retard plant growth & reduce hatching

success, fish growth & survival, • cause illness/death to aquatic life, • cause illness in animals & humans, • dissolve and release heavy metals, • corrode/weaken engineering structures,

such as bridges & pipes. 4.9 Acid Sulfate Soils– State Acid sulphate soils indicators (Consistent Indicator 8) a) Extent and location of land identified with acid sulphate soils ASS b) Extent and no. of identified ASS hot spots; c) Length of drainage system; and d) New developments/works on ground (including for remediation) on identified ASS areas. Why use this Indicator? Acid Sulfate soils are naturally prevalent in coastal floodplains. Agricultural drainage practices in some areas have increased the frequency of acid discharges to waterways. The presence of acid sulfate soils can affect agricultural productivity and impact on aquatic ecosystems. Water quality impacts including fish kills and red spot disease are common in the region. Areas of acid sulfate soil (ASS) will not change over time, although development and land management practices in these areas may influence the frequency and severity of acid discharges. a) Extent and location of land identified with acid sulphate soils ASS 6,188 Ha of land in are in some class of acid sulphate soil affected land in the Coffs Harbour LGA. Table 4.4: Acid Sulphate Soils in Coffs Harbour LGA

Acid Sulphate Soil Risk Categorisation

Area (Ha)

High 2288 Low 3536 Disturbed 364 TOTAL 6188

Source: DIPNR 2004

- Land -

64

b) Extent and no. of identified ASS hot spots There are no identified ASS hotspots in the Coffs Harbour LGA. c) Length of drainage system This indicator is not applicable in the Coffs Harbour area as there are no intensive agricultural drainage practices occurring that are likely to disturb ASS.

4.10 Acid Sulfate Soils– Response Council’s Local Environment Plan Clause 23 includes controls over development in areas of mapped Potential Acid Sulfate Soils. Clause 23 requires proponents of certain development to seek development consent, where these soils may be affected due to the development. Information on ASS Risk Classes is included in s.149 Certificates for property transaction purposes.

4.11 Contaminated Land – Pressure

Land contamination is the result of various land uses and land management practices past and present involving the use of chemicals that persist in the environment and which are difficult to remediate. Contaminated land represents a pressure on the land resource as a whole in that it can restrict allowable uses of the land itself and place limits on allowable adjoining land uses (the state of contaminated lands in the Coffs LGA is discussed further below). Coffs Harbour has inherited a legacy of extensive chemical contamination and soil losses from past practices. Contaminated land is predominantly the result of past banana plantations in the Coffs Harbour area, but may also be due to cattle tick dip sites, fuel storage areas, timber treatment plants and various industrial premises. A new Council policy concerning contaminated lands is being developed.

4.12 Contaminated Land – State Much of the land in the Coffs Harbour LGA has been used for the production of bananas and as a result of the production methods and chemicals used, lands used for production between 1943 to 1994 have been mapped by Council as contaminated lands. Mapped lands are affected by Council’s Agricultural Chemical Residues Policy, which details conditions for development on such lands. In addition, a range of other lands may be contaminated, including current or former fuel storage depots, service stations, mechanical workshops, wrecking yards, gold mining areas, timber treatment plants and some industrial premises. Contaminated Lands (Consistent Indicator 9) No./area of contaminated sites and nature of contamination Why use this Indicator? The total number of contaminated sites in the north coast region is not currently known. Dip sites are well documented other sites include old

- Land -

65

fuel depots, past agricultural practices (eg. bananas), mechanical workshops, slipways, timber treatment plants and industrial sites. It is important to know how many contaminated sites have been identified and what efforts are being made to remediate them. This indicator is based on the core ANZECC indicator, status of highly contaminated sites — number of known contaminated sites where levels of contaminants exceed ANZECC/NHMRC and international threshold values, classified by status of remediation efforts. Table 4.5: Number of Listed Contaminated Lands in the Coffs Harbour Region

Type 2004 2009 Unexploded ordinance site 1 1 Cattle tic-dip sites 3 3 Unhealthy Building Act land 2 2 Under Investigation 5 5

Source: EPA 2004. What this Indicator shows The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) identifies a range of sites that are potentially contaminated within the Coffs Harbour LGA, as shown in Table 4.5. There is no change in the data from 2004.

4.13 Contaminated Land – Response

In NSW, the management of contaminated land is shared by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA – which forms part of the Department of Environment, Climate Change & Water (DECCW)), and planning consent authorities, which is usually a local council. Under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 (CLM Act), the EPA may use its powers to regulate a site where they consider the contamination to be “significant enough to warrant regulation under the CLM Act given the site’s current or approved use”. Contaminated sites that are not regulated by the EPA are managed by local councils through land use planning processes, meaning that under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), land is not allowed to be put to a use that is inappropriate because of the presence of contamination. Mechanisms are in place to ensure that:

• planning authorities consider contamination issues when they are making rezoning and development decisions;

• local councils provide information about land contamination on planning certificates that they issue under section 149 of the EP&A Act; and,

• land remediation is facilitated and controlled through State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP55).

Where a development application is received which involves a proposed change of use, Council will make an initial evaluation of the likelihood of contamination of the land. If the initial evaluation indicates that there may be contamination or there is insufficient information available, the proponent will be required to carry out a preliminary investigation, which may involve sampling. Generally, a preliminary investigation will be required under the following circumstances:

Type of Development Proposed

Residential, educational, recreational, childcare, hospital

All other development

Land declared by EPA as a “management area” √ √

Land where a potentially contaminating activity is or has been carried out

√ √

Land where a potentially contaminating activity could have been carried out

√ X

Land where a ‘clear’ report has been issued X X

If the preliminary investigation indicates that contamination is present or likely and the proposed land uses would increase the risk of exposure, Council will require a detailed investigation, which in turn will determine if and what remediation works are required. Council currently has an Agricultural Chemical Residues Policy, which relates to land mapped as being currently or previously used for banana farming. A new Council policy is under preparation and review, the draft Policy for the Management of Contaminated Land. The new draft policy includes many other land uses of potential risk as well as those from banana land.

Condition

steady

- Land -

66

4.14 Flood Prone Land - Pressure In the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area (LGA) the Great Dividing Range passes very close to the coast. The proximity of the coastal ranges to the ocean determines that the coastal plain has no major river systems. Instead coastal waterways are characterised by numerous small creek systems. Overall there are 16 major coastal creeks plus inland waterways, the largest being the Orara River. The area experiences a high rainfall, averaging 1700mm annually, with most rain falling in late summer and early autumn. Landform exerts a strong influence on rainfall within the area. Higher rainfall occurs east of the coastal range, due to the orographic effect of moist maritime air rising over the land and can lead to high intensity storms. Coffs Harbour’s coastal catchment areas are relatively small and steep. Critical storms in this area are therefore generally short, up to nine hours, but many are less than two hours. Rainfall on the coastal strip in Coffs Harbour City can be almost tropical in its intensity and cyclones have come as far south as Coffs Harbour. Inundation periods can last up to several hours and can result in significant flooding. The majority of Council’s population and urban development occurs in the coastal catchments with development pressures on the coastal floodplains. Flood events do occur regularly in the Coffs Harbour LGA with significant flood events having occurred in 1917, 1938, 1950, 1963, 1974, 1977, 1989 and 1991. More recently there have been two significant flood events occurring in November 1996 and March 2009 with both events being declared natural disasters.

4.15 Flood Prone Land - State On 31 March 2009 the Coffs Creek, Boambee – Newports Creek and Bonville Creek catchments experienced heavy rainfall leading to major flooding. The flooding caused inundation of residential, commercial and industrial areas and blocked local roads and the Pacific Highway. The event caused severe damage

to private and public infrastructure and has led the State Government into declaring the event a ‘Natural Disaster’, opening up flood relief funding to repair damage caused by the event. The event produced widespread environmental damage throughout the LGA. The waterways and wetlands suffered contamination due to failure and damage to sewer pumping stations. The Catchment Management Authority (CMA) undertook a preliminary assessment of restoration costs for the Orara, Coffs Harbour, Bellinger and Nambucca catchments. Most of the damage relates to a large contribution of silt leading to a decline in water quality within the Town Drinking Water Supply Area. There is also extensive undercutting, slumping and erosion of banks, loss of bank vegetation, bank destabilisation, an increased risk of sedimentation of pools downstream and loss of in stream habitat. A significant feature of the rainfall patterns for both the 2009 and 1996 storm events are how the rainfall intensities vary over the catchments. Rain gauges located in the hinterland (higher parts of the catchments) experience much greater rainfall intensities than those located at lower altitudes close to the coast. This is referred to as orographic influence. For example in the March 2009 storm event the Red Hill and Shephards Lane gauges, located in the Coffs hinterland, recorded well over 400mm for 24 hours while the Coffs Airport gauge, located close to the coast, only recorded 166mm for 24 hours.

Figure 4.1: March 2009 floods.

- Land -

67

4.16 Flood Prone Land - Response To manage the impacts of flooding, Council prepares Flood Studies and Flood Plain Risk Management Studies and Plans in accordance with the State Governments ‘Floodplain Development Manual’. The Flood Studies and Floodplain Risk Management Studies and Plans provide Council with sound information and data to use in developing strategic documents and planning controls. The advantages to both Council and the community in having the floodplain management studies and plans in place are: -

Having a proper basis for managing and using flood prone land to provide a balance between danger to personal safety and economic losses due to flooding, and social, ecological and cultural interests; Optimising community infrastructure; Minimizing personal danger to

residents, visitors and emergency response personnel and community flood damage; Strategically assessing catchments so

that the impacts of development on flooding and flooding on development can be effectively considered.

The following flood studies and plans have been completed since 1996: - Northern Tributaries of Coffs Creek

Flood Study, Nov 1997; Northern Tributaries of Coffs Creek

Floodplain Management Study, 1997; Northern Tributaries of Coffs Creek

Floodplain Management Plan, Jul 1998. Bonville and Middle Creek Floodplain

Management Study, May 1998; Moonee Creek Flood Study, Jun 1998; Bonville and Middle Creek, Floodplain

Management Plan, July 1999; Coffs Creek Flood Study, May 2001; Coffs Creek Floodplain Risk

Management Study, Oct 2005; Coffs Creek Floodplain Risk

Management Plan, Sep 2006. There remain numerous catchments and areas for which Council has little or poor quality flood information. Council has assessed its priorities for these remaining

catchments and taking into consideration existing & potential urban development & the nature of local flood problems has a program for preparing future flood studies & plans for the LGA. Council is currently working with consultants in the preparation of a Boambee – Newport’s Creek Flood Study & has funding to undertake flood studies for Woolgoolga Creek & the Orara River – Bucca Bucca Creek catchments. The above management studies and plans have been developed following the guidelines in the State Governments ‘Floodplain Development Manual’. Council receives indemnity, in relation to flood advice given & actions done provided it has followed the guidelines of the State Government's Manual in developing, adopting & implementing the Floodplain Risk Management Plans. Also by following the guidelines and registering the projects with the Floodplain Management Authority the projects will receive a ranking & may become eligible for grant funding from the State Government. Funding for flood mitigation projects is normally on a 2:1 (State : Council) basis. The Floodplain Management Plans also recommend different capital works to mitigate flood impacts. Works that have been completed since 1996 include: - Jetty drainage works Stage 1

($306,000); Northern Tributaries of Coffs Creek

detention basin, stream improvements and retaining wall flood levy ($300,000);

CBD drainage works stage 2 ($1.1M); CBD drainage works stage 3 ($1.2M); Middle Creek, Sawtell detention basin

($75,000); Bakers Road Detention Basin, Coffs

Creek catchment. This project is currently underway with the detailed design complete and land acquisition progressing. Construction is due to start October 2009. (Estimated cost $2.3M though this may increase with detailed costing of final design and changes to land values for property acquisition);

Jetty Drainage Stage 2, detailed design completed and grant funds available. Programmed to commence work later in 2009.

- Land -

68

Bakers Road Detention Basin The Bakers Road Detention Basin is the largest and most expensive of the proposed flood mitigation works with the basin being approximately 180m long and 6m high. The total estimated cost of the basin is $2.3M. This comprises $1.0M in estimated land acquisition costs. The basin reduces the peak 100-year flood flow from 46m3/s to 17m3/s downstream of the basin site. Flood level reductions of up to 0.2m are estimated to occur along the main creek, from Bakers Road to Grafton Street. Below Grafton Street the benefit gradually reduces as other catchments and factors influence flood behaviour. It is estimated that the proposed basin would reduce the number of residential homes inundated by the 100-year flood from 308 to 214 and reduce the number of inundated commercial buildings from 111 to 78. The total flood damage for the 100-year flood is estimated to reduce from $28.3M to $18.8M. The net present value of flood benefits (from all floods) is estimated at $3.8M. This provides an attractive economic benefit/cost ratio of 1.7 even though the basin has relatively high capital cost. The total flood damage for the 100-year flood will be reduced even more by the construction of additional basins and mitigations works but the works will not eliminate damage costs for flood events.

- Land -

69


actions that need to be undertaken to protect the land. These actions align with the Our Living City Settlement Strategy Interim Document.

Actions Implemented

Ensure the Sustainable Agriculture Strategy (when written) addresses land management practices.

Develop strict controls across the entire Coffs Harbour LGA to limit the possibility of pre-emptive clearing.

Develop education and interpretation programs aimed at reducing impacts on natural areas by neighbours and visitors.

Develop strategies to ensure rehabilitation of degraded banana lands, and revegetation of visually significant areas.

Provide a schedule to minimise impacts from Acid Sulfate Soils in development areas

Ensure any future Sustainable Industry Strategy deals with contaminated land by using minimum tillage, permaculture, biodynamics and contouring.

Prepare detailed mapping and investigation into potential acid sulfate soils and potentially contaminated sites in the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Incorporate results of the 2005 Coffs Creek Floodplain Management Study into strategic planning documents.

Complete floodplain management studies for other development areas as they become available.

- Water -

71

5 WATER

5.1 Overview The Great Dividing Range passes very close to the coast in the Coffs Harbour area. The proximity of the coastal ranges to the ocean determines that the coastal plain has no major river systems. Instead, drainage is characterised by numerous small creek systems (Nicholson and Mansbridge, 1996). Aquatic systems within the Coffs Harbour area form an integral part of the environment. Generally the creeks are small but they perform a variety of functions, including provision of agricultural water supplies and acting as recreational resources for activities such as swimming, fishing and, in the larger streams, boating. With their associated wetlands they provide a habitat for a myriad of plant and animal species.

5.2 Freshwater Ecosystem Health – Pressure

The major pressures on water quality, water quantity and aquatic ecosystem health in inland waters of the Coffs Harbour area stem from various land uses, the provision of town water supplies, water diversion for irrigation and stock uses through harvestable water rights and domestic stock rights, aquatic weed infestation, erosion (sediments), nutrients, pollution incidents as well as bacterial contamination from sources such as failing septic tanks and animal faeces. Cropping, grazing and the use of water soluble fertilizers can all contribute to the pollution of inland creek systems, including through the exposure, erosion and runoff of soils and sediments and runoff of nutrients added to these soils. Nutrients used in the majority of agricultural pursuits can lead to excess nutrients in water bodies and to algal bloom outbreaks. This in turn can have serious consequences on stream health, water quality and ecological balance in inland waterways.

Pesticides entering waterways via rural run-off can also degrade water quality and place aquatic organisms under stress. Clearing of vegetation reduces the size of root-zone water storage and the frequency with which water moves beyond the root-zone to the regional groundwater is therefore increased. Surface run-off, erosion and sedimentation of waterways are also increased as a result of exposing soil following clearing and through land management practices involving regular mechanical cultivation without the establishment of ground covers. Removal of the canopy cover also exposes the ground surface to direct rainfall and increased erosion potential. Clearing of vegetation can lower the infiltration capacity of water into soil due to changes over time such as becoming less friable with less organic matter and being compressed by stock. The clearing of riparian (ie river and creek bank) vegetation and the invasion of exotic species has an adverse impact on water quality and also on bank stability and stream ecology. Pollutants including excessive sediments, heavy metals, pesticides and nutrients can be filtered and trapped in a healthy riparian zone, which acts as a buffer, preventing pollutants from flowing into the stream.

5.3 Freshwater Ecosystem Health – State

5.3.1 Water Quality The rivers located in the Coffs Harbour area, west of the dividing range are the Bobo River, Urumbilum River, Little Nymboida River and the Orara River. Plants and animals in aquatic ecosystems rely on good water quality for their survival. Humans also rely on good water quality for aesthetic, recreational and productive values. Whether the water quality of a waterway is “good” or “poor” is largely dependant on the management of land use activities within its catchment described in the pressures section above.

- Water -

72

There are a variety of indicators and various benchmark studies that can be used to assess inland water quality and broader ecological health attributes, including: • Meeting various ANZECC water quality

standards • Bacterial contamination levels

5.3.2 ANZECC Water Quality Standards Water quality is determined by a range of factors and different standards must be met for different uses of inland waterways. ANZECC water quality guidelines provide a mechanism by which to determine how well our waterways meet these standards. Percentage Exceedances of ANZECC Water Quality Guidelines (Consistent Indicator 3) Why use this Indicator? Water has many environmental values, including recreation, irrigation, stock watering and protection of aquatic ecosystems. The maintenance of these values is a critical environmental issue. Standard methods are used to measure the various water quality parameters, and the indicator allows for variation in the parameters measured and the frequency of measurement for each water body. Water quality guidelines are used to indicate significant levels of change for the range of environmental values, including human health, recreation, irrigation, stock watering and protection of aquatic ecosystems for each water quality variable or parameter. This is a core ANZECC indicator. What this indicator shows Figure 6.1 illustrates the ecological health at each water quality sampling site during the reporting period, which gives a ranking on how well it complies with the ANZECC Guidelines. This ranking gives an assessment of Excellent (A) through to Fail (E). These assessments are based on monthly testing of water quality parameters which are total nitrogen, nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, total phosphorus, faecal coliforms, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, temperature and pH. The ecological health assessments were done at four sites which are Cochranes, Coramba, Nana Glen and Hallgaths.

Note that this indicator has not been used previously and it is therefore not possible to comment about trends on this basis at this stage.

5.3.3 Riparian Vegetation Cover Riparian vegetation is important for stabilising banks, providing a filter for pollutants and as a flora and fauna habitat area. Note that the Healthy Rivers Commission emphasizes that healthy native riverside vegetation is the most important element of a healthy river in coastal NSW (Healthy Rivers Commission, 2003). Within non-urban areas, the State Government (DIPNR) have responsibility for the conservation of riparian vegetation under the Native Vegetation Conservation Act. The consent process for clearing riparian vegetation provides some degree of control and protection of riparian vegetation in rural areas. Presence or absence of riparian vegetation (Consistent Indicator 19) Why Use this Indicator? Pressure on water systems arises from removing riparian vegetation. Streams with little or no riparian vegetation (<10% cover) are likely to have lost most of their habitat value and ecological function. This is a core ANZECC indicator. It is difficult to make an accurate assessment of the riparian vegetation cover within the Coffs Harbour LGA. The former Department of Land and Water Conservation provided the following assessment in 1999 of selected waterways without vegetation cover. Table 5.1: % of Selected Waterways without Vegetation Cover

Waterway % with no cover

Little Nymboida River

13.25

Upper Orara River 23.76 Middle Orara River 31.89 Lower Orara River 22.79

(DLWC, 1999)

Trend uncertain

- Water -

73

What this indicator shows It is not possible to make an updated assessment of these figures because the methodology used to create these figures is unclear and Council has a mapping system that uses different categories and classes of vegetation. Also the boundaries for Upper, middle or Orara River are unavailable at present. However, using vegetation data held by Council indicates the following as benchmark for 2004: • Little Nymboida corridor has 57.5% riparian

vegetation cover. • Orara river corridor has 84.1% riparian

vegetation cover. These figures suggest that inland creeks and rivers are fairly well protected by riparian vegetation. However, much of the riparian vegetation in the Coffs Harbour LGA consists of introduced and weed tree species such as Camphor laurel and privet, which nevertheless play a significant role in the stabilisation of creek and river banks and management of weeds species in riparian areas should take this into account.

Condition uncertain

- Water -

74

Figure 5.1: Ecological health assessment of sites west of the diving range. The four sites are Cochranes, Coramba, Nana Glen and Hallgaths.

- Water -

75

5.4 Freshwater Ecosystem Health – Response

5.4.1 Riparian Vegetation Protection Mechanisms for the protection and maintenance of riparian vegetation in the Coffs Harbour LGA is achieved in a number of ways, including through zoning in the Local Environment Plan as Zone 7A Environmental Protection Habitat/ Catchment Protection. There are also a range of other requirements and provisions for the protection of riparian vegetation such as the general requirement of land holders to seek permission from DECCW for removal of riparian vegetation and the buffering of land use practices from riparian areas under NSW protected lands provisions.

5.4.2 Orara River Rehabilitation Project The river rehabilitation project has been continuing since 1999, in the Orara River Catchment within the western portion of Coffs Harbour LGA, as a sub catchment of the Clarence River Catchment. The project has received CHCC Environmental Levy funding since 2004, and regular funding from the Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority. The project involves approximately 120 private landholders in the exclusion of stock from the riparian zone, weed control, and rainforest regeneration works, to reduce impacts upon streambank and instream biodiversity as well as impacts upon water quality. The project works to restore the Endangered Ecological Community of Lowland Subtropical Rainforest in the riparian zone, connecting vegetation remnants and corridors which link into well forested head waters under National Park and State Forest tenures.

5.4.3 Orara Valley Primary Schools WaterWatch Program

CHCC is a partner in the Orara Valley Schools WaterWatch program, together with Coffs Harbour Regional LandCare, Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority and the NSW Department of Education & Training Cascade Environmental Education Centre. The program involves primary school students in monthly water quality

testing and aquatic macro invertebrate monitoring at four sites adjacent to Orara Valley Primary Schools. Data gathered is uploaded to a State wide database which is publically available.

- Water -

76

5.5 Coasts and Estuaries – Pressure

The most significant pressure relating to coasts and estuaries is the likelihood of increased population and associated development pressure within coastal areas. Climate change will place an unknown pressure on coasts and estuaries from sea level rise, average temperature, rainfall patterns, storm surges, drought frequency and extreme storm events. Inappropriate or poor land management practices contribute pressure on the coastal creek and estuary systems in the Coffs Harbour area including those associated with urban development and agriculture. These generate sediment, nutrients and other pollutants that enter our waterways. Litter and chemicals are also flushed into the creeks and estuaries directly through rainfall events or via the stormwater system. Bacterial contamination enters waterways from sources such as failing on-site sewage management systems, sewer overflows and animal faeces. Riparian (creek/river bank) vegetation continues to be under pressure from weed invasion and streambank erosion which, in turn, degrades the water quality downstream. Associated with human uses of estuaries and surrounding areas are various structures that can be considered to have impacts and are indicators of pressures on estuarine and coastal waters. Structures that alter or impede tidal flow are therefore likely to degrade estuaries and change and isolate areas of important estuarine habitat. Tidal flow plays a significant role in the health, vitality and diversity of estuarine systems and inter-tidal habitat areas are particularly sensitive to changes in tidal levels and frequency of tidal inundation. Structures such as dams, weirs and causeways in waterways can have a significant impact on the flow of coastal waterways through pooling water, changing channel course or creating bank erosion depending on the type of structure. This in turn can have a number of further effects on

the physical characteristics and ecosystem health aspects of waterways.

5.6 Coasts and Estuaries – State Coastal creeks, estuaries and the sea are highly indicative of the broader state of the environment in the sense that these waterways are the receiving body for most of the activities in the catchments. Their health in terms of water quality, biological integrity and structure provide us with a reasonable picture of the integrity of relevant catchments and the state of human practices in these catchments. There are 16 major coastal creeks and 24 beaches over 74km of coastline in the local government area. Coastal creeks include:

Corindi Arrawarra Darkum Woolgoolga Willis Double Crossing Fiddamans Moonee Jordans Pinebrush Coffs Boambee Bonville Pine Bundageree Pipeclay

Point source discharges (Consistent Indicator 1) a) Number, location and type of point source discharges b) see Stormwater section Why use this Indicator? Maintaining water quality relies on identifying and evaluating effluent from a variety of pollution sources, especially those that may adversely affect water quality. This is a core ANZECC indicator.

5.6.1 Licensed Point Source Pollution Sources

The DECCW licences activities that are sources of pollutant and sets conditions for the conduct of these activities that aim to control and minimise pollution into waterways. a) Number, location and type of point

source discharges Data from the DECCW is based on licences issued under the POEO Act and no distinction is made between those through which direct or

- Water -

77

indirect sources of pollutants are discharged. It is therefore necessary to group activities on the basis of assumed relevance to waterway discharges. Other activities licensed under this Act may have relevance to the issue of pressures on water quality, however, are likely to have very indirect bearing on water quality and as such, are reported in relation to the atmosphere (Chapter 3). Data is reported here for the two comprehensive SOE years. Table 5.2: Licensed activities with DECCW in Coffs Harbour LGA

Licences for point source discharges 2003-04 2008-09Sewage Treatment 3 4 Misc Licensed Discharge to Waters (any) 1 2 Other Vessel Construction/Maintenance 1 0 Hazardous, Industrial or Group A Waste G 4 2 Mooring and Boat Storage 1 0 TOTAL 10 8

Extent and degree of change of estuarine habitat types (mangroves, salt marshes and seagrasses (Consistent Indicator 20) Why use this indicator? Different habitat types reflect differing environmental/ecological conditions and therefore different components of biological diversity. There is a need to develop a consistent national classification of marine and estuarine habitat types. Changes in tidal flow may be indicated by the extent of saltmarsh or mangroves. Mapping and data is limited, however, this is a core ANZECC indicator. The NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) is responsible for managing fish (including aquatic invertebrates), and fish habitat throughout NSW. In addition, the Department works to provide quality commercial and recreational fishing, and aquaculture permit requirements under s198-202, s205 and s218-220 of the Fisheries Management Act (1994). Fish populations have and continue to suffer serious decline, consequently, in addition to mitigation of deleterious impacts on fish and fish habitat, some emphasis must be placed on restoration. Even through the fish populations are in decline table 5.3 provides a

trend from the previous reporting period which remains steady. Table 5.3: Information regarding fish and aquatic habitat from the Department of Primary Industries

2007/08 2008/09 Permits issued 7 4 Permits refused 0 0 Proposals significantly modified to reduce impact on fish habitat

5 5

Saltmarsh (ha) 95 95 Mangroves (ha) 115 115 Seagrass (ha) 22 22 Priority Oyster Leases

0 0

Road crossing 10 (1 high priority

11(1 high priority

Weirs 3 20 Rehabilitation Projects Casuarina Lane Full-width Rock-ramp Fishway completed Threatened species • Grey Nurse Shark (Carcharias Taurus) • Green Sawfish (Pristis zijsron) • Southern Bluefin Tuna (Thunnus maccoyii) • Great White Shark (Carcharadon

carcharias) • Black Cod (Epinephelus daemelii) • Eastern Freshwater Cod (Maccullochella

ikei) • Oxleyan Pygmy Perch (Nannoperca

oxleyana) • Purple Spotted Gudgeon (Mogurnda

adspersa) • Marine Brown (Nereia lophocladia) The most recent information on the status of fisheries resources in NSW, is available in Status of Fisheries Resources in NSW 2006/2007. This general overview reports on the state of fish populations that are harvested by commercial fisheries licensed by NSW DPI and includes a summary of the state of knowledge of 92 key species. This report is available at: http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/research/areas/systems-research/wild-fisheries/outputs/2008/972

Condition

steady

Condition

steady

- Water -

78

5.6.2 Beachwatch Seven swimming locations were monitored in the Coffs Harbour City Council area: six ocean beaches and one rockpool. These sites have also been monitored in previous years (DEC 2004b, DECC 2007, DECC 2008). Enterococci samples were collected between the end of November 2008 and February 2009, the busiest period of the summer swimming season. Compliance was assessed against the NHMRC (1990) swimming water quality guidelines. It should be noted that only four samples were collected in each month and to calculate compliance an additional data point was ‘borrowed’ from an adjacent month. A high level of compliance with NHMRC (1990) swimming water guidelines was recorded at all ocean beaches. Woolgoolga Main, Emerald, Jetty, Diggers, Park and Mid-Sawtell beaches were suitable for swimming during all three months in which compliance was assessed (Figure 5.2).

Figure 5.2: Summary of compliance with NHMRC (1990) microbiological guidelines for swimming at Coffs Harbour City Council swimming sites during the 2008–2009 summer swimming season

5.6.3 Council’s Water Quality Monitoring Program

Coffs Harbour City Council regularly conducts tests within major creeks and rivers, monitoring total nitrogen, nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, total phosphorus and

faecal coliforms numbers, as well as a range of other water quality parameters. There are numerous sampling sites from Red Rock in the North to Bonville in the South, covering the main estuaries within the local government area, and including sites influenced by various land use types. Exceedances of ANZECC Water Quality Guidelines (Consistent Indicator 3) Why use this Indicator? Water has many environmental values, including recreation, irrigation, stock watering and protection of aquatic ecosystems. The maintenance of these values is a critical environmental issue. Standard methods are used to measure the various water quality parameters, and the indicator allows for variation in the parameters measured and the frequency of measurement for each water body. Water quality guidelines are used to indicate significant levels of change for the range of environmental values, including human health, recreation, irrigation, stock watering and protection of aquatic ecosystems for each water quality variable or parameter. This is a core ANZECC indicator. What this indicator shows Figure 5.3 illustrates the ecological health at each water quality sampling site during the reporting period, which gives a ranking on how well it complies with the ANZECC Guidelines. This ranking gives an assessment of Excellent (A) through to Fail (E). These assessments are based on monthly testing of water quality parameters which are total nitrogen, nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, total phosphorus, faecal coliforms, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, temperature and pH. The ecological health assessments were done at fifteen sites which are Red Rock Estuary, Arrawarra Creek, Darkum Creek, Woolgoolga Lake, Hearnes Lake, Fiddamans Creek, Moonee Creek, Pine Brush Creek, Jordons, Creek, Coffs Creek, Boambee Creek, Bonville and Chinnamans Creek and Sawtell Rock Pool. Note that this indicator has not been used previously and it is therefore not possible to comment about trends on this basis at this stage.

Trend uncertain

- Water -

79

Figure 5.3: Ecological health assessments of estuaries and waterways along the Coffs Harbour coastline.

- Water -

80

5.7 Coasts and Estuaries – Response

5.7.1 Draft Coastal Hazards Definition Study

A draft Coastal Hazards Definition Study has been completed. The next step is to identify hazard lines which will then require a management plan for the Coastline. Coastal processes and hazards are part of the complex natural systems affecting the coastline and impacting upon private and public assets and property. The processes and hazards will be influenced by any future changes in climate or sea level. Pressures on natural resources and public infrastructure are increasing with population growth and expanding residential, industrial and tourism needs. In recognition of these pressures Council through its Coastal Estuary Management Advisory Committee (CEMAC), has resolved to prepare a Coastal Zone Management Plan. The first step being preparation of a Coastal Process - Hazard Definition Study.

5.7.2 Estuary Management This high level of development pressure means that estuaries are subject to a range of direct and indirect impacts due to land use in the catchment, changes to hydrology and tidal processes, and the direct use of the estuary waterway. In recognition of the need for future sustainable use of these threatened resources, the NSW Government is implementing a number of key strategic initiatives, one of which is the Estuary Management Program. The Estuary Management Program commenced in 1992 to assist local government to better manage estuaries through a strategic process outlined in the NSW 'Estuary Management Manual' (BMT WBM, 2008). Estuary Management Plans for Moonee Creek, Hearnes Lake and Pipe Clay Lake have been prepared on behalf of Coffs Harbour City Council and Department of Environment & Climate Change (DECC), to fulfil the requirements of the NSW Estuary Management Policy (1992) and the NSW Coastal Policy (1997). The Plans provide programs of strategic actions to assist

government authorities and other stakeholder groups to sustain a healthy estuary through appropriate waterway, foreshore and catchment management. The Plans present an integrated suite of management strategies, giving consideration to the complex interactions between many estuarine processes and functions. Moonee Estuary Management Plan The Moonee Creek Estuary Management Plan is designed to provide clear direction regarding responsibilities for actions, which will help achieve the overall goal of a sustainable waterway. The Plan also provides information on who is responsible for implementation of these actions and how they can be funded. The Plan is designed to be a dynamic document. That is, as the needs or conditions of the estuary change in the future, the options and strategies being implemented as part of this Plan can be adjusted to suit. It is intended that progress in implementing the Plan will be reviewed annually by the Estuary Management Committee, while the entire Plan will be updated every 3-5 years (BMT WBM, 2008).

Hearnes Lake Estuary Management Plan The Hearnes Lake Estuary Management Plan is to provide strategic direction and specific focus for the long and short term sustainable management of the Hearnes Lake waterway, tributaries, its surrounding foreshore lands, and its catchment in so far as catchment activities impact on the condition of the waterway. The Plan is designed to be used as a ‘user manual’ for undertaking activities and implementing strategies that will result in improved environmental conditions and a better

- Water -

81

balance between human and ecological demands on the estuary. The Plan should be used to inform other strategic documents that aim to manage and rationalise human activities and development within the catchment, such as Regional Strategies, Urban Structure Plans, DCPs and the Coffs Harbour LEP (BMT WBM, 2009).

Pipe Clay Lake Draft Estuary Management Plan An Estuary Management Plan is under preparation for Pipe Clay Lake to provide strategic direction and guidance on short and long term management of the system and its catchment. This includes consideration and management of existing development within the catchment (and associated stormwater runoff for example) as well as plans for future development (including controls, buffers, setbacks etc). The Plan will be used as a platform for conservation and protection of existing values, and for future rehabilitation works that aim to redress issues associated with past and present development around the estuary and within the catchment (BMT WBM, 2009).

Other Studies Boambee Creek Draft Processes Study and Bonville Pine Processes Study have been completed with the next step being to complete an estuary management plan. Woolgoolga Lake will begin the processes study in 2010 which will include Darkum Creek and Willis Creek. For further information regarding these Estuary Management Plans, please refer to Council’s website: www.coffsharbour.nsw.gov.au

5.7.3 Beachwatch Program The Beachwatch Reporting Program established by Council aims to assess water quality parameters and bacterial concentrations at seven swimming locations in the area: six ocean beaches and one rockpool. These sites have also been monitored in previous years (DEC 2004b, DECC 2007, DECC 2008). Enterococci samples were collected between November 2008 & February 2009, being the busiest period of the summer swimming season. Compliance was assessed against the NHMRC(1990) swimming water quality guidelines. It should be noted that four samples were collected in each month and to calculate compliance an additional data point was ‘borrowed’ from an adjacent month.

- Water -

82

5.8 Stormwater – Pressure Stormwater runoff from both rural and urban areas has been identified as a major source of nutrients in receiving waterways. Nutrients can be transported in solution, or attached to soil particles and other sediments that are carried by stormwater (OECD, 1986). Excess nutrients, particularly nitrogen and phosphorus, can lead to the eutrophication of waterways (ie resulting in excessive algae growth). Nutrients enter stormwater from a wide variety of sources. In urban areas, this includes garden waste washed down street gutters, detergents, such as those used for car washing, and fertilisers used on gardens. Other sources include on-site sewage disposal systems when they fail, runoff from industrial work areas, illegal washing of industrial equipment and fertilisers used on sports grounds and gardens. One other important source is animal faeces, including domestic stock, pets and native wildlife. Agricultural land represents the most significant proportion of area discharging into our natural waterways and would thus be considered as providing a significant impact or pressure on aquatic ecosystems (including estuaries). In rural areas, agricultural runoff is usually high in nutrients. Bananas have been grown in the Coffs Harbour area since the 1880’s. In 1987, the Department of Agriculture determined that each hectare of land generally required 230 kg Nitrogen, 50 kg Phosphorus, 400 kg Potash and 1 to 1.2 tonnes of lime or dolomite, every year (NSW Department of Agriculture, 1987). Although less extensive, cattle grazing is also important in the Coffs Harbour area, particularly on the lower slopes. The impact on stormwater runoff from cattle grazing is dependent on management practices, particularly the number of cattle and the grazing regime. Cattle contribute substantial amounts of nutrients, which may be transported with stormwater. It has been estimated that one cow can produce 58 kg

Nitrogen and 18 kg Phosphorus each year (Moss, 1988). Littering is also a pollution issue for our waterways and consistent data regarding the volumes of material collected in gross pollutant traps is becoming more systematically collected by Council. This will provide an accurate picture of the scale and trends in relation to this problem in future (see discussion above regarding stormwater pollutant traps). Faeces from dogs and cats in public areas are a nuisance, health issue and environmental problem. Faeces from domestic pets being washed by rain from parks/streets and footpaths into creeks and stormwater drains are a significant source of bacteria in local waterways. This has effects on both the aquatic ecosystem and people using the creek for recreational pursuits such as swimming. Pet droppings also contribute to the high levels of phosphorous and other potential harmful nutrients in our waterways.

5.9 Stormwater – State In addition to the above licensed pollution discharges, Council has 23 stormwater outlets in the urban area of Coffs Harbour, that act as point source discharges draining directly into various creeks after the collection of diffuse sources of pollutants across various catchments. Point source discharges (Consistent Indicator 1) b) area of urban collection catchment, % of

this area with discharge point sources (ie stormwater outlets), and % of this area treated to primary, secondary and tertiary stormwater treatment levels)

Primary stormwater treatment includes screening of gross pollutants and sedimentation of coarse particles. Secondary includes removal of sediment though sedimentation of fine particulates and filtration with some removal of nutrients and bacteria. Tertiary treatment includes enhanced sedimentation and filtration, biological uptake and absorption onto

- Water -

83

sediments through the use of constructed wetland systems or sand filters. In Coffs Harbour, only primary level stormwater treatment has been used to date. While monitoring systems for pollutant traps are still evolving, it is possible to report that approximately 21.25 cubic meters of materials were removed from all 25 stormwater pollutant traps over a 12 month period (August 08 to February 09), based on records of visual inspections of materials removed during routine maintenance. Of these materials, the following approximate breakdown was recorded (see Table 5.4). Table 5.4: Materials Removed from Stormwater Pollutant Traps (May 03-May 04 & August 08 – February 2009)

Approximate % based on visual assessment

Material

2003/04 2008/09 Sand/Silt Aggregate

15 12

Litter 25 30 Vegetation 56 54 Other 4 4 Total 100% 100%

What this indicator shows The size of the urban area catchment and the percentage of this area with discharge point sources have not been calculated for this report, due to the fact that this information is not readily able to be determined as point source discharges are not yet accurately mapped. However, the data collected is based on materials removed from stormwater pollutant traps. The comparison between 2003/04 and 2008/09 showed very similar results. The DECCW has also reported 39 pollution incident calls in relation to all Coffs Harbour waterways for the reporting period. Complaints to Council Regarding Water Pollution Why use this Indicator? This indicator provides a measure of the types of major pollution incidents that are reported to Council. This helps track the major pressures which can and are creating immediate visible impacts.

Table 5.5: Complaints to Council regarding water pollution during the two comprehensive periods.

Complaint Type 03/04

08/09

Substance/Chemical 17 24 Rubbish 10 5 Oil 6 7 Algae 2 2 Other 9 3 TOTAL 44 41

What this Indicator shows There continued to be a significant number of water pollution complaints made to Council during the past year and Council continues to undertake regulatory and educational responses to such pollution incidences. While the number of complaints was similar to 2003/04 period.

5.10 Stormwater – Response

5.10.1 Urban Stormwater Management Plan

In 2000, Council adopted a Stormwater Management Plan which has an extensive list of actions for implementation on an ongoing basis. The Urban Stormwater Management Plan (USMP) has been developed on a catchment basis to specifically address stormwater management within urban areas that have a population in excess of 1000.

5.10.2 Enforcement of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act

Council staff have been trained on the Protection of the Environment Operations Act and specific regulatory powers for various offences under this Act. Council now has many trained staff with authority to issue infringement notices for littering with specific attention on littering from vehicles. Council officers will continue to use the regulatory powers under the POEO Act to establish appropriate environmental management and pollution controls on building and development sites throughout the city.

Condition

steady

Condition

steady

- Water -

84

5.10.3 Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD)

A Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) policy was adopted by Council throughout the reporting period. WSUD is a multi-faceted approach to managing stormwater. It integrates land-use planning with water management. Using a holistic approach, WSUD aims to blend urban infrastructure with a site's natural features in a way that reduces negative impacts on the natural water cycle and protects the health of aquatic ecosystems. WSUD treatments collect, treat and use stormwater as close as possible to where it falls as rain. WSUD measures aim to mimic the natural processes of small and frequent runoff (or rain) events. This is because in terms of pollution, these smaller events are of greatest environmental significance as they frequently cause enough runoff to carry pollutants into our waterways. The impact of urbanisation on the water cycle and natural environment occurs as there is typically a large increase in impervious surfaces (eg roads, driveways, roofs). Stormwater which previously infiltrated the ground (vegetated areas) now collects and travels along the path of least resistance (traditional stormwater pipes and gutters) to a point of discharge (natural waterways). The water flow rate is increased, the level of pollutants high and the frequency of high pollutant concentration events is high (as smaller rain events which generate enough runoff to move settled pollutants from a site are frequent). In order to protect and improve the quality of our waterways, Council has adopted WSUD to help manage these frequent, high polluting rainfall events that occur in our ever developing urban area. WSUD applies to all developments of the following type; • Subdivision developments greater

than five lots • Commercial Development • Industrial Development • Tourist Development

• Public Buildings • Single & dual occupancies, MUDs,

alterations and additions The Hood Street Biofiltration Project has been designed as a retrofit project within a developed streetscape. The basin will reduce the inflow of pollutants entering Coffs Creek. In particular a reduction of Suspended Solids by 80%, Total Phosphorus by 65% and Total Nitrogen by 45% of the current pollutant loads. While sized to DECCW and future Council guidelines, the main goal of the Hood Street Biofiltration Basin is to assess the effectiveness, efficiency, cost and work load associated with a typical basin. This will be assessed by collaborating data with other organisations on establishment and maintenance costs, typical problems faced, pollutant removal effectiveness etc.

Figure 5.4: Hood Street Biofiltration Project For further information refer to Council’s website for information sheet WSUD policy and guideline: http://www.coffsharbour.nsw.gov.au.

5.10.4 Gross Pollutant Trap Gross pollutant traps continue to operate throughout the LGA. There are currently 25 in operation which continually receive maintenance.

- Water -

85

5.11 Effluent Management – Pressure

5.11.1 Onsite Sewage Management Systems

The major pressure on waterways derives from increasing numbers of on-site sewage management (OSSM) systems associated with dwellings and some farm operations and in particular, those located near to waterways and which are operationally faulty. Increasing numbers of poorly functioning OSSM systems have cumulative impacts on the quality of creeks and waterways and this is an issue of concern. Rural villages such as Coramba, Nana Glen and Red Rock, Ulong and Lowanna are unsewered and rely on OSSM systems. Failing systems, particularly during periods of rainfall when soil absorption is minimal and water tables are high, are a major source of pathogenic bacteria in waterways. The presence of pathogens in creeks and waterways is a serious concern as they affect native species and make waterways unsafe for human use (either primary or secondary contact). The introduction of sewage into a waterway also increases nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen, decreasing available oxygen and facilitating eutrophication (Hinchey, 2000b).

5.11.2 Reticulated Sewerage System All of businesses and households from Corindi to Sawtell are connected to the reticulated sewerage system provided by Coffs Harbour City Council. The small village of Red Rock is the only coastal urban area not serviced by reticulated sewer. The sewered areas are serviced by five separate sewerage schemes and treatment plants which consist of Sawtell Treatment Plant, Coffs Harbour Water Reclamation Plant, Moonee Water Reclamation Plant, Woolgoolga Water Reclamation Plant and Corindi Sewerage Treatment Works. The Woolgoolga, Moonee and Coffs Harbour Water Reclamation Plants discharges excess reclaimed water (that which is

unable to be reused) to the Deep Sea Release pipeline off Boambee Beach. The network includes 116 pump stations and 54 private pump stations 490 kilometres of reticulation mains, 100 kilometres of pressure mains and 61 kilometres of reclaimed water mains. With excessive stormwater ingress and blockages these systems may pose a risk to the environment and public health. The current sewerage system carries a load from a population of about 62,750, with a peak of approximately 75,500. Over 70% of the waste receives tertiary treatment, with all plants except Sawtell STP using filtration after the secondary process. All plants disinfect the reclaimed water prior to reuse or disposal. The upgrade of the Coffs Harbour Water Reclamation Plant will allow Sawtell STP to be decommissioned by 2011, with all of its flow going to the Coffs Harbour Plant.

5.12 Effluent Management – State The Coffs Harbour City Council LGA now has 5,276. OSSM systems. Council's OSSM strategy, which involves regular inspections of all systems, has resulted in the identification of unsatisfactory on-site sewage management systems. Once identified Council ensures systems are rectified and comply with Council’s OSSM strategy and Australian Standard AS1457:2000. No. of Existing & New On-Site Sewage Management Systems (Consistent Indicator 2) (a) Total No. of new septic approvals per year; (b) % of population serviced by septics or sewer; (c) Current No. of OSSM systems; (d) Complaints regarding OSSM systems Why use this Indicator? Septic tanks are a common feature of rural residential development and have been identified as a potential contributor to water pollution in the region. They are a non-point source pollution component, but tend to have a cumulative impact on catchment water quality. The Local Government (Approvals) Amendment (Sewage Management) Regulation 1998 requires registration and inspection of on-site sewage management systems such as septic

- Water -

86

tanks, aerated waste water treatment systems, composting toilets and cesspits. This indicator assists with the identification of the potential pressure that could be placed on the environment, particularly as a result of failing systems which contribute significant amounts of pathogens and nutrients to local waterways. The number of complaints received by Council regarding on-site sewerage management systems is indicative of where problems are occurring, thus allowing control and management. Table 5.6: Information regarding the number of existing and new OSSM systems.

Indicator 2005-06 2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

(a) No. OSSM at present

5261 5,151 5,181 5,276

(b) No. additional OSSM during year

-110 30 115

(c) % population on OSSM: sewer

20%/80%

20%/80%

20%/80%

20%/80%

(d) No. complaints re: OSSM

28 27 23 9

What this Indicator shows (a) The total number of OSSM systems has increased in conjunction with the high number of development applications received for single dwellings during the year. The greater number of on-site systems increases the potential for environmental impacts. However, since 2005 there has been a slight increase in the total OSSM systems due to the Council’s Water Alliance projects. The current break up of OSSM systems are Septics - 4540, Aerated Wastewater Treatment Systems – 580, Pumpouts – 76, Cesspits – 3, Compost – 15, Private Pump stations – 40, Bilogical Filter Systems – 10,Reed System – 2, Split System – 4, Unknown – 4. (b) Not only has the number of OSSM increased in the year, but the rate of increase in OSSM systems continues to rise. This implies an increase in the rate of increased environmental pressure. (c) There are currently 19,376 residential properties with reticulated sewerage and 1,126 additional sewered businesses. There are 5,457 OSSM systems in the LGA. This makes a ratio of 4:1 of sewered to on-site sewage management.

(d) There has been a reduction in OSSM complaints during the reporting period. This is due to the implementation of Council’s OSSM Strategy. Table 5.7: Amount of systems in each category and total approval issued

Risk Total 2yr approval High Risk

2049

5yr approval Low Risk 3139 Approvals issued 07/08 306 08/09 790

Overall, while there are increasing numbers of OSSM system being approved (see table 5.7) yet decreasing numbers of complaints to council, the trend for the impact that OSSM systems are having on the environment has remained steady. However, the continued implementation of Council’s OSSM Strategy will lessen the impact on the environment by identifying unsatisfactory system. Reticulated Sewage System Fourteen sewer line overflow incidents were reported to the DECCW during the reporting period. Sewer overflows can occur for a range of reasons and vary in terms of their impact. Incidents are reported to the DECCW as a matter of course and precaution where it is considered there may be a threat to the environment. Sewerage Overflow Incidents Reported to the EPA 2008-09 Why Use this Indicator? Council monitors the sewerage system performance as part of its licensing conditions and reports to the DECCW. This information can be detailed and technical, requiring a significant level of expert interpretation. It is available from Council if required. The number and type of sewerage overflow incidents reported below to the DECCW indicates potentially significant incidents that may involve sewerage entering waterways and may also provide an indication of sewer system defect or malfunction. 15 incidents were reported to the DECC in 2008-09. A summary of incidents for this year are shown in the table below.

Condition

steady

- Water -

87

Date Location Reason for Incident

Pollution Impact

2/7/2008 Noomba St Sawtell

Tree Roots and foreign bodies block mains

1.5L spread into reserve

22/8/2008 West Argyle Street, Coffs Harbour

Fat build up in line, caused blockage

1..0kL spread over floodplain

18/9/2008 Bay Drive Coffs Harbour

Rising Main Break

Contained, minimal impact

27/10/2008 Shelton Close Toormina

Tree roots caused sewer blockage

50L over bush area

2/10/2008 North Sapphire Estate

Scour valve leakage

225kl into bushland

16/2/2009 Various Pump Stations

Natural Disaster (Flood)

Minimal in overall situation

31/3/2009 Nigntingale Street Woolgoolga

Rising Main Break

2.8ML into Willis Ck

31/3/2009 Various Locations

Natural Disaster (Flood)

Minimal in overall situation

9/4/2009 Railway Line, Sawtell

Reclaimed Water Main break

Contained, minimal impact

10/4/2009 Sawtell STP Manhole overflow due to blocked main

Minimal impact

14/4/2009 Mildura St Coffs Harbour

Rising Main break

Minimal impact

21/4/2009 Corindi Pump Stations

Overflows caused by caused storm inflow due to high rainfall

Minimal flows to stormwater

12/5/2009 Rear of Coffs Harbour WRP

Reclaimed Main break

1ML of Reclaimed Water to sand dune







What this indicator shows There continue to be isolated problems with the reticulated sewerage system in Coffs Harbour that can result in overflows of varying degrees of impact to the environment, depending on local circumstances. Reoccurring issues will need to be dealt with as a priority. Line clearances and rehabilitation, equipment replacement and other maintenance requirements are carried out to prevent recurrence. Ongoing maintenance and inspections continue throughout the system. Problems such as these are logged by staff and priorities

for ongoing maintenance and capital upgrades are allocated, in part, on this basis. Improved tracking of problems and asset management will assist in lowering of environmental issues occurring due to sewage spills. Percentage of Primary/Secondary/Tertiary Waste Water Treatment Consistent Indicator 4 Why Use this Indicator? Treatment of waste water to primary, secondary or tertiary levels exerts different and progressively lessening pressures on receiving waters. Treatment is a significant response to ensure high level water quality. Untreated water can cause disease or pollution. The volume of water released is a less precise measure than the actual quantities of pollutants. This is a core ANZECC indicator. There are five sewerage treatment plants, with all but Sawtell providing tertiary treatment. At present, the percentage of each level of treatment across these five plants is as shown in Table 5.3. Note: Sawtell STP will be soon decommissioned with all influent treated at the Coffs Harbour Plant. Table 5.8: Waste Water Treatment in Coffs Harbour

STP Primary Secondary Tertiary Comment Corindi 100% Secondary,

Filtration and Disinfection

Woolgoolga 100% Secondary, Filtration and Disinfection

Moonee 100% Secondary, Filtration and Disinfection

Coffs Harbour

100% Secondary, Filtration and Disinfection

Sawtell 100% Secondary treated effluent is disinfected for reuse.

What this Indicator shows Various upgrades to the sewerage system are increasing the level of treatment of waste water across the LGA. This means that the quality of effluent is improving from the point of view of impacts on receiving waters.

Condition improving

Condition improving

- Water -

88

5.13 Effluent Management – Response

5.13.1 On-Site Sewage Management Strategy

The continued implementation of Council’s On-Site Sewage Management Strategy revolves around an inspection and monitoring program of on-site sewage management systems to ensure that they meet the environmental and health performance objectives of the strategy. Where systems are found to be failing, the owner is required to undertake appropriate remedial measures to ensure that systems operate within current legislation, polices and guidelines. To carry out effective and ongoing inspections of the 5,276 on site systems in Coffs Harbour, all systems have been classified into risk categories. The frequency of inspections undertaken is determined by the risk classification. High-risk systems are inspected every two years, and low risk every five years.

5.13.2 Reticulated Sewerage System Systematic testing and inspection of

the reticulation system has commenced and is ongoing.

A program of rehabilitation of the reticulation system has commenced, in order to act on information gained from the investigations.

With the completion of the most of the major capital works in the Coffs Harbour Sewer Strategy, priority will now be shifted to the reticulation system, with preference given to identified issues.

New system control and data monitoring enable the early identification and rectification of problems

New data monitoring systems enables the collection of information in order to prioritise issues for remedy.

A new Asset Management System (presently being implemented) will enable the best use of resources to address issues in the system

Corindi Beach was ‘inherited’ by Coffs Harbour City Council in a Local Government boundary adjustment in 2005. Upgrading of the system is to be included in the capital works program

Sawtell Treatment Works is due to be decommissioned in 2011, after which all Sawtell flows will be transferred to Coffs Harbour Water Reclamation Plant. At this time all sewage will receive tertiary treatment.

5.13.3 The Sewerage Strategy The Coffs Harbour Sewerage Strategy is a major program of Council that involves capital works estimated to cost about $250 million and is intended to serve Coffs Harbour to the year 2021 and beyond. (The upgrades to the Water Reclamation Plants will cater for the population well beyond 2021). The Sewerage Strategy is to provide an integrated sewerage system that will meet the following objectives: • Safeguard Public Health • Provide sewerage services to present

and future urban development • Satisfy stringent environmental

safeguards • Protect the coastal environment of the

Solitary Islands Marine Park • Maximise the beneficial use of

reclaimed water • Ensure the strategy is affordable for the

Coffs Harbour community • Stage implementation to take advantage

of developing technology Major components of the Sewerage Strategy that have been completed since the approval of the EIS include: • Sewering of the urban areas of Moonee

Beach, Emerald Beach, Mullaway and Arrawarra

• Construction of the Deep Sea Release to the south of the Solitary Islands Marine Park, 1.5km offshore and in 20 metres of water. Its connection to the Coffs Harbour, Moonee and Woolgoolga plants; enabled the decommissioning of

- Water -

89

two shoreline outfalls at Willis Creek, and Coffs Harbour

• Construction of the Moonee Water Reclamation Plant

• Upgrading of the Woolgoolga Water Reclamation Plant

• Upgrading of the Coffs Harbour Water Reclamation Plant

• Development of Reclaimed Water markets

• Development of a Reclaimed Water Strategy

• Construction of a Reclaimed Water Pipeline from Woolgoolga to Sawtell for the supply to water users and with the excess going to the DSR.

• Construction of a Reclaimed Water Line from Corindi WRP to Arrawarra to supply users

• Construction of 5ML Reclaimed Water Storage Reservoir at Morgan’s Road for supply to users

• Development and operation of Morgan’s Road Farm to promote Reclaimed Water use.

• Upgrade of major trunk sewerage system in Coffs Harbour and Sawtell, including Pump Stations, Rising Mains and Reticulation Lines.

• Minor Sewer Rehabilitation Works Components of the Sewer Strategy that are yet to be completed: • Construction of a major Pumping Station

and Rising Main to transport sewage from Sawtell to Coffs Harbour WRP.

• Decommissioning of the Sawtell STP • Close the existing shoreline outfall at

Boambee Headland • Construction of an additional Reclaimed

Water Main from Coffs Harbour to Sawtell to allow expansion of the user market.

• Construction of the Reclaimed Water Main from Woolgoolga to Arrawarra allowing expansion of the user market, and also linking all the WRP’s.

• Sewer Rehabilitation works in the reticulation system to minimise the effects of stormwater inflow, and blockages causing system failure.

• Continue upgrades of Pumping Stations in line with the capital works program in

Corindi, Woolgoolga Coffs Harbour and Sawtell.

In relation to reclaimed water reuse, it will be important that nutrient levels are monitored and controlled. Council will need to consider striking a balance between achieving water efficiency goals through reuse of reclaimed water and the goal of preserving native vegetation as there may be additional pressures to clear vegetation associated with the increased ability to irrigate for agricultural purposes.

5.13.4 Sewage Overflows Sewer overflows caused by blockages in the reticulated system continue to be a problem in some areas. In terms of responding to future incidents that pose environmental threats, Council continues to develop its procedures for notification, repairs and other appropriate actions, based on clear triggers and chains of command. Notification of sewage overflows are reported to DECCW, responsible managers of the sewerage system and relevant environmental health officers. Generally the trigger is "if the spill cannot be contained within the property boundaries", however, additional considerations are included where there is close proximity to waterways.

- Water -

90


actions that need to be undertaken to protect the waterways. These actions align with the Our Living City Settlement Strategy Interim Document.

Actions Implemented

Implement WSUD Policy

Continue to undertake regulatory and educational responses to pollution incidences.

Expand monitoring of water quality to all waterways within the Coffs Harbour LGA (for example, use of school campaigns).

Ensure the continued implementation of Council’s Onsite Sewage Management Strategy

Finalise and implement Council’s Water Action Plan

Ensure strict enforcement of sediment erosion measures on development sites during and after construction

Continue the development and implementation of estuary management plans in consultation with relevant government agencies

Develop a strategy for sustainable agriculture in conjunction with a future Sustainable Industry Strategy

Undertake an Environmental Repair Program for all creeks and rivers in the Coffs Harbour LGA

Continue to undertake priority restoration works in conjunction with community Landcare and Rivercare groups.

Provide incentives for riparian reestablishment for private holdings.

Ensure stream and riparian area management is addresses in the Sustainable Agriculture Strategy.

Continue to implement Councils water quality program.

Incorporate erosion mitigation programs and review Council’s sediment and erosion controls.

Continue to promote water awareness and to provide opportunities and incentives for the community to decrease their water usage.

Assess what Council buildings could be fitted with rainwater tanks and water conserving devices for landscaping, vehicle and plant washing and other uses.

Monitor the impacts of climate change and the rate of change annually.

Continue to undertake priority restoration works in conjunction with community Landcare and Dunecare groups.

91

- Heritage -

93

6 HERITAGE 6.1 Overview Heritage places and objects are often symbols of shared pasts and values, often they become sites of conflict between groups whose views of the past differ (Lydon & Ireland 2005:3). These sites have differing levels of significance depending on peoples differing perspectives, they reflect the diversity of our present and past society. Some places provide tangible expressions of Australian identity and experience, where other sites may have no visible remains yet provide a spiritual or social connection to place, community or landscape. The Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975 defines heritage places as those natural and cultural sites, structures, areas or regions that have “aesthetic, historic, scientific, social significance or other special value for future generations as well as for the present community.” Heritage objects provide material evidence of Australia’s natural and cultural environments or its historical and cultural life and biophysical evolution. They may be in situ at significant sites, historic buildings, or held in collecting institutions such as archives, libraries, museums, galleries, zoos, herbaria or botanic gardens. In NSW, environmental heritage is defined in the Heritage Act 1977 as being “those buildings, works, relics, or places of historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic significance for the state.” Heritage values are defined by people and thus differ among and between individuals and groups with different cultural backgrounds. A diverse range of heritage values is recognised across NSW, largely due to its multicultural population (EPA 2003). Cultural heritage comprises both indigenous and non-indigenous (historic) heritage and takes physical and/or non-physical forms. Physical forms are generally places or objects showing evidence of occupation, such as buildings, roads, stone tools,

engraving sites, midden deposits and scarred trees. Non-physical forms may include places which have intangible qualities such as people's associations with or feelings for a place, including those of spiritual, customary or cultural significance like songs, stories, cultural practices and initiation/ceremonial/ story places. Natural heritage refers to the physical forms of the terrestrial and aquatic environments, such as landforms and landscapes, flora and fauna, and marine, estuarine and inland waters. Natural heritage encompasses a wide range of values. These include the simple value of existence through to those values that are culturally based (EPA 2003). Natural and cultural heritage is worth conserving because it helps build individual, community and national identities; defines who we are and maintains links with the past and often is of scientific and economic value. Heritage is increasingly being seen as important by the community, with this evidenced by a growing interest in both the cultural and natural environment, as well as an increased willingness by non government organizations, private property owners and community based groups to undertake a variety of heritage projects. 6.2 Aboriginal Heritage -

Pressure Aborigines of the Gumbaynggirr nation, which numbered up to 1,500 people (Coffs Harbour Heritage Study, 1997), originally inhabited the Coffs Harbour area. This clan led a less nomadic lifestyle than was typical of Aboriginal clans elsewhere. Aboriginal sites of scientific and spiritual significance predominantly exist along the coastline and around estuaries. According to the Department of Planning, (1989) in the publication Aboriginal Heritage of the North Coast, occupation sites (or base camps) were where great concentrations of food were available for example on estuaries and along major rivers. Occupation sites are also located away from the coast and these supported

- Heritage -

94

hunting parties or other groups involved in the likes of material collection for tools, visiting ceremonial grounds or mythological sites. The precise location of sites, currently listed on the National Parks and Wildlife Service's Aboriginal Archaeology database, are confidential in order to afford some protection from desecration. The Local Aboriginal Land Council has indicated that the sites on the NPWS register may only identify a small number of the actual sites. However, due to the extensive clearing, operation of agricultural practices and settlement within the Coffs Harbour LGA many of the undisclosed sites and relics may have been disturbed and or destroyed. Existing forested areas should be maintained in order to assist with the preservation of any undisclosed relics and sites. Any development, to be undertaken within known and previously undisturbed areas, are to be subject to specific conditions of consent requiring availability of suitable qualified persons (archaeologists) to ensure that any relic or sites integrity is maintained. This requirement will be included in development consents for activities within known actual sites.

As the Coffs Harbour area is one of the fastest growing areas in the State, it is crucial that as development proceeds, the wider community become more aware of and respectful of traditional Aboriginal ways of recording past events and that this awareness is used to help to protect this heritage for all people.

6.3 Aboriginal Heritage - State Locally, the Coffs Harbour and District Local Aboriginal Land Council is responsible for the co-ordination of indigenous land related issues within the CHCC LGA. Significant reason exists for current generations of Aboriginal people to distrust government and Europeans given the history of land dispossession, geographic displacement, forced assimilation and stolen generation policies, and in the recent past, the refusal of previous governments to

directly apologise for the past wrongs of past governments. In addition, the concept of ‘land rights’ for Aboriginal people has commonly been taken incorrectly to mean that Aboriginal people are against development and that there is a threat to white Australia’s ‘backyard’. There are therefore valid reasons for a lack of trust in transmitting traditional knowledge and knowledge about significant sites. European prejudice about methods of establishment of connection with land has meant that the protection of heritage is more commonly afforded to sites on the basis of environmental significance, regardless of the significance as understood by Aboriginal elders. The absence of written documentation regarding sites and their significance, as well as a reluctance to release general information about the location and nature of sites in order to avoid inappropriate behaviour or wilful destruction, can make it difficult to prevent loss of this form of heritage. Where there is limited information generally available or little desire to ‘advertise’ the location and significance of sites, there is an inherent problem for proactively maintaining Aboriginal heritage. It can be common that Aboriginal heritage sites or issues are little known until after development proposals have been lodged, which has in turn sometimes exacerbated the issue of mistrust.

Spoken word must be considered a valid means of documenting and maintaining Aboriginal understanding of the significance of heritage, alongside of European means. It is well known that Aboriginal people have passed culture on through story telling, art and dance, which has been the way Aboriginals have connected with the past and understood the present. Disbelief and misunderstanding by many non-aboriginal people about these means of knowledge transmission contributes to pressure upon elders responsible for accounting for the past. Community acceptance and understanding of the traditional ways of Aboriginal people

- Heritage -

95

and their culture is of vital importance to the future of Aboriginal heritage, as is strong protection for Aboriginal sites remaining in the Coffs Harbour area. An indicator of pressure on natural heritage in the Coffs Harbour LGA is the number of licences issued under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 to destroy, damage or collect in areas of Aboriginal sites. No. of licences issued under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 to destroy, damage or collect in Aboriginal sites Consistent Indicator 18B Why Use this indicator? Licences are required from the National Parks and Wildlife Service for proposed works which could impact on Aboriginal Heritage, either positively or negatively. This information can assist in understanding whether Aboriginal heritage is being maintained or destroyed.

What this Indicator Shows Thirteen (13) Licences were issued by DECC in the Reporting Period. Licences are required not only for activities which may destroy or damage objects or places, but for conservation works or relocation of Aboriginal heritage objects. There were more licences issued during this reporting period compared to previous ones as seen in table 6.1. Table 6.1: Number of licences issued by DECCW over the last 4 years Environmental Indicator

2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9

Number of licences (DECCW) to alter, destroy, and damage Aboriginal sites.

1 5 0 13

The Coffs Harbour area contains numerous sites of significance to Aboriginal people. While probably not all of these are recorded, the National Parks and Wildlife register of Aboriginal sites provides some indication of the state of Aboriginal Heritage in this area.

Number and Nature of Aboriginal Sites Consistent Indicator 18A Why Use this indicator? Licences are required from the National Parks and Wildlife Service for proposed works which could impact on Aboriginal Heritage, either positively or negatively. This information can assist in understanding whether Aboriginal heritage is being maintained or destroyed.

Table 6.2: Sites Listed* on the National Aboriginal Sites Register

Type Count Type Count Aboriginal Resource and Gathering

18 Habitation Structure

2

Aboriginal Ceremony and Dreaming

10 Hearth -

Art (Pigment or Engraved)

- Non-Human Bone & Organic Material

-

Artefact 224 Ochre Quarry 1 Burial 4 Potential

Archaeological Deposit

31

Ceremonial Ring (Stone or Earth)

4 Shell 55

Conflict - Stone Arrangement

-

Earth Mound 46 Stone Quarry 9 Fish Trap 1 Modified Tree

(Carved or Scarred)

131

Grinding Groove - Water Hole - TOTAL 536

* Note: There may be other important sites located in the area not listed on the Aboriginal Sites Register

What this indicator shows The table above shows that there are a significant number of listed Aboriginal sites of a wide variety of types. Over half of the sites consist of artefacts and modified trees, with 46 earth mounds that are recognised as significant. These sorts of remnants tell of former focal points of occupation of the land and of techniques for survival and cultural transmission. Assuming that these sites can be preserved, it is unlikely that this information will change significantly, except in the instance of destruction of sites, or discovery of new sites. Table 6.3 shows a significant increase in identified Aboriginal Sites. Table 6.3: Number of licences issued by DECCW over the last 4 years Environmental Indicator

2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9

Number of identified Aboriginal Sites

235 256 277 536

Condition declining

Condition improving

- Heritage -

96

No. of Aboriginal places gazetted under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 Why use this indicator? Any place of 'special significance with respect to Aboriginal culture' may be reserved as an Aboriginal place. Reservations are effected by the publication of notices in the NSW Government Gazette. No Aboriginal Places were gazetted during the reporting period. What this indicator shows As no new Aboriginal places were gazetted during the reporting period, there is therefore no reportable trend in terms of responses to the preservation of Aboriginal places (within the meaning of that term). That is, there has been neither positive nor negative action in relation to preservation of Aboriginal places under this NSW mechanism, probably due to lack of resources for identifying and administering such places. This does suggest that continued pressures on any unprotected places of significance will continue unabated.

6.4 Aboriginal Heritage – Response

6.4.1 Aboriginal Heritage Preservation The preservation of Aboriginal heritage depends on the identification of sites or places of significance, which itself involves coordination and cooperation between various statutory authorities and diverse, relevant Aboriginal people. But it also requires a willingness to ‘expose’ sites to protection through bureaucratic mechanisms that may (or may be perceived to) lead to greater risk of damage and destruction compared with the option of leaving them unexposed and hoping they can retain their integrity. Council works with the National Parks and Wildlife Service, which administers matters concerning Aboriginal sites and their preservation. The NPWS holds information relating to Aboriginal sites and while some known sites are listed, other sites are likely to exist, some of which may only be

revealed during development or other works. Council aims to ensure persons seeking development consent contact the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) regarding the protection of identified Aboriginal sites. A person who, without first obtaining the written consent of the Director, knowingly destroys, defaces or damages a relic or Aboriginal place is guilty of an offence against the National Parks and Wildlife Service Act 1974, which can lead to a penalty of $1,000 or imprisonment for six months or both, and, in addition, $100 for each day during which the offence continues.

6.4.2 Yandaarra - Coffs Harbour City Council’s Aboriginal Consultative Committee

Council established an Aboriginal Consultative Committee in 1996 for the purpose of developing appropriate procedures and levels of consultation in dealing with matters of preservation of Aboriginal heritage. This committee is made up of one representative from the local Aboriginal land council, six representatives from the local Aboriginal community, three council staff and Coffs Harbour City Councillors. The Committee has adopted the name Yandaarra, which means “to go as a group”. One role of the committee was to have input into major development applications, amendments to Local Environmental Plans and Development Control Plans. Council is continuing to work with this Committee on the development of a protocol for managing development applications and assessment process in relation to Aboriginal heritage matters.

Condition

steady

- Heritage -

97

6.5 Non Aboriginal Heritage - Pressure

Increasing population and the demand for housing and commercial development that arises with this increase and with the expectations of property developers seeking to meet that demand are at the root of pressures on heritage of all forms. Land uses change through expansion of urban areas and related infrastructure can be an immense source of pressure on heritage items when the economic return of development is high. Conversely, a decrease in population in some towns and rural areas can leave heritage buildings and sites abandoned. The demand to develop land for urban and other uses has resulted in more heritage sites being recorded in recent times as they are discovered when development is proposed for an area and during inspections to determine site suitability (EPA 2003). One of the major pressures on preserving European cultural heritage items is the cost involved in their upkeep. Many structures require constant maintenance and repairs in order to remain sound and parts and repairs to maintain the historical integrity of structures and sites are often difficult to source or may need to be hand made.

6.6 Non Aboriginal Heritage - State

With increasing growth, the redevelopment of older established areas generally follows. This in turn leads to pressure on heritage areas and items. The number of heritage items demolished or destroyed is a useful indicator of the pressure on non-Aboriginal heritage. Indicator – Number of Heritage Items Altered/Demolished/Destroyed Consistent Indicator 18B Why use this Indicator? This indicator was identified as a North Coast Consistent Regional Indicator. It provides for an assessment of the rate of loss of heritage items

and whether heritage protection measures are effective. What this indicator shows Of the 73 heritage items identified in Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2000, one has been demolished. The site was subject to an approval to demolish in 2006. This decision was made based on evidence produced by the applicant that the building was structurally unsound. 72 individual heritage items and 2 conservation areas (Sawtell and Coramba) identified in LEP 2000 have been retained through planning and development controls. Council has not needed to utilise its delegations with regard to applying Interim Heritage Orders. Number and Nature of European Heritage Sites Consistent Indicator 18A Why use this indicator? Local European cultural heritage items are listed in Council’s Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2000. This list provides an indication over time of items in addition to the National Estate Register of recognised heritage significance within the local context. Please refer to schedule 5 of the LEP for locally heritage listed items. Schedule 6 of the LEP illustrates Sawtell and Coramba as Heritage Conservation Areas. What this indicator shows The list has been updated in 2009 to include Red Rock and Corindi heritage items.

6.6.1 The National Estate Register The National Estate Register lists items deemed to hold national heritage significance. This includes sites of both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal cultural heritage and natural heritage items also. The register is kept by the Australian Heritage Commission and is federally funded. There are now 16 places within the Coffs Harbour LGA listed on the database, of which fourteen (14) are registered. Five (5) are listed as Indicative places - requiring

Condition improving

Condition

steady

- Heritage -

98

more investigation by the commission before registration, while one item is listed as Destroyed. The places listed on the database as at September 2009 are: • Anemone Bay - North Solitary Island Grey Nurse Shark Habitat Woolgoolga, (National Heritage List) • Bobo River Area, Cascade - Brooklana Rd, Cascade, (Indicative Place) • Bongil Bongil Area, Sawtell, (Registered) • Coffs Harbour Jetty, Jordan Esp, Coffs Harbour, (Indicative Place) • Coramba Nature Reserve, Coramba, (Registered) • Indigenous Place, Woolgoolga, (Registered) • Indigenous Place, Sandy Beach, (Destroyed) • Kororo Nature Reserve, Pacific Hwy, Korora, (Registered) • Moonee Beach Nature Reserve, Pacific Hwy, Moonee Beach, (Registered) • Mutton Bird Island Nature Reserve, Jordan Esp, Coffs Harbour, (Registered) • North Rock Nature Reserve, Red Rock (Registered) • North Solitary Island Nature Reserve, Wooli (Registered) • Orara Ornithological Area, Bruxner Park Rd, Coffs Harbour (Indicative Place) • Red Rock National Park (former) Station Creek Rd, Red Rock (Registered) • Solitary Islands Marine Area, North to Wooli, (Registered) • South Solitary Island Lighthouse Group, Moonee Beach, (Registered) • South West Solitary Island Nature Reserve, Emerald Beach, (Registered) • Southern Clarence River Tributaries Catchments, (Indicative Place) • Split Solitary Island Nature Reserve, Moonee Beach, (Registered) • Woolgoolga Area and Solitary Islands, Pacific Hwy, Woolgoolga, (Indicative Place) • Yuraygir National Park and Adjacent Areas, Wooli, (Registered)

6.7 Non Aboriginal Heritage - Response

6.7.1 Planning Although Council only embarked upon the heritage programme in 2003, commitment to the process has been reinforced by the allocation of resources in the Management Plan and in the studies undertaken to date. Council is meeting its obligations as established in the agreement with the NSW State Heritage Office, in relation to education, management and promotion.

6.7.2 Management The heritage executive committee was established in 2003/2004. The committee consists of: • the Heritage Contact Officer, • an External Heritage Advisor, • a Coffs Harbour Museum society

representative, • a Coffs Harbour Local Aboriginal Land

Council representative, • a Sawtell and District Progress

Association representative, • a Coffs Harbour Heritage Trust

representative, and • three Community representatives. Coffs Harbour City Council’s comprehensive heritage survey, undertaken in 1997/1998, was used to identify heritage items in the local government area. The current local environmental plan (LEP 2000) now lists 73 individual items in the Heritage Schedule. The 1998 Heritage Study assessed an additional 70 items. This list is being further refined. Part of the heritage strategy includes revision of this study. Members of the Heritage Executive Committee are actively collecting data on some 40 additional items with an aim to list them. These items have not previously been included in the Heritage Study and on the LEP. Coffs Harbour City Council has revised its information sheet on heritage matters. This is not a specific statutory planning instrument, however it has been developed

- Heritage -

99

as a Council policy to control and guide conservation of heritage items in Coffs Harbour. The State Heritage Listed Coffs Harbour Jetty has also recently undergone an extensive maintenance program involving the replacement of damaged and weathered piers and girders.

6.7.3 Promotion The promotion of heritage values within the community is being conducted in various ways, including the following: 1. Installing appropriate Heritage Plaques

and/or signs on significant sites. 2. Establishing heritage trails throughout the

City, focusing on the themes of rural heritage (included in the Draft Rural Lands Strategic Plan) and landscapes and the Conservation Areas of Sawtell and Coramba. Council introduced the Sawtell Heritage Walk and associated brochure in June 2009. The inaugural walk attracted over 100 participants. Further heritage trails are being researched for implementation by Rural Place management Committees with an endeavour to link with adjoining local government areas of Nambucca and Bellingen.

3. Preparation of simple heritage brochures to be issued with the rates notice each year for the next three years – each brochure will cover a different aspect of heritage. The 1st heritage publication focuses on What is Heritage? This article was included in the Annual Homemakers booklet as a supplement to the local newspaper.

4. Expenditure of funds from the local heritage fund - this has encouraged on a yearly basis, an average of 16 owners to undertake conservation work on individual items.

5. The pursuit of heritage tourism - including a modification to the LEP to promote Tourism in the Rural Villages (Coramba Conservation Area) and hinterland areas.

6. Implementation of streetscape plans and works to enhance the Coramba conservation area. This involved extensive community consultation and

the establishment of a Place Management Committee. To assist in promotion of Heritage theme for Coramba, bollards have been installed along the main street. On the bollards are cattle brands from original settlers with a commemorative information plague about the brand and the family.

7. Implementation of the Sawtell Masterplan – for the Sawtell Conservation Area. Bollards have been installed to restrict damaging vehicular access to the heritage central median gardens on First Avenue. Further improvements have been undertaken including the installation of flood lighting, a town clock, banners and further plantings in the central plot.

- Heritage -

100


actions that need to be undertaken to protect aboriginal and non-aboriginal heritage. These actions align with the Our Living City Settlement Strategy Interim Document.

Actions Implemented

Develop a protocol to identify and protect areas of Aboriginal significance, in consultation with Aboriginal elders, the Local Aboriginal Land Council and DECC

Prepare a GIS mapping layer for internal use only to identify buffers for significant indigenous cultural sites

Consult with the community and individual landowners to prepare clearer guidelines for heritage provisions.

Indentify exempt and complying provisions for heritage lands

Continue to source additional funding to assist with implementing heritage conservation projects

Update Council’s LEP to include items that have been identified for conservation

101

- Human Settlements -

103

7 HUMAN SETTLEMENTS 7.1 Overview Understanding the state of the environment in relation to human settlements requires assessment of economic development issues, as these activities use natural resources, or require the development or supply of specific infrastructure and land. These issues are also important for community development in the region. ‘Environmental accounting’ has been developing in the past decade or more as an attempt to take into account these sorts of hidden costs when assessing the benefits of certain forms of development. But it is also increasingly recognised that there are some so-called ‘environmental resources’ (air, land, biodiversity etc) that have never been and can never be accounted for with a monetary value. Some impacts are irreversible and their loss can never be given a monetary value. It is with these issues in mind that the concept of ecologically sustainable development and the principles of inter-generational and intra-generational equity have been developed. Ecologically Sustainable Development is development that meets the needs of the present generation, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

In other words, the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations and that within the present generation there is equitable development. For example, within Coffs Harbour, unemployment rates are relatively high and family incomes relatively low, and it is important to monitor how this changes over time and to seek to actively encourage development that aims at producing improvements in equity rather than simply increasing economic turnover. It is with these sorts of considerations in mind that

assessment of the economy of Coffs Harbour should be made. How humans occupy and use land has a significant influence on the natural environment. The challenge for urban planning is to create sustainable settlement patterns that have a neutral impact upon the natural environment. The focus of this chapter is on how to create more sustainable settlement patterns, practices and communities in Coffs Harbour. It is important to recognise that people do not exist separately from the environment, but are a component of our ecosystems. Not only do we change the environment by our actions and choices, but we are affected by the environment. We rely on the ecosystems around us for food, resources, clean air and water. Increasingly, linkages are being identified between public health and environmental health. Changes in the environment around us can directly impact upon us. A sustainable community recognises that individuals and the community are part of the environment as a whole and such communities consider this interrelationship in its decision-making processes and actions. 7.2 Population and Settlement

Patterns – Pressure Many of the pressures on the environment arise from population growth and the need to meet the housing, employment and recreation needs of this population. The population of the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area according to the Coffs Harbour Economic Profile in 2006 was estimated to be 68,021. It is anticipated that by 2031 this number will grow to 98,711. Coffs Harbour has been one of the fastest growing areas in the State, with the population more than tripling over the last three decades. Added to this are pressures associated with an expanding tourist population. The climate, coastal location and other environmental qualities of Coffs Harbour are


104

a significant part of the attraction for people settle in the area. As such, residents are clustered along the coastal areas, with approximately 90% of the total residential population residing within the narrow coastal plain extending from Red Rock in the north to Bundagen in the south. This is typical of settlement patterns in Australia generally, with the majority of the population located close to the coastline.

7.2.1 Release of Future Urban Settlement Areas

The Our Living Coast (OLC) Settlement Strategy envisages that by 2031 the population in the Coffs Harbour LGA will be in the order of 99,000 people made-up of 94,000 people accommodated in existing zoned urban areas and 6,000 in areas for potential urban expansion. Projected population growth indicates that, at existing rates of consumption, additional land will be required for residential purposes by the period 2016-2021 in proximity to the Coffs Harbour Township. Additional lands to the north will be needed by the year 2021, and to the south around 2010, to secure land supplies to meet expected demands in these locations. A total of 15,499 additional dwellings in the entire Coffs Harbour LGA by 2031 (calculated forward from 2004 figures). This number is composed of: • 3,726 additional dwellings in new

residential zones;

• 2,707 dwellings infilled into existing residential zones;

• 639 additional rural residential dwellings in possible future rural residential areas (once the 1999 Rural Residential Strategy is updated and any additional areas confirmed);

• 1,509 vacant lots;

• 6,336 dwellings on existing zoned, but unsubdivided residential land;

• 382 dwellings on existing zoned, but unsubdivided rural residential land;

• 2,957 dwellings in Bonville and Bark Hut Road areas (beige areas of the draft

Settlement Strategy) but most of these are longer term than the 2031 Regional Strategy timeframe. An allowance of 200 dwellings at Bonville before 2031 is included.

Urban development in all investigation areas will be subject to detailed environmental assessment (Coffs Harbour City Council, 2008).

7.3 Population and Settlement Patterns – State

Population growth rates & population numbers (Consistent Indicator 15) Why Use this Indicator? Growing populations can place additional pressures on the environment through increased development and human activity. Coastal ecosystems are particularly fragile and may require more careful management than elsewhere — it is therefore useful to examine trends in coastal populations separate to inland areas. This is based upon the core ANZECC indicator for the human settlements theme. Table 7.1: Regional Population Projections 2006-2031

Year 2006 2021 2031 Population 68,021 87,209 98,711

Source: ABS 3218.0, Dept of Planning, Coffs Harbour Economic Profile What this Indicator Shows Over the period to 2031, the population of Coffs Harbour is expected to increase by 30,690 persons – or an average rate of 1.5% - to a population of approximately 98,711 persons. The growth rate for Coffs Harbour is higher than that forecast for the Mid-North Coast SD (0.9%) and New South Wales (0.8%) over the same period. Coffs Harbour is expected to contribute 40.1% of the total increase in population of the Mid North Coast over the period to 2031 (Coffs Harbour City Council, 2007). With the anticipated increase in population for Coffs Harbour, this will result in an increase pressure on resources and the environment.

Condition declining


105

Table 7.2: Population 2001 Census by Locality Locality No. % Red Rock/Corindi Beach/Corindi Plateau

1,267 2.0

Arrawarra/Mullaway/Safety Beach

2,430 3.9

Woolgoolga 4,526 7.2 Sandy Beach/Emerald Beach

3,651 5.8

Moonee/Sapphire 3,456 5.5 Korora 2,701 4.3 Coffs Urban 23,547 37.4 Sawtell/Toormina/East Boambee

13,831 22.0

West Boambee 1,689 2.7 Bonville 1,872 3.0 Coramba 297 0.5 Ulong 122 0.2 Nana Glen/Bucca 1,469 2.3 Coffs Rural 2,044 3.2 Total LGA 62,902 100

%

Based on 2001 Census count information and includes overseas visitors. The residential population in 2001 was distributed as shown in Table 8.2. 37% live in the township of Coffs Harbour, 22% in Sawtell/Toormina/Boambee area, 7% in Woolgoolga, and the remaining third (34%) of the population reside in or near rural villages and beyond the range. In addition to urban coastal development, areas of low-density dispersed settlement have alienated some rural and environmentally sensitive land, and increased the cost of physical infrastructure and human services in some areas. This also increases the reliance on the private car for travel in the region. No. and area of rural residential lots approved and rate of uptake (Consistent Indicator No. 16) Why Use this Indicator? Dispersed settlement, coupled with rapid population growth is a key influence on servicing, management and infrastructure development. Rural residential development commonly results in the clearing of vegetation, extraction and consumption of resources, resource sterilisation (that is, loss of agricultural and/or environmentally significant land) and potential land use conflict. During 2008-09, there were six developments for rural residential subdivisions approved, which created a total

of 15 lots. A reassessment of rural residential development is likely. What this indicator shows This indicator highlights residential pressures on rural land, however, it is unclear what if anything, the trend is in relation to sustainability overall as this depends very much on how settlements are planned and how residents live in rural settlements.

7.4 Population and Settlement Patterns – Responses

7.4.1 Our Living City (OLC) Settlement Strategy

Our Living City: A Settlement Strategy for Coffs City to 2031 is an interim document partly endorsed by the Department of Planning in 2007. For further information relating to this document refer to Council’s website www.coffsharbour.nsw.gov.au

7.4.2 Rural Lands Strategic Plan A Rural Lands Working Group was to be established to look at the issue of settlement patterns in rural areas. A moratorium on subdivision of lands zoned Rural 1A Agriculture also applies until council has determined LEP 32 for Corindi Red Rock. A review of the 1998 Rural Residential Strategy is also underway to consider impacts of dispersed settlement. This move follows a study by the Rural Lands Strategic Planning Committee, which included council staff, government agencies and landholders, to consider the recommendations of the Commissioners of Inquiry report into parts of the Rural Lands Strategic Plan. The Rural Lands Strategic Plan is a Council planning initiative focused on achieving economic, social and environmental sustainability in rural communities. This framework has been described in Chapter 4 in relation to broader land management issues. One of the key aspects of this plan was revitalization works in some of the rural townships. In particular, Coramba and Nana Glen have commenced some of the works identified in the plan.

Trend uncertain


106

7.4.3 Mixed Use Zones The Coffs Harbour city-wide Local Environmental Study recommended the establishment of a business centre hierarchy to reduce duplication of business services, reinforce the role and function of the centres and provide guidance for investment decisions. This hierarchy has been implemented under the LEP 2000 business zones with the land uses permitted and excluded from each centre conforming to this hierarchy (refer Map 18 of the LEP). The concept of mixed use development has been introduced to provide for a mix of compatible land uses in the higher order business centres. An example of mixed use development is a building with shops/restaurants at ground floor level and professional offices/housing at second floor level. Mixed use developments integrate compatible land uses, rather than separate land uses. Despite the introduction of mixed use zones in higher order business centres, the development industry has been reluctant to develop sites with mixed uses such as developments with combined commercial/retail developments. An incentive scheme that encourages housing in these areas could have some benefits, such as: • reduced home to work vehicle trips; • increased employment potential; • reduced transport costs (time and

money); • increased vibrancy and activity levels;

and • reduced greenhouse emissions. The new settlement strategies referred to above will address the issue of mixed use zones from the point of view of seeking to develop possibilities for some employment opportunities within or near residential areas. CHCC is in the process of jointly preparing a strategic plan for the central core of the City – including the areas of the CBD, the Jetty and Park Beach. Four documents will be produced including A Vision, a Local Environmental Plan, a development Control Plan and a Civic Improvement Plan. It is

expected that these documents will be on public exhibition during the latter part of 2009. In accordance with the State Government’s Orders, CHCC is also preparing a “Standard Local Environmental Plan” for the whole of the LGA. This plan is being guided by various strategic documents including the Vision 2030. It is anticipated that this LEP will be publicly exhibited during 2010.

7.4.4 Coffs Coast Growers Markets One of the Initiatives of the Rural Lands Strategic Plan was Streets Ahead Program developed in conjunction with local producers for the development of the local Growers Market, which occurs every Thursday in the City Square. These markets have been running since September 2003 and operate very successfully.


107

7.5 Drinking Water Quality and Consumption – Pressure

7.5.1 Quality The main source of drinking water for Coffs Harbour residents has always been the Orara River. The Orara River Cochranes Pool Catchment was adopted by Coffs Harbour City Council (CHCC) in the Rural Lands Strategy in August, 2003. This means that development in the catchment area can be much more strictly controlled, and the quality of the drinking water for CHCC residents protected. The Regional Water Supply Scheme (RWSS) now draws water from the Nymboida River outside the CHCC LGA, so a Water Treatment Plant (WTP) was built in 2009 by Coffs Harbour Water (CHW) as a method to control the quality of drinking water for Coffs Harbour City Council residents.

7.5.2 Consumption Demand for potable water is a considerable pressure on any environment associated with nearby urban development. Rainfall in the catchments serving as the source of drinking water for CHCC residents has been average or above in the last few years and river levels have correspondingly been healthy. There has in fact been several flooding events in 2009 alone as well as other high flow periods resulting from high rainfalls.

The Orara River may have significant consumption pressures on it due to the number of riparian users, but the pressure from extractions for provision of Coffs Harbour town water supplies has actually decreased. Coffs Harbour Water, the business unit delivering water and sewer services for CHCC, has to operate the town water supply in compliance with a water extraction licence, which includes low flow protection requirements for the Orara River. Historically, extraction has been dependant on the capacity of Karangi Dam, so when the storage was: >85% full – 25ML/day must be allowed to pass the offtake; <84% but >65%, full – 15ML/day must be allowed to pass the offtake point; and <65% full – 5ML/day must be allowed to pass. After connection to the RWSS pipeline from the Nymboida River in 2002, extraction from

Regional Water Supply Strategy The population of the Clarence Valley and Coffs Harbour region is expected to more than double in the next 50 years, from 95,000 to approximately 220,000. The water supply schemes that historically serviced the Clarence Valley and CHCC communities needed to be upgraded to ensure a reliable and secure supply during periods of drought. The RWSS began in 1995 and involved linking the Clarence Valley and Coffs Harbour bulk water supplies to meet future predicted demands for water in the region. It is estimated that the RWSS and Karangi Dam will be able to meet water demand until at least 2021. However, with demand management and alternate sources coming on line as well, the system should provide adequate water until at least 2046. The RWSS involves a 'non-build' Water Efficiency Program and a $180 million ‘build' Project, which was completed in 2009 and includes: a 30,000ML off-stream storage dam at Shannon Creek; and, 90km of underground pipeline distribution system linking the Nymboida River to the Reservoir at South Grafton, the Shannon Creek Storage and Karangi Dam at Coffs Harbour.


108

the Orara River for Coffs Harbour town water had to cease, irrespective of dam levels, when flow drops below 25ML/day, guaranteeing this increased low flow protection as a minimum. Additionally, when Shannon Creek Dam is 50% full or more and the water quality suitable, the low flow protection requirements for the Orara River will change to the higher minimums, as seen in Table 7.3 below: Table 7.3: Future Seasonal Low Flow Protection for Orara River

Month Recommended Low Flow Protection (ML/day)

July 50 August* 25

September* 25 October 50

November 50 December 50 January 25 February 25

March 25 April 50 May 50 June 50

*Months in which Eastern Freshwater Cod are known to migrate for breeding. Minimum flow in these months is 25ML/day. However if flow reaches 70-90ML/day, extraction must cease altogether to give the Eastern Cod migration the best chance of success. Extraction can begin again if flows are measured over 90ML/day, but the minimum flow in the river must remain at 90ML/day. On the Nymboida River, whereas extraction by our RWSS partners, North Coast Water, is still permitted when flows are down to 5ML/day, when the Shannon Creek Dam is 50% full or more and the water quality is suitable, the low flow protection of 225ML/day is guaranteed, since this is the point where extraction must cease. Coffs Harbour Water has always had a 225ML/day low flow protection requirement on the Nymboida River since initial pipeline connection in 2002. The growing population and accompanying demand for water, as well as previous years of low rainfall and resulting severe water restrictions, led to the need for the

development of the RWWS. However, water in Shannon Creek Dam will only be used by CHCC when Orara River flows and Karangi Dam storage levels are not adequate to meet demand from residents. Karangi Dam storage levels have not been below 90% since November 2005. Transfer of water directly from the Nymboida River when high flows permit, as part of RWWS, has helped to keep the storage levels at Karangi Dam consistently high. .

Figure 7.1: Karangi Dam Estimates show that around 90% of residents in the CHCC Local Government Area (LGA) are connected to the reticulated water supply. There are around 23,170 total connections in the LGA, of which about 90% are for residential properties. There were 315 new connections to Council’s water supply for the 2008/2009 period, which is the lowest number of new connections for at least 5 years. The small villages of Coramba and Nana Glen have separate water supplies. Coramba is supplied with Nymboida River water via an adjacent RWSS pipeline offtake and Nana Glen draws water from the Orara River. There are 158 properties connected to water in Nana Glen and 146 properties connected to water in Coramba.

7.6 Drinking Water Quality and Consumption – State

7.6.1 Quality As a result of the RWSS and the increased addition of water from the Nymboida River to the CHCC water supply, it was necessary


109

for CHCC to construct a Water Filtration Plant (WFP) in 2008/09. Whereas the high quality of the raw water from the Orara River had not required a WFP previously, the raw water quality from the Nymboida River is not as good and so residents now have a state of the art WFP producing cleaner water than they have ever experienced, with less chlorine dosing required. A directive from NSW Health Department to commence the addition of fluoride to the town water supply for the first time ever in 2009 has caused controversy for some residents, but NSW Health believes that this will improve dental health for residents in the CHCC area. Coramba and Nana Glen water supplies remain unfluoridated, as these villages were not subject to the NSW Health Department directive.

7.6.2 Consumption Coffs Harbour is consistently reported to be amongst the most water efficient areas in the state of NSW. In the most recent 2007/08 NSW Department of Water and Energy Performance Monitoring Benchmarking Report, it was found that the NSW average for water consumption per property per year is 173kL. The average property in Coffs Harbour was found to use only 169kL per year, and this is without the high level water restrictions experienced in some other areas with below average water consumption figures. CHCC introduced permanent Level 1 water restrictions, referred to as water conservation initiatives, in June 2004. Residents have experienced Level 4 water restrictions once at the end of 2004 since the water conservation initiatives were implemented. After returning to permanent water restrictions at the end of 2004, no higher level of water restriction has been necessary. Various water efficiency and education programs have combined with water pricing and permanent water restrictions to create a situation where, despite a large increase in

population, there has not been a corresponding large increase in the average daily water consumption. As shown in Figure 7.2, there has been 77% increase in population and only a 5% increase in consumption, since 1985. Water Consumption per capita (Consistent Indicator 5) Why use this Indicator? A measure of pressure on water extraction is indicated by the number of users connected to reticulated water supplies, i.e. the percentage of population connected to reticulated water supplies. Water consumption is a measure of the pressure that is placed upon the water supply and of the state of water consumption demands. The more water people use, the greater the amount of water which must be supplied. This has implications for both infrastructure i.e. Karangi and Shannon Creek Dams, and environmental flow at the draw-off points at Cochranes Pool and the Nymboida Weir.

Figure 7.2: Increases in population and water consumption over the same time scale for Coffs Harbour City Council. What this Indicator shows Yearly water consumption decreased substantially following the implementation of demand management programs, a full user pays system and restrictions applied in the late 1980's. The graph above shows a levelling off of demand in the early 1990's, but an increase in consumption in the late 1990’s/early 2000’s. Consumption appears to start decreasing in mid 2000’s. Taking into account likely population increases, it is clear that in combination with water restrictions, water pricing and water efficiency initiatives, there appears from the data to be an ongoing community awareness of, and support for, water conservation.

Condition improving


110

The most recent figure from 2007/08 for residential daily consumption in the CHCC LGA is 161 litres/person, compared with 175 litres/person/day the previous year in 2006/07. This represents an 8% reduction in daily water use per person in the CHCC LGA in one year and is the biggest water consumption reduction for at least 10 years. The total amount of water supplied for consumption in 2007/08 was 5919 ML, which is the lowest total consumption figure for 5 years, as shown in Figure 2 below.

CHCC Total Annual Water Consumption

5919

5702

5458

5809

5735

5200

5300

5400

5500

5600

5700

5800

5900

6000

03_04 04_05 05_06 06_07 07_08

Year

Wat

er C

onsu

mpt

ion

(ML)

Total WaterConsumption

Figure 7.3: Total Annual Consumption for CHCC

7.6.3 Ground Water Extraction As the limits of surface water supply have been reached in NSW, the demand for groundwater resources has increased substantially across NSW, with groundwater use increasing by 217% between 1983–84 and 1996–97. This represents the largest increase in groundwater use of any Australian State or Territory (EPA 2003). Many ecosystems in NSW require ground water for their ongoing health and maintenance. These include surface water bodies, such as wetlands, rivers and lakes, which are connected to ground water, and terrestrial ecosystems. The over-extraction of ground water potentially places pressure on dependent aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems because it: • reduces base flows to rivers and

decreases the water available to other groundwater-dependent ecosystems

• alters water quality by inducing more saline water into an aquifer

• reduces the amount of ground water available for future extraction (EPA 2003).

Groundwater is an important natural resource in NSW. Groundwater is a source of drinking water for many rural towns, is used for industrial needs such as mining, the domestic and stock requirements of farms or remote households and communities and for irrigation. For further information visit www.water.nsw.gov.au. Table 7.4 shows the number of active bore water licences issued by the Department of Water and Energy within the Coffs Harbour LGA. Table 7.4: Active bore water licences issued by Department Water and Energy

Year 2003/04 2008/09 Number of Active Licences

1325 1680

Source: Department Water and Energy 2009 Indicator – Ground Water Allocations Why use this Indicator? What this Indicator shows These figures show that a significant amount of water is taken from ground water reservoirs, placing pressure on this valuable resource. There have been significant annual increases of about 15% in the past several years in the number of ground water bores with active licences. Note also that this indicator provides only a rough measure of the pressure being placed upon groundwater resources, as it does not (and can not) account for unregistered bores. It is expected that these unregistered bores may be relatively abundant throughout the area.

Condition declining


111

7.7 Drinking Water Quality and Consumption – Responses

7.7.1 Quality Coffs Harbour Water employs a multi barrier approach to ensure the best quality drinking water, meeting the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG), is delivered to residents in the CHCC LGA. The new $59 million WFP is a Dissolved Air Floatation and Filtration (DAFF) plant and started supplying water to residents in June, 2009. 1) Initially, the Cochrane’s Pool drinking

water catchment is protected from development impacts by the CHCC Rural Lands Strategy, 2003;

2) Coffs Harbour water provides annual funding for best practice catchment management activities to Orara River Landcare;

3) Online turbidity meters in the Orara River at Cochranes Pool ensure dirty water above 5 NTU is not pumped into Karangi Dam;

4) Water stored in Karangi Dam is aerated to prevent stratification and assist oxidisation and removal of iron and manganese;

5) Lime is dosed into the water as it leaves Karangi Dam on the way to the WFP to raise alkalinity and pH levels for more effective treatment in the WFP;

6) At the DAFF i. Carbon Dioxide is dosed in the Contact

Tanks for pH correction; ii. Alum is added at the start of the Rapid

Mix Tanks to assist in flocculation and coagulation of sediment particles;

iii. Air saturated water is pumped into the DAFF cells so the sediment floats to the top of the water as a scum;

iv. Scum is removed by a skimmer and sent to the Washwater Tank (see iv.b below for further details about the Washwater Tank);

v. Water is filtered through a 3 layer media filter - a) filter coal; b) fine sand and c) gravel support media;

vi. UV irradiation to kill bacteria and microorganisms, including viruses, etc for disinfection in the UV Gallery;

vii. Fluoride added; viii. Sodium Hydroxide is added for final pH

trimming; ix. Chlorine is added to ensure that

disinfection is maintained in all reticulation pipes;

x. Drinking water is then sent to the on-site treated water storage tank;

xi. Water is then pumped to the Red Hill Balance Tanks and then gravity fed into the various reservoirs and from there gravity fed into town;

iv.b) Scum and backwash water is sent to the Washwater Tank; iv.c) Dirty water from the Washwater Tank is sent to the Sludge Thickener; iv.d) Thickened sludge is put through a centrifuge for de-watering; iv.e) Sludge solids are disposed of either to landfill or to the greenwaste facility. The liquids from centrifuge are returned, with the liquids from the sludge thickener, to the inlet of the plant for reprocessing.

7.7.2 Conservation Since 1980, a range of measures have been introduced in the CHCC LGA to conserve existing water supplies, as well as to provide a more secure water supply into the future: Universal Metering and User Pays Pricing - CHCC LGA has been universally metered since 1980 and full User Pays Pricing has been used since 1989. This historical combination of water billing strategies has helped to create a water conscious community and thus helped to achieve the results as one of the most water efficient communities in NSW. Water Pricing - Under the latest 2009/2010 Fees and Charges, CHCC residents pay $2.14 for every kl of water used, if the household uses less than an average of 1kl/day. Residents pay $3.00 for every kl over the 1kl/day average threshold. Bills are generally issued on a 90 day/quarterly basis. Whilst these water prices are amongst the most expensive in NSW, and this in itself is a disincentive for inefficient use of water, the funds raised go to


112

providing the security and quality of the water supply, via the RWWS and the new WFP, now enjoyed by the CHCC community. User pays sewerage and Trade Waste charges also apply for commercial properties, providing a further financial reason for operating water efficiently. Water Restrictions - As mentioned before, Level 1 water restrictions were made permanent in June, 2004. These water efficiency measures ban the use of: • Sprinklers and unattended hoses

between 8:00am and 4:00pm, • Hosing of paved areas/driveways, etc

except for health reasons. Pressure cleaners are permitted,

• Car washing is allowed, provided that runoff is directed to lawn, where practical.

Rebates - CHCC offers several rebate programs to residents for installation of water saving products in their homes: • $30 rebates for residents who replace a

single flush toilet cistern with a more water efficient dual flush system began in 1992. To date, there have been 1,517 single flush toilet replacements made through this rebate program.

• New for Old shower exchange and Shower Rebate programs commenced in December, 2002 and were very successful with over 2,000 showerheads being issued in the first two weeks of the New for Old program. Both programs combined have resulted in the replacement of 4,302 inefficient showers to date.

Water Audit Program – initially trialled in July 2002 the program allows residents to get a visit from CHWs’ Water Efficiency Officer by calling (02) 6648 4000 to arrange for a free check-up. • These incentive programs are ongoing

and have produced the following results:

Program Outcomes Showerhead Rebate Program

505 water efficient showerhead replacements

New for Old Showerheads

3,797 water efficient showerhead replacements

Dual Flush Toilet Rebates

1,517 single flush toilets replaced

Total 5,819 water efficiency incentives

Waterwise Schools Program - Under an MOU between CHW, North Coast Water and Macleay Water signed in 2006, Cascade Environmental Education Centre, a NSW Department of Education school, delivers the Waterwise Schools Program to local schools connected to reticulated water. The Waterwise Schools program takes a long-term, whole-of-school approach to water education and complements the curriculum across all major learning areas. The proven program is used under licence from WA Water Corporation and to date 7 CHCC primary schools, comprising around 1,800 students, have taken the accreditation steps to become an officially recognised Water Wise School.

National Water Week Celebrations - Every October, CHW joins the rest of the Australian water industry and focuses CHCC community attention on water in a variety of ways, including radio and newspaper education initiatives, front load washing machine giveaway competitions, free school shows every other year for around 2,500 K-2 students, launch of new WaterWise Gardens, etc. World Water Day - The United Nations declares 22nd March every year as World Water Day. CHW commemorate the day by donating water related resources to the CHCC library network. These books and DVDs provide another source of water education for CHCC students and the community in general.


113

WaterWise Gardening - In 2001, Coffs Harbour Water sponsored the WaterWise Demonstration Garden in the Coffs Harbour Regional Botanical Gardens. Coffs Harbour Water also produced a Waterwise Garden Guide in July 2003 which was distributed to 20,000 residential properties. TAFE Horticulture Certificate students now update a section of the WaterWise Demonstration Garden every year for CHW, to be officially opened in National Water Week. Whilst providing valuable practical experience for the TAFE students, the annual updates ensure the WaterWise Garden remains relevant in the contemporary gardening world and interesting for locals and visitors alike. Meter Exchange Program - CHW runs a water meter replacement program to reduce the maximum age of all meters to 12 years old. As meters age, accuracy tends to decline and meters under-read the water which passes through them, making full cost recovery through water billing and system water balances difficult. The objective is to replace 2,000 water meters every year, until all meters are 12 years old or less. This is expected to be achieved in 2014. The water meter exchange will be an ongoing program, replacing all meters as they reach 12 years old to maintain the accuracy of the CHCC meter fleet. In 2007/08, CHW exchanged 2,662 old water meters. WSUD (Water Sensitive Urban Design) - Council adopted a WSUD Policy in June, 2009 which targets 3 main areas: 1) Frequent Flow Management: Council WSUD policy ensures the initial 10mm of rainfall will be captured from impervious surfaces and used within the catchment - through rainwater tanks, infiltration trenches and detention basins. This use of captured rainfall may reduce demand for drinking water in the respective catchments. 2) Waterway Stability Management: Council WSUD policy will restrict all frequent rainfall events to the pre-development discharge

rates through on-site stormwater detention systems and retention basins. 3) Stormwater Quality Management: Council WSUD Policy will restrict pollutants generated from development by 85% for Total Suspended Solids, 65% for Total Phosphorus and 45% for Total Nitrogen. Whilst WSUD is primarily focussed on the quality of environmental water, the CHCC policy has implications for drinking water consumption, largely through the Frequent Flow Management area. Water Reclamation Plant - CHW completed augmentation of the Woolgoolga Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) in 2005 and construction of a new WRP in Coffs Harbour in 2009. Both WRPs are now capable of providing high quality reclaimed water for a range of non-potable uses. Demand for this water resource is high amongst local banana and blueberry farmers, sports fields, golf courses, etc and the Solitary Islands Marine Park benefits from the higher quality water discharged via the Deep Sea Release pipeline during wet weather periods, when the need for irrigation water is lower. Availability of this reclaimed water for suitable purposes reduces demand on local drinking water supplies. The reclaimed water scheme enabled the reuse of 790 megalitres of treated water derived from incoming sewage in the sewerage treatment system during the reporting period. This represents about 12% of incoming sewage.

Figure 7.4: Cochrane’s Pool


114

7.8 Transport – Pressure “Sustainable transport” is used to describe all forms of transport and other actions that can minimise emissions of carbon dioxide and pollutants. It can refer to initiatives such as public transport, car sharing, walking and cycling as well as technologies such as electric and hybrid cars and biodiesel. There are also opportunities for us to investigate more efficient uses of resources to encourage less burning of fossil fuels. Some of these initiatives could include teleconferencing, opportunities for working from homes and car-pooling. The term encompasses a wide array of economic, social and environmental effects that should be taken into account when developing the Integrated Transport Plan (ITP) for our city.

Coffs Harbour is a car dominated community, with car oriented development. This necessitates the use of the Pacific Highway to provide a number of daily north / south trips to service local needs. Settlement patterns dictate transport needs. The current settlement pattern has led to a high use of the private car and less use of bikes and public transport. The population would therefore find travelling in the area problematic should there be an oil shortage, or should prices reach prohibitive levels. The impacts of this planning are • Environmental – urban sprawl and

pollution from gas emissions. • Economic – Coffs Harbour is a ribbon

development along a narrow strip of coastline.

• Social – isolation; social stratification of areas and reduced access to public transport.

Another pressure on transport is “Peak Oil” which is the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum production is reached, after which the rate of production enters its terminal decline. If global consumption is not mitigated before the peak, an energy crisis may develop because the availability of conventional oil will drop and prices will rise, perhaps dramatically.

7.9 Transport – State During Census 2001, it was determined that 77% of employed people use only one method of travel to work while 22% either worked from home, did not travel to work or did not state their method of travel. Of the 77% of people using one transport method, 76% of these drive their car, while 11% travel as a passenger. This suggests there are significant single passenger trips to and from work. 5% of people walked to work and 3% cycled and less than 1% used some mode of public transport, which is comparable with figures for the mid-north coast region as a whole. Settlement patterns and transport are inextricably linked. The linear form of urban settlement in Coffs Harbour, together with the low housing densities and segregated land uses creates difficulties in developing an affordable public transport system. Cost effective and convenient public transport is generally considered more achievable at higher densities. Table 7.5: Methods of Travel to Work for those Stating Single Commuting Method

Sole Method of transport to Work

Coffs Harbour %

Mid Nth Coast %

Car, as driver 76 75 Car, as passenger 11 10 Walked only 5 5 Truck 3 4 Other 3 4 Bicycle 2 2 Total 100% 100%

Source ABS Census 2001 This high reliance on the private car for transport is at odds with attempts at reducing the reliance on fossil fuels and emission of greenhouse gases. It is also at odds with Coffs Harbour's social structure which comprises lower household incomes and higher proportion of elderly than the State average. The Pacific Highway is the most dominant transport link in Coffs Harbour carrying approximately 30,000 vehicles per day (CHCC 2000). Whilst the Highway provides convenient access, it also divides many of the townships and villages. Issues concerning community segregation, safety,


115

aesthetics, noise and air pollution should be at the forefront in future decisions concerning the long-term development of the Highway and the issue of the highway by-pass. Rail services are limited to 2 northbound and 3 southbound passenger services per day (Sydney-Brisbane route) and a weekend service to Grafton. With only two passenger railway stations, one at the Coffs Harbour Jetty and another at Sawtell and low-density urban development, opportunities for a local rail system are restricted. For light rail to be a more viable option, higher urban densities would be needed or possibly a connection with major tourist development provided. Similarly, the airport and harbour provide for intrastate and interstate transport but are not viable for local transport services.

7.10 Transport – Responses

7.10.1 Sustainable Transport Action Plan The Sustainable Transport Action Plan (STAP) was undertaken as part of the Cities for Climate Protection Program (CCP). Progress in the STAP is measured by a series of five milestones. Through this structure, Coffs Harbour City Council has committed to:

• Identify priority actions relating to sustainable transport;

• Plan for their successful implementation; and

• Implement and report upon the actions

STAP Goals 1. Develop and implement an integrated

and sustainable transport plan. 2. Develop cohesive links across all

transport-oriented stakeholders. 3. Develop, encourage and promote an

increased use of sustainable transport options in the wider community.

4. Develop, encourage and promote an increased use of sustainable transport options across Council.

5. Plan for the effects of peak oil and climate change on transport use and provision.

The priority will be to develop the Integrated Transport Plan (ITP). The STAP will serve as a part of this plan, and form a preface, seeking to ensure sustainability remains a key criterion for all transport planning decisions.

7.10.2 Active Transport Modes Summary of active transport modes within Coffs Harbour LGA.

• The Pedestrian Access Mobility Plan was developed in 2000. The accomplishments of this plan and a review will be undertaken as part of the Integrated Transport Plan.

• In Coffs Harbour LGA, footpath and cycleway facilities are provided at two levels: Local streets are used for walking and cycling, and footpaths and cycleways are provided along collector and distributor roads.

• The Bike Plan is currently being reviewed in consultation with the Coffs Harbour City Council Bicycle Users Committee and other stakeholders.

• Pedestrian and cycleway infrastructure provision and maintenance is a focus in policies and schemes.

• Coffs Harbour City Council has successfully obtained funding from the Department of Planning for three sections of the Coastline Cycleway.

• Bicycle Users Committee has been working with schools to organise “Big Bike Days”.

• Regular events are held in Bike Week to encourage more cyclists.

• Bicycle Clubs and other stakeholders collaborate to organise bike rides. An advertisement sponsored by the retailers, advertises club events.

• Council is currently engaged in a program to supply bicycle infrastructure such as bike racks in central and popular recreation areas and bicycle cages for commuters. Council also has end of trip facilities for cyclists – showers, lockers and bike racks.

• Council liaises with stakeholders to improve road safety for vulnerable groups including pedestrians, people with a disability, pedal cyclists and motorcyclists


116

7.10.3 Peak Oil Part 1 of the Peak Oil Report investigates the basis, impacts, and risks of “Peak Oil” on Coffs Harbour City Council’s operations, and the Coffs Harbour community. Part 2 of this report explores the measures that may be taken to proactively adapt to such change. For further information relating to this document refer to Council’s website. www.coffsharbour.nsw.gov.au 7.10.4 Rail Working Group Council at its meeting of 28 May 2009 resolved to establish a Rail Working Group to investigate the feasibility of developing a Passenger Rail Network to service Coffs Harbour's future transport needs. The main focus of the Working Group is to investigate the feasibility of utilising the North Coast Rail Line as part of a local train service providing high frequency passenger services between towns and villages south of Coffs Harbour through to Glenreagh. The Working Group however is also charged with the task of investigating Light Rail systems and corridors to service local commuter needs. In terms of demand and benefit to the local community the development of a light rail system between Coffs Harbour and Woolgoolga is seen as a high priority.

7.11 Waste Management – Pressure

Solid waste generation continues to put pressure on the local environment, with problems associated with litter and illegal dumping as well as diminishing our ability to dispose of waste materials in an environmentally responsible way. Increasing amounts of industrial and hazardous waste are also associated with growing human settlements, further adding pressure to the receiving environment in absorbing these waste products. 7.12 Waste Management – State The amount of waste that the Council collects from various sources is indicative of the amount of material throughput in the local government area and the degree to which the community as a whole is creating demands on natural resources to satisfy their wants and needs. Amounts of waste reaching landfill for disposal (rather than being reused or recycled or otherwise diverted from disposal) are indicative of the character of our consumer lifestyle and of the effectiveness of strategies to promote waste minimisation. While many environmental impacts of landfill operations are prevented and minimised through strict licensing conditions established by the EPA, the rate at which landfill space is used by the current generation also limits the ability of future generations to make use of the same disposal techniques Waste Generated, Disposed and Recovered Consistent Indicator 17 a)-Volume/percentage of municipal waste disposed to landfill and recycled Why use this Indicator? If not managed properly, waste can pollute the land, air or water. When examined in terms of the total amount of waste generated, it is possible to determine the total pressure placed on a scarce resource (landfill space). This is also a response indicator in that it illustrates how much or how little is being done over a period of time to address waste generation by the community and Council. This is a core ANZECC and EPA indicator.


117

The total amount of waste generated and disposed of to landfill clearly shows the overall pressure placed on our environment, while the amounts diverted for other purposes - reused , recycled or composted – is an indicator of the community’s response to this issue.

Waste Generation and Disposal 2000-2009

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04_05 05_06 06_07 07_08 08_09

Tonn

es

Total Generated Total Landfilled Total Recycled Total Greenw aste Figure 7.5: Waste generation and Disposal 2000 - 2009 What this Indicator shows The graph illustrates the component of waste disposed of in landfill, recycled or composted as green waste. Note: Total Recycled includes clean fill which is utilised as cover and capping material. The total amount of waste generated has steadily decreased between 2000 and 2009: • Between 2004 to 2008 there has a steady

decrease in waste disposed to landfill, however there has been a increase during the 08/09 reporting period possibly attributed to Councils pick up service after Coffs Harbour flood in March 2009.

• The amount of waste recycled has steadily increased since 2004, reaching a high in 2008/09.

• Green waste recovery has doubled between 2000 to 2009.

Total Waste Generated and amount of waste to landfill has improved overall. The amounts of waste recovered through recycling and composting is increasing. The overall trend in terms of environmental pressures is improving in the sense that despite increasing population, the amounts to landfill is decreasing per annum, and the amount of materials recovery is increasing. However, further interpretation depends on consideration of per capita waste statistics below).

b) Per Capita Waste Generation Why Use This Indicator? Much of the waste that is produced can be initially avoided, or if not, can be reused or recycled to create new products. Waste that is reused or recycled can be measured as waste prevented from being disposed of in landfill. This indicator measures waste disposed of and diverted each year. It is measured as a function of population, as the number of people significantly impacts the amount of waste generated and disposed. With the introduction of the Waste Minimisation and Management Act 1995, the New South Wales Government set a 60% reduction target on the amount of domestic waste being disposed of in landfills per capita, based on 1990 disposal rates. This Act has since been replaced by the Waste Avoidance and Recovery Act 2001 which promotes an ongoing commitment to reduction of waste to landfill. The graph below shows per capita waste sent to landfill and that diverted from landfill, along with the 60% reduction target, which is equivalent to 306kg/capita/annum in the Coffs Harbour area.

Waste per Capita

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04_05 05_06 06_07 07_08 08_09

kg/C

apita

Total Kg Landfilled per capita Total Diverted per capita

306 kg/capita/annum target to landfill

Figure 7.6: Waste generation per Capita between 2000 to 2009

What this Indicator shows The indicator shows that the total amount of waste generated per capita has steadily decreased since 2000. This decrease has been attributed to: • The commencement of the organic

composting in 2007. • The mixed waste treatment process • Improved technology in recycling Since 2003/04 reporting period there has been a decreasing trend of waste disposed to landfill per kg/capita/annum. 1015

Condition improving

Condition improving


118

kg/capita/annum was diverted or recycled during 2003/04 reporting period compared with 572 kg/capita/annum during the 2008/09 reporting period. Continued improvement in these figures is still possible and further action including improving waste minimisation and recycling within the Commercial and Industrial sector which will be implemented in the coming year. In terms of the target of waste to landfill of 306kg/captia/year, the trend has been a slight increase, in terms of amounts diverted from landfill. 7.13 Waste Management –

Responses Council prepared and adopted the Waste Resource Action Strategy in 2002 which outlines Council's innovative approach to waste management with a focus on the reduction of waste generation, alternative technologies for processing and producing marketable products from the waste stream. The strategy can be viewed on the Internet at www.coffsharbour.nsw.gov.au. 7.13.1 Landfill Environmental

Management Plan (LEMP) The Landfill Environmental Management Plan (LEMP) was revised in 2003 for the Englands Road Waste Management Facility. The LEMP is currently subject to a major review, given the changes to the site since the previous major review. 7.13.2 Coffs Coast Resource Recovery

Facility At Council's Englands Road Waste Management Facility, the Coffs Coast Resource Recovery Facility (CCRRF) was commissioned in January 2007 with the commencement of organic composting. Mixed waste treatment commenced in August 2007. The CCRRF has been continuing to fine tune its operations since 2007. The 20-year, $125million waste processing facility contract was awarded to Biomass Solutions Pty Ltd. The contract included building and operating the $15million regional facility. The CCRRF comprises an industrial building for waste processing and recovery as well as an education centre for school groups and technical tours, office, amenities, control room, air filtration

equipment, storage areas and undercover public waste drop-off area. The contractors have been working with the NSW DECCW to correct several issues encountered with the operation of the CCRRF, including the management of odour, leachate and stockpiles of compost and biomass products.

7.13.3 Midwaste Council is a key member of Midwaste which is made up of representatives from eight Councils on the mid north coast. Midwaste is currently completing an updated Regional Waste Strategy, including a sub-regional strategy covering the Coffs Coast Waste Services (CCWS) area. 7.13.4 Coffs Harbour Oil Recycling

Initiative Council continues to operate the three specially-designed oil collection units at its England’s Road Waste Management Facility and the Woolgoolga and Coramba Waste Transfer Stations for the collection and storage of waste oil. Domestic users can dispose of their waste oil free of charge at these facilities. The waste oil is then transferred to a licensed processing plant in Newcastle to be refined as a fuel source for power plants in the Hunter area. 7.13.5 Waste Education Activities Education of residents about their household waste services is undertaken by Handybin Waste Services. Information about these waste education activities can be accessed by visiting www.coffscoastwaste.com.au. Other waste education initiaitives carried out by Council in 2008/09 include: • carrying out waste audits of primary and

high schools, as part of Council's "A-


119

team" Schools Environmental Audit program.

• participating in the MobileMuster mobile phone recycling program and collecting 26kg of mobile phones, batteries and accessories for recycling.

7.13.6 NSW Government Waste and

Environment Levy In July 2009, the NSW State Government extended the area affected by its “Waste and Environment Levy” to include the coastal local government areas including Coffs Harbour. This Levy is charged for every tonne of waste which is landfilled. The Levy is currently $10/tonne, rising another $10/tonne/year (plus CPI) for several years until it reaches the level of the Sydney levy. The Levy is an attempt by the NSW Government to minimise the rate of waste being landfilled. Council is now required to integrate the advertisement, collection, reporting, payment and associated requirements of the Levy on behalf the NSW State Government. In 2010 DECCW will provide a Waste and Sustainability Program from the above mentioned Levy which will fund additional Council waste and sustainability initiatives. 7.13.7 Landfill Gas Extraction and

Disposal Project Council recently entered into an agreement with AGL Energy Sales Limited to construct a landfill gas extraction system at the Englands Road landfill. Construction work is continuing with the anticipated commissioning in late December 2009. The extraction system being installed consists of a network of 48 gas extraction wells drilled into the existing landfill to a depth of up to 18 metres, connected to a network of gas supply piping and an enclosed flare to combust the collected landfill gas. The landfill gas project is expected to assist in the reduction of odour generated from the landfill in the form of fugitive landfill gas emissions, and assist reduce the release of greenhouse gas emissions contributing to dangerous climate change.

7.14 Noise – Pressure Increasing urbanisation results in direct and some background creeping increases in levels of ambient noise. Noise sources include domestic and commercial sources, traffic, domestic and other animals, industrial and airport noise and noise related to schools and sporting fields and entertainment. Increasing numbers of machines such as air conditioners, refrigerators and swimming pool pumps add to the background noise increase as the city grows. Increasing levels of some types of noise can contribute to reduced liveability of settlements, with some people significantly affected by unwanted noises. Close proximity of domestic dwellings in urban areas and inconsiderate or inappropriate design of groups of buildings tends to exacerbate local noise sources which can lead to neighbourly disputes. Barking dogs are one of the most common causes of noise complaints in the Coffs Harbour area. These complaints are often associated with noise during the night. This noise is now recognised as an environmental pollutant and a factor in reducing quality of life, particularly in urban areas. For some problems such as barking, there is rarely an immediate resolution and often prolonged investigation is necessary. Over 80% of noise complaints to Council concern barking dogs. Roosters/hens and birds within aviaries are also a source of complaints to Council. In addition, some native animals are likely to be adversely affected by increasing levels of noise associated with urbanisation and be deterred from dwelling in proximity to areas with unnatural levels and types of noise. Aircraft noise has significant impact on the surrounding urban area and represents a planning constraint. The Pacific Highway is an ongoing concern for many residents from the point of view of impacts on quality of life from noise. Various public rallies in support of an alternative


120

route for the Highway reflect this as an ongoing community concern. This is particularly so with increase in heavy vehicles and general increase in traffic volumes.

7.15 Noise – State Noise Complaints Received by Council Consistent Indicator 14 Why use this Indicator? Complaints about noise from the community can reflect an important aspect of perceived liveability in the community. The number and type of complaints is a reflection of living conditions for people in general, but it is recognised that other factors can be at play in the generation of complaints, including in some instances, intolerance. It is not possible to interpret each complaint to determine the actual level of unreasonable noise, however, these statistics can give a picture of the social cohesiveness of the community in general in the sense that the step to taken to involve Council in resolving a perceived problem assumes that a direct neighbourly approach to resolution is considered ineffective or inappropriate. Table 7.6: Noise complaints received by Council during the 03/04, 07/08 and 08/09 reporting periods.

Year Noise complaints Barking

dogs Other Total

03/04 363 64 427 07/08 445 26 471 08/09 432 87 519

What this Indicator shows Noise problems from barking dogs continue to make up the vast bulk of noise complaints received by Council and these figures are slightly increased on last year at around 85% of all complaints. These complaints are distributed throughout the entire area, but the issue is of most concern in urban residential areas. The number of domestic related complaints is the second most significant category of noise complaints, including loud music, noisy machinery and construction work. This figure and the total figure of 519 noise related complaints are about average in relation to the previous reporting period.

7.16 Noise – Responses Council continues to address the numerous complaints received annually about noise in accordance with the circumstances of the situation. In general, Council officers will seek to ensure that the complainant has first sought to resolve the noise issue through discussion with the relevant generator of noise before directly intervening.

Condition declining


121


actions that need to be undertaken to protect human settlements. These actions align with the Our Living City Settlement Strategy Interim Document.

Actions Implemented

Work collaboratively with DWE to develop and implement a Groundwater Strategy for the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Provide groundwater monitoring to high-density industrial areas.

Consider the impact of likely groundwater contamination when assessing new development applications, particularly in proximity to the Solitary Islands Marine Park.

Undertake a review of the Companion Animals Management Plan Noise complaints from barking dogs.

Ensure development consents promote sound absorption technology.

Maintain membership with relevant organisations, with a view to implementation of best practice controls for water consumption and efficiency.

Undertake a continued education campaign through the entire Coffs Harbour LGA, promoting water efficiency.

Provide continued incentives to reduce water consumption and increase efficiency

Promote the installation of rainwater tanks and/or grey water reuse in all areas of the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Develop a policy for mandatory fitting of water conservation showerheads in all holiday accommodations throughout the Coffs Harbour LGA.

Implement actions contained within the Waste Resource Action Strategy.

Provide strict enforcement of dumping legislation.

Provide continuing waste education.

Implement actions in the Peak Oil Report

- References -

122

8 REFERENCES

• Australian Institute (2004), “Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Industrialised Countries:

where does Australia stand?”, Hal Turton for the Australia Institute, Discussion Paper Number 66, June 2004

• Bennett, A.F., 1998, Linkages in the Landscape: The Role of Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

• CHCC BAS, Biodiversity Action Strategy, Coffs Harbour City Council, 2002. • CHCC Economic Profile, 2003 • CHCC GAS, Greenhouse Action Strategy, Coffs Harbour City Council, 2002 • CHCC Koala Plan of Management, 2000 • CHCC Population Profile, 2004 • CHCC Urban Stormwater Management Plan, 2000 • CHCC WAS, Waste Action Strategy • CHCC, Environmental Awareness Strategy • Coffs Harbour City Council, 2007., Coffs Harbour Economic Profile 2007. Coffs

Harbour City Council • Coffs Harbour City Council, 2008., OUR LIVING CITY: A Settlement Strategy for

Coffs City to 2031(Interim document partly endorsed by the Department of Planning, Coffs Harbour City Council

• Coffs Harbour Sewerage Strategy Environmental Impact Statement, prepared by Consulting Engineers, 2000.

• CSIRO (2004), Climate Change in New South Wales: Part 1 - Past climate variability and projected changes in average climate, Consultancy report for the New South Wales Greenhouse Office by K. Hennessy, C. Page, K. McInnes, R. Jones, J. Bathols, D. Collins and D. Jones, Climate Impact Group, CSIRO Atmospheric Research, National Climate Centre, Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology, July 2004

• DEC (2004), Data for Coffs Harbour LGA for State of the Environment Report 2003-04, Department of Environment and Conservation, 2004.

• Department of Environment & Heritage (2001). Australia State of the Environment Report 2001. Commonwealth of Australia

• Department of Land and Water Conservation, 1999, Stressed River Assessment Report.

• Department of State and Regional Development, Regional Agribusiness Strategy, Australia’s Holiday Coast, Discussion Paper, September 2001.

• Department of the Environment and Climate Change,2007. Floodplain Risk Management Guideline: Practical Consideration of Climate Change.

• Donnelly, R, 1998, Sediment Control Options for Unsealed Roads in a High Rainfall Area of Northeastern New South Wales, Honours Minor Project, Southern Cross University, Lismore.

• EJ & Associates Pty Ltd, 1986. Coffs Harbour City Council Sand and Gravel Resources Study. Coffs Harbour.

• Environment Protection Authority, 2000. State of the Environment Data • Environment Protection Authority, 2003, State of the Environment Report 2002-03. • Fisher, M, Body, M and Gill, J, 1996. The Vegetation of the Coffs Harbour City Local

Government Area. Coffs Harbour City Council. • Healthy Rivers Commission, 2003, North Coast Rivers Independent Inquiry into the

North Coast Rivers, March 2003 • Hinchey, T, 1995. A Water Quality Study of the Estuaries Releasing into the Solitary

Islands Marine Reserve, A LEAP (Landcare Environment Action Program) Project. • Hinchey, T, 2000b. On-Site Sewage Management Strategy. Coffs Harbour City

Council. • Hunter Valley Research Foundation, July 2003. Mid North Coast Regional Profile. A

socio economic profile of the Mid North Coast Region. Prepared for the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources.

- References -

123

• IPCC Working Group II Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (Geneva: WHO and UNEP IPCC, 2007), accessed online at www.ipcc.ch, on June 1, 2007.

• Leeming, R., 2002. Tracing faecal pollution using sterol biomarkers and microbial faecal indicators in the rivers and creeks in the Coffs Harbour Region, NSW. Report prepared by the CSIRO Marine Research Department for the Coffs Harbour City Council

• Lydon, J. & T. Ireland (Ed.), 2005 Object Lessons: Archaeology and Heritage in Australia. Australian Scholarly Publishing, Melbourne, VIC.

• Mackie Martin and Associates Pty Ltd, 1993. Analysis of Regional Groundwater Resources. Coffs Harbour.

• Moreland Energy Foundation, 2004, “HOME GREENHOUSE AUDIT MANUAL” prepared for Cool Communities

• New South Wales Fisheries, 2000. State of the Environment Data – unpublished. • New South Wales Planning and Environment Commission (PEC), 1980. Working

Paper 3, Climate, Coffs Harbour Coastal Planning Study. • Nicholson, KM and Mansbridge, VV, 1996, Estuarine Water Quality in the Solitary

Island ,marine Reserve, New South Wales, Centre for Coastal Management, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales.

• WBM Oceanics Australia (2008) Moonee Creek Estuary Management Plan, Final Report, Prepared for Coffs Harbour City Council and Department of Environment and Climate Change, February 2005.

• WBM Oceanics Australia (2009) Draft Pipe Clay Lake Estuary Management Plan, Final Report, Prepared for Coffs Harbour City Council and Department of Environment and Climate Change, February 2005.

• WBM Oceanics Australia (2009) Hearnes Lake Estuary Management Plan, Final Report, Prepared for Coffs Harbour City Council and Department of Environment and Climate Change, February 2005.

Documents

Coffs Harbour€¦ · the private car and less use of bikes and public transport. The development of the Integrated Transport Plan and implementation the Sustainable Transport Action