South East Queensland Regional Plan RTI 089 - Part 1RTI Document No. 105 RTI RELEASE. Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031 . There were a significant number ofPrograms,

Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031

PART A .. INTRODUCTION Reference-PrincipleiPolicylProgram Pa2eNo.

Comments Suggest Amendment Change!Addition, Clarification, Consideration

... ... ----- --- - --- -- ---- --- ------- - - ---

No further comments required. General overall comments on draft Plan made in Preamble. Basically this Part reiterates the 2005 Plan.

-

PART B - REGIONAL VISION AND STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS Reference-Principle/Policy/Program Pa2eNo.


Remains the same with minor additions to reference climate change and green house gas emissions eg 'resilient to climate change'.

Regional Vision

Strategic directions • The statements have been updated and reflect the additional focus on climate change, sustainability, delivering smart growth.

• Should provide greater reference to community health and well-being directions. The strategic directions focus appears to be very land use orientated when clearly the docwnent covers the broad range ofplanning issues across the SEQ region. Amend to include an additional paragraph along the lines of: Developing Strong, Safe and Healthy Communities. This section should address to the need for coordinated and timely social infrastructure delivery to address the needs ofthe ageing population. disadvantaged communities and new neighbourhood developments. This paragraph reflects the intent ofthe Toward Q2 policy document.

• Draft uses phase'Accommodating future growth'. This should be amended to "Managing future growth', as has been advocated in the SEQCoM messages (2008) to the State. In this context, sound planning and policy implementation will manage the region's growth; with population trend projections.

Page 5 of29

RTI Document No. 101

RTI R

ELEA

SE


PART C - REGIONAL LAND USE PATTERN Reference- Comments Principle/Policy/Program Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration Pa2eNo. Map 2 Land Use • Removal of 'Investigation Areas' from Map. Additionally there is no longer reference to Rural Villages in the Categories RL&RP Area and Regs.

Originally 2005 Plan and Regs Identified Rural Villages on NSI - Point Lookout, DWlwich and Amity Point. '.• Revised 2009 Plan approach is to maintain in RL and RP area, with urban activities recognised under local planning scheme (Refer: Regs - Div I S1.5(la)

• Obtain written confirmation from State to this interpretation and the future progress for planning ofthe new Emerging Urban communities (zoned) - Point Lookout and Dunwich.

Regional landscape and No change to intent and description. Comments in regulatory provisions reflect the support for diversification of Rural Production Area rural economies. Support for principles.

Urban Footprint • Wording changes do not alter overall principles - provides clearer expression and is supported. Commentary around 'focuses urban growth in locations' maintains the principles being pursued by this Council.

• Maintains statements covering the urban footprint not implying all land can be developed for urban purposes. Identifies that local government planning schemes and urban growth areas will be the principal instruments for

~tablishing_thedesil"ed-use-o.£-landand-the-prefeIl'ed-timing-ofdevelopment.--

No areas in Redland City. Rural Living Areas

Page 60f29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

- -

----


Regional growth areas

-

-_._----

2009 Plan removes Investigation Areas and includes Regional Growth Areas. a) Urban Growth Areas - key broad hectare locations within urban footprint and indicated on the regulatory maps. Minister can declare as master plan areas (MPA) under IPA, triggering structme planning process. b) Future Growth Areas - intended as possible urban growth areas. Require further planning or resolution ofkey impediments such as the availability 0 f infrastructure. Regulatory provisions direct that no development may occur within these area(s) that will be inconsistent with its future purpose. c) Identified growth areas - 'are being seriously considered for futUre urb~ development. (Map 3)'. References that to be recognised by the Minister as a urban growth area, extensive investigation is required.---------- - --- 10. Southern Redland Bay is shown on Map 3. The extent of this area remains common with that shown for the previous Investigation Area.

• South-east Thomlands and Kinross Road are former major development areas (MDAs) and have been recognised as a 'committed area' in the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy. It is considered that they

__shQllld 'be trll!1SI'ttedJQ 'Ul"b~ lOJ}reYisedaccordinglY'.

• Council in 2008 identified within the LGMS, that the Investigation Area in Southern Redland Bay was not required to meet the dwelling targets of the 2005 Plan. While council supports the inclusion ofthis area in the RL and RP Area in Map 2, it does strongly request that this area not be identified on Map 3. With a preferred settlement pattern that achieves a compact urban form and consolidation through land use efficiency, planned infill; the 2031 dwelling target can be achieved without the necessity to expand the urban footprint in the southern extremity of the City. (Public transport & arterial road infrastructure upgrade requirements are lagging in the current urban expansion areas & the State is unwilling to commit to the current infrastructure deficiencies..) This Council position also reflects the State's agencies response to the previous planning investigation conducted for this area in 2007.

• Inappropriate use of terms ego 'seriously considered'. Should be redrafted. • In relation to use ofthe 'Identified growth areas' - Comments made in the past (also through SEQCoM)

regarding uncertainty; identified ability to acconunodate projected growth iIi the bounds ofthe urban footprint; and driving planning outside of the preferred development sequence and policy framework of the Plan, are again reiterated. Further there is no clear understanding ofwhat triggers any future planning, investigation in these areas • (including timing) and if such action is driven by the MinisterlDIP.

Page 7 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

Redland City Council Submission on Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031

Queensland the Smart State 4J..~ Queensland Government ~~ Oelli'lftmtnl ofitfrutrud::Drt and PJannjnC


RTI R

ELEA

SE


Redland City Council Submission on Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031

Preamble General Comments

This is the initialS year review of the SEQ Regional Plan 2005-2026. This review has been based on a tenns ofreference (TOR) issued by the State Government in May 2008. Redland City Council (RCC) through the SEQ Council ofMayors (SEQCoM) had input into the TOR and in the review process. Additionally,

i) SEQCOM presented a list ofkey messages to the State on the urban footprint principles; ii) RCC forwarded the 2008 Local Growth Management Strategy (LGMS) as a submission to the State to assist its initial review work on the

Plan (June 2008) iii) RCC provided data and mapping to the State & SEQCoM, on request. iv) Council officers provided input into working groups convened by both the State and SEQCoM.

The fundamentals of the Planin performing the function as a high level strategic planning instrument for managing growth in SEQ remain sound. The 2009 Plan's structure and format remain common with that of2005, reinforcing the position that this is a review not a major rewrite ofpolicy. It has included the emerging issues ofcontinued high population growth, housing affordability, transport congestion, climate change and peak oil. The pressing need to address these issues has been defined as the reason for bringing forward the review by 12 months.

The review in general has~mhra_~ed~h~principJesJ)utlined-b}'-LQthroughthe-SEQCoM~(-for-example-=-in-l"elation-to-the-lJl"ban-J


There were a significant number ofPrograms, Strategies, Studies, Actions referenced in the 2005 Plan. A number remain uncompleted. It is important that critical pieces of work, strategy development be prioritised with funding and other resourcing commitment for implementation and alignment with the Regional Plan.

Key action: Give priority to completion of the following and undertake alignment with the Plan-i) Koala Mapping and other initiatives of the Premier's Taskforce report.

ii) SEQ NRM Plan iii) Regional Roads & PublicTransportlmplementationPlan(as part ofSEQIPP) to deliver-civil infrastructure projects thatare----

lagging for currently developing areas iv) Integrated Regional Transport Plan review v) Rural Futures Strategy and Action Plan

vi) Climate Change management plan and adaptation strategies vii) Nature Conservation Strategy review.

--------vi'ii)Sfrong-Coml1iimily govemance-mecnaIiismsror implemenhifion

The DIP - regional planning team for SEQ needs to be appropriately resourced to meet this implementation commitment.

The State has recognised and quoted that broadhectare land in a number areas in the region (including Redland City) will be exhausted in the life of the Plan. This recognises the policy position on physical constraints and sustainability values protection and enhancement being pursued by Redland City Council.

The Regional Plan and its population management strategies need to be informed by the state ofregion reporting and other environmental report cards. The longer term implications/consequences of the policy direction need to be understood, with determination to whether the responses satisfy quadruple bottom line principles. (including the intergenerationaVequity tests).

Governance, as stated above, is critical to seeing the necessary co-ordination ofthe Plan's delivery. The sub-regional narratives (replacing the LGMS's) do not cover the broader range of core matters set out in the LGMS. It is acknowledged that the IPA reform will defme and reintroduce a strategic plan element into planning schemes (with this detail being refined). It is important that the significant scope of work done at the local level in preparing the draft LGMS is given statutory instrument status. (in some fonn).

Growth Management targets. Some level of constructive assessment has been done (with assistance ofthe LGMSs) to arrive at the population growth distribution across the Region.

Page 3 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


• Regional Infill target of 45% of all new dwellings.

• Maintains focus to western corridor

2004-2026 Existing Dwellinas Total New Dwellinas Total IInfill

• Redlands infill target 397.0071 156,500. being 51 % of all 202,58 137.500 new dwellings.

(Consistent with the LGMS policy

52,35 116.000: 11,55 11,000:

position)90,1791 60,50 • Target aligns with a

123,900 86,500 City-wide population 49,779 19,500 17,500 I 8,100 estimate of 181,000-13,652 15,000 182,000 people.

This is mid-range of7,818 6,000 the PIFU low and130,016 98,500 medium series

45,538 28,500 population estimates (2008

Total I 1,124,3881 735,5001 325,5001579,9001255,000 release). ~J!~!>!~reated!'r!:~f_ft0!TI data ~2_09~~~QQ~lans - note ch~ge ofI-ocal Government Areas in 2008)1- _

Redland City's 2031 target is generally consistent with the independent analysis done in house - based on the policy position adopted by this Council. ie compact settlement pattern based on the 2005 urban footprint, 2006 Redlands Planning Scheme and the 2008 Local Growth Management Strategy.

.The Plans terminology remains generally consistent, one notable change is the use of the term 'broadhectare' in lieu of 'greenfield'. This is·

supported.

Page 4 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 20b-2031

PART A - INTRODUCTION Reference- Comments

-'-,'_.'.'-_.".- .-

Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration Pae:eNo. Principle/PolicylProgram

_ . ..

No further comments required. General overall comments on draft Plan made in Preamble. Basically this Part reiterates the 2005 Plan.

PARTB~GIONAL-'~']SION AND STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS Reference-Principle/Policy/Program Pae:eNo.

Comments Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration

Remains the same with minor additions to reference climate change and green house gas emissions eg 'resilient to climate change'.

Regional Vision

Strategic directions • The statements have been updated and reflect the additional focus on climate change, sustainability, delivering smart growth.

• Should provide greater reference to community health and well-being directions. The strategic directions focus appears to be very land use orientated when clearly the document covers the broad range ofplanning issues across the SEQ region. Amend to include an additional paragraph along the lines of: Developing Strong, Safe and Healthy Communities. This section should address to the need for coordinated and timely social infrastructure delivery to address the needs ofthe ageing population. disadvantaged communities and new neighbourhood developments. This paragraph reflects the intent of the Toward Q2 policy document.

• Draft uses phase'Accommodating future growth'. This should be amended to "Managing future growth', as has been advocated in the SEQCoM messages (2008) to the State. In this context, sound planning and policy implementation will manage the region's growth; with population trend projections.

Page 5 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


PART C - REGIONAL LAND USE PATTERN Reference Comments Principle/Policy/Program Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration Pa2e No. Map 2 Land Use • Removal of 'Investigation Areas' from Map. Additionally there is no longer reference to Rural Villages in the Categories RL&RP Area and Regs.

• Originally 2005 Plan and Regs Identified Rural Villages on NSI - Point Lookout, Dunwich and Amity Point. • Revised 2009 Plan approach is to maintain in RL and RP area, with urban activities recognised under local

planning scheme (Refer: Regs - Div 1 S1.5(la)

• Obtain written confirmation from State to this interpretation and the future progress for planning ofthe new Emerging Urban communities (zoned) - Point Lookout and Dunwich.

No change to intent and description. Comments in regulatory provisions reflect the support for diversification of Rural Production Area Regional landscape and

rural economies. Support for principles.

Urban Footprint • Wording changes do not alter overall principles - provides clearer expression and is supported. Commentary around 'focuses urban growth in locations' maintains the principles being pursued by this Council.

• Maintains statements covering the urban footprint not implying aU land can be developed for urban purposes. Identifies that local government planning schemes and urban growth areas will be the principal instruments for establishing-the-desn-ea-use-ef-lana-ana-the-pfeferred-timing-of-development.

Rural Living Areas No areas in Redland City.

Page 60f29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


--------1

_____1

Regional growth areas

I

2009 Plan removes Investigation Areas and includes Regional Growth Areas. a) Urban Growth Areas - key broad hectare locations within urban footprint and indicated on the regulatory maps. Minister can declare as master plan areas (MPA) under IPA, triggering structure planning process. b) Future Growth Areas - intended as possible urban growth areas. Require further planning or resolution ofkey impediments such as the availability of infrastructure. Regulatory provisions direct that no development may occur within these area(s) that will be inconsistent with its future purpose. c) Identified growth areas - 'are being seriously considered for future urban development. (Map 3)'. References

I that to be recognised by the Minister as a urban growth area; extensive investigation is required. ------ ----10. Southern Redland Bay is shown on Map 3. The extent of this area remains common with that shown for the previous Investigation Area. • South-east Thornlands and Kinross Road are former major development areas (MDAs) and have been

recognised as a 'committed area' in the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy. It is considered that they shQ111

-I


Urban Growth Areas • 'Minister can include new areas by notice in the Government Gazette' and Future Growth Has already done for area nominated in draft Plan (December 2008) Areas Page Number 15 Effectively Identified growth areas can be recognised by Minister as Future growth areas or Urban growth (Inclusion as new dot areas following 'extensive investigation'. This when read in conjunction with Div 6 ofthe Regulations, point - Page 7 of draft means the Minister can amend the Urban Footprint of the Plan to include Identified growth area through submission) gazette notice and not as a fonnal amendment of the Plan with its associated notification and consultative

processes. Council strongly recommends that this position be amended to respect the Plan and importantly the consultative process for alternation to the urban footprint of the Plan. (Map 2).

Page 15 Para 1 Use ofterminology 'categories ofland' - is confusing with 'Land use categories' in Map 2 the principal regional land use identification. Amend wording.

Map 3 Tided Identified Title is confusing in light ofbeing conunon with one ofregional growth areas. Amend to 'Regional Growth Growth Areas Areas'.

Sub-regional narratives • Opportunity was given to assist in drafting the narrative - revised draft by council officers was circulated to Redland Councillors. In general, the final version reflects the submission from council, with one major exception that is Page 27 the inclusion ofa 'identified growth areas' paragraph (not included in initial copy forwarded to Council).

Council requires (consistent with previous comments) that this paragraph be removed with those amendments +---required-to-Map-3-;-'Fhis-wiH-also-inc1ude-removal-ofreference-in-'Pable-5-{PtOl-)~in-BR08-Smart-(Jrowth-.--1------

• Reference to the Thornlands Integrated Enterprise Area as drafted by Council is appreciated and supported with minor change to remove reference to district -level activity centre. This is consistent with council's policy position as set out in the 2008 LGMS.

-- 1- 1----------·------

Page 80f29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

-------- - ------------------ --


-

Mapping - Map 2 • The urban footprint has been refined on the 5MBIs. It more closely reflects the RPS zonings. The following statistics represent the scope of change:

" """ 5MBI Draft SEQRP Anah sis

Total 8MBI Lots 18628

New Lots in Draft SEQRP in Regional Landscape & Rural Production Area (RLRPA) 5189

----_._- ----_ .._------------------"---~-------------

Draft RLRPA Public Lots 4359 Draft RLRPA Private Lots 830

Private RLRPA Lots - RPS ZoninQ Conservation 617 Rural 25 5MBI Residential 188

Produced by Land Use Planning, Redland Citv Council- February 2009

• Additionally, the RPS will continue to determine the level ofassessment for a dwelling house on an existing land parcel (Material change ofuse) in the RL & RP Area - unaffected by the SEQRP. Prohibition of subdivision in RL&RP (less than 1DOha) is consistent with the RPS policy position.

• Inclusion ofthe CP zone - Island Industry investigation Area in RL& RP Area should be amended back to 2005 Land Use Category - Urban Footprint.

Page 90f29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


• Additional mapping changes - 5MBI RUSSELL ISLAND.

Description I Include in Land Redlands Use Category Planning Scheme

Zone i. Lot 5 IRL + RP Area RNU and

RP129494 Conservation Wright Street

n. Lot I I RL + RP Area RNU RP64911

Lot 1 RP166350

Lot 1 RP67877 Canapia Point Drive

• In relation to the Mainland, the only changes related to: a. Rectification ofurban footprint boundary - no policy consequences. (Mapped and reviewed by

--- ------------- I--------Officers)---------------- -------------- --- ------------ ------

b. Removal ofInvestigation Area (Southern Redland Bay) and inclusion in RL and RP Area which is supported.

Hardcopy Maps: Map • These maps are a composite ofMaps 2 and 3 ofthe draft Plan. In addition to the land use categories of Map 2, SEQ .R.}-l~Q_-Map_S~Q______ they also show Identified growth areas and Urban Growth areas (not Future Growth Areas.) -- This Plan should- - I RP25 reflect Map 2 of Plan -land use categories only.

DRO 1-SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE Reference Principle/Policy/Program PalZe No.


Page 100f29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

_____


DRO No.1 • Substantially new DRO recognising gaps from 2005 Plan. Page No. 32 • Recognition ofhigh level principles and under the intent to be a clear and present threat.

• Continuing to develop response and understanding to the implications ofadaptation strategies. At the strategic level, the treat of liability is implied and there is a substantial number ofplans, actions uncompleted.

• As local government planning schemes must be consistent with the intent of the desired regional outcomes, principles and policies, the wording of these parts ofthe SEQRP is critical. In attempting brevity, the single sentence format ofDROI omits two important considerations - 'protecting native habitat and wildlife' and

--1--···1- ---- -- ,-- 'maintaining ecological processes' both ofwhich are primary inclusions in most defmitions and outcome listings for sustainability. This DRO would be better as an expanded list format and include the above additions.

1 ~:~~:~:l~:::C::~red I· ~~:~~~:a~:~~:~:~-::c~:~l;:~~~:d~:~t~:~:~~~F:~::~:~~~:'-=;~~~~~-~~;~~~~:~~e~;~:iPles-.I'---Page No. 32 ~;e Appendix 1.

Sustainability Sustainability Characteristics - further inclusions are recommended in dot points: Characteristics • Subdivision design to assist in achieving dot point 4 Page No. 33 • Development Designs

• Renewable Resources • Improved bush fire protection • Building floor heights protection against sea level rise. • Increased Protection from climate hazards - such as storm, cyclone and heat wave events.

• 'Sustainability characteristics' are the main guide in the SEQRP on what is meant by the term sustainability as used in the DROl. Yet the characteristics are, open to several interpretations and not all encompassing. They need to be more tightly worded and be inclusive.

1.3 - Reducing • Concerned about the requirement to assess development against goals for greenhouse gas emissions. State greenhouse gas emissions needs to provide a usable methodology - Council officers are not aware ofone. Its an onerous requirement that Page No. 35 will be passed to developers to do the assessment and Councils to evaluate that. What exactly are the

objectives of such an impost?

1.5 - Climate Change • Concerned that the Climate Change Management Plan will be developed without public consultation. Management • Concern that climate chan,ge initiatives will not achieve regional consistency where necessary(eg,Council

Page 11 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


Page No. 39 detennined habitable floor levels for urban development under climate change scenarios)

Additional Issues: • High priority to complete actions/strategies - Key is implementation and future alignment ofPlan with these developing strategies/management plans.

• Insufficient recognition of community engagement in this ORO. Include comment to increasing the Community's awareness, understanding ofthe issues, responses and outcomes through education and engagement.

DRO 2 - NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Reference Comments Principle/Policy/Program Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration Page No. General Comment • The ORO statement, principle and programs contain concepts that are ambiguous and require clarification.

• The wording of the Principle should include the concepts of rehabilitation and research. This concept of research needs to address those matters set out in Section 1.3.6 ofIntegrated Planning Act..

• Areas with significant biodiversity values within and outside the Urban Footprint and linkages providing, or capable ofproviding ecologic~l functionality must be provided with ongoing protection from development. Impacts from areas adjacent or adjoining these areas are to be addressed through buffering or effectively mitigated by other measures.

I ,--The ~o1iciessheuld-inGlude-the-role-of-State-ageneies-in-providing-facilitation-and-leadershi~ • NRM Plan (non-statutory) is called up through SEQRP. Future alignment issues need to be critically

addressed with finalisation. The implementation ofthe SEQ NRM plan must be listed as a policy.

• Programs regarding offsets, receiving sites and the identification ofbiodiversity corridors require prioritisation and completion dates need to defined and communicated to local govemments. __

I 1-.-- Threatening processes including habitat removal and fragmentation, climate change, fire, pests and weeds and roads are not comprehensively or consistently addressed.

2.1 Biodiversity • The ORO statement includes words and concepts that are ambiguous in their meaning. These ambiguities Page 42 should be explained and clarified.

• The DRO recognises the region's rich biodiversity and that there is a need for maintaining its health and resilience. It recognises that the natural environment provi4es some ecosystem services (air and water),

Page 12 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


lifestyle and community needs. • It recognises that the natural environment should be sustainably managed but this concept is not defined or

explained (ORO 1 explanatory text defines ESO but not sustainable management). Further, it indicates that the natural environment supports economic development. It is not explained if the intention is to manage the natural environment to enable it to be exploited economically or ifit is recognition that the economy is ultimately dependant upon the ecosystem services derived from the natural environment.

• Without clarification ofthe concept of 'sustainably managing', particularly in its relationship to economic ---~-------I---development,it is difficult envisage the achievement of the ORO in a way that recognises the value ofthe-----I---

natural environment to biodiversity, ecosystem services, outdoor lifestyle and community needs.

ORO 2 Explanatory text • The text does not explain how coordination or leadership will be provided or who will undertake responsibility for its provision.

_____1 I· The_text includes_a&tatementthaL'a_coordinatedand collahorativ~_approachh}'goYermnent,industqr-and_the----j community is required to protect the region's natural values' and the 'strong leadership is critical to improve the natural environment's resilience', however, the draft SEQ RP 2009-2031 and the SEQ NRM Plan are silent on who will take responsibility for providing leadership and coordination.

The Principle • The principle requires clarification and could include other words to better align with, and support, Redland City Council policy documents.

• The principle includes the words 'protect' and 'enhance' but now qualifies where these activities will apply; specifically in areas with 'significant biodiversity values.' This is a variation and, arguably, a caveat on the position of the SEQ RP 2005-2026. Why the word 'significant' was included needs to be explained particularly when the policies require the avoidance ofdevelopment impacts in both areas ofsignificant biodiversity values and areas not identified in Map 5.

• The inclusion ofthe concepts ofrehabilitation and research would benefit the draft SEQ RP 2009-2031. • The RSC Corporate Plan 2006-2010 includes Objective 1.1 which states;

"To protect, maintain and rehabilitate environmental values and biodiversity". The RCC Biodiversity Strategy 2008-2012 Vision for the Future states; ''To protect what we have, to rehabilitate what has been degraded and better our understanding ofthe

unknown". • It would be productive to include the concept ofrehabilitation into the Principle of the draft SEQ RP 2009

2031. It would be consistent with the notes which state; ''These gaps (in the biodiversity network) should be restored or rehabilitated" Further, it would support concepts like offsets and carbon sink plantings as well as recoMisin,g that there is

Page 13 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

--------- -

- -


much that we do not know about the region's biodiversity.

• Research needs to be completed on the resilience of species & ecosystems in response to climate change conditions.

Policy 2.1.1 • This policy broadly supports Objective 1.1 and ActionI.I.2 in the RCC Biodiversity Strategy 2008-2012 but does not provide adequate protection to biodiversity beyond areas with significant biodiversity such as corridors and linkages.

Policy 2.1.2 • This policy is inconsistent with Policy 2.1.1. • This policy requires development and planning schemes within the Urban Footprint and Rural Living Area to

have 'regard to adverse impacts on significant biodiversity values'. This is inconsistent with Policy 2.1.1 which requires that development 'avoids impacts on areas with significant biodiversity values' .

• Furthermore, the requirement to be consistent and avoid impacts on areas with significant biodiversity values in both the Urban Footprint and Regional Landscape is reinforced by the notes for 2.2 'Koala conservation' which states;

"... the koala population in the wild is directly linked to koala movement through urban areas." Significant biodiversity values must be given the highest level of protection whether inside or outside of the• Urban Footprint to be consistent with the DRO Principle.

Policy 2.1.3 • In areas where biodiversity networks are~ill b~i!tKClll~lysed, any planning needs to reco~istLthis-P_QSitioll.-----witliout-colnpromlsmg thevaluesexisting.. • The identification ofbiodiversity networks, particularly those parts which link isolated areas of significant

biodiversity values is critical in the protection, management and enhancement of the region's significant biodiversity.

• Once identified and mapped, the biodiversity network in particular those 'gaps' that require restoration or - --- ---- - ------_._--------- rehabilitation to improve connectivity, must be afforded the same level of protection as the areas with-------

significant biodiversity values in Map 5.

Policy 2.1.4 • Development adjacent to areas of significant biodiversity must require studies to ensure that impacts are avoided or effectively mitigated. This may require provisions to extend time frames at the information request stage ofthe DA process.

Page 14 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


Program 2.1.5

- -

• •

•

This program must recOgnise the need for implementation, facilitation and leadership. This program statement must include 'implementation' in addition to the development of a regional biodiversity information system. This program broadly supports RCC Biodiversity Strategy 2008-2012 Objective 1.11. While it is recognised that effective partnerships will assist in this program, the relevant state agencies must assume a leadership role and provide assistance and facilitation in achieving this program. . _..

-

Program 2.1.6 • • •

•

•

The program must be listed as a policy under DR02. The principle or intent ofPolicy 2.1.5 SEQ RP 2005-2026 has been 'down graded' to that ofprogram in the draft SEQ RP 2009-2031. The program references the draft SEQ NRM plan. It is difficult to imagine the SEQ NRM plan as a vehicle for creating 'a coordinated and collaborative approach by government, industry and the community... ' without an endorsed-policy-p()siti()n-in-the-draft-SEG-RP-20()9·~()3-1.

The referencing of the draft SEQ NRM plan within a program under DRO 2 'Natural environment' is inconsistent with DRO 4 'Natural resources' in which the draft SEQ NRM plan is referenced in a policy (Policy 4.1.1). To overcome the inconsistencies within, and between, the SEQ RP 2005-2026 and the draft SEQ RP 20092031 and to facilitate effective and coordinated collaboration, the program must be listed as a policy.

Program 2.1.7 • • •

This program requires clearer direction and outcomes to be effective. This program. must include the intent to facilitate and implement regionally consistent local government offsets programs and the identification of receiving sites that are ofhigh priority to achieve biodiversity outcomes. The program should indicate the intention to rapidly determine the multiplier, or multipliers, that will determine the rate ofoffsets required (for example, three trees to be planted to offset one tree removed for development). This will be critical in achieving Program 2.1.8.

Program 2.1.8 • See also 11.2. This program is a key requirement to achieve program 2.1.7 and, therefore, should be prioritised, facilitated and lead by the relevant state agencies. Critically, the program or notes should indicate an expected completion date.

Page 15 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

__ ---


Program 2.1.9

Map 5 - Biodiversity

Additional Comments

•

•

•

•

•

_.-

•

Viewed broadly, this program has a significant relationship with Policy 2.1.3, Programs 2.1.7 and 2.1.8. For these to programs and, in particular, the policy to achieve the desired outcomes the program must be prioritised with an expected completion date.

Is out dated as there are areas on the map identified as state regional and local significance that have been cleared by development. This mapping needs to be updated (noted that biodiversity areas are being lost sue to historical development approvals).

While the draft SEQ RP 2009-2031 identifies a number ofdistinctive features for which South East Queensland is renowned it does not specifically identify the threatening processes that may diminish their quality or existence. The RCC Biodiversity Strategy 2008-2012 lists the following threatening processes;

• Habitat removal and fragmentation; • Climate change; • Fire; • Pests and weeds; and • Roads.

Habitat removal and fragmentation is a key theme in the principle, policies, programs and notes ofDRO 2 Biodiversity but is not mentioned specifically. Further, there is no recognition ofthe increased impact offrre, pests and weeds under DRO 2 Natural Environment or DRO 4 Natural Resources in developed or developing environments. This must be addressed directly within a DRO or by reference to regional documents like the SEQ Pest Management Plan.

policies, programs and notes ofDRO 2 Natural Environment or DRO 4 Natural Resources. The RCC Biodiversity Strategy 2008-20124.2.2 states that "human-induced climate change may result in large-scale biodiversity loss on a global. scale. It could cause dramatic shifts in species distributions and species extinctions, particularly across fragmented or vulnerable ecosystems." With regard to the impact of climate change on the natural environment and biodiversity,programl.4.9-----indicates that local and regional nature conservation and natural resource management plans "take account of risks from climate hazards resulting from climate change". Given the gravity and magnitude of this threat to the effective sustainable management the draft SEQ RP 2009-2031 must address the issue of climate change in specific policies to be confident of achieving DRO 2 and 2.1 Biodiversity Principle. Existing, new and upgraded roads and railways present significant barriers to the ecological functionality of the biodiversity network. This is not recognised in either ORO 2 Natural Environment or ORO 12 Integrated transport.

Climate ehange-isspecificallymeflfioned iiHfieDRO-2~explanaforytextl,ut does riot appead.ri-thi pTinciple,-.

--------

Page 16 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2" _)-2031

2.2 Koala Conservation • Principle - 'Conflict between urban development and Koalas' Not just 'urban development' - rural land Page No. 45 practices, infrastructure/roads. Needs to be expanded.

• Redland City Council has adopted a Koala Policy and Strategy for the City and recognised that the koalas in Policy 2.2.3 the Koala Coast area are "Endangered". They face extinction within the 10 years without serious decisions

regarding a moratorium in koala habitat clearing within the SEQ and the protection and management ofhabitat Policy 2.2.5 within the urban footprint. The goal ofno net loss and in fact increasing koala habitat in SEQ must be treated

---as a priority by the State.

• Need for alternatives to be tested on basis of principle ofprotecting koala habitat in KCA & KSA, that is a balanced values assessment ofhighest and best use from regional perspective.

• Stronger wording than 'consider' and 'encourage' to be used. I I .-Koala-mapping-being-completed-by-mid-2009j-eritical-fer-its-alignment-inte-the-Plan.-lmplementatien 1---

strategies must be translated into planning instruments and regulatory provisions ofPlan. Further strengthening of this to support local council through support for strong protection mechanisms within their relevant planning schemes. Opportunity needs to be taken up to initiate protection measures without threats of compensation LG's buffered in making plan changes through the Regulatory Provisions of the Regional Plan and the Plan itself

General • Generic criteria use ofterminology like 'avoids impacts' (2.1.1), 'regard to' and 'avoids impacts' (2.1.2) needs to reflect current drafting practice and be consistent with other legislation, strategies. Also needs to point to the specific actions being required.

• Concern over consistent mapping methodologies. • Issue ofoffset - whole ofgovernment policy is sound. 2.1.7 Seems out ofplace unless specific reference made

to EcoFund. • It must also be recognised that development and infrastructure causes threats beyond that ofhabitat loss

through anthropogenic forces that are also causing the death of many koalas through car strikes, dog attacks, disease through stress. These need to be addressed with any proposal for infrastructure upgrades.

• It is appropriate that the State considers inclusion of the preservation and protection ofhabitat for ecological and environmental purposes in infrastructure charges - in particular as part of master planning, structure planning and priority infrastructure plans.

• That all development within koala habitat include koala sensitive design through appropriate road widths, dog controls and facilitates koala movement thou~h both urban and rural areas by retention and enhancement of

Page 17 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

------------


habitat.

• Issue oftrading development density for biodiversity outcomes - especially in koala areas. Might be that higher densities are offered for greater protection ofwildlife or lands set aside for corridors.

• The relationship between the SEQ RP Desired Regional Outcomes, principles(s), and policies, and SEQ NRM Plan core elements and targets is not yet coherent. The NRM Plan appears to have relevance in a number of areas not yet well articulated in the SEQRP. For example, policies ofthe SEQRP at 2.1 do not call up the SEQNRMP or defer to it for 'management, planning, investment, monitoring and reporting' ofbiodiversity (Principle 2.1) as they do in policy 4.1.1 in regard to natural resources. The wording of DROs and principles in the SEQRP is not accurately carried through to the SEQ NRM Plan (eg, DR01 and DR02). This is probably just an issue ofaccess to up to date text during the drafting process, needs to rectified.

• The actual SEQRP policies 2.1.1 through 2.1.4 cannot be regarded as a complete biodiversity agenda for the region and do not implement the principle (2.1). For example, there are no policies relating to core habitat areas, regionally significant species at risk, conservation recovery planning, habitat offset, or objectives for how any new nature conservation areas are to be prioritised, acquired, or managed. Rather, the wording of 2.1.3 refers to (undefmed) term 'biodiversity networks'.

• Coordination between the drafts ofthe NRM Plan and SEQRP. The wording of DROs and principles in the SEQRP is not accurately carried through to the SEQ NRM Plan (eg, DR01 and DR02). On the other side, the NRM Plan appears to have relevance in a number of areas not yet well articulated in the SEQRP. For example, policies of the SEQRP at 2.1 do not call up the SEQNRMP or defer to it for 'management, planning, investment, monitoring and reporting' ofbiodiversity (Principle 2.1) as they do in policy 4.1.1 in regard to natul'al-resourees.-

• While the NRM 'Plan' may technically be non-statutory, it is called up as a SEQRP Policy and Program under 4.1.1/4.1.4. It certainly means that the participants now are no longer there in the voluntary capacity that they were during the plan's drafting. It now represents a 'must do' for all local governments. While the individual actions of local governments and agencies towards the targets will vary, there is no guidance in the plan as to what the desirable strategies and actions are, or the priorities among them. This is not conducive to good----

~-

coordination between local governments and the State agencies. Nor will it position us well to understand how we should respond to any failures to meet targets.

-----,.

• 2.3 Rewrite the Air and Noise section to update for recent legislative changes. All legislative references are out of date.

Page 18 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

----------- - --- ----- -------- -- - ------------ - -- ----- ----


DRO 3 - REGIONAL LANDSCAPE Comments

PrinciplelPolicylProgram Reference-

Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration Page No. General issues • No substantial change. DRO • Key DRO at regional level. 80% ofPlan's area. Essential to introduce michanisms like ecosystem services for

-values management (Referenced in 4.3 ofPlan.)--------

• Add wording 'and through a balanced assessment ofhighest and best sustainable use' to the DRO.

Is the Toward Q2: Tomorrow's Queensland target to protect 50% more land for public recreation by 2020 (page 49 Intent notes at DR03

of Regional Plan), a realistic target? What land will be counted in the baseline calculations? Will the baseline Page 49 figureinE!u~~l'J'ati()IlalParks and ifnot it should. The National Park system should not be added in after the

baseline calculations have been done to bolster the target. What implications will this have for local government? Will LG's be expected to contribute to the target? As the land is for public recreation will LG's be able to use green levy's to purchase and protect new land for these purposes?

Fully support outdoor recreation being a regional landscape value. Management Areas 3.2 Regional Landscape

3.3.1 'Identify and protect. Implementation oflevel of detail/identification at Regional and Local level. 3.3.5 'Monitor and report on major changes in scenic amenity values' Clarification required on mechanisms to achieve

Page 51 3.3 Scenic Amenity

and the requirement for localised assessment.

Fully support urban open space recognition as a function ofthe regional open space network. Some urban open landscape management Table 1. Regional

space has regional significance which should be recognised and protected. areas Page 52

It should be noted that Outdoor Recreation demand is being driven by population increases in SEQ. A policy that Page 56 3.5 Outdoor recreation

only meets priority outdoor recreation demand will overlook the full suite of activities occurring in the landscape. SEQ provides high quality recreation opportunities due to the quality of the landscape. It is the landscape that is at risk if not properly planned for and managed.

DRO 4 - NATURAL RESOURCES Reference - .. ,. Comments

Page 19 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


Principle/Policy/Program Pa2eNo.

Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration

• Remains unchan~ed from 2005 Plan. • Capturing, analysing and managing nature resource information - Added new wording 'and landowner

knowledge based on the principles ofadaptive management.' Need to acknowledge that this must be initially balanced with a triple bottom line values assessment of highest and best land use from regional perspective.

• Rehabilitation - Recognition and determination ofpost-extraction land uses with an innovative outlook to achieving triple bottom line outcomes.

• Use ofthe phase 'permits resource development where appropriate'. Issue of competing values - State or regional interests requires resolution by State in satisfying a comprehensive values assessment. (including an opportunities and alternatives assessment to supply of a natural resource.)

• Additional new principle included. This needs to be strengthened with expanded drafting of this section. General acknowledgement to its involvement as a general principle for all land use - Mainstreamed and not perceived just as a 'green' management objectiVe/initiative. Promote the concept of reward and not compensation. Community understanding of the values with the collective willingness to move forward and pay.

DR04 Wording 4.1 Natural Resource Management Policy 4.1.3 4.2 Land, extractive resources, minerals, forestry and fisheries Policy 4.2.5

Note Page 61

4.3 Ecosystem Services

DRO 5 - RURALFuTURES(RELATIVELY UNCHANGED)

---------

ReferencePrinciple/PolicylProgram Pae:e No.


• DRO remains relatively unchanged. -- --- - - - - - - -----Provides the head ofpower to pick up/implement opportunities from the SEQ Rural Futures Strategy. This • needs to be high priority, in that it has lacked focus and constructive implementation since 2005. 80% of region is in the RL & RP Area category.

• Regulatory Provisions (relative to the RLRP Area) have reflected greater diversity for enterprise opportunities in these areas across the region. The characteristics ofrural areas across the region are variable and diverse.

• Work with local communities to address deficiencies in local service provision through community development and innovated service delivery models as applied in Blueprint for the Bush program.

General -----------

Page 20 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

I Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 20lu-2031

c== I DRO 6 - STRONG COMMUNITIES Reference Comments Principle/Policy/Program Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration Page No.

--~---- _I General ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ .-Acknowledges the lag between urban growth and community services provision.----------- - -- -------1----• There is a pro-active response and understanding of socio-economic services in principles of 'new urbanism'

higher density/compact urban settlements. • Support the acknowledgement of the important role community engagement, capacity building and networks

have in building a strong community. • Draft plan emphasises need to form collaborative partnerships across government, non-government and ~rivat~I _

1---- I sector to fund, manage and deliver social infrastructure - but implementation does not achieve this i.e. PIP excludes infrastructure charges for facilities not controlled by local government which is very limiting. PIP/ICS is also only for land so prevents any leasing opportunities that could be achieved through private sector.

• DIP is requiring 51 % of new development up to 2031 to be intill. Given, the complications in providing social infrastructure to respond to the needs ofthe increased population from this development (i.e. acquisitions, colocation etc), DIP should be providing a higher level ofcoordination with State agencies to help respond to this. Co-location opportunities and integrated service delivery will be essential. Need targeted, resourced social planning support from DIP on implementation to achieve strong communities and social infrastructure policy outcomes:

o - Well-serviced communities o - Prioritised responses o - Integrated approaches o - Partnership and innovation o - Informed communities

6.3 Health and safe • The programs outlined in Healthy and Safe Communities (page 73) need to be strengthened through communities infrastructure and service delivery programs funded by all levels ofgovernment. There must be existing State Page 73 and Federal Gov programs that can be highlighted and implemented through the regional planning process.

• The Regional Plan needs to cite some specific programs for reducing obesity (page 73). The Regional Plan needs to announce actual programs that can be delivered through State and Local partnerships.

Page 21 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

-- --------- ---

- - ---- - - - - --- ----- -- --- ---- --------

--

I Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031

I I

DRO 7 - ENGAGING ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER PEOPLE Reference-Principle/Policy/Program Page No.


• Provides recognition ofnew models to engage with traditional owners. Recognition for innovative support models ego social enterprise, commercial and business model opportunities - jobs in local communities, independent sustainability.

• Proactive support for social infrastructure provision which address national health and well-being targets • DRO remains fundamentally unchanged.

General

DRO 8 - SMART GROWTH Reference Principle/Policy/Program PaeeNo.

8.2 Compact Development


• Name Change from 'Urban Development' - acknowledged and supported.

• Dwelling Targets -19,500 - can be met. Defmition of ,Intill' still is subject to interpretation difficulties. Need to align with work PIFU is doing. Infill target - 10,000 dwellingsJQ~R.-~n'tncl~ity.~~_______

I------~-------- ~-------------~--------- -~~ --~~----Page86---------~--- • Density Targets -1510tslha net in Urban Growth Areas only and mandated through Regulatory Provisions is acceptable. Need to consider widening application as consideration in Planning scheme drafting, strategic planning element.

8.3 Urban Character and • Maintains sub-tropical design principles which is supported. -----~-design_____~ _______ ----_.. _--

Page 88 8.4 Housing Choice and Affordability Page 86

8.5 Activity Centres

• Policy 8.4.4 Lacks strategic or legislation detail to achieve. • Policy 8.4.5 Decision making needs to consistent and deliver on this policy. No reference is made to

partnering with Federal Government and generating national initiatives with regional implementation.

• Cleveland and Capalaba continue to be recognised as Principal Activity Centres. No chan~e in City's sub-

Page 22 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


Page 90 regional framework/network of Centres. The State's focus should be on strengthening this policy with facilities implementation and funding strategies.

• Victoria Point should be recognised as a Major Centre in the Regional Activity Centres network - it fulfils the majority of criteria established by the Plan and will continue to service a growing urban Catchment.

8.6 Centres that sBusiness

upport Policy 8.6.2 added to support business and employment growth. For any extension of more than 10,0001112 GFA to an existing retail centre, there needs to be provisions of sufficient street frontage to accommodate affordable office

- ----- -I Page 94-----~--------- premises - equivalent to 15% of the proposed increase in retail floor space or alternatively by building up to 2--storeys with, no more than 40% of site coverage. Concur with active streetscape, building frontages, mixed use principles, but could be drafted more effectively, as it will fundamentally be delivered through planning schemes.

8.8 Integrated Land Use • Policies supported·and have been the fundamental premis ofCouncil's strategic and planning instruments. - I~and-Transpod-PJannin~---I!~inciples-set~Qut-in-l'able-3~lll"e-sQund.-1'he-QutcQme-t(Hle1iver-mQre1Qbs~tQ-the-middle-and-Qut€f-ring 1--

Page 96 metropolitan areas needs acknowledgement. Transit oriented • Needs to provide consistency with work from TOO Taskforce - need to finalise as a high priority developments implementation action. (communities) • Implementation - Prioritisation of investment, recognition of exemplar projects, across the Region. Key sites, Table 4 need to be nominated/identified with facilitation and funding partnerships a priority.

• Identification of 30-80 dwellings/ha (net) or greater is supported, being consistent with RPS and current master planning being undertaken for the principal regional activity centres in Redland City.

Table 5 Key • Future Growth Areas - Kinross Road, South-East Thornlands, Victoria Point (Double Jump/Bunker Road) Development areas Thornlands Integrated Enterprise Area. Page 101 Question to why South-east Thomlands and Kinross are not defmed as Urban Growth Areas. Recommended this

be amended and these areas included as Urban Growth Areas.

DRO 9 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Reference-Principle/Policy/Program Pae;e No.


• Approach to spatial identify enterprise areas is constructive and reinforces the need to preserve these areas OverallDRO Page 23 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

-----


Page 103

9.1 Diversifying the Economy Page 105

Mapping Page 110 -113

9.4 Enterprise Areas Page 114 Pg 115

from competing urban land use - especially residential. It is critical to increasing the distribution ofjob opportunities across the region, increasing levels of local job self-containment in local government areas.

• No employment job targets (as aspiration commitments) have been pursued in the Regional Plan. This would increasingly align growth areas with job creation - suggest this be considered and included in fmal Plan.

• Programs discuss 'Refine and implement sub-regional economic development strategies". Implementation detail lacking due to not being complemented by a contemporary Regional Economic Development Strategy.

• Relationship to Regional Activity Centres networks (Map 12 DR08) is not identified. Needs a composite map to show the overall network with focus on connectivity and priority public transport between activity centres. Facilitate increased radial movement across region - not just centric based on Brisbane CBD.

• Change Map 17 -location ofRl- Thornlands Enterprise Area is required to be amended. Mapping has been provided to DIP.

• Support of Principle and Policies - Need to add additional programs for PT infrastructure and planning for broadband communication technology.

• Inclusion ofparagraph in page 115 covering enterprise opportunity areas (shown on Map 17) with a diverse enterprise activity base and include reference to the objective of achieving increase local job self-containment.

• Diversifying the Economy - smart growth needs to recognise the role home based business will play in delivering a number ofthe Regional Plan's principles.

DRO 10 - INFRASTRUCTURE Reference Principle/Policy/Program Pa2e No.


10.3 Managing Demand Page 120

• .Integration of the 2005 Regional plan with regional infrastructure plan is well supported, together with the principle of infrastructure leading major development. There is some concern in performance over the past 2 years with a re-defmition of this principle to 'supporting', 'not leading'.

• The Plan and SEQ Infrastructure Planning and Program needs to ensure that equity is achieved in distribution of infrastructure funding between new growth corridors and providing adequate provision for infrastructure provision and upgrade to those areas that have experienced high levels of growth in recent years.

Page 24 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

--- --------- -- ---- -- - -------


10.7 Waste Page 123

General Comments

• Supporting this principle is also the efficient use (optimal use) of existing infrastructure and reducing future demand through the range of tools outlined in the plan.

• The principle should be reworded to say "establish goals to minimise all waste types disposed of to landfill and maximise re-use and recycling for waste produced in the region". This would give greater confidence that action will be taken over the life of the plan and involve all industry players to achieve sustainability results

----and is more in line with the principle for reduction ofgreenhouse gas emissions.

• Policy 10.7.1 and 10.7.2 should include the establishment ofgoals to reduce or eliminate waste to landfill and increasing resource recovery on a " per capita basis". As it stands the wording is more of a motherhood statement rather than being designed to achieve action. There should be more emphasis placed on designing action to improve product stewardship and producers of waste held more accountable for recovering their waste. Policy 10.7.3 should also include provision of funding and grants to be distributed for establishment of green• resource recovery technologies. These funds could be derived from funds captured under pricing policies such as waste levies.

• Policy 10.7.4 should include the development of a regionally consistent methodology for optimising the location of resource and waste facilities in parallel with new growth areas.

• Policy 10.7.5 should be encouraging and identifying sites across the region for altemative waste technology more than landfills to achieve a balanced approach to resource recovery. These sites should be given strict protection ofbuffer distances to avoid encroachment of incompatible land uses. There should be encouragement to protect the existing landfill capacities for use as disposal of a last resort only.

• Policy 10.7.6 an 10.7.7 should also include provision for minimising carbon emissions from waste facilities and transport.

• Support the inclusion ofsocial infrastructure provisions. Suggestions for a coordination body are addressed under Implementation and Monitoring.

• 10.8.10 Should be amended to include capacity for the development of technical notes/guidelines to support social infrastructure planning and delivery as well as capacity for jointly funded research and evaluation projects. Funding to support the piloting of innovative models ofdelivery at the local level is encouraged.

• 10.8.11 Strategies to address gaps should also include planning for island communities, ageing communities, children and young people.

Page 25 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

- - - ---- ---------- -

- ----- - -------------

Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009"2031

DRO 11-WATER MANAGEMENT Reference-Principle/Policy/Program Pa2e No.


• ORO does not articulate any regional outcome that is not already included in State Legislation, legislative plans or high level SEQ Strategies. In this regard, it must not only consolidate long term priorities but also provide leadership to service providers and local government on local land use planning matters.

• No reference is made to environmental flows - should include additional policy for planning and management to ensure environmental flows are determined and maintained.

• The EPP Water, SPP Healthy Waters, EP Act, Water Act, SEQ Water Strategy etc all manage water resources. What is needed in the SEQ RP is a focus on any of the regional concerns for improving water supply, catchment management, waterway health that are not covered in the above. For example there is nothing in the plan about developing alternative supply from stormwater (as is occurring in Melbourne), greywater, or the like.

-DRO-12 .....-IN-'I'-EGRA+ED-TRANSPOR~------Reference- Comments Principle/Policy/Program Suggest Amendment Change!Addition, Clarification, Consideration Pai!e No.

• It is critical that the future alignment ofthe strategy and policy outcomes align with the Integrated Regional ___ Transport Plan - Connecting SEQ 2031.

• Planning for integrated transport systems should avoid in the first instance or alternatively if this is not possible Map 20 Priority freight then mitigate the impacts on the values & functionality of ecosystems & the continuity of corridors ,etc. routes - Greater • Identification ofCapalaba - inaccurate needs alteration. Also Cleveland should be identified. Brisbane and the • Recognition of additional freight routes in Redland City though Mt Cotton Road and Broadwater Road. Western Corridor • The State needs to commit to the timely provision ofkey transport infrastructure in the City; to not only meet Page 143 the future growth demands, but to meet the current needs of the current population ofthe City.

Page 26 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

--- ------- -----------

Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2" ~j-2031

Page 145 Sub-regional • Recognition of an eastern busway as a key public transport corridor, together with proposals to increase the transport corridors capacity of the rail network. Council has reiterated the need to provide short-term interim measures to provide

bus priority into and out ofCapalaba. The Plan recognised this is the City's Narrative (Page 28) is 'Transport Infrastructure'. Map 22 (Page 148) identifies Eastern Busway built to Capalaba by 2031 (page 148)

o Quality rapid transport route to Carindale o Road with public transport infrastructure from Carindale to Capalaba

Bus Priority network • LGMS recommended proposed expansion of Redlands Bus Priority Measure (SEQIPP ref 4.42). This has not --been included in the draft SEQRP Transport Infrastructure Network Plan 2006-2031 (refer page 148).

• Provides identification ofeastern busway extension investigation further east from Capalaba to Cleveland (indicative). While the principle (as a longer term planning initiative) is supported, the focus needs to be on the southern suburbs - Thomlands, Victoria Point and Redland Bay and be reflected in the Integrated Regional

----I-~Map22-Transport----- ----'I'ransport Plan~(IRTR)-l"eview-l2009~. 1 _ infrastructure - Greater • Map 22 to be amended include identification and reference to Capalaba and Victoria Point. (Tri-apex network Brisbane and the across the City) Western Corridor • Intra regional transport corridor (coastal route from northern Gold Coast) - continues to be shown linking MI Page 148 to south ofLoganholme and Logan River. Council expresses strong objection to any variation to this route

which would cross the Logan and use the existing arterial road network in Redland City.

PART E - IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING Reference-Principle/Policy/Program Page No.


• Critical to ensure there is clear responsibility for direction and monitoring of the Plan's performance. (see previous comments). High priority needs to be given in implementation of further defmed strategies/programs. This should be firmly monitored by RCC and RPIG; including the alignment of those strategies, programs with this Plan.

• Plan delivery through a range ofmechanism including, predominantly, the Local Government Planning Schemes (amendments) needs to be streamlined to ensure policy alignment/implementation is swift.

• The establishment of a Metropolitan Development Program in DIP to monitor residential and industrial land supply in SEQ on an annual basis is supported. The providing of advice on timing of land releases needs

Page 27 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

--- ------ ---- --- -- - -- ---- - ------------------- --------

Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009~2031

ongoing discussion with LG. • Incorporate/alignment of monitoring to perfonnance indicators - this need to be responsive enough to

detennine and analyse achievements, change outcomes in line with policy direction.. • Strong governance mechanisms to advance the Strong Communities (including health and safety) are missing.

The current Human Services Planning Information Group comprises only state government agencies. There is also limited accountability across government departments regarding quality and standards for service delivery. It is proposed a SEQ Social Infrastructure Network Plan be developed to address this shortfall. A Social Infrastructure Coordination Group comprising commonwealth, state and local governments could be established. Engagement with corrnnunity and private sector provider peak bodies is also encouraged. This body would also liaise closely with the Broadhectare Infrastructure Group to align priorities and funding mechanisms.

• Earlier consultations with the department have identified the need for the continued development of technical resources to support the coordinated delivery of social infrastlllcture across SEQ:

o Update/stage 2 ofimplementation Guidelines No 5: Social Infrastructure Planning - focus on delivery mechanisms for networks, services and facilities

o Technical Guidelines: Social Considerations & Planning for Social Infrastructure in greenfield communities, Social Considerations and Social Infrastructure in infill developmentsffODs

• Research and evaluation: Community issues in Greenfield communities, funding models including PPPs for social infrastructure, community development strategy development, health and social impact assessment

---P1\RIF---=-DR1tFT-SUUTH-EA:STQUEENSLA:ND REGIONAL PLAN 2009-2031 REGULATORY PROVISIONS Reference- Comments Principle/Policy/Program Suggest Amendment Change/Addition, Clarification, Consideration Page No. .....

• Reformatting provides simpler application of regulatory provisions. • Inclusion ofSchedules 3 (How to determine overriding need) and 4 (Site and Criteria requirements for

community activities) has also been constructive and is supported.

• Need to rectify typo in Table 2C Column 2(a) - 250m2 not 50m2. • Clearer that developments in Column 2 and 3 require referral (DIP-Concurrence Agency status). • The term 'Urban area' is not defined.

Page 28 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE


1.5 (1) a • The term 'Rural Residential Development' should be reinserted into Schedule 2 - Dictionary; not just included Page 155 under notes section ofSection 8.10 ofPlan. It is noted that as cun'ently drafted that the original reference to lot

size of2000m has been removed. For clearer interpretation the use ofa lot size would again be beneficial. Table 2B- tourism activity and sport and recreation ( • The threshold triggers for referral & impact level ofassessment for MCUs have been changed. ( previous outside of the urban comments refer DR05 Rural futures.) Originally the Regs defmed a "small scale tourist accommodation

·------1 footprint. )

- ._-facility" as 20 units, total capacity not than 10Opeople & GFA less than 100m2. This was restrictive in the RLRP area across the entire region. --1-----·

• Clearly the new threshold limits reference the circumstance where State have an interest. The Reg. provisions will be complemented by the local planning schemes and planning policies and should not be interpretated that across the regional that development to these threshold would be supported. It also continues to reference short term accommodation which is defmed & refers to a period of accommodation not exceeding 12weeks.

-----\-1 I---The-RPS-has land usecontrols-for-this type.of-deY:elopmentirLthe.RuratnoILurban_,_Consery.ation_&~ _ Environmental protection zones & also in the overlay and use codes. Council is intending to proceed with the preparation ofa local Rural Futures Strategy for the City in the mid to later part of2009.

• The above comments will similarly apply to the Sport & Recreation land uses .

Definitions "Infill • Needs to reflect work being undertaken with PIFU. The current defmition continues to reference land only Development" where - 'vacant or has previously been used for another urban purpose".

Page 29 of29


RTI R

ELEA

SE

Appendix 1: Melbourne Principles For Sustainable Cities

IA Vision for the Creation ofSustainable Qties I I To create environmentally healthy, vibrant and sustainaThle cities where people respect one another and nature, to the benefit ofall.

Objectives ofthe Melbourne Principles i

Sustainable development is defmed by the Brundtland 90mmission as 'development that meets the needs ofthe present, without compromis~g the ability offuture generations to meet their own needs'. The Melbourne P~inciples for Sustainable Cities have been developed to assist cities that wish to achieve Ithis sustainable development objective. The Principles provide a simple set ofstatemdnts on how a sustainable city would function. I The Melbourne Principles are intended to guide thinking and provide a strategic framework for action. The Principles are not prescriptiv~. They allow cities to develop sustainable solutions that are relevant to their particular circumstances. They can help to bring together citizens and decision-makers, whose pJrticipation and cooperation is essential in transforming our cities to sustainability. I, The Principles also provide cities with a foundation for the integration of international, national and local programmes, gaps to be lidentified and addressed, as well as realising synergies through partnerships. I Ii For the Melbourne Principles to add value, they will nee(! to be supplemented by relevant case examples and decision support tools to ass~st cities on their journey towards sustainability. I I

i

Prindplel Provide a long-term vision for cities based on: sustainabiility; intergenerationa~ socia~ economic and political equity; and their individuality. I I Elaboration I I A long-term vision is the starting point for catalysing positive change, leading to sustainability. The vision needs to reflect the distinctive ~ature and characteristics of

I

each city. The vision should also express the shared aspiIfations ofthe people for their cities to become more sustainable. It needs to address equity, which means equal access to both natural and human resources, as well as sHared responsibility for preserving the value of these resources for future generations. A vision based on sustainability will help align and motivate communities, governments, businesses and others around a common purpose, and will provide a basis for developing a strategy, an action programme and processes to achieve that visioA. I,

! I I

Prindple2 Achieve long-term economic and social security. I I Elaboration I Long-term economic and social security are prerequisite~ for beneficial change and are dependent upon environmentally sound, sustainable ~evelopment. To achieve triple bottom line sustainability, economic strategies need to increase the value and vitality ofhuman and natural systems, and conserve and tenew human, financial and natural resources. Through fair allocation ofresources,rOOmie strate" shoolrl


RTI R

ELEA

SE

seek to meet basic human needs in a just and equitable manner. IIi particular, economic strategies should guJrantee the right to potable water, clean air, food security, shelter and safe sanitation. Cities are the locus ofhuman diversity; their policies, structures and institut~ons can significantly contribute to fostering cohesive, stimulating. safe and fulfilled communities.

Prindple3 I Recognise the intrinsic value 0 biodiversity and natural ecosystems, and protect and restore them. I

I I

Elaboration ' Nature is more than a commodfty for the benefit ofhumans. We share the Earth with many other life-forms that hav~ their own intrinsic value. They warrant our respect, whether or not they are ofirnmfdiate benefit to us. It is through people's direct experience with nature that they understand its value and gain a better appreciation of the importance ofhealthy habit:ats and ecosystems. This connection provides them with an appreciation ofthe n~ to manage our interactions with nature empathically. Just as humans have the abilityito alter the habitat and even to extinguish other species, we can also protect an

Principle 6 Recognise and build on the distinctive characteristics oflcities, including their human and cultural values, ~istory and natural systems. I i Elaboration I· Each city has a distinctive profile ofhuman, cultural, historic and natural characteristics. This profile provides insights on pathwafs to sustainability that are both acceptable to their people and compatible with their values, traditions, institutions and ecological realities. Building on existingl characteristics helps motivate and mobilise the human and physical resourc~ of cities to achieve sustainable development and regeneration. Ii

Principle 7 I Empower people and foster participation. I I Elaboration I The journey towards sustainability requires broadly based support. Empowering

I

people mobilises local knowledge and resources and enlists the support and active participation of all who need to be involved in all stages; from long-term planning to implementation of sustainable solutions. People have a right to be involved in the decisions that affect them. Attention needs to be given t1

1

empowering those whose voices are not always heard, such as the poor.

Principle 8 Expand and enable cooperative networks to work towards a cornmon, sustainable

future. j II Elaboration . Strengthening existing networks and establishing new c operative networks within cities facilitates the transfer of knowledge and supports dontinual environmental improvement. The people of cities are the key drivers fot transfonning cities towards sustainability. This can be achieved effectively if the pedple living in cities are well informed, can easily access knowledge and share learnin~. Furthermore, the energy and talent ofpeople can be enhanced by people working with one another through such networks. There is also value in cities sharing their learning with other cities, pooling resources to develop sustainability tools, and supporting and mentoring one another through inter-city and regional networks. These hetworks can serve as vehicles for information exchange and encouraging collJctive effort. I

Prindple9 I I

Promote sustainable production and consumption, through appropriate u~e of environmentally sound technologies and effective demartd management. I Elaboration I i A range ofapproaches and tools can be used to promote ~ustainable practices. Demand management, which includes accurate valuations ofnatural resources and increasing public awareness, is a valuable strategy to su~port sustainable consumption. This approach can also provide significant I savings in infrastructure investment. Sustainable production can be supported by the adoption and use of environmentally sound technologies which can improve bnvironmental performance significantly. These technologies protect the environmt are less pollurg, use


RTI R

ELEA

SE

resources in a sustainable manner, recycle more of their wastes and products and handle all residual wastes in a rhore environmentally acceptable way than the technologies for which they are! substitutes. Environmentally sOWld technologies can also be used to drive reduced nbpacts and enhance value along a supply chain and support buSines~ embracing tOdUcl stewardship. Principle 10 I Enable continual improvement, based on accoWltability, transparency and good governance. Elaboration ! Good urban governance require1s robust processes directed towards achieving the transformatien of cities to sustainability through continual improvement. While in some areas gains will be increniental, there are also opportunities to make substantial improvements through innovatire strategies, programmes and technologies. To manage the continual improvement cycle, it is necessary to use relevant indicators, set targets based on benchmarks ad,d monitor progress against milestones to achieving these targets. This facilitates progress and accountability and ensures effective implementation. Transparency r openness to scrutiny are part ofgood governance.


RTI R

ELEA

SE

Queensland Governnlent•

Department of Infrastructure and PlanningPlease quote:

Thursday, 26 March 2009

Dear

I

The Department of Infrastructure and Planning would like to thank you for your submission inI

response to the draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031 (draft SEQ Regional Plan) released on the 7 December 2008. I

The Department of Infrastructure and Planning has registered your letter as a formal submission on the draft SEQ Reg an under the Integrated Planning Act 1997. It has been registered

I

as submission number I.

The issues raised in your submission will be evaluated ~d considered by the Department in the finalisation ofthe draft SEQ Regional Plan consultation report.

The consultation report will summarise all issues r~Jed during public consultation and will inform the review of the SEQ Regional Plan prior to its !release in July 2009.

I If you wish to provide further information in support of your submission, please quote the above submission reference number. Thank you agb for your interest in the draft SEQ Regional Plan. If you require any additional information, please phone 1800 070 609 (free call). I

Yours sincerely II

David Rowland Director, SEQ Regional Plan Review Department of Infrastructure and Planning

Ground Floor 63 George Street POBox 15009 City East Qu_land 4002 Telephone -t{)11800 070 609 free-call Facsimile +(II 73235 4071 Website www.dip.qldgov.aa

Contrary to Public Interest





RTI R

ELEA

SE

__L.....-J

I Z5MAR 7009 I

SEQ. ~ EG IONAL PLAN Submission 90ver form Draft South East QUeenjland Regional Plan 2009-2031

You are invited to use this form to IcomPlete All information collected from these submissions your submission or to use it as a clover sheet will help inform the finalised South East and attach it to a more detailed sU!bmission. Queensland Regional Plan 200!r2o31.

How to make your submIssion count I • respond under the headings of the draft SEQ Regional Plan or draft state planning regulatory provisions and

For the purposes of feedback, a properly made submission must: other mailers for consideration. • indude the name and address of the s~bmiller Information considered confidential should be clearly identified. • be made in writing, and signed by eac~ person who has Please note submissIons may be accessed under the Freedom of

made the submission I Information ACI 1992.

I

Somt""' illforrnallOn About vou

J

~Ad ~

De you repre'ent dn IrIterfst group'

o Academic

o Urban development

o Economic

o EnvIronmental

IJ landholder

o MIlling

[J Primary production

o Natural resource managerent

o Recreation

o Rural communities

o Tourism

o Local government

o Community gfDup (pleose opecIfr)

o Ind1senous community (pI_specify)

o Indll5lJy !l"'up (pI...., specify)

o Other (plMsespocily)

I

---~-




RTI R

ELEA

SE

SUbmission cover form••[] Which ared' of the draft plan do your comments mainly "ddr~s5?

I 7" ~:::1t""~-~~~#::"j

.' . .

•

Please quote:

Monday, 30 March 2009

Dea

·Queensland Govemment

Department of Infrastructure and PlannIng

The Department of Infrastructure and Planning would like to thank you for your submission in response to the draft South East Queensland RegiOnallllan 2009-2031 (draft SEQ Regional Plan) released on the 7 December 2008. I

The Department of Infrastructure and Plamung has regis~ered your letter as a formal submission on the draft SEQ Reg under the Integrated Planning Act 1997. It has been registered as submission numbe I

II

The issues raised in your submission will be evaluated and considered by the Department in the finalisation ofthe draft SEQ Regional Plan consultation ~eport.

The consultation report will summadse all issues raisld during public consultation and will inform the review of the SEQ Regional Plan prior to its ~e1ease in July 2009. .

If you wish to provide further information in support Iof your submission, please quote the above submission reference number. Thank you again for your interest in the draft SEQ Regional Plan. (free call).

If you require any additional information, please phone 1800 070 609 I.

Yours sincerely I I,

d!'lU/ I David Rowland Director, SEQ Regional Plan Review Department of Infrastructure and Planning

Ground Floor 63 George Street POBox 15009 City East Queensland 4002 Telephone -+ill 1800 070 "" free-caB Facsimile+61 7 3135 4071 Website www.dip.qld.goV.8U






RTI R

ELEA

SE

-,I RECEIVED Submission cover form27 MAR 7.009

SEa .~ EGION ALP LAN

Submission co~er form Draft South East QueenSlard Regional Plan 2009-2031

I

I

You are invited to use this form to co~ptete AU Information collected from these submissions your submission or to use it as a covelr sheet will help inform the finalised South East and attach it to a more detailed submission. Queensland Regional Plan 200!}-2031.

I I

How to make your submission count I For the purposes of feedback, a properly made s~bmiSSion must:

• Include the name and address of the submitter

• be made in writinr. and signed by each pe~on who has made the submIssion I

Some information about yOJ

• respond under the headIngs of the draft SEQ Regional Plan or draft state plannIng regulatory provisIons and ' other matters for conSideration.

Information considered confidential should be clearly Identlfied. Please note submissions may be accessed under the Freedom of In{ormation Act 2992.

o Academic ~dholder I

o Co mmunlty groupo Reueallon (pI_speciFy! o Indigenous communityo lJItJan development o MIning

ID Rural communities (pl.... specll)?

o Industry groupo Economic o Prfmary productIon o Tolll1sm I (prease spodfy)

I o Othero Environmental o Natul1ll resClurce manageme?t o Local government (please spedry)

I




RTI R

ELEA

SE

SubmIssion C01Ier ronn

Wh;ch JreJS of tnc draft pl~n do 'lour comlTl~nts r.lalnly "ddress?

o o

1 Sustalnabllity and dlmate change o 7 EngagIng AbOrlllnall1 and Torres Strait Islander peopl.s o 2 Naturall!llVlronment o 8 Smart Srowth o 3 RegIonal landscape o 9 Economic develOP'"jnt o 4 Natural resources o 10 Infrastructure I o 5 Rural futures o 11 Water o 6 strong communItIes o 12 Integrated transpo1 o

o oo

Your thoughts about the Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2co9-2031

1. Are there any elements of the draft ptan that you particularly support? o No Please comment

Regubtory maps

2. Do you' wlsh 10 make a comment on the regulatDly maps (e.g. boundary of the urban footprlnt) DYe

Documents

South East Queensland Regional Plan RTI 089 - Part 1RTI Document No. 105 RTI RELEASE. Draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031 . There were a significant number ofPrograms,