The document summarizes an industry briefing on Victoria's recently released Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS). The BCS provides an overarching framework for long-term biodiversity protection within and outside Melbourne's urban growth boundary, while providing certainty for developers. It establishes conservation reserves totaling over 5,700 hectares and offsets the cumulative loss of ecological values from urban development. The briefing addressed the costs of offsetting ecological values under the BCS for different areas and species. Several outstanding implementation questions were also discussed.

1. BIODIVERSFY CONSERVATION Strategy:
AN INDUSTRY BRIEFING
BY CHAD BROWNING [CONSULTANT ZOOLOGIST]
IN JUNE, Ecology and Heritage Partners sponsored with
Maddocks at the UDIA industry briefing on the recently
released final Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS).
The session focused on the implications of the BCS on urban
development throughout Melbourne's Growth Corridors
and provided a preliminary overview of the Reforms to
Victoria's Native Vegetation Permitted Clearing Regulations,
with presentations delivered by Peter Betson (executive
director, environment programs, Department of Environment
and Primary Industries (DEPI)), Warrick McGrath (director,
regulatory strategy and design, DEPI), Peter Graham (director,
economic branch, DEPI) and Aaron Organ (director/principal
ecologist, Ecology and Heritage Partners).
The BCS provides an overarching framework for the long-term
protection and management of biodiversity within and outside
of the revised Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), while providing
certainty for the development industry across Melbourne's
Growth Corridors.
The primary objective of the BCS is to 'strike a balance'
between the key elements of sustainable development through
the delivery of environmental, social and economic benefits.
The strategy forms part of the Melbourne Strategic Assessment
which was initiated in June 2009 through agreement between
the state and commonwealth governments to undertake a
Strategic Impact Assessment (SIA) under the Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)
- the first of many SIAs currently being developed in Australia.
The SIA report, released in October 2009, was designed to
address the cumulative loss of ecological values resulting
from urban development across the four growth corridors,
with emphasis on matters of National Environmental
Significance (NES). The report aimed to deliver ecological
benefits through the consolidation of environmental offsets
and security of conservation areas, while providing certainty
to the development industry in the following ways:
24 urbanAFFAiRs I JULY13
Removes the prescriptions under the SIA and the need for-
individual project referrals under Part 9 of the EPBC Act
(single environmental approval).
Avoids duplication of assessment processes under the
EPBC Act and State regulations (reduced timelines).
Reduces information costs (i.e. requirement for site as-
sessments and surveys) and administrative burden.
Provides upfront information regarding offset obligations
and costs.
Establishes the responsibility of the State Government to
administer the cost recovery process rather than developers
having to source offsets which can often be time consuming.
The BCS addresses a commitment identified during the SIA
process to develop an overarching conservation strategy
that provides high level guidance and specifically: informs the
preparation of Precinct Structure Plans (PSPs), outlines the
delivery of conservation outcomes, identifies conservation
areas for long term protection, and details associated
management commitments. The strategy provides for the
following environmental outcomes:
The establishment of 36 conservation reserves within the
UGB comprising about 5700 hectares, including about
3000 hectares of land along major waterways to protect and
restore habitat for the growling grass frog Litoria raniformis.
The establishment of 1600 hectares of new conservation
reserves outside the UGB across rural Victoria.
• The establishment of a 15,000 hectare Western Grass-
lands Reserve extending from Mt Cottrell, south east of
Melton to north of Little River, west of Werribee.
The creation of a 1200 hectare grassy woodland conser-
vation reserve.

2. The development of sub-regional species strategies and/
or protection targets for species including the growling
grass frog, golden sun moth synemon plane, southern
brown bandicoot Isoodon obesulus obesulus, spiny rice-
flower Pimelea spinescens subsp, spinescens and the
matted flax-lily Dianella amoena.
Over the course of the briefing session, the expert panel
summarised the broader context of the BCS, and explored
specific issues and implications relevant to the urban
development industry, including the costs associated with
offsetting ecological values under the BCS. During his
presentation, Aaron Organ outlined the BCS pricing model
and triggers for offsets within each of the four growth
corridors, as summarised below.
BCS OFFSET TRIGGERS AND PRICING MODEL
While several matters were addressed by the panel, it is clear
that industry has several outstanding questions that require
further clarification, and this will be achieved through further
consultation with industry during the implementation of the
BCS. •
It is important to note that the BCS is currently being
assessed for approval by the Commonwealth Department
of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and
Communities (SEWPaC). The following opportunities exist for
the development industry and key stakeholders to contribute
to the BCS and its implementation:
• Provide submissions to SEWPaC during the assessment
process.
Native
ve • etation
Scattered Trees
Malted Flax-lily
Spiny Rice- -
lower
Golden Sun
Moth
Growling Grass
Frog
cological
alues
Applicable Growth
Area
W NW N
,/
,/
SE
Southern Brown
Bandicoot
Striped Legless
Lizard
Note: W = Western growth area (Melton and Wyndham); NW = North-western growth area
(Sunbury); N = Northern growth area (Hume, Whittlesea and Mitchell): SE = South-Eastern
rowth area Case and Cardinia
Price Unit
$95075 Per hectare of native vegetation
removed
Per tree considered removed$13218
Per hectare of native vegetation
$11196 removed
Per hectare of native vegetation
$7937 removed
Per hectare of non-native vegetation
removed, excluding areas identified as$7914
Category 2 Growling Grass Frog habitat
Per hectare of non-native vegetation
$7529 removed, identified as Category 2
habitat
Per hectare of native and non-native
$4015 vegetation removed
Per hectare of native and non-native
vegetation removed, where vegetation
$350 has been identified as habitat for Striped
Legless Lizard (based on a site-specific
assessment b an ecolo• ist
Provide feedback to DEPI
regarding the cost recovery
process, including the Draft
Habitat compensation under
the Biodiversity Conservation
Strategy document released
by DEPI.
When released, review and
respond to DEPI's Land Ac-
quisition Strategy, Growling
Grass Frog Masterplan, final
Southern Brown Bandi-
coot Sub-regional Species
Strategy, and online habitat
compensation administration
system.
• Provide input into the revision
of Conservation Areas and
Growling Grass Frog corridor
boundaries during the PSP
process.
A panel session following the presentations prompted a
discussion of a number of issues regarding the implementation
of the BCS, some of which are outline below:
Will the provisions of the BCS account for the findings of
additional surveys and research, particularly in relation to
the future revision of the extent of Growling Grass Frog
Category 1 habitat along waterways?
• What are the opportunities and processes for landowner
compensation for areas that have been designated as
Conservation Areas under the BCS (it is understood that
the Valuer-General will determine the value of land; how-
ever will there be opportunities to contest the amount)?
• What are the appeal rights, if any, associated with 'Works
in Kind' and staged payments under the government's
habitat compensation process?
• What are the additional incentives for the protection
of large old trees and scattered trees during the PSP
process, and what control will local councils have with
respect to the further protection of trees under local tree
protection policies?
Following the release of the final BCS, it is important for
industry to be aware that there are three legislative processes
protecting matters of NES under the EPBC Act in and around
Melbourne: 1) the existing 28 precincts within the 2005 UGB
for which a planning scheme amendment to introduce a PSP
was approved prior to 1 March 2012, 2) the BCS, and 3) Part
9 referrals under EPBC Act where the SIA does not apply.
Each approval pathway provides a different approach for the
protection and offsetting of impacts to ecological values, with
offset costs and approval timelines varying between the three.
Ecology and Heritage Partners has played a lead role working
with the development industry and government (Growth
Areas Authority, DEPI) during the preparation of the BCS and
PSP process over the past five years. We thank the UDIA
for the opportunity to contribute to the briefing session and
inform industry of these key changes, and we look forward
to continuing to provide value for our clients and their projects
across Melbourne's Growth Corridors during these times of
change.
JULY13 I urbanAFFAies 25