Planning Submission
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development
Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Prepared for: King Island Council
Project Management
Leading Architect
Codesign + Masterplan
Codesign + Masterplan
Development Management Richard John Nebauer
Issue 01
Date 17 September 2018
Project Name Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development
Project Number 17.291
Author George Walker 6ty Pty Ltd ©
Planning Submission
Contents
1.0 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background to Proposal ...... 1 1.2 Existing Operation ...... 3 2.0 Site and Surrounds ...... 5 2.1 The Site ...... 5 2.2 Topography ...... 7 2.3 Natural Values ...... 7 2.4 Natural Hazards ...... 8 2.5 European Heritage ...... 8 2.6 Aboriginal Heritage ...... 9 2.7 Access ...... 9 2.8 Infrastructure Services ...... 10 3.0 Development Application ...... 11 3.1 Planning Overview ...... 11 3.2 Proposed Development...... 11 3.3 Development Precincts ...... 13 3.4 Incidental Development...... 16 3.5 Design Philosophy (from GFAB Architects) ...... 17 4.0 Planning Assessment ...... 18 4.1 Zone ...... 18 4.2 Use Categorisation ...... 18 4.3 Zone Purpose ...... 19 4.4 Local Area Objectives ...... 20 4.5 Desired Future Character Statements ...... 22 4.6 Use Standards ...... 23 4.7 Development Standards ...... 27 5.0 Code Assessment ...... 43 5.1 Bushfire-Prone Areas Code ...... 43 5.2 Airport Impact Management Code ...... 43 5.3 Clearing and Conversion of Vegetation Code ...... 43 5.4 Change in Ground Level Code ...... 43 5.5 Local Heritage Code ...... 46 5.6 Hazard Management Code ...... 46 5.7 Sign Code ...... 46
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development i Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
5.8 Telecommunication Code ...... 46 5.9 Traffic Generating Use and Parking Code ...... 46 5.10 Water and Waterways Code ...... 51 6.0 Conclusion ...... 52
Appendix A Certificate of Title Appendix B Flora and Fauna Assessment + Environmental Management Plan Appendix C European Heritage Assessment Appendix D Aboriginal Heritage Assessment Appendix E Traffic Circulation Flow Diagram Appendix F Water, On-site wastewater and Stormwater Assessment Appendix G Villa Development Plans Appendix H Clubhouse Development Plans Appendix I Conference Building Development Plans Appendix J Wellbeing Centre Development Plans Appendix K Staff Accommodation Development Plans Appendix L Masterplan Appendix M Site Specific Precinct Plans Appendix N Photomontages
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development ii Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
1.0 Introduction
Planning approval is sought for the development of a new clubhouse, villas and associated facilities at CaThepe Wickham Golf Links located at Cape Wickham Road, Wickham (the site – refer to Image 1). This planning submission provides relevant details of the application and an assessment against the applicable provisions of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 (‘Scheme’).
Image 1 - aerial image identifying the perimeter of the site
Cape Wickham Lighthouse
Cape Wickham Road
Site
Source: base image and data extracted from the LIST (www.thelist.tas.gov.au) © State of Tasmania
1.1 Background to Proposal
Cape Wickham Golf Links (Cape Wickham) is an 18 hole golf course located on the north-western tip of King Island approximately 48km north of the Currie. The golf course is concentrated along the coastline extending between Cape Wickham Lighthouse and Cape Farewell and includes Victoria Cove (refer to Image 2 and 3). Since its inception, Cape Wickham has quickly become one of the most highly regarded golf courses in the World due in part to its alluring and dramatic setting. As testament, the golf course is currently ranked the number 1 public golf course in Australia and number 24 in the World1. Use and development of the golf course was approved under planning permit DA 14/1213 (‘permit’) which, in addition to the golf course, included a clubhouse inclusive of a bar, restaurant and pro-shop, 30 single bedroom accommodation units, maintenance facility, water storage dam and associated pump shed, practice facilities
1 as ranked by GolfDigest
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 1 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
inclusive of a driving range and putting and chipping greens, car parking facilities and access roads. The permit has been substantially commenced2 with the golf course coming into operation in October 2015. Although key components of the permit have been completed which include the golf course, maintenance facility, water storage dam, practice facilities and access roads, several components of the permit remain outstanding which include development of a permanent clubhouse and substantive accommodation facilities. Subsequently, a temporary clubhouse and portable accommodation units have been constructed to provide basic amenities and services for visiting golfers in the interim.
Image 2 - photo looking north-east showing the 18th hole in the foreground, Victoria Cove in the middle ground and Cape Wickham Lighthouse in the background
Image 3 - photo looking west showing the 1st hole straddling Cape Farewell and the existing accommodation units to the south of the fairway
2 pursuant to section 53(5A) Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 2 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Prior to the development of the golf course, the site was used for cattle grazing, which is understood to have commenced during the 1800s. The site included a variety of infrastructure associated with grazing operations including several farm dams, fences, cattle yards and farm tracks which accessed a series of pasture areas. The majority of native vegetation within the site was cleared to accommodate introduced pasture species to increase the productivity of the grazing operation. Further, the bulk of remnant native vegetation within the coastal fringe has been removed to make way for the golf course and associated infrastructure.
1.2 Existing Operation
The golf course is opened to visitors between mid-September through to mid-June and is closed to visitors throughout the winter months during which time the course is placed under care and maintenance. Between December 2016 and December 2017 9,200 rounds where played with international visitors only making up 3% of the total green fee sales. Occupancy of the existing accommodation facilities rise in the months of October, November, February, March and April and most acutely on weekends (refer to Table 1). Mid-week accommodation occupancy falls dramatically which can be correlated to mainland golfers typically visiting over weekend periods. Average occupancy within a calendar year sits at around 55%. The temporary clubhouse is the focal point for visitors on entry to the site and includes a small bar and restaurant, toilets and a small golf shop. The restaurant offers dinner (staying guests only), breakfast and lunch. A total of 14 full time equivalent (FTE) employees are required to operate the clubhouse and accommodation facilities with an additional 3-5 FTE’s required during the busier months. A total of 9 FTE employees are required to maintain the golf course. Typically, visiting groups of four or less hire cars to travel to the course with larger groups using bus services. Vehicles are parked within the existing car park located adjacent to the clubhouse with additional parking located adjacent to the accommodation units. Staff parking is available within the curtilage of the maintenance facility which is located to the south of the clubhouse. Golf carts are the predominant mode of transport throughout the site which are housed within a shed that is located to the south-west of the clubhouse. Overall, the golf course has experienced strong growth since its opening. However, visitation numbers are slowly declining. A factor that appears to be contributing to the decline is the lack of complete service experience, limited offerings and lack of accommodation as a result of the temporary clubhouse and small number of beds. It is observed that the lack of visitor accommodation is not an isolated issue for the golf course, but a broader issue that is affecting the King Island visitor economy generally3.
3 Accommodation Supply Analysis – King Island February 2017
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 3 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
This development application endeavours to address visitation decline and enhance the experience offered by the golf course by providing high quality facilities and services that are expected of a world class golf course.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 4 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
2.0 Site and Surrounds
2.1 The Site
The site is located on the north-western tip of King Island, directly south of the Cape Wickham Lighthouse and encompasses an area of approximately 122 ha. It is of an irregular ‘bow-tie’ shape that comprises two large parcels to the north-east and south- west that intersect at a narrow point that is roughly parallel to the centre of the Victoria Cove beach. The south-western parcel has been significantly modified to accommodate the bulk of the golf holes which are concentrated to the west and south. The temporary clubhouse, accommodation units and maintenance facility which are clustered in the north-east on an escarpment that rises above Victoria Cove (refer to Image 4).
Image 4 - photo looking south-west showing the location of the clubhouse and golf cart shed on the escarpment above Victoria Cove. The existing accommodation units are located on the righthand side of the photo which is west of the clubhouse. The existing maintenance facility and staff accommodation area is located to the south of the clubhouse and is screened by a dune ridge.
The parcel adjoins the Cape Wickham Conservation area to the north which encompasses the coastal fringe adjacent to Victoria Cove and Cape Farewell. The western boundary adjoins an isolated parcel of Crown Land and a public reserve. The golf course extends into the adjoining land to the north and west. The southern boundary adjoins private freehold land that is under native vegetation cover. The north-eastern parcel contains the remaining golf holes which are oriented north- south parallel to the coastline. The main access road meanders through the parcel from Cape Wickham Road to the clubhouse in a general north-east to south-west alignment an is approximately 1.5km long. The access road is located on the high side the golf holes to the west and between the toe of a series of dune ridges and gullies to the east (refer to Image 5). A turf nursery is located to the south in the gully formed between two dune ridges and the water storage dam is located to the north also within a natural gully (refer to Image 6). The eastern half is otherwise undeveloped and remains under a mixture of introduce and native grass cover. The northern boundary
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 5 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
adjoins a road reserve parcel that contains Cape Wickham Road. The eastern and southern boundaries adjoin private freehold land that is undulating and under native vegetation cover.
Image 5 – photo looking south-west showing the location of the main access road which follows the toe of the dune ridges.
Image 6 – aerial image illustrating the location of the existing water storage dam, turf nursery and main access road.
Cape Wickham Road
main access road
water storage dam
turf nursery
Source: base image and data extracted from the LIST (www.thelist.tas.gov.au) © State of Tasmania
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 6 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
2.2 Topography
The topography of the site is characterised by gently to moderately undulating slopes formed by aeolian sand dune systems. A series of predominately north-south oriented foreshore dune ridges straddle the western portion of the site parallel to the coastline. These dune ridges now form part of the golf course. A second series of predominately larger north-east to south-west oriented dune ridges prevail in the north-eastern and south-eastern section of the site. The ridge crest of these dunes are elevated up to approximately 50-60m AHD and have a narrow and typically level plateau. Higher dune peaks are located further east. The gradient of the dune ridges is typically steep ranging between 10-35°. A series of gullies have formed between the larger dune ridges which slope downwards towards the coastline. Overall, the terrain is elevated and undulating in the eastern half of the site and falls gradually towards the coastline with some localised aberrations.
2.3 Natural Values
The site has been significantly modified overtime to accommodate grazing activities and more recently the golf course development. TASVEG 3.0 mapping identifies the site as comprising predominately agricultural land with a mixture of exotic vegetation and no threatened vegetation communities are identified as being present on the site. Further, the site is not shown on the planning scheme map as significant for scenic, biodiversity or landscape value. Notwithstanding, the site has been extensively surveyed for natural values to ensure the golf course would not result in any adverse impacts on any listed flora and fauna species, communities and habitats. The predominant Flora and Fauna assessment (‘assessment’) that accompanied the development application for the golf course was prepared by Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants. The assessment remains pertinent to the proposed use and development insofar as it covered the entire area of the site inclusive of the proposed development areas. The assessment concluded that the site is unlikely to contain any Commonwealth or State listed flora species. However, the assessment determined that four listed fauna species may or do forage, live and/or breed on the site. These species and correlating areas of the site include: the existing dam (now the water storage dam) may contain potential habitat for the green and gold frog and the striped marsh frog. This area is not proposed to be disturbed;
the coastal fringe contained a large breeding colony of short-tailed shearwaters. These areas have since been developed to accommodate the golf course and accommodation units.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 7 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Short-tailed shearwater burrows are still present on the land to the south and west of the accommodation units. This area is proposed to be developed with additional accommodation villas with approval from the relevant authorities.
Removal and relocation of the shearwater burrows is regulated by the Nature Conservation Act 2002 and the associated Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010. Application to remove and relocate any shearwater burrows will be made with the relevant authorities should planning approval be granted; and
the coastal reserve was identified as potential foraging habitat for orange- bellied parrots during migration periods. However, it was concluded that due to limited disturbance of the coastal area that negligible disturbance to the current status of the potential habitat for the species was anticipated.
It is noted that no additional development is proposed within the coastal reserve. Overall, the proposed use and development is not expected to result in any adverse impacts on the natural values of the site. A copy of the flora and fauna assessment is contained in Appendix B. A copy of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) prepared by ECOtas is also contained within Appendix B. The EMP details the management plan that was implemented during the construction, operation and maintenance stages of the golf course.
2.4 Natural Hazards
The site is not shown on the planning scheme maps4 as an area exposed to risk from coastal inundation, coastal erosion and recession, flooding or landslide. The vegetation within the site and adjoining property to the east and south is identified as bushfire prone vegetation. However, the Bushfire-Prone Areas Code does not apply to the proposed use and development on the basis that no subdivision is proposed, and no vulnerable or hazardous uses are proposed5.
2.5 European Heritage
The site is not identified as a heritage place or within a conservation area as prescribed by the Local Heritage Code6. Notwithstanding, the site is located immediately south of the Cape Wickham Lighthouse and associated historic settlement area.
4 determined by the Tasmanian Interim Planning Scheme Overlay dataset https://www.thelist.tas.gov.au/app/content/data/geo-meta- data-record?detailRecordUID=2d71412d-0c45-4d0d-942e-529a8aff425c 5 clause E1.2.1 of the Scheme 6 clause E5.2.1 of the Scheme
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 8 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
A European Heritage Assessment (EHA) was prepared by Cultural Heritage Management Australia for the golf course development application. The study area of the EHA encompassed the site. The EHA concluded that no registered historic sites occur within the bounds of the site and that the field survey failed to identify any definitive historic sites of features within the study area. The proposed use and development will be contained within the bounds of the site. However, the EHA recommended that if suspected historic remains were unearthed during excavation works the Unanticipated Discovery Plan presented in section 9 of the report should be followed. It is considered that this recommendation could be included as a note to a permit should approval be granted. A copy of the EHA is contained in Appendix C.
2.6 Aboriginal Heritage
The Scheme does not deal with matters relating to Aboriginal Heritage. Rather, they are regulated separately through the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1975. An Aboriginal Heritage Assessment (AHA) was prepared by Cultural Heritage Management Australia for the golf course development application. The study area of the AHA encompassed the site. The AHA concluded that, besides five registered Aboriginal sites which were primarily located along the coastal fringe, the remainder of the study area was assessed as being of low archaeological sensitivity. This conclusion was based on negative survey findings, high levels of prior land disturbance and low potential for undetected Aboriginal heritage resources to be present. However, the AHA recommended that if suspected Aboriginal sites and objects were unearthed during excavation works the Unanticipated Discovery Plan (UDP) presented in section 13 of the report should be followed. The UDP is a guiding framework that will assist with meeting the obligations of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1975 as necessary. A copy of the AHA is contained in Appendix D.
2.7 Access
The site has approximately 650m of frontage onto Cape Wickham Road which is parallel to the northern most boundary of the site. Cape Wickham Road is an arterial road under the authority of Council and is open to the public. Cape Wickham Road has recently been sealed for a distance of approximately 7.3km between the junction of North Road and Haines Road to the south and the cattle grid which is adjacent to the north-eastern tip of the site. The road comprises a compacted gravel surface from the cattle grid to the Cape Wickham Lighthouse.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 9 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
An internal compacted gravel road provides access between Cape Wickham Road and the clubhouse. New roads will be accessed off the main internal road to service each of the proposed development nodes. A secondary access is proposed off Cape Wickham Road at the north-eastern boundary which will provide access to a cluster of villas in addition to the maintenance facility and staff accommodation area. A Traffic Circulation Flow Diagram is contained in Appendix E which illustrates the existing and proposed access roads and the subsequent flow paths throughout the site.
2.8 Infrastructure Services
The site is not located within an area that is serviced by reticulated water, sewerage or stormwater infrastructure. Subsequently, the proposed use and development will rely on on-site water supply and disposal of sewage and stormwater. A water, on-site wastewater and stormwater assessment has been prepared by Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd which addresses the relevant provisions of the Scheme with respect to these matters7. A copy of the assessment is contained within Appendix F. The site has access to a 3-Phase reticulated power supply.
7 clauses 26.4.1 (P3), (P4) and (A5)
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 10 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
3.0 Development Application
3.1 Planning Overview
Element Overview Location Cape Wickham Road, Wickham Title Information 169267/1 Land Area 122ha Planning Instrument King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 Proposed Use Community meeting and entertainment; Food services; Sports and recreation; Visitor accommodation Proposed Construction of buildings and associated works Development Zone(s) 26.0 - Rural Resource Applicable Code(s) E4.0 - Change in Ground Level Code E9.0 - Traffic Generating Use and Parking Status of Application Discretionary
3.2 Proposed Development
The planning application seeks approval to use and develop the site for 89 accommodation villas inclusive of a 6 bedroom ‘king villa’, clubhouse, conference building, wellbeing centre, staff accommodation and maintenance facility. Typical details of the proposed buildings are summarised as follows:
Villas
Each villa type will be self-contained and will include generally open plan living, dining and kitchen areas which open out into external deck spaces. Bedrooms will be separated from the living areas and will be provided with a private ensuite. Quantitative details of villa types is outlined in the following table:
Villa Type Gross Floor Typical Building Configuration Total Area8 Height9 2 Bed 140m2 6m single level suspended above natural 13 ground level 3 Bed-1st 168m2 6m single level suspended above natural 35 ground level
8 In accordance with clause 4.1.3 of the Scheme, gross floor area means the total floor area of the building measured from the outside of the external walls of the centre of a common wall 9 In accordance with clause 4.1.3 of the Scheme, building height means the vertical distance from natural ground level at any point to the uppermost part of a building directly above that point, excluding minor protrusions such as aerials, antennae, solar panels, chimneys and vents
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 11 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Villa Type Gross Floor Typical Building Configuration Total Area8 Height9 3 Bed-2st 187m2 7.9m split level cut into the hillside with 18 lower level suspended above natural ground level 4 Bed 229m2 7m split level cut into the hillside with 22 lower level suspended above natural ground level 6 Bed 639m2 9.2m split level cut into the hillside with 1 lower level suspended above natural ground level
Development plans for each villa type are contained in Appendix G. The villas will be constructed of a mixture of concrete, wood and aluminium materials which will convey natural colours and muted tones.
It is noted that there will be some variation between the height of each villa which is subject to the differences in site specific topography and degree of slope. Villa types for the nominated development precincts have been selected based on site specific topography with single level villas located on flatter sites and split level villas located on steeper sites to minimise visual impacts of the proposed development within the landscape.
It is intended to strata title individual villas10
Clubhouse
The clubhouse will have a floor area of approximately 1,454m2 and will be constructed over two storeys. The building will have an overall height of approximately 9.5m with the ground floor to extend over the lower floor.
The ground floor will include the main entrance, front reception and office, pro shop, change room facilities, bar, lounge area, restaurant and private function room, outdoor enclosed terrace and access to the lower floor. The lower floor will include golf cart parking, locker rooms, laundry and staff lunch room.
Short term parking and vehicle circulation will be provided adjacent to the ground floor entrance
Development plans for the clubhouse are contained in Appendix H.
Conference Building
The conference building will have a floor area of approximately 1,143m2 and will be constructed over two storeys. The building will have an overall height of approximately 9m. The ground floor will include three main rooms which can be expanded and contracted, a pre-function space, toilets and storage space. The lower floor will consist of golf cart parking and a lobby space for the elevator.
10 Clause 5.8 of the Scheme exempts division by strata titles of lawfully approved and constructed buildings
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 12 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Development plans for the conference building are contained within Appendix I.
Wellbeing Centre
The wellbeing centre will be single level with a floor area of approximately 456m2 and a height of approximately 6.8m. The building will comprise a main entrance and reception area, separate gym and yoga rooms, treatment rooms, male and female sauna rooms and an outdoor pool.
Development plans for the wellbeing centre are contained within Appendix J.
Staff Accommodation and Maintenance Facility
The staff accommodation area will comprise two building types. The senior staff accommodation will comprise the existing accommodation units which will be relocated. These buildings are in clusters of four units each with an area of approximately 40m2 and an overall height of approximately 3.4m. There will be a total of four of these buildings.
The general staff accommodation buildings will be single level square shaped buildings with an internal courtyard. The buildings will have an area of approximately 292m2 and an overall height of approximately 3.4m. The buildings will consist of two outer wings that will contain separate bedrooms each with an ensuite and a communal core which will include a kitchen, dining and lounge space. There will be a total of four of these buildings.
Development plans for the staff accommodation buildings are contained within Appendix K.
The existing maintenance buildings on site will be relocated to the new precinct. The existing shed is approximately 900m2 in area and 6.5m in height.
3.3 Development Precincts
The proposed buildings will be concentrated within 6 distinct precincts which will be distributed throughout the site. The location of each development precinct is illustrated within the Masterplan that is contained in Appendix L. The location, composition and configuration of each development precinct is summarised as follows:
Sanctuary Precinct
The Sanctuary Precinct is located in the south-western parcel of the site approximately 120m to the west of the clubhouse (refer to Image 7). The precinct is relatively level and is bound by fairways to the north, west and south.
The precinct will comprise a curved row of 3 Bed single storey villas which will follow a general east-west alignment. The access road will be located on the southern side of
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 13 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
the villas and will loop back around in the western section. Small access tracks will extend to the north and south providing access to individual fairways.
Image 7 - photo looking south-east showing the Sanctuary Villa Precinct which is located in the middle ground.
Clubhouse Precinct
The Clubhouse Precinct will encompass the location of the temporary clubhouse and will include additional land to the south (refer to Image 8).
Image 8 - photo looking east towards the temporary clubhouse. This land and the land to the south (right hand side) will be incorporated into the Clubhouse Precinct.
The precinct will include the clubhouse, two rows of 2 Bed villas, the main car parking area and the ‘King Villa’. The clubhouse will be positioned over and extend upon the footprint of the temporary clubhouse.
The 2 Bed villas will be located to the south of the clubhouse and will be staggered on the northern aspect of a dune ridge over two rows in a general east-west alignment.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 14 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Access to individual villas will be provided by roads which will be located to the south of each row.
The car parking area will be located within the gully that currently contains the maintenance facility. This area is screened by the dune ridge. The ‘King Villa’ will be located approximately 120m south-east of the clubhouse and will sit between 50-55m AHD.
Hillside 1 Precinct
Hillside 1 Precinct will be located on the southern dune ridge adjacent to the existing turf nursery (refer to Image 9).
Image 9 - photo looking south toward the dune ridge on the southern side of the existing turf nursery
The precinct will comprise two rows of villas which will be staggered down the face of the ridge between 40-55m AHD in a general east-west alignment. The southern (highest) row will contain 4 Bed villas with northern (lowest) row containing 3 Bed double storey villas. Each villa will be accessed from a road which will be located parallel on the southern side of the row.
The wellbeing centre is proposed to be located above the southern row of villas and will sit at approximately 55m AHD. The wellbeing centre will be oriented in a northerly direction.
Hillside 2 Precinct
Hillside 2 Precinct will be clustered around a larger south-east to north-west dune ridge that is located between the water storage dam and the turf nursery. The precinct will comprise a total of 24 villas which will be distributed across two rows. The lower row will wrap around the western edge of the ridge and will sit between 35-45m AHD. The units will be oriented to have a north-west/westerly aspect. The higher row will share a similar alignment and will sit between 45-55m AHD. The western most villas will comprise 4 Bed with the remaining villas being 3 Bed with a mixture of single and two storeys.
The conference building will be located at the base of the northern dune ridge that frames the turf nursery.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 15 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Staff Accommodation and Maintenance Precinct
Staff Accommodation and Maintenance Precinct is located to the east of the water storage dam within a naturally gully. Access will be provided from a new road which will extend from the cattle grid off Cape Wickham Road which is located approximately 450m to the north-east.
Hillside 3 Precinct
Hillside 3 Precinct is located on the northern most dune ridge located on the site. The dune ridge trends north-west to south-east with the crest of the ridge located approximately 200m to the south of Cape Wickham Road (refer to Image 10).
Image 10 - photo looking south-east towards Hillside 3 Precinct ridgeline that is located approximately 200m to the south of Cape Wickham Road
The precinct will comprise three rows of villas that will be oriented to the north-west and will have a general east-west alignment. The southern row (highest) will sit between 60-65m AHD with the middle and northern rows located below that will site between 45-55m AHD.
A primary access road will extend between Cape Wickham Road to the east and will join into the main internal road to the west. Access to individual villas will be from an internal road network which will be located on the southern side of each row of villas.
Site specific precinct plans are contained in Appendix M.
3.4 Incidental Development
Other development that will be incidental to the main development include:
removal and relocation of the existing accommodation units and maintenance buildings; installation of water supply, wastewater treatment and stormwater disposal and reuse infrastructure; cut and fill of individual building locations and new access roads of variable depth and height. Indicative cut and fill details are provided within section plans
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 16 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
for respective buildings which have been based on the analysis of site specific contours; disturbed areas around buildings and new works will be revegetated with a range of native, and where possible endemic, plant species; all undeveloped land will remain under existing vegetation cover.
3.5 Design Philosophy (from GFAB Architects)
The development at Cape Wickham envisages villas and other club facilities set alongside the existing, highly rated links golf course.
Our approach has been to set our buildings into the surrounding hills in order to both maximise the potential views over the bay and minimise their impact within the landscape. The buildings use the sloping nature of their sites within their design - the villas are predominantly “terraced” in level in order to respond to the topography and effectively make them part of the site itself. Such terracing is easily achieved in this area since the underlying ground is basically sand and thus easy to cut/form using locally available labour and quite basic machinery.
The decision to locate most of the accommodation as we have, was also based upon the desire to minimise development within the reserve and lighthouse areas of the site, lessen impact of the buildings from the course itself and gain some degree of shelter from the hillsides during the strong winds which buffet the site throughout the year.
In keeping with this desire for minimal impact, we have sought to utilise a very simple formal language in the design along with dark stained timber as the predominant material which will ensure that the buildings blend seamlessly into the hillsides. Our intention is to source, where possible, Tasmanian timber from managed, environmentally sound suppliers. In addition to timber, limited amounts of concrete and local limestone will lend accents to the design both internally and externally, providing a historical link to the lighthouse which the area is famous for. Finally, large areas of glazing will allow the guests to enjoy uninterrupted views whilst also reflecting the surrounding colours of the landscape and the ever changing, often dramatic, hues of the sky.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 17 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
4.0 Planning Assessment
4.1 Zone
The site is zoned Rural Resource in accordance with the Scheme as shown in Figure 1. The site is not subject to any scheme overlays.
29.0 Environmental Management Zone 19.0 Open Space Zone 26.0 Rural Resource Zone
4.2 Use Categorisation
The broad use classification for the proposed development is ‘Sports and recreation’ on the basis that each component will largely be subservient to, or bear a relationship with, the existing golf course11. However, it is conceivable that several components could be used in a manner that is not directly subservient to the ‘Sports and recreation’ use class and can therefore be categorised as separate uses12. The following table identifies individual components of the proposed development and indicates the use classes it will either be directly associated with or subservient to13:
11 clause 8.2.2 of the Scheme 12 clause 8.2.5 of the Scheme 13 the uses listed within this table represent the uses that are being applied for by the development application
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 18 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Component Community Food Sports and Visitor Residential meeting and Services Recreation Accommodation entertainment Clubhouse Villas Wellbeing Centre Carparking Maintenance Facility Staff Accommodation Conference Centre
4.3 Zone Purpose
The following section provides an assessment of the proposal against the purpose statements of the Rural Resource zone. 26.1.1.1 To provide for the sustainable use or development of resources for agriculture, aquaculture, forestry, mining and other primary industries, including opportunities for resource processing. Response The proposed use and development will no restrict the provision of sustainable use or development of resources for agriculture, aquaculture, forestry, mining and other primary industries, including opportunities for resource processing within Rural Resource zoned located on King Island. The site represents approximately 0.12% of King Islands Rural Resource zoned land. The proposed use and development will therefore occupy a marginal footprint and is unlikely to affect established and future agricultural and other primary industry uses. 26.1.1.2 To provide for other use or development that does not constrain or conflict with resource development uses. Response The proposed use and development is not expected to constrain or conflict with resource development uses located on the immediately adjoining land to the east and south which is currently under native and introduced vegetation cover. This land is only suited to marginal grazing activities due to topographical constraints. Such activities could occur up to the shared boundary without
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 19 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
causing any adverse impact on the proposed use and development and vice versa.
4.4 Local Area Objectives
The following section provides an assessment of the proposal against the local area objectives of the Rural Resource zone. a) The priority purpose for rural land is primary industry dependent upon access to a naturally occurring resource;
Response
The proposed use and development represents an evolution of an established non-primary industry use.
b) Air, land and water resources are of importance for current and potential primary industry and other permitted use;
Response
The proposed use and development will not preclude air, land or water from sustaining existing and future potential industry uses.
c) Air, land and water resources are protected against –
(i) permanent loss to a use or development that has no need or reason to locate on land containing such a resource; and
(ii) use or development that has potential to exclude or unduly conflict, constraint, or interfere with the practice of primary industry or any other use dependent on access to a naturally occurring resource;
Response
The proposed use and development is required to be located on the site due to the presence of the established golf course.
The use of the site for agricultural activities or the practice of other primary industry uses dependant on access to a naturally occurring resource has been permanently removed by the issuance of permit DA 14/1213 which allowed the golf course and associated facilities to establish.
d) Primary industry is diverse, dynamic, and innovative; and may occur on a range of lot sizes and at different levels of intensity;
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 20 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Response
The proposed use and development will not affect this objective.
e) All agricultural land is a valuable resource to be protected for sustainable agricultural production;
Response
The site is not classified as agricultural land14.
f) Rural land may be used and developed for economic, community, and utility activity that cannot reasonably be accommodated on land within a settlement or nature conservation area;
Response
The proposed use and development is unable to be reasonably accommodated on land within a defined settlement area or nature conservation area on the basis that each component will be subservient to, or bear a relationship with, the existing golf course which is located on the site.
g) Rural land may be used and developed for tourism and recreation use dependent upon a rural location or undertaken in association with primary industry;
Response
The proposed use and development represents the evolution of an established recreation use that is located within the interface of a rural and coastal landscape.
h) Residential use and development on rural land is appropriate only if –
(i) required by a primary industry or a resource based activity; or
(ii) without permanent loss of land significant for primary industry use and without constraint or interference to existing and potential use of land for primary industry purposes.
Response
The proposed residential use for the purposes of staff accommodation is considered appropriate to develop on the site on the basis that it is required to support the established and proposed uses.
14 as defined under clause 4.1.3 of the Scheme
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 21 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
4.5 Desired Future Character Statements
The following section provides an assessment of the proposal against the local area objectives of the Rural Resource zone. Use and development on rural land - a) may create a dynamic, extensively cultivated, highly modified, and relatively sparsely settled working landscape featuring –
(i) expansive areas for agriculture and forestry;
(ii) mining and extraction sites;
(iii) utility and transport sites and extended corridors; and
(iv) service and support buildings and work areas of substantial size, utilitarian character, and visual prominence that are sited and managed with priority for operational efficiency;
Response
This statement is not considered applicable to the proposed use and development.
b) may be interspersed with –
(i) small-scale residential settlement nodes;
(ii) places of ecological, scientific, cultural, or aesthetic value; and
(iii) pockets of remnant vegetation;
Response
This statement is not considered applicable to the proposed use and development.
c) will seek to minimise disturbance to –
(i) physical terrain;
(ii) natural biodiversity and ecological systems;
(iii) scenic attributes; and
(iv) rural residential and visitor amenity;
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 22 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Response
It is considered that the proposed use and development has been located and designed in a manner that will minimise disturbance to scenic attributes and physical terrain.
d) may involve sites of varying size –
(i) in accordance with the type, scale and intensity of primary industry; and
(ii) to reduce loss and constraint on use of land important for sustainable commercial production based on naturally occurring resources;
Response
This statement is not considered applicable to the proposed use and development.
e) is significantly influenced in temporal nature, character, scale, frequency, and intensity by external factors, including technology, production techniques, and in economic, management, and marketing systems.
Response
This statement is not considered applicable to the proposed use and development.
4.6 Use Standards
26.3.1 Requirement for discretionary non-residential use to locate on rural resource land Objective: Other than for residential use, discretionary permit use of rural resource land is to minimise – a) unnecessary loss of air, land and water resources of significance for sustainable primary industry and other permitted use, including for agricultural use dependent on the soil as a growth medium; and
b) unreasonable conflict or interference to existing or potential primary industry use, including agricultural use, by other land use. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 There is no acceptable solution. Other than for residential use, discretionary permit use must – a) be consistent with the local area objectives;
b) be consistent with any applicable desired future character statement;
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 23 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
c) be required to locate on rural resource land for operational efficiency –
(i) to access a specific naturally occurring resource on the site or on adjacent land in the zone;
(ii) to access infrastructure only available on the site or on adjacent land in the zone;
(iii) to access a product of primary industry from a use on the site or on adjacent land in the zone;
(iv) to service or support a primary industry or other permitted use on the site or on adjacent land in the zone;
(v) if required –
a. to acquire access to a mandatory site area not otherwise available in a zone intended for that purpose;
b. for security;
c. for public health or safety if all measures to minimise impact could create an unacceptable level of risk to human health, life or property if located on land in a zone intended for that purpose;
(vi) to provide opportunity for diversification, innovation, and value-adding to secure existing or potential primary industry use of the site or of adjacent land;
(vii) to provide an essential utility or community service infrastructure for the municipal or regional community or that is of significance for Tasmania; or
(viii) if a cost-benefit analysis in economic, environmental, and social terms indicates significant benefits to the region; and
d) minimise likelihood for –
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 24 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
(i) permanent loss of land for existing and potential primary industry use;
(ii) constraint or interference to existing and potential primary industry use on the site and on adjacent land; and
(iii) loss of land within a proclaimed irrigation district under Part 9 Water Management Act 1999 or land that may benefit from the application of broad-scale irrigation development.
Response
There is no acceptable solution. Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
The proposed discretionary permit use of the site will minimise the unnecessary loss of naturally occurring resources for sustainable primary industry and agricultural uses and will not unreasonably conflict or interfere with existing and future primary industry or agricultural uses having regard to the following:
a) the proposed use and development has been assessed as being consistent with the local area objectives of the zone;
b) the proposed use and development has been assessed as being consistent with applicable desired future character statements of the zone;
c) the proposed use and development is necessary to enhance the operational efficiency of the established golf course by providing better facilities, more accommodation and new services.
The proposed use and development is required to locate on the site to service and support the golf course which is an established permitted use15. Accordingly, subclause (c)(iv) is met16;
d) the use of the site for agricultural purposes or the practice of other primary industry activities dependant on access to a naturally occurring resource has been permanently removed by the issuance of permit DA 14/1213 which allowed the golf course and associated facilities to establish.
15 as guided by clause 9.2.1 of the Scheme 16 proposed use and development is not required to comply with all parts of subparagraph (c) of clause 26.3.1 P1 in accordance with the recent decision of the Tribunal in Raff Angus Pty Ltd v King Island Council and Ors [2018] TASRMPAT 13.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 25 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
To this extent, the site is no longer classified as agricultural land. Accordingly, the proposed use and development will not result in the permanent loss of land for existing or potential primary industry use.
The proposed use and development will be sufficiently buffered from adjoining land to the east and south by way of distance and topography to ensure existing and future agricultural and/or primary industry uses located on the adjoining land will not be constrained or interfered with by the proposed use and development.
The site is not located within a proclaimed irrigation district under Part 9 Water Management Act 1999 or land that may benefit from the application of broad- scale irrigation development.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
26.3.2 Required residential use Objective: Residential use – a) is required as part of a resource development or other non-residential use;
b) does not confine or restrain use of land for resource development or other non-residential use. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 Residential use required as part of a use must – Residential use required as part of a use must – a) be an alteration or addition to an existing a) be consistent with local area objectives; lawful and structurally sound residential building; b) be consistent with any applicable desired future character statement; b) be an ancillary dwelling to an existing lawful and structurally sound single c) be required to locate on rural resource land dwelling; if –
c) not intensify an existing lawful residential i. the type, scale, intensity, or use; operational characteristics of a permitted use make it necessary for d) replace a lawful existing residential use; a person to live on the site for the purpose of undertaking such use; e) not create a new residential use through conversion of an existing building; or ii. residential use will be integral and subservient to the principal use; and f) be home based business in association with occupation of an existing lawful and iii. there is no other available dwelling structural sound residential building; and on the site; and d) if the required residential use relies on land g) there is no change in the title description in two or more titles in different ownership, of the site on which the residential use is the written consent of the owner of each located. title to enter into a Part 5 agreement to be registered on the title for each of the lots and providing –
i. the dwelling is required as part of a nominated permitted use; and
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 26 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
ii. the lots are not to be sold separately.
Response
The proposed residential use in the form of staff accommodation facilities is unable to comply with any of the subparagraphs of clause 26.3.2 (A1). Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
The proposed residential use is required as part of an established non-residential use and will not confine or restrain the use of adjoining land for resource development or other non-residential use having regard to the following:
a) the proposed use and development has been assessed as being consistent with the local area objectives of the zone;
b) the proposed use and development has been assessed as being consistent with applicable desired future character statements of the zone;
c) at full capacity, the proposed use and development inclusive of the operation of the golf course will employ approximately 103 staff. The remote location of the site to key population nodes on King Island, scale of the golf course and proposed facilities and characteristics of the operation which include late night dining and early morning rounds make it necessary for accommodation to be made available for staff. The proposed accommodation facilities have capacity for 80 staff.
The proposed residential use will be integral and subservient to the principal use of the site which will be the operation of the golf course and associated visitor accommodation. Further, there are no other dwellings located on the site that are available to accommodate staff;
d) the proposed residential use does not rely on land in two or more titles in different ownership.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
4.7 Development Standards
26.4.1 Suitability of a site of lot on a plan of subdivision for use or development Objective: The minimum properties of a site and of each lot on a plan of subdivision are to – a) provide a suitable development area for the intended use;
b) provide access from a road; and
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 27 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
c) make adequate provision for a water supply and for the drainage and disposal of sewage and stormwater. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 A site or each lot on a plan of subdivision must – A site or each lot on a plan of subdivision must be of sufficient area for the intended use or a) unless for agricultural use, have an area of development without likely constraint or not less than 1 hectare not including any interference for – access strip; and a) erection of a building if required by the b) if intended for a building, contain a building intended use; area – b) access to the site; (i) of not more than 2000m2 or 20% of the area of the site, whichever is the c) use or development of adjacent land; greater unless a crop protection structure for an agricultural use; d) a utility; and
(ii) clear of any applicable setback from e) any easement or lawful entitlement for a frontage, side or rear boundary; access to other land.
(iii) clear of any applicable setback from a zone boundary;
(iv) clear of any registered easement;
(v) clear of any registered right of way benefiting other land;
(vi) clear of any restriction imposed by a utility;
(vii) not including an access strip;
(viii) accessible from a frontage or access strip.
Response
The site will have the following characteristics:
a) an area of 122ha;
b) contain a building area17 -
i. of approximately 1.8% of the area of the site;
ii. that will encroach upon the rear setback prescribed by clause 26.4.2 (A1);
iii. clear of any applicable setback from a zone boundary (of which there are none);
17 In accordance with clause 4.1.3 of the Scheme, building area the area shown on a plan to indicate where all buildings will be located
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 28 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
iv. clear of any registered easement (of which there are none);
v. clear of any registered right of way benefiting other land (of which there are none);
vi. clear of any restriction imposed by a utility (of which there are none);
vii. that does not include an access strip; and
viii. is accessible from the frontage of Cape Wickham Road via an internal road network.
It is evident that the proposed development will not meet subparagraph A1 (b) (ii). Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
The site is of sufficient area for the intended use having regard to the following:
a) the area of the site will not constrain or interfere with the erection of proposed buildings;
b) sufficient access to the site is provided from Cape Wickham Road;
c) matters of constraint and interference of use or development on adjacent land is discussed against performance criteria 26.4.2 (P1);
d) the proposed use and development of the site will not have any bearing or impact on a utility; and
e) the site is not subject to any easements or entitlement for access to other land.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A2 P2 A site or each lot on a subdivision plan must have a) A site must have a reasonable and secure a separate access from a road – access from a road provided –
a) across a frontage over which no other land (i) across a frontage; or has a right of access; and
(ii) by an access strip connecting to b) if an internal lot, by an access strip a frontage, if for an internal lot; or connecting to a frontage over land not
required as the means of access to any (iii) by a right of way connecting to a other land; or road over land not required to
give the lot of which it is a part the c) by a right of way connecting to a road –
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 29 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
minimum properties of a lot in (i) over land not required as the means accordance with the acceptable of access to any other land; and solution in any applicable standard; and (ii) not required to give the lot of which it is a part the minimum properties of (iv) the dimensions of the frontage a lot in accordance with the and any access strip or right of acceptable solution in any way must be adequate for the applicable standard; and type and volume of traffic likely to be generated by – d) with a width of frontage and any access strip or right of way of not less than 6.0m; a. the intended use; and and b. the existing or potential e) the relevant road authority in accordance use of any other land with the Local Government (Highways) Act which requires use of the 1982 or the Roads and Jetties Act 1935 access as the means of must have advised it is satisfied adequate access for that land; and arrangements can be made to provide vehicular access between the carriageway (v) the relevant road authority in of a road and the frontage, access strip or accordance with the Local right of way to the site or each lot on a Government (Highways) Act proposed subdivision plan. 1982 or the Roads and Jetties Act 1935 must have advised it is satisfied adequate arrangements can be made to provide vehicular access between the carriageway of a road and the frontage, access strip or right of way to the site or each lot on a subdivision plan; or
b) It must be unnecessary for the development to require access to the site or to a lot on a subdivision plan.
Response
The site has access across a frontage onto Cape Wickham Road which is under the authority of Council. The frontage is approximately 650m in width and no other land has right of access over it.
The application complies with the acceptable solution.
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A3 P3 Unless for agricultural use other than controlled a) There must be a water supply available environment agriculture which permanently for the site or for each lot on a plan of precludes the land for an agricultural use subdivision with an adequate level of dependent on the soil as a growth medium, a site reliability, quality, and quantity to service or each lot on a plan of subdivision must be the anticipated use of the site or the capable of connecting to a water supply – intended use of each lot on a plan of subdivision; or a) provided in accordance with the Water and
Sewerage Industry Act 2008; or b) It must be unnecessary to require a water
supply.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 30 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
b) from a rechargeable drinking water system R31 with a storage capacity of not less than 10,000 litres if–
(i) there is not a reticulated water supply; and
(ii) development is for –
a. a single dwelling; or
b. a use with an equivalent population of not more than 10 people per day.
Response
The site is not located within an area that is serviced by a reticulated water supply provided in accordance with the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008. Accordingly, water will be supplied by an on-site rechargeable drinking water system. However, the proposed development is for a use with an equivalent population of greater than 10 people per day. Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
It is proposed to utilise rainwater harvesting from the roofs of proposed buildings which will be supplemented from the existing spring water supply where necessary. It has been determined that the volume of water produced from roof rainwater harvesting and the spring will be of an adequate reliability, quality, and quantity to service the anticipated use of the site. Further details are provided within the Water, On-site wastewater and Stormwater Assessment.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A4 P4 Unless for agricultural use other than controlled a) A site or each lot on a plan of subdivision environment agriculture which permanently must drain and dispose of sewage and precludes the land for an agricultural use liquid trade waste – dependent on the soil as a growth medium, a site or each lot on a plan of subdivision must be (i) in accordance with any capable of draining and disposing of sewage and prescribed emission limits for liquid trade waste – discharge of waste water;
a) to a sewerage system provided in (ii) in accordance with any limit accordance with the Water and Sewerage advised by the Tasmanian Industry Act 2008; or Environmental Protection
Agency; b) by on-site disposal if –
(iii) without likely adverse impact for (i) sewage or liquid trade waste cannot the health or amenity of the land be drained to a reticulated sewer and adjacent land; system; and
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 31 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
(ii) the development – (iv) without compromise to water quality objectives for surface or a. is for a single dwelling; or ground water established under the State Policy on Water Quality b. provides for an equivalent Management 1997; and population of not more than 10 people per day; or (v) with appropriate safeguards to minimise contamination if the use (iii) the site has capacity for on-site or development has potential to – disposal of domestic waste water in accordance with AS/NZS1547:2012 a. indirectly cause the On-site domestic-wastewater contamination of surface management clear of any defined or ground water; or building area or access strip. b. involve an activity or process which requires the use, production, conveyance or storage of significant quantities of sewage or liquid trade waste that may cause harm to surface or ground water if released through accident, malfunction, or spillage; or
b) it must be unnecessary to require the drainage and disposal of sewage or liquid trade waste.
Response
The site is not located within an area that is serviced by a reticulated sewerage supply provided in accordance with the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008. Accordingly, sewerage will be disposed of on-site. However, the proposed development is for a use with an equivalent population of greater than 10 people per day. Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
Two wastewater disposal options have been recommended within the Water, On-site wastewater and Stormwater Assessment for the treatment and disposal of anticipate sewerage. The assessment concludes that both options, if adopted will comply with performance criteria P4 (a) (i) to (v).
The application complies with the performance criteria.
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A5 P5 Unless for agricultural use other than controlled a) A site or each lot on a plan of subdivision environment agriculture which permanently must drain and dispose of stormwater – precludes the land for an agricultural use dependent on the soil as a growth medium, a site (i) to accommodate the anticipated stormwater –
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 32 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
or each lot on a plan of subdivision must be capable of draining and disposing of stormwater – a. currently entering from beyond its boundaries; and a) to a stormwater system provided in
accordance with the Urban Drainage Act b. from the proposed 2013; or development;
b) if stormwater cannot be drained to a (ii) without likelihood for stormwater system – concentration on adjacent land;
(i) for discharge to a natural drainage (iii) without creating an unacceptable line, water body, or watercourse; or level of risk for the safety of life or
for use or development on the (ii) for disposal within the site if – land and on adjacent land;
a. the site has an area of not (iv) to manage the quantity and rate less than 5000m2; of discharge of stormwater to
receiving waters; b. the disposal area is not
within any defined building (v) to manage the quality of area; stormwater discharged to
receiving waters; and c. the disposal area is not
within any area required for (vi) to provide positive drainage away the disposal of sewage; from any sewer pipe, on-site
sewage disposal system, or d. the disposal area is not building area; or within any access strip; and
b) It must be unnecessary to require the e. not more than 50% of the drainage and disposal of stormwater. site is impervious surface.
Response
It has been determined that stormwater will not be drained to a stormwater system. Accordingly, it is proposed to discharge stormwater within the site. To this extent, subparagraph A5 (b) (ii) (a) to (e) is met on the following basis:
a. the site has an area of 122ha;
b. there is sufficient space and slope around development sites to ensure discharge and disposal is directed away from defined building areas;
c. there is sufficient space to ensure disposal of stormwater and sewerage are managed effectively;
d. stormwater disposal areas will not be located within any access roads or laneways;
e. approximately 95% of the site will remain impervious.
It is noted that all stormwater captured will be reused on the site as a potable supply or for irrigation of the golf course and other landscaped areas.
The application complies with the acceptable solution.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 33 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
26.4.2 Location and configuration of development Objective: The location and configuration of development is to provide reasonable consistency between sites for setback from a boundary, height of buildings, and location within the landscape. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 A building or utility structure, other than a crop The setback of a building or utility structure must protection structure for an agricultural use, must be – be setback – a) consistent with the streetscape; and a) not less than 20.0m from the frontage; or b) required by a constraint imposed by – b) if the development is for a sensitive use on land that adjoins a road specified in the (i) size and shape of the site; Table to this Clause, not less than the setback specified from that road; (ii) orientation and topography of land; c) not less than 10.0m from each side boundary; and (iii) arrangements for a water supply and for the drainage and disposal d) not less than 10.0m from the rear of sewage and stormwater; boundary; or (iv) arrangements for vehicular or e) in accordance with any applicable building pedestrian access; area shown on a sealed plan. (v) a utility;
(vi) any requirement of a conservation or urban design outcome detailed in a provision in this planning scheme;
(vii) any lawful and binding requirement –
a. by the State or a council or by an entity owned or regulated by the State or a council to acquire or occupy part of the site; or
b. an interest protected at law by an easement or other regulation.
Response
Buildings will have the following minimum setbacks from respective boundaries:
Hillside 3 Precinct
frontage (northern boundary): 110m +/- side (north-eastern boundary): 20m +/-
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 34 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Hillside 2 Precinct
side (western boundary):160m +/-
Hillside 1 Precinct
rear (southern boundary): 4m +/-
Clubhouse Precinct
side (eastern boundary):22m +/- rear (southern boundary): 390m +/-
Sanctuary Precinct
side (northern boundary): 15m +/- side (western boundary): 130m +/-
It is evident that the 10m rear setback prescribed by subparagraph P1 (d) will not be met by all buildings located within the Hillside 1 Precinct. Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
The particular discretion will be invoked by the location of proposed villa 1 within Hillside 1 Precinct which will be setback approximately 4m from the rear (southern boundary).
It is considered that the location of the building will be consistent with the landscape having regard to the following:
a) the villa will be consistent with the streetscape by virtue of being located approximately 1.1km from the frontage boundary and being set behind a series of dune ridges that will screen the individual villa from Cape Wickham Road;
b) the location of the villa within 4m of the southern boundary is required by a constraint imposed by the proposed location of an internal access road which will be located to the south of the northern row of villas. The location of the northern row of villas is further constrained by the main access road and turf nursery.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A2 P2 Building height must not be more than 8.5m Building height must – a) minimise likelihood for overshadowing of a habitable room or a required minimum area
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 35 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
of private open space in any adjacent dwelling;
b) minimise apparent scale, bulk massing and proportion in relation to any adjacent dwelling;
c) be consistent with the streetscape and rural landscape;
d) respond to the effect of the slope and orientation of the site; and
e) take into account the effect and durability of screening other than vegetation to attenuate impact.
Response
The proposed buildings that will have a height greater than 8.5m include the clubhouse (9.5m), conference centre (9m) and ‘King Villa’ (9.2m). All other buildings will be less than 8.5m. Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
It is considered that the height of buildings exceeding 8.5m in height will be consistent with the landscape having regard to the following:
a) there are no adjacent dwellings for the respective buildings to overshadow;
b) there are no adjacent dwellings to measure apparent scale, bulk, massing and proportion against;
c) the buildings will be located between 750m to 1.2km from the frontage boundary and will be screened by a series of dune ridges from Cape Wickham Road. Accordingly, the buildings will not interfere with the prevailing streetscape character of Cape Wickham Road.
The environmental setting of the site has transformed from a ‘rural’ landscape to a ‘golf course’ landscape that combines variations to the topography, expansive and manicured fairways and greens that are broken up by native grasses, rocky outcrops, the rocky coastline and dune ridges. The setting also includes the temporary clubhouse which is located on a prominent position within the site and the existing accommodation villas which have been set into the golf course.
The presence of the buildings that will exceed 8.5m in height will be minimised when viewed amongst the scale and volume of other proposed building forms that will be below 8.5m within the immediate landscape setting of the site.
Longer views to the buildings from key public view points including Cape Wickham Road, Cape Wickham Light House which form part of the established
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 36 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
‘rural’ landscape character of the locality will be obstructed, if not fully screened by the undulating landforms both within and beyond the site boundaries.
Further relief from the scale and height of the buildings when viewed from public viewpoints where they will have visibility farther afield such as the coastal reserve and public reserves will be provided as a result of the distance to the buildings.
The proposed buildings will therefore be consistent with the established golf course setting within the site and existing rural landscape beyond the site.
d) the buildings will be oriented to the north and west consistent with other proposed buildings. The buildings have been designed so that they are split level or terraced to follow site specific topography which will reduce visual impacts of the built form within the landscape by way of modulation;
e) screening and softening of the buildings will be provided through the use of vegetation and natural materials that will convey darker colours and muted tones. Additional screening will be afforded by the natural undulations, dune ridges and peaks throughout the site.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A3.1 P3.1 A building or utility structure, other than a crop The location, height and visual appearance of a protection structure for an agricultural use or wind building or structure except for wind power power turbines or wind power pumps, must – turbines or wind power pumps must have regard to – a) not project above an elevation 15m below the closest ridgeline; a) minimising the visual impact on the skyline;
b) be not less than 30m from any shoreline b) minimising height above the adjacent to a marine or aquatic water body, water vegetation canopy; course, or wetland; c) minimising visual impact on the shoreline or c) be below the canopy level of any adjacent a marine or aquatic water body, forest or woodland vegetation; and watercourse, or wetland where possible; and d) clad and roofed with materials with a light reflectance value of less than 40%. d) minimising reflection of light from an external surface.
A3.2 Wind power turbines and wind power pumps must P3.2 not exceed 20m in height. Wind power turbines or wind power pumps must minimise their impacts on the broader landscape having regard to – a) the visual impacts of the development;
b) the characteristics of the vicinity of the site;
c) the characteristics of the wind source;
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 37 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
d) the topography of the site and how that location affords access to wind; and
e) potential impacts on birds.
Response
The proposed buildings will –
a) project above an elevation 15m below localised ridgelines;
b) be greater than 30m from the shoreline of Victoria Cove and the coastal waterbody;
c) not be located in proximity to an adjacent canopy of forest or woodland vegetation; and
d) will be clad and roofed in materials with natural materials which will have a light reflectance value of less than 40%.
It is evident that subparagraph A3.1 (a) is not met. Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
It is noted that acceptable solution A3.2 is not applicable to the proposed use and development on the basis that no wind power turbines or wind power pumps are proposed.
Performance Criteria Assessment
The location of buildings along localised ridgelines will be consistent within the context of the landscape having regard to the following:
a) developable space within the site that sits beneath an elevation of 15m below localised ridgelines is limited for the purposes of siting functional building areas for the proposed use and development due to the positioning and proximity to the golf course and existing infrastructure and facilities including the turf nursery, water storage dam, existing buildings and access roads. Subsequently, the slopes and crests of the hillsides and ridgelines represent the remaining developable land on the site.
The buildings have been distributed and embedded across the hillsides and ridgelines of corresponding precincts in a manner that attempts to minimise visual impacts of the built form on the landscape setting, which includes Cape Wickham Lighthouse.
The prevailing silhouette of the various ridgelines and skylines within the site are diverse and are typically characterised by a series of moderate to abrupt undulating patterns which correlate with dune peaks and depressions, rocky outcrops and the composition of vegetation along the ridge crests. The form
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 38 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
and shape of skylines and the associated landscape that frame the skylines constantly change when viewed from the different locations within the site.
At times, the profile of the ridgelines will invariably be broken from different perspectives by the proposed buildings that are located on elevated sections of the ridges. The presence of buildings is not expected to be inconsistent with the irregular pattern of the ridgelines that is created by the existing landforms within the site.
Visual impacts on the skylines will be minimised by terracing the buildings down the slope, modulation of individual villas and the use of different villa types throughout each precinct and by using natural materials that exude dark colours and muted tones which will become recessive within the landscape. Landscaping will also be incorporated throughout each precinct with the use of native and endemic plants species encourage, which will provide further visual relief.
Additionally, visual impacts from the built form and modulation of each precinct will be lessened when viewed juxtaposed to the vast surface area of the hillsides that fold throughout the site.
Further reduction of the bulk, scale and massing of the buildings when viewed in the context of the landscape from public viewpoints where they will have visibility farther afield such as the coastal reserve and public reserves will be provided as a result of the distance to the buildings.
A series of photomontages for the various precincts are contained within Appendix N which show indicative locations of buildings within the context of respective ridgelines.
b) the site is not adjacent to a vegetation canopy;
c) development will minimise visual impact on the shoreline and coastal water body to the west by virtue of complying with the corresponding acceptable solution;
d) the proposed buildings will be clad and roofed with materials that will minimise reflection of light from external surfaces.
It is noted that performance criteria P3.2 is not applicable to the proposed use and development on the basis that no wind power turbines or wind power pumps are proposed.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
26.4.3 Location of development for sensitive uses Objective:
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 39 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
The location of development for sensitive uses on rural land does not unreasonably interfere or otherwise constrain – a) agricultural land for existing and potential sustainable agricultural use dependent on the soil as a growth medium;
b) agricultural use of land in a proclaimed irrigation district under Part 9 Water Management Act 1999 or land that may benefit from the application of broad-scale irrigation development;
c) use of land for agricultural production that is not dependent on the soil as a growth medium, including aquaculture, controlled environment agriculture, and intensive animal husbandry;
d) conservation management;
e) extractive industry;
f) forestry; and
g) transport and utility infrastructure. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 New development, except for extensions to New development, except for extensions to existing sensitive use where the extension is no existing sensitive use where the extension is no greater than 30% of the existing gross floor area greater than 30% of the existing gross floor area of the sensitive use, must – of the sensitive use, must minimise – a) be located not less than - a) permanent loss of land for existing and potential primary industry use; (i) 200m from any agricultural land; b) likely constraint or interference to existing (ii) 200m from aquaculture or and potential primary industry use on the controlled environment site and on adjacent land; agriculture; c) permanent loss of land within a (iii) 500m from the operational area proclaimed irrigation district under Part 9 boundary established by a mining Water Management Act 1999 or land that lease issued in accordance with may benefit from the application of broad- the Mineral Resources scale irrigation development; and Development Act 1995 if blasting does not occur; or d) adverse effect on the operability and safety of a major road, a railway or a (iv) 1000m from the operational area utility. boundary established by a mining lease issued in accordance with the Mineral Resources Development Act 1995 if blasting does occur;
(v) 500m from intensive animal husbandry;
(vi) 100m from land under a reserve management plan;
(vii) 100m from land designated for production forestry;
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 40 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
(viii) 50m from a boundary of the land to a road identified in Clause 26.4.2 or to a railway line; and
(ix) clear of any restriction imposed by a utility; and
b) not be on land within a proclaimed irrigation district under Part 9 Water Management Act 1999 or land that may benefit from the application of broad- scale irrigation development.
Response
The proposed development involves sensitive uses in the form of the staff and visitor accommodation. The sensitive use will be –
i. within 200m of adjacent agricultural land;
ii. greater than 200m from aquaculture and controlled environment agriculture;
iii. greater than 500m from the operational boundary of a mining lease where blasting does not occur;
iv. greater than 1000m from the operational boundary of a mining lease where blasting occurs;
v. greater than 500m from intensive animal husbandry;
vi. within 100m from the adjoining coastal reserve which is managed under the Nature Conservation Act 2000;
vii. greater than 100m from land that is designated for production forestry;
viii. greater than 50m from a boundary of the land to a road identified in clause 26.4.2 or to a railway line;
ix. clear of any restrictions imposed by a utility; and
b) will not be on land within a proclaimed irrigation district under Part 9 Water Management Act 1999 or land that may benefit from the application of broad-scale irrigation development.
It is evident that proposed sensitive uses will be located within 200m from adjoining agricultural land and within 100m of a coastal reserve under a management plan. Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 41 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
The location of the proposed sensitive uses will not unreasonably interfere with or otherwise constrain agricultural land and conservation areas having regard to the following:
a) the proposed development for sensitive use will not result in the permanent loss of adjoining land for existing and potential primary industry use;
b) likely constrain or interference to existing and potential primary industry use occurring on adjacent land will be minimised by locating the sensitive uses downslope from the adjacent land, natural buffering created by topography and vegetation. Further, the temporary and transient nature of visitor accommodation use will minimise long-term impacts on existing and potential primary industry use from occurring on the adjacent land;
c) the site is not located on land within a proclaimed irrigation district under Part 9 Water Management Act 1999 or land that may benefit from the application of broad-scale irrigation development; and
d) the site is not located in proximity to a major road, railway or utility.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 42 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
5.0 Code Assessment
5.1 Bushfire-Prone Areas Code
The Bushfire-Prone Areas Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development pursuant to clause E1.2.1 of the Scheme.
5.2 Airport Impact Management Code
The Airport Impact Management Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development pursuant to clause E2.2.1 of the Scheme.
5.3 Clearing and Conversion of Vegetation Code
The Clearing and Conversion of Vegetation Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development pursuant to clause E3.2.1 of the Scheme on the basis that proposed removal of native vegetation will not: i. contain threatened native vegetation communities within the meaning of the Nature Conservation Act 200218;
ii. contain part of the habitat for a threatened species within the meaning of the Threatened Species Protection Act 199519;
iii. be within 30m of a named water body or watercourse;
iv. be vegetation in a wetland, or within 30m of a coastal shoreline;
v. be located on land shown on the planning scheme map as significant for scenic, biodiversity or landscape values; and
vi. be located on land with risk from landslide identified by Code E6.0 - Hazard Management under the Scheme.
5.4 Change in Ground Level Code
E4.6.1 Change in existing ground level or natural ground level Objective: Change in the existing ground level or the natural ground level by cut or fill is to minimise – a) likely adverse impact on the physical, environmental, cultural, aesthetic, and amenity features of land; and b) risk from a natural hazard.
18 As per Schedule 3A of the Nature Conservation Act 2002 19 As per Schedules 3, 4 and 5 of the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 43 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 Cut or fill must - Cut or fill must - a) not be on land within the Environmental a) make arrangements for the drainage and Living zone or the Environmental disposal of stormwater; Management zone; b) make arrangements to stabilise any b) be required to – existing building or to increase the requirements for construction of any i. provide a construction site for potential building on adjacent land; buildings and structures; c) manage drainage and disposal of ii. facilitate vehicular access; intersected ground water;
iii. mitigate exposure to a natural or d) safeguard the quality of receiving waters; environmental hazard; e) not require a retaining or support structure iv. facilitate provision of a utility; that would result in an area of influence within the boundary of adjacent land unless v. assist the consolidation or the owner of adjacent land has provided intensification of development; or written consent to enter into an agreement under Part 5 Land Use Planning and vi. assist stormwater management Approvals Act 1993 registered on the title of adjacent land providing for the level of c) not result in a modification of surface constraint; and stormwater water flow to increase – f) not encroach upon or expose, disturb, or i. surface water drainage onto reduce cover over an underground utility to adjacent land; less than 1.0m unless the relevant regulatory entity has advised – ii. pooling of water on the site or on adjacent land; or i. it is satisfied the cut or fill will not result in harm to the utility; and iii. the nature or capacity of discharge from land upstream in ii. any condition or requirement it a natural or artificial drainage determines are appropriate to channel; protect the utility.
d) not destabilise any existing building or increase the requirements for construction of any potential building on adjacent land;
e) manage disposal of intersected ground water;
f) safeguard the quality of receiving waters through measures to minimise erosion and release of sediments and other contaminants during each of the site preparation, construction and rehabilitation phase in accordance with Soil and Water Management on Building and Construction Sites 2009;
g) Not require a retaining or support structure that would result in an area of influence within the boundary of adjacent land; and
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 44 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
h) not encroach upon or expose, disturb, or reduce cover over an underground utility to less than 1.0m unless the relevant regulatory entity has advised –
i. it is satisfied the cut or fill will not result in harm to the utility; and
ii. any condition or requirement it determines are appropriate to protect the utility.
Response A level of cut and fill is required to accommodate the proposed use and development. Indicative cut and fill levels are detailed within section plans for respective building types. With regard to the acceptable solutions, the proposed cut and fill will: a) not be located on land within the Environmental Living or Environmental Management zones;
b) be required for:
i. the provision of a construction site for buildings and structures;
ii. facilitation of vehicular access;
iii. the intensification of development; and
iv. to assist with the management of concentrated stormwater runoff
c) stormwater flow as a result of the modification to existing and natural ground surfaces will primarily be drained and captured for reuse on-site;
d) there are no existing buildings on adjacent land that will be destabilised by the proposed cut and fill. Further, the earthworks will be located sufficient distances from potential building areas on adjacent land when taking into account setback requirements and other requirements of the Scheme, which will minimise specific construction requirements of potential buildings, if any;
e) the proposed cut is not considered to be of a depth that will encounter ground water;
f) soil and water management plans will be implemented during the construction and remediation stages which will minimise erosion and release of sediments, therefore safeguarding any receiving waters;
g) the proposed cut and fill will be sufficient distances from adjacent land so as not to result in an area of influence within the boundary of adjacent land; and
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 45 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
h) not encroach upon or expose, disturb, or reduce cover over an underground utility. The application complies with the acceptable solution.
5.5 Local Heritage Code
The Local Heritage Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development pursuant to clause E5.2.1 of the Scheme.
5.6 Hazard Management Code
The Hazard Management Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development pursuant to clause E6.2.1 of the Scheme on the basis that the land is not exposed to a risk from: a) coastal inundation as shown on the Coastal Inundation Map;
b) coastal erosion and recession as shown on the Coastal Erosion and Recession Map;
c) potential contamination as a result of a previous use from an activity listed in Table E6.1;
d) flooding from a watercourse, wetland or stormwater disposal system; and
e) landslide as shown on the Landslide Hazard Map.
5.7 Sign Code
The Sign Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development on the basis that no signage is proposed.
5.8 Telecommunication Code
The Telecommunication Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development on the basis that no telecommunications facilities are proposed.
5.9 Traffic Generating Use and Parking Code
E9.5.1 Provision for parking Objective:
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 46 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Provision is to be made for convenient, accessible, and usable vehicle parking to satisfy requirements for use or development without impact for use or development of other land or for the safety and operation of any road. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 Provision for parking must be – a) It must be unnecessary or unreasonable to require arrangements for the provision a) The minimum number of on-site vehicle of vehicle parking; or parking spaces must be in accordance
with the applicable standard for the use b) Adequate and appropriate provision must class as shown in the Table to this Code. be made for vehicle parking to meet –
i. anticipated requirement for the type, scale, and intensity of the use;
ii. likely needs and requirements of site users;
iii. likely type, number, frequency, and duration of vehicle parking demand.
Response It has been determined that the minimum number of car parking spaces required for the proposed use and development will not be provided on-site. For an outdoor sports ground under the ‘Sports and recreation’ use class alone, Table E9.1 requires car parking spaces to be provided at a rate of 8 spaces per 100m2 of gross site area. Theoretically, this rate requires the golf course to provide 97,600 on-site car parking spaces. This number is plainly excessive and unreasonable for the proposed use and development. Notwithstanding, assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is required.
Performance Criteria Assessment Adequate and appropriate vehicle parking will be made to service the proposed use and development having regard to the following: i. a total of 120 car parking spaces are provided within the proposed car parking area to be located approximately 100m to the south of the clubhouse site. This parking area will provide adequate and appropriate vehicle parking for the short to long term users of the site.
An additional 61 car parking spaces are located adjacent to the clubhouse on the southern side which will provide adequate and appropriate vehicle parking for single day use of the clubhouse and golf course. The main car parking area to the south of the clubhouse will provide overflow spaces should these be required.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 47 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Further parking spaces will be provided at the entrance to each villa and at the staff accommodation and maintenance facility which will ensure private vehicle parking is sufficiently catered for;
ii. the proposed number of car parking spaces and arrangement of car parking areas will be appropriate to meet the needs and requirements of site users who will visit the site in a mixture of private and grouped vehicles. Demand for car parking will be reduced when group travel occurs;
iii. private vehicles are likely to be parked outside individual villas, within the staff accommodation and maintenance facility and the main car parking area. Vehicles are expected to remain in the one location whilst on-site with movement and transport throughout the site to occur predominately by golf carts or walking (where facilities are in reasonable distance). Each component of the proposed use and development has been designed to cater for golf cart usage and storage.
Off-site car parking will not be relied upon.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
E9.5.2 Provision for loading and unloading of vehicles Objective: Provision is made for conveniently located and accessible areas for the loading and unloading of goods and materials and for the pick-up and set-down of passengers from vehicles. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1 P1 There must be provision within a site for – a) It must be unnecessary or unreasonable to require arrangements for loading and a) on-site loading area in accordance with unloading of vehicles; or the requirement of the Table to this Code;
and b) Adequate and appropriate provision must
be made for the loading and unloading of b) passenger vehicle pick-up and set-down vehicles to meet – facilities for business, commercial,
educational and retail use at the rate of 1 i. likely volume, type and frequency space for every 50 parking spaces. of vehicles associated with the delivery and collection of goods and passengers; and
ii. likely frequency and duration of requirements for delivery and collection of goods or people.
Response There will be provision within the site for a small rigid truck to load and/or unload in accordance with the minimum loading area requirements for individual use classes as
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 48 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
prescribed by Table E9.1. Loading and unloading will likely occur within the vehicle circulation area adjacent to the clubhouse on the southern side. Further, the use does not involve business, commercial, educational or retail components.
The application complies with the acceptable solution.
E9.6.1 Design of vehicle parking and loading areas Objective: Vehicle circulation, loading, and parking areas– a) protect the efficient operation and safety of the road from which access is provided;
b) promote efficiency, convenience, safety, and security for vehicles and users; and
c) provide an appropriate layout and adequate dimension to accommodate passenger or freight vehicle associated with use of the site. Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A1.1 P1 All development must provide for the collection, The layout and construction of a vehicle parking drainage and disposal of stormwater; and area, loading area, circulation aisle, and manoeuvring area must be adequate and
appropriate for – A1.2 a) the nature and intensity of the use; Other than for development for a single dwelling in the General Residential, Low Density b) effect of size, slope and other physical Residential, Urban Mixed Use and Village zones, characteristics and conditions of the site; the layout of vehicle parking area, loading area, circulation aisle and manoeuvring area must – c) likely volume, type, and frequency of vehicles accessing the site; a) Be in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1
(2004) – Parking Facilities - Off Street Car Parking; d) likely demand and turnover for parking;
b) Be in accordance with AS/NZS2890.2 e) delivery and collection vehicles; (2002) Parking Facilities - Off Street Commercial Vehicles; f) familiarity of users with the vehicle loading and vehicle parking area; c) Be in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.3 1993) Parking Facilities – Bicycle Parking g) convenience and safety of access to the Facilities; site from a road;
d) Be in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.6 h) safety and convenience of internal vehicle Parking Facilities - Off Street Parking for and pedestrian movement; People with Disabilities; i) safety and security of site users; and e) Each parking space must be separately accessed from the internal circulation j) the collection, drainage, and disposal of aisle within the site; stormwater.
f) Provide for the forward movement and passing of all vehicles within the site other than if entering or leaving a loading or parking space; and
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 49 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
g) Be formed and constructed with compacted sub-base and an all-weather surface.
Response The proposed access roads and car parking areas will be adequately designed to allow for the collection, drainage and disposal of stormwater.
The layout of proposed vehicle parking areas, loading areas, circulation aisles and manoeuvring areas are capable of being designed to meet subparagraphs A1.2 (a) to (f). However, it is not proposed to construct the road with an all-weather surface.
Assessment against the corresponding performance criteria is therefore required.
Performance Criteria Assessment The layout and construction of a vehicle parking area, loading area, circulation aisle, and manoeuvring area must be adequate and appropriate for the proposed use and development having regard to the following: a) the compacted gravel road and car parking areas will be appropriate for the nature and intensity of the proposed use and development as evidenced by the use of the existing access road and parking areas which are of compacted gravel;
b) new access roads have been located, and will be designed, taking into account the topography and other physical characteristics of the site to ensure they are functional, efficient and safe for all users;
c) existing roads and proposed new roads will be upgraded and designed to cater for the expected volume, vehicle types and frequency that will be generated by the proposed use and development;
d) there will be sufficient car parking spaces made available on-site to supply anticipated car parking demand and turnover;
e) appropriate provision for delivery and collection vehicles will be made in proximity to the clubhouse and maintenance facility for loading and unloading of goods and materials;
f) access roads will be provided with roadside guide and marker posts to assist navigating users throughout the site. The villas, clubhouse and other key facilities will be lit with soft lighting which will further aid navigation and orientation during night time;
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 50 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
g) the existing access from Cape Wickham Road will be retained;
h) internal access roads will be designed and marked to ensure safety of all users;
i) car parking spaces will be located in proximity or adjacent to key buildings on the site which will enhance the safety and security of parking areas;
j) all roads and car parking areas will be designed to collect, drain and dispose of stormwater.
The application complies with the performance criteria.
Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria A2 P1 Design and construction of an access strip and Design of internal access roads and vehicle vehicle circulation, movement and standing areas circulation, movement and standing areas for for use or development on land within the Rural permitted use on land within the Rural Living, Living, Environmental Living, Open Space, Rural Environmental Living, Open Space, Rural Resource, or Environmental Management zones Resource, or Environmental Management zones must be in accordance with the principles and must be adequate and appropriate for the likely requirements for in the current edition of Unsealed type, volume, and frequency of traffic. Roads Manual – Guideline for Good Practice
ARRB.
Response The proposed new accesses and car parking areas are capable of being designed in accordance with the principles and requirements for in the current edition of Unsealed Roads Manual – Guideline for Good Practice ARRB.
The application complies with the acceptable solution.
5.10 Water and Waterways Code
The Water and Waterways Code is not applicable to the proposed use and development pursuant to clause E10.2.1 of the Scheme.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 51 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
6.0 Conclusion
The proposed development involves the construction of a new clubhouse, villas and associated facilities at Cape Wickham Golf Links located at Cape Wickham Road, Wickham.
The proposed use and development complies with the applicable Scheme standards in the Rural Resource zone and relevant code provisions, including the following performance criteria:
26.3.1 Requirement for discretionary non-residential use to locate on rural resource land – Performance Criteria P1;
26.3.2 Required Residential Use – Performance Criteria P1;
26.4.1 Suitability of a lot on a plan of subdivision for use or development – Performance Criteria P1, P3 and P4;
26.4.2 Location and configuration of development – Performance Criteria P1 and P2;
26.4.3 Location of development for sensitive uses – Performance Criteria P1;
E9.5.1 Provision for parking – Performance Criteria P1; and
E9.6.1 Design of vehicle parking and loading areas – Performance Criteria P1.
It is therefore submitted that a discretionary permit can be issued for the use and proposed development in accordance with Sections 51 and 57 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development 52 Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Appendix A Certificate of Title
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham RESULT OF SEARCH RECORDER OF TITLES Issued Pursuant to the Land Titles Act 1980 SEARCH OF TORRENS TITLE
VOLUME FOLIO 169267 1
EDITION DATE OF ISSUE 3 22-Aug-2017 SEARCH DATE : 11-Sep-2018 SEARCH TIME : 02.47 PM
DESCRIPTION OF LAND
Parish of WICKHAM Land District of KING ISLAND Lot 1 on Plan 169267 Derivation : Part of Lot 18485, 92A-3R-0P & Part of Lot 18589, 106A-1R-35P Gtd. to Arthur Bowling and Part of 859A-2R-3. 4/10Ps. originally vested in the Closer Settlement Board and duly acquired as appears by Notification No. A616197 Prior CTs 166674/1 and 10469/1
SCHEDULE 1
M632069 TRANSFER to KOLMAKOVA EKATERINA Registered 22-Aug-2017 at noon
SCHEDULE 2
M490442 Land is limited in depth to 15 metres, excludes minerals and is subject to reservations relating to drains sewers and waterways in favour of the Crown M490442 FENCING PROVISION in Transfer D106359 ADHESION ORDER under Section 110 of the Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1993 Registered 22-Apr-2015 at noon
UNREGISTERED DEALINGS AND NOTATIONS
No unregistered dealings or other notations
Page 1 of 1 Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment www.thelist.tas.gov.au FOLIO PLAN RECORDER OF TITLES Issued Pursuant to the Land Titles Act 1980
Search Date: 11 Sep 2018 Search Time: 02:47 PM Volume Number: 169267 Revision Number: 01 Page 1 of 1 Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment www.thelist.tas.gov.au
Planning Submission
Appendix B Flora and Fauna Assessment + Environmental Management Plan
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd ______
Flora and fauna assessment of the private land area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development, King Island, Tasmania
Prepared for
Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd
by Barry Baker & Sheryl Hamilton
August 2012 Executive Summary
Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd have proposed a golf course development on the northwest coast of King Island immediately south of the historic Cape Wickham Lighthouse. A Development Application has been approved by the King Island Council (in October 2011) based on a Master Plan that included an 18 hole golf course and associated buildings fully contained within the privately owned property. Subsequent to this approval, Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd purchased a second block to the immediate south. To improve the quality and the international ‘ranking’ of the golf course, and based on the purchase of the second block of land, Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd has adjusted the proposed golf course design. For the application process of the new proposed Cape Wickham golf course development, Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd were tasked with completing a flora and fauna assessment of the private property and assessing the number of short-tailed shearwater (Pufffinus tenuirostris) burrows which would be displaced on the private property by the current proposed golf course design.
This report presents the findings of a flora and fauna assessment to: document whether any species listed on the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act ) or on Tasmania’s Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSP Act) are likely to occur on the private land at or near the proposed development site; assess the flora and fauna values of the private land; and provide a list of flora and fauna species, particularly species protected by legislation, which may occur or are known to occur within a 5 km radius of the private land.
As part of this assessment, a survey of the short-tailed shearwater colonies was undertaken which aimed to:
- estimate the size and location of shearwater colonies in and around the private land area of the proposed development site;
- assess the number of shearwater burrows on the private land which would be displaced by the proposed golf course development.
The above desktop and site visit assessment revealed that it is unlikely that any of the Commonwealth or State listed flora species occur on the private land area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site. However, four listed fauna species may or do forage, live and/or breed on the private property area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development.
1
A small dam on the southern private property block may contain potential habitat for the green and golden frog (Litoria raniformis) and the striped marsh frog (Limnodynaste peroni). However, larger bodies of water (e.g. Lake Flannigan) providing more suitable habitat occur approximately 2 km from the proposed development site.
It is estimated that ~45,700 short-tailed shearwater (Puffinus tenuirostris) burrows occur in the Cape Farewell and surrounding area. It is estimated that approximately 4,100 shearwater burrows located on the private property areas would be lost due to the proposed golf course development. This equates to the displacement of an estimated 2,130-2,830 breeding pairs of shearwaters. The loss of 4,100 burrows on the private property is approximately 15% of the burrows located on the private land and approximately 9% of the total number of ~45,700 burrows in the Cape Farewell and surrounding area. The loss of 4,100 burrows on the private property area is estimated to range from 0.04% - 0.07% of the total number of burrows in Tasmania.
It is also considered that the orange-bellied parrot (Neophema chrysogaster) would occur at the proposed development site on occasion and that the site contains food plants for this species.
2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...... 1 1. Introduction ...... 4 2. Methods ...... 6 3. Results and Discussion ...... 10 4. Summary ...... 20 References ...... 21 APPENDIX 1: Flora species known to occur or potentially occurring in or near the private property area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site...... 23 APPENDIX 2: Fauna species known to occur or potentially occurring in or near the private property area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site...... 28
List of Figures
Figure 1: Proposed new layout of the Cape Wickham golf course development showing, in black outline, the tees, walkways, landing areas and greens of the proposed golf holes (figure supplied by Richard Chamberlain 15 August 2012). The purple outline delineates the private property boundaries. The colour areas indicate the short-tailed shearwater colony areas with red = high density (≥0.2 burrows/m2), brown = medium density (≥0.1 and <0.2 burrows/m2) and yellow = low density (<0.1 burrows/m2)...... 5 Figure 2: King Island distribution (black dots) of the leafy greenhood (Pterostylis cucullata) overlain on the Yellow Rock land system (figure from DPIPWE 2010)...... 11
List of Tables
Table 1: The estimated number of short-tailed shearwater burrows within the private property area that would be displaced by golf holes for the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development...... 20 Table 1-1: Flora species recorded as occurring or habitat that may occur for the area within a 5 km radius of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site...... 23 Table 2-1: Bird species recorded as occurring or habitat that may occur at or within 5 km of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site. Species in bold were recorded at or near the site on the 3, 4 or 5 July 2012...... 28 Table 2-2. Other fauna species recorded as occurring or habitat that may occur for the area within a 5 km radius of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site...... 32
3
1. Introduction
Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd (hereafter referred to as "Lighthouse Properties") has purchased two parcels of land, one lot of 86 ha and one lot of 72 ha, on the northwest coast of King Island. The properties are immediately south of the historic Cape Wickham Lighthouse, King Island and abut Cape Farewell and Victoria Cove. Lighthouse Properties has obtained development approval from the King Island Council (approved October 2011) for an 18 hole golf course, practice facilities, clubhouse/starters pavilion, eco-lodge, accommodation, manager’s residence, maintenance facility and a car park on the first property immediately south of the historic Cape Wickham Lighthouse (described as C/T 241059/1, Cape Wickham Road (PID 2921284)).
The initial development application approval from King Island Council only considered the first block of privately owned land (PID 2921284). However, subsequent to this approval, Lighthouse Properties purchased a second block to the immediate south (PID 6497265). To improve the quality and the international ‘ranking’ of the golf course, and based on the purchase of the second block of land, Lighthouse Properties has now adjusted the layout of golf holes. Figure 1 shows the new proposed golf course layout (hereafter referred to as "proposed development site").
The purpose of this assessment is to identify flora and fauna species that may occur on the private land at or near the proposed development site, with a focus on identifying species that may be of conservation significance and which may affect future development and/or use of the site. This report, prepared by Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd., presents the findings of the flora and fauna assessment, based on a desktop review and site visit, which aimed to:
document whether any species listed on the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act ) or on Tasmania’s Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSP Act) are likely to occur on the private land at or near the proposed development site; assess the flora and fauna values of the private land; and provide a list of flora and fauna species, particularly species protected by legislation, which may occur or are known to occur within a 5 km radius of the private land at or near the proposed development site.
As part of this assessment, a survey of the short-tailed shearwater (Pufffinus tenuirostris) colonies was undertaken which aimed to:
4
- estimate the size and location of shearwater colonies in and around the private land area of the proposed development site; and
- assess the number of shearwater burrows on the private land which would be displaced by the current design of the proposed golf course development.
Figure 1: Proposed new layout of the Cape Wickham golf course development showing, in black outline, the tees, walkways, landing areas and greens of the proposed golf holes (figure supplied by Richard Chamberlain 15 August 2012). The purple outline delineates the private property boundaries. The colour areas indicate the short-tailed shearwater colony areas with red = high density (≥0.2 burrows/m2), brown = medium density (≥0.1 and <0.2 burrows/m2) and yellow = low density (<0.1 burrows/m2).
5
2. Methods
Desktop assessment There was an overall paucity of general and scientific information for the area of the proposed development site, particularly records for the distribution and abundance of flora and fauna. Consequently, the desktop assessment entailed searches of flora and fauna species potentially using the private land area by accessing the following databases and online tools for the area:
using the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) Protected Matters Search Tool (hereafter referred to as PMST) (DSEWPaC 2010), a search of the species or species habitats that are known to occur, likely to occur or may occur on the private land area of the proposed development site with both a 1 km and a 5 km buffer. This search tool determines whether matters of national environmental significance or other matters protected by the EPBC Act are likely to occur in the area of interest but the information is indicative only and local knowledge and information should be sought where possible (DSEWPaC 2010);
using Tasmania’s Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSP Act) Natural Values Atlas (hereafter referred to as NVA) (DPIPWE 2011), a search of the species or species habitat that are known to occur or have the potential to occur on the private land area of the proposed development site with a 500 m and a 5 km buffer. The NVA is Tasmania's comprehensive database for flora and fauna information including threatened species and contains information and locations on more than 20,000 species from Tasmania (DPIPWE 2011);
The Atlas of Australian Birds database (BirdLife Australia 2012) (hereafter referred to as the Atlas), which has been developed and maintained by BirdLife Australia, a non government organisation dedicated to the conservation of Australian birds. The Atlas is one of the largest continent-wide, wildlife databases in the world. It contains more than seven million records from over 400,000 surveys, and is continuously updated with additional survey sheets accumulating at the rate of 700–1000 per week (Barrett et al. 2003; Dunn and Weston 2008). The Atlas data have been collected in a standardised manner for some years through a well-established network of volunteers. A search of these data (BirdLife Australia 2012) was undertaken based on a 5 km radius circle centred on Cape Wickham Lighthouse which encompasses the private land area of the proposed development site.
6
Threatened species categories A flora or fauna species is described as threatened if it is at risk of becoming extinct through a range of factors that may be natural or human induced. Species may be listed under the Commonwealth EPBC Act and/or the Tasmanian TSP Act. The EPBC Act categorises species into: i. Extinct; ii. Extinct in the wild: species that can no longer be found in the wild, but still exist in captivity; iii. Critically Endangered: species in extreme danger of becoming extinct in the immediate future; iv. Endangered: species in danger of extinction, while the factors causing them to be endangered continue operating; v. Vulnerable: species which are at risk of becoming endangered; vi. Conservation Dependent: species whose survival is dependent on conservation activities.
In addition species can be listed as ‘migratory’ species (listed under one or more of the following international migratory agreements: the Japan – Australia Migratory Birds Agreement (JAMBA), the China – Australia Migratory Birds Agreement (CAMBA), the Republic of Korea – Australia Migratory Birds Agreement (ROKAMBA), or the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS)) or as ‘marine” species.
Species in the Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable categories are considered ‘threatened species’.
The TSP Act categorises threatened species into: i. Endangered: species is in danger of extinction because long-term survival is unlikely while factors causing it to be endangered continue operating. Within this category a species may be presumed extinct if it has not been recorded in the wild within the past 50 years; ii. Vulnerable: species likely to become endangered while factors causing it to be vulnerable continue operating; iii. Rare: species that have a small population or distribution within Tasmania that is not endangered or vulnerable but is at risk.
Limitations of desktop assessment There are limitations when species lists are derived from database searches such as those described above. In particular, searches may:
7
- include species that have been recorded in the specified buffer zone (e.g. a 5 km radius) on only one or two occasions; - include species that are vagrant and have been recorded at the site but are not normally residents i.e. vagrants can be recorded almost anywhere; - include species that are now locally extinct but still appear because these databases are historic records; - include species that have specific habitat requirements that may be present in the surrounding region but not on the actual site; - include species that have complex life histories or are not well understood, so that deciding whether they frequent the site or are vagrants is difficult; - result in database lists that are underwritten by observations from spatially or temporally limited surveys such that unsubstantiated observations can appear as fact; and/or, - result in an amalgamation of long-term observations so that an area can appear to have a more diverse fauna than is actually present from year to year.
As a consequence of the above limitations, some species included in the lists produced from database searches may not be present on the site. However, in the absence of data obtained from systematic surveys of species at the site, database searches are an invaluable tool for producing species lists for a particular location. From the desktop search lists, any marine-based bird species (e.g. albatrosses, petrels) that would not forage on the shoreline and/or are rarely seen over land were not considered further. This does not include any seabird species that are known to breed on King Island (e.g. short-tailed shearwater). Any marine algae or marine plant were also not considered further.
On-site flora and fauna surveys and assessment of short-tailed shearwater colonies No systematic on-ground surveys across the entire site were undertaken which could validate the database records. An initial flora and fauna survey of the first block of land (PID 2921284) and adjoining coastal reserve was undertaken on 1 September 2011 by Carmen Holloway, Graeme Batey and Margaret Batey (Holloway 2011). The flora and fauna recorded during this survey (Holloway 2011) are included in the tables of this report (Appendices 1 and 2).
An on-ground assessment of the proposed development site including the private land area was carried out by Barry Baker and Sheryl Hamilton of Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd on 23 and 24 February and 3, 4 and 5 July 2012.
On 23 and 24 February 2012, the boundary of the short-tailed shearwater colony at Cape Farewell was marked using GPS waypoints and burrow density was estimated by counting
8
burrow entrances on straight line transects 2 m wide and usually 50 m long (Baker and Hamilton (2012).
In July 2012, the private property areas of the proposed development site were traversed on foot during which the habitat was assessed and flora and fauna species were opportunistically identified. The general area of the proposed development site, including a buffer area, was divided into 100m x 100m grid squares marked by GPS waypoints. Each grid square was surveyed for shearwater burrows. From the central waypoint, shearwater burrows were counted in four 25m x 2m wide transects on north, south, east and west bearings. The average burrow density was calculated for each 100m x 100m grid square (i.e. total number of burrows in four transects/200m2 of transects).
Based on the burrow densities at each 100m x 100m grid waypoint and notes taken during each grid-line traverse of the area as well as the shearwater colony transect data from February 2012 (Baker and Hamilton 2012), a map of the shearwater colonies was produced (see Figure 1). Using this data, the shearwater colony areas were split into high (≥0.2 burrows/m2), medium (≥0.1 and <0.2 burrows/m2), or low density (<0.1 burrows/m2) burrow areas. Richard Chamberlain and Lighthouse Properties overlaid the proposed golf holes onto the shearwater colony layout. On the private land, the area that each proposed golf hole overlapped the shearwater colony and the estimated number of burrows that would be displaced by each proposed golf hole was calculated.
For each colony, only a proportion of the total number of burrows would contain a short-tailed shearwater nest each season. However, some other burrows would be utilised at times throughout the breeding season by young and/or un-paired birds or breeding birds that, for various reasons, failed to nest that season. The proportion of 'occupied' burrows' (i.e. those containing a nest - also known as the 'burrow occupancy rate') varies from colony to colony and from season to season. There are no current data available on 'burrow occupancy rates' for the Cape Farewell/Cape Wickham area. The Resource Management and Conservation Division, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (RMC, DPIPWE) monitor seven short-tailed shearwater colonies in western Bass Strait. Using the range of burrow occupancy rates of 52-69% (occupied burrows during the egg incubation period; RMC, DPIPWE unpubl. data), the number of breeding pairs displaced by each golf hole was calculated.
9
3. Results and Discussion
3.1 General Flora and Fauna assessment
FLORA The low physical variation and geographic isolation of King Island has led to vegetation that has relatively low diversity (DPIPWE 2010). About 470 native vascular plant species have been recorded on King Island including 50 flora species that are currently listed as threatened under State and/or Commonwealth legislation (DPIPWE 2010).
As no systematic on-ground flora surveys were undertaken by Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd for the private land area of the proposed development site, flora lists obtained using the NVA and PMST for the area up to 5 km from the private land are presented in Appendix 1, Table 1.1. In addition, the species recorded by Holloway (2011) and her colleagues on 1 September 2011 are also included in Appendix 1, Table 1.1. These sources represent the available records on the flora of the area but records are very limited. The NVA identified that four species listed as Rare on the TSP Act occurred within 500 m of the proposed development site (Appendix 1, Table 1.1): coast houndstongue, earth cress, lance beardheath and shining dogwood. All four records were of single sites near Wickham Hill and would not be affected by the proposed development. Holloway (2011) also recorded one shining dogwood plant at 54H 0753070 UTM 5613467 which is not within the proposed development site.
Three EPBC-listed species (the scrambling ground-fern, the leafy greenhood and the grassland greenhood) were identified by the PMST as species that may occur or are likely to occur on or within 1 km of the proposed development site (Appendix 1, Table 1.1).
Scrambling ground-fern: On King Island, the scrambling ground-fern has been recorded from two locations: the Nook Swamps site in the northeast where the plant occurs in Melaleuca squarrosa–Leptospermum scoparium–Acacia melanoxylon scrubland bordering Melaleuca ericifolia swamp forest, and the Deep Lagoons site in the southwest where it occurs in disturbance-induced Baloskion tetraphyllum sedgeland within a dune-barred swamp (DPIPWE 2010). The private land areas of the proposed development site do not contain substantial habitat (as described above) for this species. Specific actions recommended for the recovery of the two known populations of scrambling ground-fern on King Island included extension surveys of suitable habitat and on-ground protective measures and monitoring (DPIPWE 2010).
Leafy greenhood: Five subpopulations of the leafy greenhood have been found on King Island and are the most extensive known in Tasmania (Figure 2). These are probably the vestiges of a
10
meta-population stretching from Cape Wickham in the north to Yellow Rock River in the south although much of this area is yet to be surveyed (DPIPWE 2010). On King Island, the species grows on near-coastal calcareous dunes and sand-sheets associated with the 16,800 ha Yellow Rock land system, generally within or close to the margins of mature closed scrub dominated by coast teatree (Leptospermum laevigatum) (DPIPWE 2010). Potential habitat for the leafy greenhood is identified as stands of coast teatree within the Yellow Rock land system between Cape Wickham and the Yellow Rock River (DPIPWE 2010). The species is best identified during its peak flowering period, October to November (DPIPWE 2010). The leafy greenhood was not recorded in or near the private land area of the proposed development site during a flora survey carried out on 1 September 2011 (Holloway 2011) and there are no areas of suitable habitat within the private land area of the proposed development site.
Figure 2: King Island distribution (black dots) of the leafy greenhood (Pterostylis cucullata) overlain on the Yellow Rock land system (figure from DPIPWE 2010). . Grassland greenhood: The grassland greenhood is not recorded in the flora species list for King Island in the King Island Biodiversity Management Plan (DPIPWE 2010). In addition, the Tasmanian Threatened Flora Listing Statement for the grassland greenhood contains no records for King Island (DPIW 2009). This species is endemic to Tasmania, growing in scattered colonies in near-coastal areas and in grassy habitat in the Midlands. It can only be identified during its flowering season from September to December. Due to the lack of King Island records for this species, it is unlikely to occur in or near the private land area of the proposed development site.
King Island has 28 broadly defined native vegetation communities (mapped at the State level as TASVEG mapping units). One of the six vegetation communities on King Island that are listed as
11
threatened on the Tasmanian Nature Conservation Act 2002 (DPIPWE 2010) is identified as occurring at or within 1 km of the proposed development site (NVA, DPIPWE 2011). This is the ‘coastal complex on King Island’ (SCK). However, another of the six threatened communities on King Island, the 'seabird rookery complex' (SRC), was not identified by the NVA as occurring at or near the proposed development site even though there is an extensive short-tailed shearwater colony within and around the proposed development site.
The private property at the proposed development site is open and has been grazed for many years with cattle damage extending into the coastal reserve and right to the rocky shoreline. The vegetation is dominated by pasture grasses. The introduced African boxthorn (listed on the Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999) occurs on the property. Sea spurge, an invasive environmental weed, is prolific along the coast and is beginning to invade the private land area.
FAUNA Fauna lists were obtained using the NVA and PMST as well as the King Island Biodiversity Management Plan (DPIPWE 2010) (Appendix 2, Tables 2.1 and 2.2). The species recorded by Holloway (2011) on 1 September 2011 are also included. These sources represent the majority of the available, but very limited, records on the fauna of the proposed development site.
Birds There are 164 species of birds recorded for King Island. In addition to the NVA, the PMST, the King Island Biodiversity Management Plan (DPIPWE 2010) and Holloway (2011), a bird list for the Cape Wickham area was obtained from the Atlas of Australian Birds (BirdLife Australia 2012). The NVA and/or PMST searches included the following three species, which have been discounted due to the reasons explained below: the Tasmanian azure kingfisher (Ceyx azureus diemenensis), listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act and TSP Act. There have been rare, vagrant sightings of this species on King Island but there is no suitable habitat at the proposed development site and, therefore, no further consideration has been given to this species; the Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle (Aquila audas fleayi), listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act and the TSP Act. There have been rare, vagrant sightings of this species on King Island and, therefore, no further consideration has been given to this species; and the grey goshawk (Accipiter novaehollandiae), listed as Endangered under the TSP Act (the species was recently assessed by Garnett et al. (2011) as ‘Least Concern’), was recorded on King Island by the Field Naturalists Club of Victoria in
12
1887. Two birds which were killing young turkeys were shot in 1912 and there have been no further reports of this bird on the island (Donaghey 2003). Therefore, no further consideration has been given to this species.
Based on the results of the database searches, a total of 66 species of birds (native and introduced) that may potentially occur on or within 5 km of the private property area of the proposed development site have been identified (Appendix 2, Table 2.1). This includes 44 species obtained from the BirdLife Australia Atlas database, an additional 29 species obtained from the PMST and/or NVA and a further three species recorded by Holloway (2011) (Appendix 2, Table 2.1). To highlight the limitations of the on-line datasets, one species recorded by Holloway (2011) that was not recorded in the NVA, PMST or Atlas lists for the area was the short-tailed shearwater, despite the large breeding colony of this species that occurs within the proposed development site.
Each of the State or Commonwealth listed species identified by the above processes is discussed below. It is unlikely that any of these species would occur on the private property area of the proposed development site due to the absence of suitable habitat, which was confirmed by the site inspection.
Australasian bittern: Listed as Endangered on the EPBC Act. No suitable habitat was identified at the proposed development site for this species. Suitable habitat may occur in the large permanent water bodies approximately 2 km from the proposed development site. This species is unlikely to be threatened by the proposed development.
White-bellied sea-eagle: Listed as Vulnerable on the TSP Act and Migratory and Marine on the EPBC Act. There are seven or eight breeding pairs and thirteen known nest sites on King Island with no known nests sites in the northern area of the island (Donaghey 2003). It is considered that this species may irregularly visit the coast line near the proposed development site but there is no suitable breeding habitat on site. Based on the NVA search and our field visits, there were no raptor nests recorded within 5 km of the proposed development site. This species is unlikely to be threatened by the proposed development.
Eastern curlew: Listed as Endangered on the TSP Act and Migratory and Marine on the EPBC Act. The NVA identified one record from the 1960s and one record from the 1980s of this species within 5 km of the proposed development site. It is considered to be an irregular migrant to King Island. There are no records of this species within 500 m of the proposed development
13
site and no recent sightings of this species in the area. This species is unlikely to be threatened by the proposed development.
Fairy tern: Listed as Vulnerable on the EPBC Act and the TSP Act. Approximately 180 pairs of the fairy tern are believed to nest in Tasmania and about two-thirds of them breed on King Island, making King Island the most important breeding site for this species in Tasmania (Woehler 2009). Known nesting sites for fairy tern on King Island include Yellow Rock Beach, Christmas Island, Lavinia Point, and the coast between Sea Elephant River and Cowper Point. The NVA identified one record from the 1980s of this species occurring within 5 km of the proposed development site. This species is unlikely to be threatened by the proposed development.
King Island green rosella: This subspecies, endemic to King Island, is listed as Vulnerable on the TSP Act. Its habitat includes dry and wet eucalypt forests, King Island scrub, shelterbelts and homestead gardens (Donaghey 2003). It nests in tree-hollow, disused buildings and the concealed forks of tree trunks (Donaghey 2003). It may depend on the vegetation community ‘Coastal complex on King Island’ for nesting. No suitable habitat was identified within the proposed development site for this species.
Orange-bellied parrot: Listed as Critically Endangered, Migratory and Marine on the EPBC Act and Endangered on the TSP Act. The NVA identified one record from 1995 of this species occurring within 500 m of the proposed development site although this sighting was across the northeast boundary of the private property block of land (PID 2921284). The NVA identified another five sightings between 1988 and 2008 within 5 km of the site. However, the lack of NVA records for the orange-bellied parrot does not mean that the species is absent from the area as the NVA has limited information on mobile species and on sites that are not regularly visited (M. Holdsworth pers. comm.).
The orange-bellied parrot breeds in southwestern Tasmania during the summer and migrates to the coasts of Victoria and South Australia for the winter (DPIPWE 2010). On the northward migration, the first birds arrive at King Island in mid-March and have usually left by June (DPIPWE 2010). On the southward migration, the first birds leave the Australian mainland for Tasmania in September with the last birds departed by mid-November (DPIPWE 2010). On their migratory passage, the species occurs in dunes, heathland, coastal grasslands, salt marshes and pasture. Birds roost in dense clumps of swamp paperbark (Melaleuca ericifolia) and coastal wattle (Acacia longifolia susp. sophorae) at the edges of estuaries. On King Island, the orange- bellied occurs in estuarine salt marsh surround by dense swamp paperbark scrub, in pasture
14
and in other grassy areas and sometimes on beaches (Bryant and Jackson 1999, DPIPWE 2010). Two thirds of the orange-bellied parrot foraging habitat on King Island is considered ephemeral with the largest patch of non-permanent foraging habitat on the island at Lake Flannigan (DPIPWE 2010) which is approximately 2 km from the proposed development site.
The majority of the orange-bellied parrot population is likely to move through the Cape Wickham area on both the northern and southern migration (M. Holdsworth pers. comm.). The Cape Wickham area has food plants that orange-bellied parrots utilise, particularly around shearwater colonies (M. Holdsworth pers. comm.). On King Island, both foraging and roosting habitat is critical for the survival of the orange-bellied parrot. There was no evidence, based on the site visit, to indicate that the private property within or near the proposed development site contains important roosting habitat for this species. However, it is considered that the orange-bellied parrot would occur at the proposed development site on occasion and that the site contains food plants for this species.
Swift parrot: Listed as Endangered, Migratory and Marine on the EPBC Act and Endangered on the TSP Act. The NVA identified one record from the 1980s of this species occurring within 5 km of the proposed development site. The swift parrot breeds in Tasmania in the summer and migrates to the Australian mainland for the winter. It has been recorded on passage on King Island and occasionally on Flinders Island (Higgins 1999). The swift parrot inhabits dry sclerophyll eucalypt forests and woodlands. It is mostly an arboreal forager that feeds mainly on nectar from eucalypts, but also psyllid insects and lerps, seeds and fruit (Higgins 1999). There was no evidence, based on the site visit, to indicate that the proposed development site contains important foraging or roosting habitat for this species.
King Island scrubtit: This subspecies, endemic to King Island, is listed as Critically Endangered on the EPBC Act and Endangered on the TSP Act. There was no evidence, based on the site visit, to indicate that the proposed development site contains important habitat for this species. The King Island scrubtit is only found in mature Melaleuca ericifolia (swamp paperbark) swamp forest (DPIPWE 2010). This species was recorded at Yellow Rock, the Nook Swamps, Pass River and Pegarah State Forest in the late 1960s and early 1970s although surveys in 2011 and 2003-2004 did not locate any birds at Yellow Rock (DPIPWE 2010). These known locations are all more than 10 km from the proposed development site. There was no evidence, based on the site visit, to indicate that the proposed development site contains important habitat for this species.
15
King Island brown thornbill: This subspecies, endemic to King Island, is listed as Endangered on the EPBC Act and the TSP Act. There was no evidence, based on the site visit, to indicate that the proposed development site contains important habitat for this species. There is a historic record of this species at Loorana. The brown thornbill is probably now extinct from King Island (B.Baker unpublished).
Mammals King Island has 12 of the 35 native mammal species present on mainland Tasmania (Appendix 2, Table 2.2). Of these 12, nine are likely to or may occur on the private property area of the proposed development site. None of these species are listed on either the EPBC Act or the TSP Act.
There are three feral species present on King Island that are likely to occur on the private property area of the proposed development site: the cat, the black rat, and the house mouse (Appendix 2, Table 2.2). These species threaten the survival of local populations of native animals via competition, predation and/or disease.
The private property areas of the proposed development site have historically been grazed by cattle and a few cattle were on site during the visit in July 2012.
Amphibians Six of the 11 Tasmanian frog species occur on King Island (Appendix 2, Table 2.2). Based on habitat mapping, some amphibian species were identified by the NVA as potentially having habitat within 500 m of the proposed development site (Appendix 2, Tables 2.2). The following two State and/or Commonwealth listed species may occur on the private property area of the proposed development site and any permanent dams on the private property may provide breeding habitat.
Green and golden frog: The NVA and PMST identified the green and golden frog, listed as Vulnerable under the EPBC and TSP Acts, as having potential habitat at or within 500 m of the proposed development site. This species is reported to have been common on King Island in the past (DPIPWE 2010). Based on surveys undertaken in 2009, populations were located in the far north and far south of King Island (Appendix 5, Figure 11 in DPIPWE 2010). The species lives in or near permanent or temporary freshwater waterbodies and requires a permanent waterbody to breed (DPIPWE 2010). The ideal breeding habitat includes shallow parts of lagoons or dams where there is underwater or emergent vegetation (DPIPWE 2010). A small dam on the southern private property block may contain potential habitat for this species but we did not
16
locate any animals during our field visits. Larger bodies of water (e.g. Lake Flannigan) providing more suitable habitat occur approximately 2 km from the proposed development site.
Striped marsh frog: The NVA identified the striped marsh frog, listed as Endangered on the TSP Act, as having potential habitat within 500 m of the proposed development site. This species likes areas of permanent water, often close to the coast (Donaghey 2003). It is common on King Island near the coast at Currie and from various sites near the west coast (Donaghey 2003). A small dam on the southern private property block may contain potential habitat for this species. Larger bodies of water (e.g. Lake Flannigan) providing more suitable habitat occur approximately 2 km from the proposed development site.
Invertebrates There is limited information on the invertebrate diversity on King Island. The southern hairy red snail (Austrochloritis victoriae) is the only invertebrate currently listed under the TSP Act (listed as Vulnerable) that is known to occur on King Island (DPIPWE 2010). This species is known only from the northeastern coast of King Island and is restricted to dense piles of twigs and rotting logs found in mature forest communities (DPIPWE 2010). This species was not identified as potentially occurring on proposed development site and no suitable habitat exists within this area.
Fish Six native freshwater fish species occur on King Island (Appendix 2, Table 2.2). A small dam on the southern private property block is unlikely to contain any potential habitat for fish species.
Australian grayling: The PMST and NVA identified the Australian grayling, listed as Vulnerable under the EPBC and TSP Acts as potentially having habitat within 5 km of the proposed development site. However, this freshwater fish species is considered extinct from King Island (DPIPWE 2010).
Reptiles King Island is home to three species of snake and six species of lizards (Appendix 2, Table 2.2). The Tasmanian tree skink is the only Tasmanian endemic species found on King Island (Donaghey 2003).
The NVA search identified the tussock skink (Pseudemoia pagenstecheri), listed as Vulnerable on TSP Act, as having potential habitat within 5 km of the proposed development site. However, this species is not recorded on the list of species in the King Island Biodiversity Action Plan
17
(DPIPWE 2010) or by Donaghey (2003) and so was not considered further. There were no other State or Commonwealth listed reptile species identified for King Island (Appendix 2, Table 3).
3.2 Survey and assessment of short-tailed shearwater colonies within the private property
Summary of breeding biology: The short-tailed shearwater is protected under the EPBC Act as a listed Migratory (JAMBA and ROKAMBA) and Marine species. It is a circum-Pacific migrant with adult birds arriving back at southern breeding colonies in late September and digging-out and maintaining burrows during October (Serventy and Curry 1984). Burrows can be well over 1 m in length before they end in a nesting chamber. Adult birds maintain long-term pair bonds and return to the same burrow each year to breed. Egg-laying (one egg per pair per year) occurs in late November and chicks hatch in January. The parent birds leave colonies in late March/early April to begin their northwards migration and fledglings depart colonies in late April although some remain until early May (Serventy and Curry 1984).Therefore, birds are absent from the breeding colonies from approximately mid-May until late September each year.
Breeding pairs of shearwaters show strong site fidelity with established pairs attempting to burrow and nest in the same location each year. Chicks also have high site fidelity. At Fisher Island, Tasmania, all known chicks that have returned to breed have established nests at their natal colony (Serventy 1967, Marchant and Higgins 1990).
It is thought that short-tailed shearwaters first began to breed on King Island around 1900 (Skira and Davies 1987) although it is unknown whether they existed there before human habitation or whether this was a new colonisation. It is likely that, historically, numbers were suppressed by, now extinct, feral pigs (Skira and Davies 1987). Skira and Davies (1987) recorded 24,650 burrows (range 21,900-27,350) at the Cape Farewell colony (39º35' S, 143º55' E) in an area of 5.31 ha (0.46 burrows/m2).
Shearwaters displaced by proposed golf course development on the private property: On the private property area of the proposed development site, based on the overlap of proposed golf holes on the shearwater colony areas (Figure 1), it was estimated that 0.4 ha (4,100m2) of high density colony, 1.3 ha (13,140m2) of medium density and 3.1 ha (31,230m2) of low density colony would be impacted by the proposed golf course development. From the transect data, using the average burrow density of 0.25/m2 for high, 0.14/m2 for medium and 0.04/m2 for low density areas, this equates to a total of ~4,100 burrows lost on the private property (Table 1). Using burrow occupancy rates of 52-69% (RMC, DPIPWE unpubl. data),
18
~2,130-2,830 occupied burrows, i.e. 4,260-5,660 breeding birds, would be displaced on the private property by the proposed development.
Based on the high, medium and low burrow densities of the short-tailed shearwater colony areas around Cape Farewell (Figure 1), it was estimated that ~18,600 burrows are located within the coastal reserve area and ~27,100 burrows within the private property (i.e. a total of ~45,700 burrows). The 4,100 shearwater burrows that would be lost on the private property due to the proposed development make up about 15% of the total number of burrows on the private land areas (~27,100) and 9% of the total number of burrows in the Cape Farewell and surrounding area (~45,700).
The short-tailed shearwater breeds in southern Australia with the majority of breeding colonies distributed around Tasmania (Skira et al. 1996). Based on data from the 1980s, Skira et al. (1996) estimated that there were 11.5 million burrows located in 209 colonies around Tasmania. The 4,100 shearwater burrows that would be lost on the private property due to the proposed development make up about 0.04% of the Tasmanian 11.5 million burrows. However, monitoring of shearwater colonies around Tasmania and southern Victoria over the last decade has indicated a dramatic decline in the numbers of breeding pairs, providing some evidence that the global population may have halved in recent years (Mark Hindell and Ross Monash pers comm.). If this is true, then the short-tailed shearwater burrows that would be lost on the private property by the proposed development is estimated to be 0.07% of 5.75 million burrows.
19
Table 1: The estimated number of short-tailed shearwater burrows within the private property area that would be displaced by golf holes for the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development.
Number of burrows displaced
High density Medium Low density Total number of colony density colony colony burrows displaced Hole 1 960 0 37 997 Hole 2 30 49 21 101 Hole 3 0 0 0 0 Hole 4 0 971 19 990 Hole 5 0 69 99 168 Hole 6 0 314 285 599 Hole 7 0 0 0 0 Hole 8 0 0 0 0 Hole 9 0 0 0 0 Hole 10 0 181 61 242 Hole 11 0 0 5 5 Hole 12 0 0 84 84 Hole 13 0 0 396 396 Hole 14 36 20 0 57 Hole 15 0 0 0 0 Hole 16 0 234 22 257 Hole 17 0 0 221 221 Hole 18 0 0 0 0 Total 1026 1839 1249 4115
4. Summary
The above desktop and site visit assessment revealed that it is unlikely that any of the Commonwealth or State listed flora species occur in the private property area of the proposed development site. However, four listed fauna species may or do forage, live and/or breed on the private property area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development.
A small dam on the southern private property block may contain potential habitat for the green and golden frog and the striped marsh frog. However, larger bodies of water (e.g. Lake Flannigan) providing more suitable habitat occur approximately 2 km from the proposed development site.
A large breeding colony of short-tailed shearwaters occurs on site and it is estimated that approximately 4,100 shearwater burrows located on the private property areas would be lost due
20
to the proposed golf course development (as outlined in Figure 1). This equates to the displacement of an estimated 2,130-2,830 breeding pairs of shearwaters. The loss of 4,100 burrows within the private property is approximately 15% of the burrows located on the private land and approximately 9% of the total number of ~45,700 burrows in the Cape Farewell and surrounding area (Figure 1). The loss of 4,100 burrows on the private property area is estimated to range from 0.04% - 0.07% of the total number of burrows in Tasmania.
It is also considered that the orange-bellied parrot would occur at the proposed development site on occasion and that the site contains food plants for this species.
References Baker, B. and Hamilton. S. 2012. Assessment of the size and location of Short-tailed shearwater colonies around the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development, King Island, Tasmania. Prepared for Turnpoint Pty Ltd and Richard Chamberlain Golf Design. Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd. March 2012. Barrett, G., Silcocks, A., Barry, S., Cunningham, R. and Poulter, R. 2003. The New Atlas of Australian Birds. Birds Australia, Melbourne.
BirdLife Australia. 2012. Records of the Australian Bird Atlas for an area within a 5 km radius of King Island Airport. Birds Australia data request, information provided 2 July 2012. Bryant, S.L. and Jackson, J. 1999. Tasmania's Threatened Fauna Handbook: what, where and how to protect Tasmania's threatened animals. Threatened Species Unit, Parks and Wildlife Service, Hobart. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC). 2010. Protected matters search tool. http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/pmst/index.html Accessed 26/6/2012. Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE). 2010. King Island Biodiversity Management Plan. Threatened Species Section, DPIPWE, Hobart. DPIPWE. 2011. Natural Values Atlas https://www.naturalvaluesatlas.tas.gov.au Accessed 26/6/2012. Department of Primary Industries and Water (DPIW). 2009. Listing Statement for Pterostylis ziegeleri (grassland greenhood). Threatened Species Section, DPIW, Tasmania. Donaghey, R. (Ed). 2003. The Fauna of King Island. A guide to identification and conservation management. Currie, King Island, King Island Natural Resource Management Group. Dunn, A.M. and Weston, M. 2008. A review of terrestrial bird atlases of the world and their application. Emu, 108, 42–67.
21
Garnett, S.T., Szabo, J.K and Dutson, G. 2011. The 2010 Action Plan for Australian Birds. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood. Higgins, P.J. (ed.). 1999. Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Four - Parrots to Dollarbird. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Holloway, C. 2011. Flora and Fauna Survey for proposed development of Golf Course at Cape Wickham, King Island. Report for Thomson Perrett Pty Ltd, Sept 2011. Marchant, S. and Higgins, P.J. 1990. Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic birds. Volume 1: Ratites to Ducks. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. OBPRT. 2006. National Recovery Plan for the Orange-bellied Parrot (Neophema chrysogaster). Department of Primary Industries and Water, Hobart. Serventy, D.L. 1967. Aspects of the population ecology of the Short-tailed Shearwater Puffinus tenuirostris. Proc. Int. Ornithological Congress XIV; 165-190. Serventy, D.L. and Curry, P.J. 1984. Observations on colony size, breeding success, recruitment and inter-colony dispersal in a Tasmanian colony of Short-tailed shearwaters Puffinus tenuirostris over a 30 year period. Emu 84: 71-79. Skira, I.J., Brothers, N.P. and Pemberton, D. 1996. Distribution, abundance and conservation status of short-tailed shearwaters Puffinus tenuirostris in Tasmania, Australia. Marine Ornithology 24 (1 & 2):1-14. Skira, I.J. and Davis, G. 1987. The Short-tailed Shearwater colonies of King Island. Tasmanian Naturalist 90: 1-6. Woehler, E.J. 2009. Shorebirds and small terns on King Island. Report to King Island NRM, August 2009, Birds Tasmania.
22
Appendix 1 - Flora species known to occur or potentially occurring in or near the private property area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site.
Table 1-1: Flora species recorded as occurring or habitat that may occur for the area within a 5 km radius of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site. PMST = identified by the EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool for the proposed development site with a 5 km buffer; NVA = identified by the Natural Values Atlas search for the proposed development site including a 5 km buffer; Holloway = identified during ground survey on 1 September 2011 (Holloway 2011); EPBC Act status: VU = Vulnerable, EN = Endangered, CR = Critically Endangered, EX = Presumed Extinct. TSP Act status: R = rare, VU = vulnerable, EN = endangered, X = presumed extinct.
Common name Scientific name Data EPBC TSP Comment sources Act Act status status scrambling ground-fern Hypolepis distans PMST EN EN The known King Island populations are in the northeast and southwest. leafy greenhood Pterostylis cucullata PMST VU EN The known locations are in the north of King Island (DPIPWE 2010). May occur on the proposed development site. grassland greenhood Pterostylis ziegeleri PMST VU VU No King Island sites marked on distribution map (DPIW 2009) coast houndstongue Cynoglossum NVA R Recorded within 500m of site. australe earth cress Geococcus pusillus NVA R Recorded within 500m of site. lance beardheath Leucopogon NVA R Recorded within 500m of site. lanceolatus var. lanceolatus shining dogwood Pomaderris NVA, R Holloway (2011) recorded paniculosa subsp Holloway plant at paralia 54H 0753070 UTM 5613467 river clubsedge Schoenoplectus NVA R Within 5 km of site. tabernaemontani hooded watermilfoil Myriophyllum NVA R Within 5 km of site. muelleri prickly raspwort Haloragis NVA R Within 5 km of site. myriocarpa shade pellitory Parietaria debilis NVA R Within 5 km of site. dune tussockgrass Poa halmaturina NVA R Within 5 km of site. cushionbush Leucophyta brownii NVA, Holloway (2011) recorded Holloway mature plants and recruits on limestone cliffs and dune tops.
coast teatree Leptospermum NVA Within 5 km of site. laevigatum
23
Common name Scientific name Data EPBC TSP Comment sources Act Act status status thyme riceflower Pimelea serpyllifolia NVA, Holloway (2011) recorded subsp. serpyllifolia Holloway one mature plant on lime cliff face south end of Victoria Cove. lake watermilfoil Myriophyllum NVA Within 5 km of site. salsugineum snow grass Poa labillardierei Holloway Large but isolated colonies on dune faces (Holloway 2011). coast wattle Acacia longifolia NVA, Occasional on dune faces subsp sophorae Holloway (Holloway 2011). pacific azolla Azolla filiculoides NVA Within 5 km of site. tuberous bittercress Cardamine gunnii NVA Within 5 km of site. forest bittercress Ruppia polycarpa NVA Within 5 km of site. manyfruit seatassel Ruppia polycarpa NVA Within 5 km of site. tassel sedge Carex fascicularis NVA Within 5 km of site. strand sedge Carex pumila NVA Within 5 km of site. swamp stonecrop Crassula helmsii NVA Within 5 km of site. mossy pennywort Hydrocotyle NVA Within 5 km of site. muscosa winged pennywort Hydrocotyle NVA Within 5 km of site. pterocarpa sea rush Juncus kraussii subsp NVA Within 5 km of site. australiensis common duckweed Lemna disperma NVA Within 5 km of site. tiny duckweed Wolffia australiana NVA Within 5 km of site. longfruit watermat Lepilaena NVA Within 5 km of site. cylindrocarpa angled lobelia Lobelia anceps NVA Within 5 km of site. salt pratia Lobelia irrigua NVA Within 5 km of site. small loosestrife Lythrum hyssopifolia NVA Within 5 km of site. spiny everlasting Nablonium NVA Within 5 km of site. calceroides sticky daisybush Olearia glutinosa NVA Within 5 km of site. clubmoss daisy-bush Olearia lepidophylla Holloway 1 plant in the north of the property (Holloway 2011). thin pondweed Potamogeton NVA Within 5 km of site. australiensis creeping brookweed Samolus repens var. NVA Within 5 km of site. repens beaded glasswort Sarcocornia NVA, Herbfield in soaks at beach quinqueflora Holloway cliff base (Holloway 2011). shiny swampmat Selliera radicans NVA, Herbfield in soaks at beach Holloway cliff base (Holloway 2011). greater waterribbons Triglochin procerum NVA Within 5 km of site.
24
Common name Scientific name Data EPBC TSP Comment sources Act Act status status streaked arrowgrass Triglochin striatum NVA, Herbfield in soaks at beach Holloway cliff base (Holloway 2011). prickly couch Zoysia macrantha NVA Within 5 km of site. subsp walshii round-leaved pigface Disphyma Holloway Coastal species. Herbfield in crassifolim subsp. soaks at beach cliff base clavellatum (Holloway 2011). native pigface Carpobrotus rossii NVA Within 5 km of site. knobby clubsedge Ficinia nodosa syn. NVA, Widespread throughout Isolepis nodosa Holloway property (Holloway 2011). little clubsedge Isolepis marginata NVA Recorded within 500 m of site (NVA). sharp clubsedge Schoenoplectus NVA Within 5 km of site. pungens shiny bogsedge Schoenus nitens NVA Within 5 km of site. boobialla Myoporium insulare Holloway Coastal species. Isolated to dunes faces (Holloway 2011). bower spinach Tetragonia Holloway Coastal species. Widespread implexicoma near beach; forms solid mat in shearwater rookeries; numerous isolated pockets throughout property where protected from grazing (Holloway 2011). sea spurge Euphorbia paralias Holloway Introduced. Has been listed as a threat in the national recovery plan for the orange- bellied parrot (OBPRT 2006). Large colony advancing from beach around Victoria Cove, extends south from 54H 0752215 UTM 5613415 (Holloway 2011). African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum NVA, Introduced. Listed on WMA. Holloway Listed as a threat in the national recovery plan for the orange-bellied parrot (OBPRT 2006). bridal creeper Asparagus PMST Introduced. Weed Of National asparagoides Significance (WONS). Listed on WMA. Targeted as part of weed control programs on King Island (DPIPWE 2010). winged thistle Carduus tenuiflorus Holloway Declared noxious weed, prolific, widespread (Holloway 2011).
25
Common name Scientific name Data EPBC TSP Comment sources Act Act status status boneseed Chrysanthemoi des PMST Introduced. WONS. Listed on monilifera subsp. WMA. Targeted as part of monilifera weed control programs on King Island (DPIPWE 2010). blackberry Rubus fruticosus PMST Introduced. WONS. Listed on WMA. gorse Ulex europaeus PMST Introduced. WONS. Listed on WMA. Targeted as part of weed control programs on King Island (DPIPWE 2010). serrated tussock Nassella trichotoma PMST Introduced. WONS. Listed on WMA. Targeted as part of weed control programs on King Island (DPIPWE 2010). willows Salix spp. except S. PMST Introduced. WONS. Listed on babylonica, S. x. WMA. calodendron & S. x. reichardtiji buzzy Acaena novae- Holloway Sporadic patches throughout zelandiae property (Holloway 2011). coastal sow thistle Actites megalocarpa Holloway sea celery Apium prostratum Holloway Around cove, understorey in marram grass near beach (Holloway 2011). grey saltbush Atriplex cinerea Holloway Beach line north end of cove (Holloway 2011). Centrolepis Centrolepis sp. Holloway Herbfield in soaks at beach cliff base (Holloway 2011). native fuchsia Correa Holloway Two mature plants on lime backhouseana cliff face south end of cove (Holloway 2011). kidney weed Dichondra repens Holloway Occasional (Holloway 2011). native hop Dodonaea viscosa Holloway Two plants in the north of the property (Holloway 2011). robust willow herb Epilobium Holloway Occasional (Holloway 2011). billardierianum subsp intermedium coast sword sedge Lepidosperma Holloway Large colonies on dune gladiatum slopes (Holloway 2011). native oxalis Oxalis perennans Holloway Occasional (Holloway 2011). coastal saltbush Rhagodia Holloway Often with Tetragonia candolleana subsp (Holloway 2011). candolleana slender dock Rumex brownii Holloway ID unconfirmed (Holloway 2011). scented groundsel Senecio odoratus Holloway One plant found (Holloway 2011). marram grass Ammophila arenaria Holloway Environmental weed, widespread
26
Common name Scientific name Data EPBC TSP Comment sources Act Act status status onion weed Asphodelus Holloway Declared noxious weed Tas, fistulosus SA, Vic twiggy turnip Brassica fruticulosa Holloway Introduced. chickweed Cerastium Holloway Introduced. glomeratum sand rocket Diplotaxis tenuifolia Holloway Introduced. storksbill Erodium sp. Holloway Introduced. Yorkshire fog grass, Holcus lanatus Holloway Introduced. hare’s tail grass Lagurus ovatus Holloway Introduced. sweet alyssum Lobularia maritima Holloway Introduced. King Island melilot Medicago sp. Holloway Introduced. watercress Nasturtium Holloway Introduced. officinale Scotch thistle Onopordum Holloway Introduced. acanthium soursob Oxalis pes-caprae Holloway Introduced. kikuyu grass Pennisetum Holloway Invasive environmental weed. clandestinum plantain Plantago major Holloway Introduced blue periwinkle Vinca major Holloway Invasive environmental weed. pasture grasses, Holloway Introduced. clovers dandelions, flat weeds
27
Appendix 2 - Fauna species known to occur or potentially occurring in or near the private property area of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site. PMST = identified by the EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool for the proposed development area with a 5 km buffer; NVA = identified by the Natural Values Atlas search for the proposed development area including a 5 km buffer; Atlas = recorded on the Atlas of Australian Birds (BirdLife Australia 2012) in a 5 km radius circle centred on Cape Wickham lighthouse; Holloway = identified during ground survey on 1 September 2011 (Holloway 2011); EPBC Act status: VU = Vulnerable, EN = Endangered, CR = Critically Endangered, EX = Presumed Extinct, M = migratory, Ma = marine. TSP Act status: R = rare, VU = vulnerable, EN = endangered, X = presumed extinct.
Table 2-1: Bird species recorded as occurring or habitat that may occur at or within 5 km of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site. Species in bold were recorded at or near the site on the 3, 4 or 5 July 2012. Common Name Scientific Name Data EPBC Act TSP Atlas Comments Source status Act surveys status reporting rate (n=15) common Phasianus Atlas, Introduced pheasant colchicus Holloway wild turkey Meleagris Atlas, 0.27 Introduced gallopavo Holloway musk duck Biziura lobata Atlas 0.13 black swan Cygnus atratus Atlas 0.60 Australasian Anas rhynchotis Atlas 0.07 shoveler grey teal Anas gracilis Atlas 0.07 chestnut teal Anas castanea Atlas 0.20 Pacific black duck Anas superciliosa Atlas 0.20 blue-billed duck Oxyura australis Atlas 0.07 Australasian Tachybaptus Atlas 0.07 Irregular migrant, visitor or grebe novaehollandiae vagrant hoary-headed Poliocephalus Atlas 0.13 grebe poliocephalus white-throated Hirundaus PMST M,Ma Irregular migrant, visitor needletail caudaculus or vagrant satin flycatcher Myiagra PMST M,Ma cyanoleuca fork-tailed swift Apus pacificus PMST M,Ma Irregular migrant, visitor or vagrant short-tailed Puffinus Holloway M,Ma Large breeding colony shearwater tenuirostris within and around the proposed development site. great cormorant Phalacrocorax Atlas 0.07 Irregular migrant, visitor carbo or vagrant Australasian Botaurus PMST EN No suitable habitat bittern poiciloptilus identified at the proposed development site.
28
Common Name Scientific Name Data EPBC Act TSP Atlas Comments Source status Act surveys status reporting rate (n=15) Eastern great Ardea modesta PMST M,Ma Irregular migrant, visitor egret or vagrant. cattle egret Ardea ibis Atlas, M,Ma 0.13 Common PMST white-faced Egretta Atlas 0.27 heron novaehollandiae white-bellied sea- Haliaeetus Atlas, M,Ma VU 0.07 Irregular migrant, visitor eagle leucogaster PMST, or vagrant. May occur NVA within 500m of site based on Habitat Mapping (NVA). swamp harrier Circus Atlas 0.27 approximans Nankeen kestrel Falco cenchroides Atlas 0.33 brown falcon Falco berigora Atlas 0.33 sooty Haematopus Holloway oystercatcher fuliginosus red-capped plover Charadrius Atlas 0.13 ruficapillus double-banded Charadrius Atlas, M, Ma 0.07 Irregular migrant, visitor plover bicinctus PMST or vagrant hooded plover Thinornis PMST, Ma Suitable breeding habitat rubricollis Holloway for this species at Victoria Cove. masked lapwing Vanellus miles Atlas 0.53 Latham’s snipe Gallinago PMST M, Ma Irregular migrant, visitor hardwickii or vagrant ruddy turnstone Arenaria interpres PMST M, Ma Irregular migrant, visitor or vagrant common Tringa nebularia Atlas M, Ma 0.07 Irregular migrant, visitor greenshank or vagrant red-necked stint Calidris ruficollis Atlas, M, Ma 0.13 Irregular migrant, visitor PMST or vagrant marsh sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis PMST M,Ma Irregular migrant, visitor or vagrant eastern curlew Numenius NVA M,Ma EN Irregular migrant. One madagascariensis record from the 1960s and one record from the 1980s within 5km of the site (NVA). fairy tern Sternula nereis PMST, Ma,VU VU Unlikely to be threatened NVA by proposed development. One record from 1980s within 5km of the proposed development site (NVA).
29
Common Name Scientific Name Data EPBC Act TSP Atlas Comments Source status Act surveys status reporting rate (n=15) pacific gull Larus pacificus Atlas, Ma 0.07 Unlikely to be threatened Holloway by proposed development silver gull Larus Atlas, Ma 0.20 Unlikely to be threatened novaehollandiae Holloway by proposed development green rosella Platycercus NVA VU Endemic subspecies. May (King Island) caledonicus occur within 500m of the brownii site based on Habitat Mapping (NVA). May depend on 'coastal complex on King Is.' vegetation community for nesting. orange-bellied Neophema PMST CR,M,Ma EN This species moves parrot chrysogaster through the area on migration. It is considered that it would occur at the proposed development site on occasion and that the site contains food plants for this species. swift parrot Lathamus discolor NVA EN,M,Ma EN Irregular migrant. One sighting recorded from the 1980s within 5km of the proposed development (NVA). Horsfield's Chalcites basalis Holloway bronze-cuckoo superb fairy-wren Malurus cyaneus Atlas, 0.13 Holloway Tasmanian Sericornis humilis Atlas, 0.07 Within 5 km of site. scrubwren NVA scrubtit (King Acanthornis PMST CR EN Endemic subspecies. Island) magna greeniana Unsuitable habitat. Pass River is nearest known location to the proposed development site. Tasmanian Acanthiza ewingii NVA Within 5 km of site. thornbill brown thornbill Acanthiza pusilla PMST, EN EN Endemic subspecies. (King Island) archibaldi NVA Historic record at Loorana, probably now extinct from King Island. yellow-throated Lichenostomus NVA Within 5 km of site. honeyeater flavicollis
30
Common Name Scientific Name Data EPBC Act TSP Atlas Comments Source status Act surveys status reporting rate (n=15) white-fronted Epthianura Atlas, 0.40 chat albifrons Holloway grey shrike-thrush Colluricincla Atlas 0.07 harmonica Australian magpie Cracticus tibicen Atlas 0.40 black currawong Strepera NVA Within 5 km of site. fuliginosa grey fantail Rhipidura Atlas 0.07 albiscapa forest raven Corvus Atlas, 0.47 tasmanicus Holloway little raven Corvus mellori Atlas 0.07 flame robin Petroica Atlas 0.07 phoenicea dusky robin Melanodryas Atlas, 0.13 Within 5 km of site. vittata NVA Eurasian skylark Alauda arvensis Atlas, 0.53 Introduced Holloway silvereye Zosterops Atlas, 0.13 lateralis Holloway welcome swallow Hirundo neoxena Atlas, 0.40 Holloway Bassian thrush Zoothera lunulata Atlas 0.07 common Turdus merula Atlas 0.20 Introduced blackbird common starling Sturnus vulgaris Atlas 0.33 Introduced house sparrow Passer Atlas 0.27 Introduced domesticus Australasian pipit Anthus Atlas, 0.20 novaeseelandiae Holloway European Carduelis Atlas 0.40 Introduced goldfinch carduelis
31
Table 2-2. Other fauna species recorded as occurring or habitat that may occur for the area within a 5 km radius of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development site. Common Name Scientific Name Data EPBC TSP Comments* Source Act Act status status Mammals platypus Ornithorhynchus May occur within 2km of site. anatinus echidna Tachyglossus Likely to occur. aculeatus swamp antechinus Antechinus minimus Unlikely to occur. common ringtail Pseudocheirus Likely to occur. possum peregrinus common brushtail Trichosurus Holloway Sighted (Holloway 2011). possum vulpecula eastern pigmy- Cercartetus nanus Unlikely to occur. possum long-nosed potoroo Potorous tridactylus Unlikely to occur. Tasmanian Thylogale billardierii Likely to occur. pademelon red-necked Macropus Holloway Seen in large numbers. (Bennett’s) wallaby rufogriseus lesser long-eared bat Nyctophilus geoffroyi Could forage over site. No suitable roosting habitat within the proposed development site. Gould’s wattled bat Nyctophilus gouldi Could forage over site. No suitable roosting habitat within the proposed development site. swamp rat Rattus lutreolus May occur. black rat Rattus rattus Introduced house mouse Mus musculus Introduced house cat Felis catus PMST Introduced cattle Reptiles common copperhead Austrelaps superbus Likely to occur tiger snake Notechis ater Likely to occur white-lipped snake Drysdalia coronoides May occur three-lined skink Bassiana duperreyi Likely to occur White’s skink Egernia whiteii Likely to occur metallic skink Niveoscincus Likely to occur metallicus southern grass skink Pseudomoia Likely to occur entrecasteauxii blotched blue- Tiliqua nigrolutea Likely to occur tongue Tasmanian tree skink Niveoscincus Likely to occur pretiosus Frogs brown tree frog Litoria ewingi Likely to occur
32
Common Name Scientific Name Data EPBC TSP Comments* Source Act Act status status green and golden Litoria raniformis PMST, VU VU May occur within 500m of site frog NVA based on Habitat Mapping (NVA). A small dam on the southern property may contain suitable habitat. Larger bodies of permanent water providing more suitable habitat occur >2km from site. common froglet Crinia signifera Likely to occur smooth froglet Geocrinia laevis Holloway 2 heard near cattle trough (Holloway 2011). striped marsh frog Limnodynaste peroni NVA EN May occur within 500m of site based on Habitat Mapping (NVA). A small dam on the southern property may contain suitable habitat. Larger bodies of permanent water providing more suitable habitat occur >2km from site. eastern banjo frog Limnodynastes May occur dumerili Fish short-finned eel Anguilla australis No suitable habitat on site. common galaxias Galaxias maculatus No suitable habitat on site. trout galaxias Galaxias truttaceus No suitable habitat on site. climbing galaxias Galaxias brevipinnis No suitable habitat on site. southern pygmy Nannoperca australis No suitable habitat on site. perch congolli or Pseudaphritis urvillii No suitable habitat on site. freshwater flathead Australian grayling Prototroctes PMST, VU VU Considered locally extinct on maraena NVA King Island. brown trout Salmo trutta Introduced. No suitable habitat on site. rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Introduced. No suitable habitat on site. Invertebrates coast snail Theba pisana Holloway Introduced conical snail unidentified spp. Holloway * ‘likely to occur’, ‘may occur’ or ‘unlikely to occur’ assessment based on habitat and distribution information from Donaghey (2003) and/or DPIPWE (2010) and the site visit to the property.
33
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
PROPOSED NEW 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE KING ISLAND GOLF LINKS CAPE FAREWELL (CAPE WICKHAM), KING ISLAND, TASMANIA
Prepared for Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd June 2013 by Environmental Consulting Options Tasmania
Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
C IT AT IO N Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd (2013). Environmental Management Plan, Proposed New 18 Hole Golf Course, King Island Golf Links, Cape Farewell (Cape Wickham), King Island, Tasmania . Prepared for Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd by Environmental Consulting Options Tasmania.
© Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd (June 2013)
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan i Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
C O NT E NT S
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 2 1.1 Preamble ...... 2 1.2 Project area ...... 2 1.3 Project design ...... 4 1.4 Environmental assessments ...... 4 2. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 5 2.1 Legislative and policy instruments ...... 5 2.2 Scope of EMP ...... 8 2.3 Objectives of EMP ...... 9 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 10 3.1 Context ...... 10 3.2 Design principles and philosophy ...... 10 3.3 Adaptive management ...... 11 3.4 Responsibilities ...... 11 3.5 Site access ...... 17 3.6 Contractor facilities ...... 18 3.7 Occupational health and safety (OH&S)...... 18 3.8 EMP review ...... 18 3.9 Documentation and record-keeping ...... 19 4. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 19 4.1 Structure ...... 19 4.2 Element: Management of land forms and erosion ...... 20 4.3 Element: Noise ...... 21 4.4 Element: Groundwater ...... 22 4.5 Element: Plant (machinery) and chemical/fertilisers ...... 23 4.6 Element: Storage and handling of dangerous substances ...... 24 4.7 Element: Waste ...... 25 4.8 Element: Fire protection and management ...... 26 4.9 Element: Cultural heritage values (European heritage) ...... 27 4.10 Element: Cultural heritage values (Aboriginal heritage) ...... 27 4.11 Element: Flora values (threatened flora) ...... 28
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan ii Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
4.12 Element: Flora values (vegetation) ...... 28 4.13 Element: Flora values (re-vegetation) ...... 31 4.14 Element: Flora values (weeds) ...... 32 4.15 Element: Fauna values (pest species) ...... 37 4.16 Element: Fauna values (shearwaters) ...... 38 4.17 Element: Management of pesticides ...... 44 4.18 Element: Public access to coastal reserve ...... 45
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan iii Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the proposed new 18-hole golf course to be known as the “King Island Golf Links” relates to the construction, operation and maintenance phases of the project on Crown and private titles and addresses the environmental elements identified in the Reserve Activity Assessment (RAA 2600 Cape Wickham Golf Course – CW CA/YRB CA) for the p roj ect . The EMP describes a set of policies aimed to provide best management of all construction and environmental elements of the project. The EMP outlines mechanisms by which the policies will be accomplished. It also sets specific criteria by which the degree of achievement of the policies can be measured. The EMP proposes a process of measuring this performance through a monitoring programme. All elements and their corresponding protective actions are set in the context of the existing conditions and how those conditions are to be modified to accommodate the proposed new land use and its accompanying landscape plan. Adoption of and adherence to the EMP will ensure that the environmental impact of the change of land use from former grazing and coastal Crown and private land to golf course will be minimised as much as practicable for those elements specifically addressed.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 1 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 P re am b le
Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd will construct an 18-hole golf course, clubhouse facilities and 60 accommodation units on a 385 acre parcel of land to the south of the Cape Wickham lighthouse on King Island, Tasmania. The project is to be known as the “King Island Golf Links”. The site is on private property and Crown land. Various approvals for the project are required under Tasmanian legislation. This Environmental Management Plan (EMP) relates to the whole project area (both private and leased Crown tenures) and is applicable to all phases of the project (including construction, operation and maintenance of the golf course and associated facilities and infrastructure). Reserve Activity Assessments (RAAs) are required for proposed developments on reserved Crown land in Tasmania. An RAA was prepared by Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd for the use of the Crown land at Cape Farewell for the purpose of a golf course and associated facilities. The Tasmanian Parks & Wildlife Service (PWS) issued provisional consent for the project on 21 December 2012 subject to specific conditions. These conditions included the production of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (herein termed under the more general concept of a broader Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the whole site) for approval by the responsible authority (PWS), to address various environmental values. Other approvals required include a Development Application to King Island Council under the King Island Planning Scheme 1995 . Other environmental approvals are noted throughout the EMP as relevant to each section.
1.2 Project ar ea
The project area is to be located on two parcels of private property to the south of the Cape Wickham Lighthouse, and on coastal Crown land (Figures 1 & 2). A crucial part of the project is an agreement to lease Crown land from the Tasmanian Government , facilitated through PWS. This involves a 50-year lease on the coastal reserve south of the lighthouse centred on Cape Farewell and Victoria Cove. There will be no physical buildings on the Crown land, but PWS has agreed to selected areas being used for golf holes. This land is judged by experts as ideal for golf in a world context and the proponent is grateful to PWS because without their support the project will not proceed. The Crown land titles cover part of the Cape Wickham Conservation Area, unallocated Crown Land and Public Reserve over Crown land (to be Yellow Rock Beach Conservation Area).
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 2 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
F i g u r e 1 . General location plan showing access (from DA) – see Figure 3 for location of internal road access
[legend: black bold lines around dark green = private title boundaries; aqua line = existing public road]
F i g u r e 2 . Location plan showing titles (from RAA)
[legend: pink lines = title boundaries; light brown = private titles; lined yellow = Crown titles]
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 3 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
F i g u r e 3 . Indicative design of the golf course and associated elements
[legend: pink lines = title boundaries; medium green = golf hole; dark green = tee; light green = green; yellow line = roads; orange dotted line = path; note that elements are indicative only and subject to c h a n g e ]
1.3 Project design
The design elements of the project are outlined in a master plan (Figure 3) for the site and are not repeated herein, except as relevant to specific sections of t h e EM P .
1.4 Environmental assessments
The project area has been extensively assessed with respect to environmental values, with specific assessments and reports produced for the Crown land and private property elements of the project area. The findings of these reports were summarised in the RAA and formed the basis for the components of this EM P . The primary environmental assessments relevant to this EMP are: Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd. (2012). Flora and Fauna Assessment of the Coastal Reserve Area of the Proposed Cape Wickham
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 4 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Golf Course Development, King Island, Tasmania . Prepared for Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd by Latitude 42 (Barry Baker & Sheryl Hamilton, August 2 0 1 2 ) ; Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd. (2012). Flora and Fauna Assessment of the Private Land Area of the Proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development, King Island, Tasmania . Prepared for Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd by Latitude 42 (Barry Baker & Sheryl Hamilton, August 2 0 1 2 ) ; Latitude 42 Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd. (2012). Flora Values of Report [sic] of Coastal Reserve, Cape Wickham, King Island . Prepared for Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd by Latitude 42 (Andrew Welling, December 2 0 1 2 ) ; Cultural Heritage Management Australia (2012). European Heritage Assessment of a Proposed Golf Course Development at Cape Wickham, King Island, Tasmania . Report prepared for Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd by Stuart Huys (22 August 2012); Cultural Heritage Management Australia (2012). Aboriginal Heritage Assessment of a Proposed Golf Course Development at Cape Wickham, King Island, Tasmania . Report prepared for Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd by Stuart Huys (5 August 2012); Richard Chamberlain Golf Design Pty Ltd (2013). King Island Golf Course Development, Cape Wickham – King Island, Tasmania: Planning Report (draft Development Application to King Island Counci l); Reserve Activity Assessment (RAA) (2013). RAA 2600 Cape Wickham Golf C ou rse – CW CA/YRB CA ; King Island Golf Links, King Island, Tasmania (2013). Master Plan ( F eb . 2 0 1 3 ) ; Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water & Environment (DPIPWE) ( 2 0 1 3 ) . Natural Values Atlas Database Report Number 57363 ECOtas_CapeFarewell_KingIsland , dated 15 March 2013; site assessment of the Crown land (and contextually the surrounding private land) by Mark Wapstra (ecologist, Environmental Consulting Options Tasmania) on 12-13 March 2013, primarily to facilitate preparation of this EMP and associated planning approval documents. The findings of these reports are only summarised in this EMP for the purposes of the successful implementation of the EMP – readers are referred to the list of documents for greater detail.
2. SCOPE OF CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
2.1 Legislative and policy instruments
The RAA summarised the relevant legislative and policy instruments applicable to the Crown land aspects of the project. Many of these are also applicable to
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 5 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd the private land aspects of the project. Other instruments may also be directly or indirectly applicable to non-environmental components of the project. T a sm a ni a n National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002 Through the RAA, EMP, lease arrangement and some specific conditioned authorities, the project will be compliant with this Act. This EMP is critical to meeting the objectives of the Act, specifically in relation to the extent of the reserve to be disturbed and the destruction of burrows of the short-tailed shearwater. The specific mitigation, offset and monitoring elements identified in this CEMP are intended to meet the intent of this Act. T a sm a ni a n Crown Lands Act 2002 A s a b ov e. T a sm a ni a n Nature Conservatio n A ct 2 0 0 2 Through the associated Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010 , an authority to disturb burrows of the short-tailed shearwater will be required. The issuing of a permit and the permit conditions will be closely linked to the provisions of the management of the species and its habitat included in this EMP. The (conditional) permits will authorise the taking of wildlife products (shearwater burrows) and to disturb wildlife (through the translocation of shearwaters). T a sm a ni a n Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 A permit to “take” threatened flora or fauna listed on schedules of this Act is required where such species will be “knowingly” disturbed. The provisions of the Act do not relate specifically to potential habitat of threatened species. In relation to the project, therefore, the only relevant value present based on surveys undertaken to date, that may require a permit to “disturb” is the presence of Poa halmaturina (dune tussockgrass) and Cynoglossum australe (coast houndstongue). Poa halmaturina is locally frequent and widespread on private property on grass-covered dunes but only sparsely distributed through the coastal reserve areas. The survey of December 2012 reported “significant populations…amongst the regenerating cleared land with most o ccurring on private land adjacent to the coastal reserve” and that the species “typically occurs in areas which contain exposed rock and bare sand…”. The most recent survey failed to detect any patches of the grass within the coastal reserve in areas nominally designated as within the most likely disturbance footprint. Cynoglossum australe is locally abundant (but by no means widespread) on the private property portion of the project area. It is recommended that a permit be applied for that relates to the whole project, irrespective of tenure, which allows for the disturbance to patches of both species. While the works will have a short-term impact on the species, the impact is likely to be temporary as it is clear that both species colonise heavily disturbed sites (e.g. heavily grazed areas, windblown eroding areas, patches of bare ground near shearwater burrows, on dune tracks, etc.). It is unlikely that the proposed works will lead to a long-term reduction in the extent and abundance of the species on the site. In fact, it is more likely that the species will colonise disturbed patches of bare ground and become
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 6 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
more abundant. The proposed revegetation works provide an excellent opportunity to utilise Poa halmaturina for landscaping and rehabilitation projects as it is a low-growing patch-forming tussock-habited species ideally suited to such uses. The conditions of the permit will need to be incorporated into the final version of this EMP, if the conditions require specific management actions (unlikely at this stage due to the disturbance ecology of the species).Staff and contractors working on site must refer to the conditions on the permits to ensure compliance. Contact Andrew Purchase at Lighthouse Properties for a copy if the current permits and their conditions. Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Potential foraging habitat for the migratory orange-bellied parrot ( N eop h e m a chrysogaster ) is present in the coastal reserve but no significant impact on the species or its habitat is anticipated as a consequence of the construction works and subsequent use of the golf course. A referral under the Act is not considered warranted. Note that the EMP includes provisions to enhance the extent and condition of potential foraging habitat but that these provisions do not form part of the consideration of the significance of the impact. The project will result in the destruction/disturbance of burrows of the short- tailed shearwater ( Ardenna_tenuirostris ), listed as a migratory species under the Act. The EMP forms a critical component of the approval of the project by the Tasmanian government, specifically in relation to the mitigation, offset and monitoring provisions related to the shearwater. The RAA clearly indicates that referral under the Act is the responsibility of the proponent and that the proponent believes the proposal is unlikely to be considered as significant. T a sm a ni a n Historical Cultural Heritage Act 1995 The project will be compliant with this Act with no specific actions required. T a sm a ni a n Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1995 The project is discretionary under the King Island Planning Scheme 1995 . The project has been approved in principle but endorsement of this EMP confirming State government approval of the inclusion of the Crown land component of the project area is critical to the project proceeding. T a sm a ni a n State Coastal Policy 1996 The intent and provisions of this policy are tested through the development application process under the King Island Planning Scheme 1995 . National Recovery Plan for the Orange-bellied Parrot ( N eop h e m a chrysogaster ) The orange-bellied parrot may occasionally use the coastal reserve (potential foraging habitat during migration periods). Based on the limited disturbance to the coastal reserve, and specifically the areas of vegetation dominated by the prime foraging source (e.g. Sarcocornia spp.), negligible disturbance to the current status of the potential habitat for the species is anticipated. The project provides opportunities for enhancing the quality and extent of potential foraging habitat through the removal of weeds and replacement
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 7 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
with native species, especially those favoured as a foraging resource (see later sections of the EMP). King Island Biodiversity Management Plan 2012- 2022 The proposed development is consistent with the provisions of this recovery plan in that the key ecological values (e.g. „Coastal Complex on King Island‟ (TASVEG code SCK) vegetation community; threatened flora and potential habitat of threatened fauna) will be protected/managed through the application of this EMP and associated permits. Tasmanian Reserve Management Code of Practice 2003 This policy applies to lands under the National Parks and Reserve Management Act 2002 and the section of public reserve under the C ro w n Lands Act 1976 . There are several relevant sections of the policy document that are applicable to the site. This EMP and associated permits address the intent of the reserve code of practice through the assessment and reporting process, consultation and development of management plans and application of a mitigation/offset strategy for key environmental values (see later sections of the EMP).
2.2 Scope of EMP
This Environmental Management Plan (EMP) relates to the whole project area (both private and leased Crown tenures) and is applicable to all phases of the project (including construction, operation and maintenance of the golf course and associated facilities and infrastructure). Specifically, this EMP addresses all environmental matters related to the Crown land coastal reserve raised in the RAA, including the following: threatened fauna protected wildlife and their products; threatened vegetation communities; threatened flora; w eed s; di sea se; p est s; erosion control and rehabilitation; Aboriginal heritage values; and recreational values (existing uses and public access). In addition to addressing matters of environmental significance raised in the RAA, this EMP also addresses other matters, including: management of disturbance to natural features, including native vegetation; methods of rehabilitating and enhancing degraded habitats;
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 8 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
measures to control noise, dust and water runoff, including sediment control during construction; maintenance of groundwater quality; storage and handling of dangerous substances (such as construction waste, including recycling of all materials generated during construction); waste minimisation and disposal; and fire protection and management. This EMP also provides guidance on the following activities and project el em en t s: administration of the project, including designation of responsible p a rti es; communication procedures to assign responsibilities and reporting; contingency and emergency response procedures community training/workshops on environmental management; hours during which construction activity will take place; location of where buildings and building materials will be stored during construction; monitoring program and due diligence checklist for EMP and legislation compliance.
2.3 Objectives of EMP
The broad objectives of this EMP are to: provide evidence of practical and achievable plans for the management of the project to ensure that environmental requirements are complied with by producing a comprehensive framework for control and monitoring of both construction and operational impacts; and provide the community and the responsible authority with evidence of the project being undertaken and the golf course being operated in an environmentally acceptable manner. The more specific objectives of this EMP are to: identify the key environmental issues that may be affected by the p roj ect ; provide a set of management actions to manage the identified values at all stages of construction and operation of the golf course and associated facilities and infrastructure; and provide a set of monitoring and reporting protocols against which to measure the completion and efficacy of management actions.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 9 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
3. IMPLEMENTATION OF EMP
3.1 C o n t e x t
The proposed King Island Golf Links development comprises the following components: an 18-hole golf course; a maintenance facility including pumpshed and irrigation storage dam; clubhouse; 60 eco-style accommodation units; car-parking and access; associated clearing, earthworks and landscaping; entry road The site will be accessed off Cape Wickham Road (existing public road). The basic philosophy of the project is minimal interference with the existing landforms. From an overall landscape perspective, the land when completed will not be too different from that presently existing, and will retain a Scottish Coastal Links character with existing vegetation retained on all non-golf areas. A significant amount of remnant vegetation has been conserved and incorporated into the landscape design. Landscaping and revegetation planting for the development will incorporate indigenous species of local provenance. Soils are generally highly permeable and there are no formal drainage lines on t h e l a n d .
3.2 Design principles and philosophy
In the preparation of the EMP it is recognised that a set of existing conditions will be modified to a greater or lesser extent in the creation of the golf course and associated facilities. A set of fundamental design principles have been adopted with these being complemented and given credence by the landscape concepts prepared by DeVries Golf Course Design. The landscape concepts indicate the overall project design intent and guide this subsequent detailed landscape design. The landform and golf course have been used as the basis for the overall landscape structure. Links golf is something quite different from what has become the „norm‟ in golf course design. It has its origin in the Old Course at St Andrews, Scotland. The inspiration for „links golf‟ is the phenomenon known as „links land‟, the or i gi nal land upon which golf was played. Found in abundance along the British coastline, it is by definition a link between arable land and the sea.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 10 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
DeVries Golf Design stated design philosophy in relation to a respect for traditional golf, for land and for the environment, fits comfortably with the concept of links golf. It is intended to apply to this project the principles learned from the team‟s collective involvement in links golf. As demonstrated by the Master Plan the layout works with the land, while taking advantage of the natural features of the site, thereby requiring minimal earthworks and minimal clearing of remnant vegetation. Golf course design today requires the creation of an optimum playing surface. Once established, given best management practices, courses should thrive on minimum irrigation, fewer fertilisers and low cost maintenance practices, yet cope with the rigours of everyday play, in order to be environmentally and economically sustainable. The subject site is ideally suited to the development of this style of golf course, with its coastal environment similar to that upon which golf began in Britain over 550 years ago. The configuration, orientation and topography of the site affords panoramic views of the coastline from the highest vantage point, an ideal feature for a project of this nature. The deep sandy soil provides very good drainage and together with a moderate climate, provides excellent conditions for the production and maintenance of turf and indeed, the playing of golf on a year round basis. Positive benefit will be achieved by providing a sustainable use for a large tract of coastal land (previously marginal farmland), while still maintaining much of the rural character. The site will be further enhanced by the rehabilitation of the natural vegetation including a diversity of species to maintain and enhance wildlife habitat.
3.3 Adaptive management
The EMP is prepared in the context of the concept of “adaptive management” aiming to adopt and achieve world‟s best practice i n all aspects of environmental management from the production of the EMP, its implementation, monitoring of actions and adopting altered management regimes in response to changing conditions.
3.4 Responsibilities
3.4.1 Ge n e r al
King Island Golf Links (the Club) will address the design recommendations of the broader EMP in the detailed design phase of the project, and significant environmental management actions will be defined in the contract documents for the main construction contractor. The Club will ensure that the actions required under this EMP and permits are implemented. The Club will ensure that all involved parties are aware of the
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 11 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd requirements of this EMP and permits and that its effectiveness is regularly monitored.
3.4.2 S p e c if ic
There are several distinct phases of the implementation of this EMP . Consequently, implementation and management of the EMP is the responsibility of certain parties at various stages of the project, which are described below
Pre-construction The following activities are to take place prior to the commencement of construction works on site: water harvesting & quality testing Horizontal ground water bores will be excavated to a depth of 3.5- 5 m . W a t er samples and flow rates are to be taken in the following locations (refer Figure 4). The samples are to be tested for the following minimum parameters: suspended solids; colour and turbidity;
BOD 5 / E. c ol i p H; sod i u m; other parameters as required. Water sampling is to be undertaken throughout the duration of the project to ensure that no decrease in water quality is experienced. The recommended testing interval is one test at each of the above locations every three (3) months during the construction phase of the project. The responsible party for the water testing is Turnpoint Pty Ltd.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 12 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
F i g u r e 4 . Location of wells for water testing
[ l e g e n d : yellow GoogleEarth “pins” = well sites ] vegetation marking Vegetation proposed for retention is to be protected by ensuring that construction works do not extend outside the designed areas (refer to Figure 8 for indicative disturbance plan across the entire site). The Golf Course Architect, or nominated representative, will nominate all works areas prior to commencement of on-site earthworks. demarcation of site boundaries A boundary fence will be erected around the entire property, in accordance with local government authority specifications (refer Figure 5).
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 13 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
F i g u r e 5 . Location of boundary fences
[legend: bold orange dotted line = location of proposed boundary fences; medium green = golf hole; dark green = tee; light green = green; yellow line = roads]
The boundary fence will be clearly identifiable and prohibit pedestrian and vehicle access to the construction site during construction works. The fence will be constructed as low as possible to meet the council and course needs. Fencing in the areas shown on Figure 12 will be constructed of non-barbed materials and have reflective metal tags (approx 150 x 75mm) placed on the top wire at regular intervals of no less than 1m apart to help prevent bird strikes. Otherwise bunting flags (ie. red or orange triangle flags strung out on a line) are appropriate and can be easily removed outside the shearwater breeding season. The fence will be inspected and the tags replaced as needed prior to September each year. The sanctuary areas are not to be fenced but demarcated by other methods. Note that users will not be prevented from accessing the coastal reserve post- construction and that only limited areas may be restricted during short periods of construction (public safety). The responsible party for demarcation of boundaries is Turnpoint Pty Ltd. The responsible party for construction of boundary fences is Turnpoint Pty Ltd. minimisation of erosion by irrigation supply
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 14 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
A minimum of 4 to 8 horizontal ground bores will be constructed to provide sufficient water for turf grass establishment and erosion control during the earthworks phase. A 17 megalitre dam will be constructed at the nominated location (refer Figure 6). The irrigation pump station will be installed at the dam location to ensure sufficient volumes of water are available prior to any earthworks commencing. The responsible party for dam design is Turnpoint Pty Ltd. The responsible party for dam construction is Turnpoint Pty Ltd. The responsible party for ground bore installation is Turnpoint Pty Ltd.
F i g u r e 6 . Location of proposed dam and access road
[legend: pink line = title boundaries; bold orange dotted line = location of proposed boundary fences ; medium green = golf hole; dark green = tee; light green = green; yellow line = internal road; white line = existing public road; light blue polygon = storage dam]
management of flora and fauna values Prior to any earthworks commencing a “Shearwater Expert” will be engaged to advise the development team on matters relating to shearwater management. The Shearwater Expert will be endorsed by DPIPWE prior to their engagement. The expert will be engaged to prepare any relevant documents and protocols as may be required under permits. The expert wil l also be used to train, and assess the competency of, Club staff in handling, relocation and ongoing monitoring activities, under guidance/endorsement from DPIPWE. Staff members trained specifically by the Shearwater Expert will titled as “Shearwater S u p e rvisor(s)”.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 15 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Staff and contractors working on site must refer to the conditions on the permits to ensure compliance. Contact Andrew Purchase at Lighthouse Properties for a copy of the current permits and their conditions. The proposed level of pre-construction surveys undertaken by the Shearwater Supervisor is: transects designed to target the mapped high, medium and low density areas of the colony where the burrows intersect the main golf course areas (i.e. holes); the specific locations and lengths of the transects will be determined by the expert, but will include, as a guideline, the following locations: 50 m along hole 3 (high), 120 m along hole 1 (high), 50 m along hole 2 (high, medium, low), 100 m along hole 5 (high, medium, low), 50 m along hole 6 (medium, low), 100 m across holes 16 and 17 (medium/low), and 100 m along hole 4 (medium, low); transects will be assessed during the day using a recognised technique (e.g. hand-searching and/or camera-probe); all burrows along the 2 m transects will be searched in order to determine occupancy status; other evidence of burrow occupation by shearwaters will be assessed (e.g. scratchings, droppings, etc.); the surveys will be undertaken in the last week of April and continue on a 3-day frequency until burrow occupation is recorded as negative; the Shearwater Supervisor will keep field notes that record occupancy. The results of all pre-construction survey transects will be recorded in a form approved by DPIPWE and these results provided to DPIPWE . Earthworks will not commence within 50m of any area supporting occupied burrows until the Shearwater Supervisor has reported a negative burrow occupancy status. A fence will be constructed around the entire site boundary to ensure risk of entry of vertebrate fauna species (with the exception of birds) to the site during construction works is minimised. The fence will be constructed as low as possible to meet the council and course needs. It will be constructed of non- barbed materials and have reflective tags placed on it to help prevent bird strikes. Note that complete exclusion of species such as wallabies is not practical as they utilise the unfenced coastal verge – the fence is intended to minimise the risk of a large influx of wallabies to construction areas, especially during works. The construction of the Shearwater Sanctuary will commence in June and be completed by no later than September (see main section of EMP on management of fauna values). In the event that birds on re-entering the site attempt to locate to previous nesting site a removal protocol will be implemented (see main section of EMP on management of fauna values). The responsible party for engaging a shearwater expert is Turnpoint Pty Ltd. The responsible party for demarcating the shearwater sanctuary area is Turnpoint Pty Ltd. Construction
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 16 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
There will be two principal contractors involved with the course's construction. These will be the successful tenderers on the course itself, and the maintenance facility and the clubhouse. These contractors and appointed sub-contractors working on the site shall ensure that all construction activities comply with the policies and procedures identified in the EMP and permits. The EMP and permit conditions will be incorporated into the contract documents and the contractors will be required by the contracts to conform to the environmental requirements set out in the EMP and permits that relate to the construction period. The performance of the contractors, and the sub-contractors in relation to the EMP will be reviewed regularly during the construction phase of the project by the Club-appointed Construction/Project Manager.
3.5 Site access Contractor access to the site will be via Cape Wickham Road (public road). Internal site access will be via the existing road easement as per site plan (refer Figure 6). A new temporary access road will be constructed to access the western boundary of the project (refer Figure 6a). Access to individual works areas will not require additional track construction. Machinery and vehicles will utilise existing informal routes through dune swales and over dune rises created during the grazing history of the property and coastal reserve area.
F i g u r e 6 a . Likely location of Temporary Access Roads
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 17 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
[legend: solid bronze line = main access road; dotted bronze line = indicative route of temporary access r o a d s . ]
3.6 Contractor facilities
The principal earthmoving/civil/golf course contractor will utilise temporary buildings for site office use. Staff toilets will be Portaloo or equivalent serviced by an external contractor. One fuel tank may be deployed on the site remote from any watercourse or ecologically fragile area and will be located in a bunded area having a bunded volume of not less that the volume of the tank. Only routine maintenance will be carried out on-site. Rubbish and litter will be removed off site as it accumulates and will be disposed of at a recognised municipal facility. Other contractors and sub-contractors that are undertaking the construction of infrastructure will be required to adhere to the principles outlined above and their site offices and compounds will progressively move through the site to keep pace with phased construction.
3.7 Occupational health and safety (OH&S)
All contractors will operate within the Turnpoint Pty Ltd Occupational Health & Safety Policy and will appoint properly qualified representatives as required by t h e A ct . Contractors shall be required to prepare a quality plan including system elements covering the management of OH&S, which shall encompass the requirements of the Act, and shall provide for prompt notification to the Superintendent of any accident or injury occurring at the site. Contractors will be required to co-operate with others, and co-ordinate with other parties, to ensure that relevant safety issues are reviewed and implemented. Contractors and their agents shall, so far as is practically possible, provide and maintain for employees and its agents or the agents of the Principal and the Superintendent, a work site environment that is safe and without risk to health. Contractors will be required to prepare a site safety plan to be submitted to the Superintendent prior to the commencement of works. The site safety plan shall i n cl u d e OH&S procedures relating to plant safety, worker safety and public safety that shall be instituted as a minimum requirement under this contract.
3.8 EMP review
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 18 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
The implementation of the EMP is intended as an adaptive management planning tool. The EMP shall be reviewed annually by the Club to ensure that a ll management actions have been implemented by the relevant parties. The annual review process will identify where the EMP can be modified to improve the management outcomes or achieve outcomes in a more efficient m a n n er. The review will include checking changes to policy elements and permit conditions under which the EMP was originally prepared to ensure that the EMP maintains relevance. After the Club has completed each annual review and report, these will be provided to DPIPWE and if deemed necessary by DPIPWE a meeting held to di scu ss.
3.9 Documentation and record-keeping
All environment-related communications, including reports, minutes of meetings, records of non-conformance, corrective actions and site inspections will be kept at the Turnpoint Pty L td construction site office, and upon completion of all construction works, shall be held at the Club's offices so that they are readily retrievable. A copy of the annual report against management actions (where relevant to Crown land or values covered under Acts, policies and permits administered by the Crown) will be supplied to the Tasmania Parks & Wildlife Service, and DPIPWE for their commentary and records. The Club is committed to maintaining a close working relationship with relevant authorities including DPIPWE, PWS and King Island Council. Where an authority requests a greater degree of input into review and documentation protocols, the Club will facilitate any such meetings and discussions in a timely manner. The Club will facilitate access to the grounds and Crown lease area to interested parties, at each party‟s expense.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
4.1 Structure
This section of the EMP is composed of a number of elements, each with an overall associated management objective, mechanism(s) for implementation, performance criteria, monitoring programs, and reporting mechanisms.
El em en t : This is the environmental issue identified in the RAA (or other planning documents) that requires specific management under the implementation of the EMP. Ob j ect i v e : This is a statement of the guiding principle that applies to the el em en t .
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 19 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Implementation : These are the specific actions by which the objective will be a chi ev ed . Performance criteria : These are the criteria by which the success of the implementation of the actions will be measured against. Monitoring and reporting : This is the process of measuring actual performance, or how well the policy has been achieved, including the format, timing and responsibility for reporting and auditing of the monitoring results.
4.2 Element: Management of land forms and erosion
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: minimise soil erosion and exposure of new areas of bare ground; minimise transportation of eroded soil by air and water; and improve the long-term condition of landforms, especially where active erosion is occurring.
Implementation Design and construction of the golf course uses a minimalist approach and will involve a minimum of earthmoving. Fairways will generally follow the existing landform and retain the subtleties of the existing contouring, with only minor reshaping of green and tee sites, and bunkering. All machinery and vehicles used on-site will be managed in accordance with standard guidelines regarding regular washdown. Any earthmoving that is required will be localised to minimise movement of soil from one part of the site to another. Construction will use no imported soil. Use will be made of the irrigation system to keep the exposed areas damp to avoid wind erosion until vegetation or other means of control are established. It is proposed to adopt a technique used successfully on Turnpoint Pty Ltd recently completed projects in similar conditions on Vi ctoria‟s Mornington Peninsula, whereby the fairways are not cultivated, but are sprayed to remove unwanted weeds, then closely mown followed by irrigation installation and planting directly into the undisturbed ground, This reduces the potential for erosion and maintains the subtle contours of the existing landform. Only after irrigation has been established will earthworks (as necessary) be conducted. Construction will be undertaken using a combination of medium-sized tracked dozers, bob cats and excavators, with skilled operators experienced at working in sensitive environments. Where construction is to occur near particularly sensitive vegetation areas, the smallest machinery practical would be used. Stockpiling of soil will be located so as not to have a detrimental effect on sensitive vegetation or rookeries.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 20 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Proper construction practices will be implemented to minimise contaminated and sediment laden run-off. The site will be progressively cleaned up and care taken to ensure weeds are not spread to sensitive vegetation areas. A cover of plants and/or mulch is to be maintained on all exposed areas during construction to minimise erosion risk. Standard practices to control soil movement developed for construction sites are to be used. In the instance of bunker construction, stabilisation of bunker edges is to be achieved by the placement of turf on a phased basis during construction. In areas of exposed topsoil with slopes greater than 1:5 jute matting and or hydromulching is to be used to ensure retention of the exposed soils prior to the areas being turfed or revegetated.
Performance criteria During the construction period the construction methods used will result in minimum erosion risk. Cut and fill will be balanced. Planting programs will be initiated as soon as contour shaping and bulk earthworks are complete.
M on i t ori ng The construction phase of the course will be the time when the site is most susceptible to soil erosion. Regular observation and recording of soil movement during this period is essential particularly when ripping, bulk earthworks and contour shaping is in progress.
4.3 Element: Noise
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: ensure that noise associated with the construction and operation of the development does not cause nuisance to neighbouring residential properties and other land uses.
Implementation Construction Hours of operation 0700-1800 Mon-Fri and 0700-1300 Saturdays. Any work on Sundays will require permission from local authorities. Maintenance shed hours September to May 0600 to Sunset.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 21 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
June to August 0600 to 1800. Clubhouse hours S u n d a y to Thursday 0700 to 2300. F ri da y & Saturday 0700 - 0100 (1am). Notification of local residents for other times or excessive noise. Fixed plant shall be designed and installed to comply with regulations. The maintenance shed and pump shed will be suitably noise insulated in accordance with guidelines provided by Tasmanian EPA. Regular equipment maintenance to ensure adequate noise suppression. An external PA system will not be installed on the site. Deliveries to the site will be scheduled so as to minimise disruption to local amenity and traffic.
Performance criteria Noise emitted from the site at all times will not exceed the requirements of the authorities. Machinery noise will be limited to that allowed by current environmental guidelines.
M on i t ori ng An assessment of the maintenance shed and pump shed will be conducted by a qualified acoustic consultant to certify the insulation and design is appropriate and to the satisfaction of the authorities. Other monitoring of noise-related issues will be in in response to complaints.
4.4 Element: Groundwater
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: ensure minimal impacts on soils and groundwater.
Implementation Irrigation application rates will be controlled so that the field capacity is not exceeded during irrigation. All hardpan areas will be precluded from irrigation. Existing bore water system to be ongoing as the irrigation water supply. Any future reclaimed water usage will comply with EPA requirements.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 22 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
General surface water drainage is not required due to the existing conditions of deep extensive sand subsurface material quickly absorbing excess rainfall and preventing water pooling on the site. Stormwater from the maintenance shed, club house and accommodation will be collected and discharged to storage t a n k s. Sewage from the clubhouse and maintenance facility will be provided by adequate septic system. Other waste to be directed to a drainage system into cleaning pits and/or a water cleaning system for removal of contaminants.
Performance criteria The achievement of zero surface run-off from the development site.
M on i t ori ng Groundwater will be regularly monitored and management practices modified if negative impacts are identified as a result of course irrigation. Water levels in the monitoring bores are to be read monthly and samples collected annually for analysis. Soil moisture will be monitored by the golf course superintendent to determine frequency of irrigation. Samples of fairway topsoils and subsoils will be collected annually from each fairway for analysis. A single sample of wastewater should be analysed to comply with requirements. All reporting results will be made available to the relevant authorities.
4.5 Element: Plant (machinery) and chemical/fertilisers
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: ensure residual water used to wash down golf course management equipment meets Australian EPA standards; and ensure nutrient management includes controlled and documented use of phosphorous fertilisers.
Implementation To minimise the risk of environmental pollution from the washdown, a bay is to be provided at a suitable location on the site. Recycle batteries and metal with scrap metal dealers. Used oils to be recycled through the local council and service stations. Vegetative refuse (turfgrass clippings, scarifyings, tree and shrub trimmings) to be chipped and/or composted for mulch.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 23 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Choose fertilisers with a low heavy metal content to reduce the risk of pollution and any future contaminated soil problems. Investigate and trial conditioning products that offer slow nutrient release, a range of trace elements and encourage an active and diverse soil biology. Match timing and quantity of fertiliser applications to soil type and expected uptake rate by the grass. Maintain up-to date fertiliser application and associated records. Apply appropriate irrigation to ensure that fertilisers do not run-off or leach. Dispose of used fertiliser bags in a way to minimise the risk of possible water pollution.
Performance criteria Maintenance of high quality playing arena for golf that is sustained and enhanced by a limited program of chemical application with and by machinery that is serviced and supported in facilities comprised of a self- contained pollution-free system.
M on i t o ri ng Monitor plant nutrient status through regular soil and/or leaf tissue analysis. Annual comprehensive soil nutrient analysis with bi-annual soil testing for pH and electrical conductivity are a minimum for all fertilised areas. An established regular surface and groundwater monitoring regime will be in place to ensure compliance with Australian EPA guidelines.
4.6 Element: Storage and handling of dangerous substances
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: ensure appropriate management of dangerous/hazardous substances on- site to avoid pollution of the environment or harm to persons.
Implementation Storage areas during construction restricted to a designated (an) area. All storage and handling of fuels and chemicals to be done in accordance with EPA guidelines and Australian Standards. Storage will be in an appropriate enclosure with concrete floor and bund and within the maintenance facility long term. Transport will be as per relevant codes and practices and licensed persons. Bins and receptacles will be maintained clean and tidy.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 24 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Quantities of chemicals and fuels stored on site will be kept to a minimum and only approved chemicals to be used on site. Chemicals will be entered into a site Chemical Register and relevant Material Safety Data Sheets will be kept on si t e. Staff to be appropriately trained, safety clothing worn and emergency equipment maintained on site at all times. An Emergency Response Plan will be prepared by the golf course management for handling and storage of chemicals.
Performance criteria Spillages prevented during handling. Storage within designated areas. Proper disposal of waste. Monitor all containment structure s.
M on i t ori ng Inspect the site, storage areas and control structures on a frequent basis to ensure that the dangerous/hazardous substances are being stored, handled and disposed of in an appropriate manner. Inspect for ground contamination and if necessary undertake soil sampling and analysis of the contractors‟ work area.
4.7 Element: Waste
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: ensure solid waste production during all stages of development, including litter, is minimised and disposed of, on and off site, in a responsible m a n n er .
Implementation All solid wastes will be placed in appropriately designed storage areas and/or disposed of on an as-required basis to certified disposal facilities. Putrescible waste storage and disposal will conform with EPA regulations and local government (King Island Council) waste storage policies. A high standard of house-keeping maintained both during construction and operation. Secured bins for construction workers and staff to be placed at locations where they consume food. These bins will not be accessible to native or introduced fa u n a .
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 25 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Wastes will be placed for collection or recycling at designated sites. Re-use or recycling opportunities will be investigated and adopted where p ossi bl e. Surplus materials and used oils to be collected and recycled on site or delivered to recyclers Prior to commencement of the maintenance shed operations, a Trade Waste Agreement or other appropriate consent will be entered into with South East W a t er.
Performance criteria Site remains tidy and well maintained. Overloaded waste to designated areas. Disposal of waste to designated areas. Proper waste disposal.
M on i t ori ng Undertake regular visual site inspections to ensure that solid wastes are being stored in the appropriate areas and disposed of at an appropriate time frame so that solid waste storage areas are not being overloaded. The contractor will monitor the lifecycle of waste generated on-site to ensure all wastes are being disposed of properly. The Construction Contractor will visually inspect and clean up the site of all litter daily during construction and on a set basis following the completion of construction.
4.8 Element: Fire protection and management
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: ensure that appropriate measures are taken to minimise the threat from fire to persons, property and the environment. The course layout compartmentalises the site into distinct areas and if a fire were to start within the course there are relatively small areas of vulnerable grassland/bushland between the irrigated fairways, therefore making the fire risk manageable.
Implementation Ensure an OH&S Officer is appointed, and all staff inducted in safety matters and fire emergency response. The fairway will provide easy access for vehicles.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 26 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Fairways will form corridors of irrigated turf acting as fire breaks. The irrigation system can be used for fire-fighting purposes. Quick coupling valves can be tapped as required for emergency fire-fighting. Maintenance tracks also provide fire and emergency access throughout the site. Course equipment to include a water tanker and a spray unit with a tank capable of use for fire-fighting purposes and vehicles will carry knapsack p u m p s. Fuels, oils and chemicals to be stored within designated areas during construction and during the operational phase within the maintenance shed. Construction and course maintenance vehicles to be maintained and refuelled in designated area and maintenance shed except in emergencies. Storage, refuelling, maintenance and operation of machinery will be undertaken to standards that eliminate the potential for heat and sparks to start fires. Refuelling areas will be attended whilst refuelling is in progress. Areas of vegetation abutting neighbouring properties will be managed to maintain a minimum fire fuel condition during fire danger period.
Performance criteria A Fire Management Plan will be prepared in conjunction with loca l authorities.
M on i t ori ng Conduct regular inspections to ensure that all fire-fighting equipment is serviceable. Conduct visual inspections of the site and control structures (e.g. silt and oil separators, bunding, level of fuel build-up in vegetated areas) to ensure that the performance requirements are met and to identify any n on-conformance. Conduct visual inspections of maintenance tracks to ensure they are kept clear and serviceable.
4.9 Element: Cultural heritage values (European heritage)
No specific values have been identified from the project site. No special management actions are required.
4.10 Element: Cultural heritage values (Aboriginal heritage)
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to:
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 27 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
ensure protection of all identified cultural sites.
Implementation Potentially sensitive sites will be identified prior to construction works and appropriately flagged to protect from inadvertent disturbance. Where disturbance to a site is unavoidable, a permit will be required – n o w ork s will commence that may disturb such a site until all appropriate permits are ob t ai n ed . If potentially significant cultural material is found during construction works, the site supervisor will be notified immediately and works will cease within 50 m of the potential site until it has been assessed by a suitably qualified person and appropriate advice provided.
Performance criteria No significant site is disturbed during construction works.
M on i t ori n g Monitoring will be undertaken during all periods of site disturbance.
4.11 Element: Flora values (threatened flora)
A permit under Section 51 of the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 has been applied for to disturb populations of Poa halmaturina (d u ne tussockgrass) and Cynoglossum australe (coast houndstongue). Based on the population characteristics and the disturbance-tolerance of the species, no special management actions are recommended, however disturbance and clearance will be minimised as much as practicable.
4.12 Element: Flora values (vegetation)
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: minimise clearance and disturbance of native vegetation to that required to create the design golf course features (refer Figure 8).
Indicative golf course routing This indicative disturbance plan (Figure 8) reflects the preliminary design of the King Island Links Golf Course. It provides an indicative display of the following: 1. likely areas to remain entirely undisturbed (shaded blue);
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 28 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
2. likely golf course holes (shaded green); 3. areas that may or may not be disturbed during the construction phase, but which will revert to (or remain) native/natural vegetation post- construction (unshaded); and 4. Shearwater Sanctuaries (shaded orange). It is important to stress that the golf course routing as shown is a „best endeavours‟ routing. No newly completed golf course is identical to its preliminary design. There are always unanticipated impediments that occur (e.g. a stony outcrop hidden by vegetation) or a new concept for a golf hole that differs from the original intention. This golf course has the potential to be one of the world‟s greatest, and to achieve this there will need to be a d eg re e of flexibility with regards the approved golf plan. The precise FINAL design of the golf course is impossible to complete at this stage, as during construction subtle design changes and adjustments will occur. If any significant changes are required this will be discussed with DPIPWE. What does this indicative design mean in practice? As stated above, change to the preliminary design is inevitable but we expect the changes to be minor. Even if holes were reversed or swapped with other holes, the net effect of any alterations would be that the area of land disturbed during construction remains the same. Further, regardless of the final finished golf course design no additional shearwater burrows will be destroyed because of changes made to this plan.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 29 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
F ig u re 8 . Indicative golf course plan with areas to be disturbed and undisturbed during and after construction works
[legend: shaded blue zones = areas likely to remain entirely undisturbed by golf course construction, shaded green zones = likely golf holes, shaded orange zones = Shearwater sanctuaries]
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 30 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Implementation Existing indigenous remnant vegetation is to be adequately protected during the golf course construction period. This shall be achieved by adherence to the following procedures and requirements during the construction period: vegetation removal will be kept to the minimum area of clearance required to achieve the design outcomes of the golf course; in this period the contractor will be given clear site instructions to ensure adequate fencing is installed and that all earthworks or ground modification is restricted to areas not so fenced (protection zones); protection shall be of sufficient height and construction so as to adequately prevent inadvertent access by vehicles or persons into protected areas during the construction contract period; the protective device shall be constantly maintained throughout the duration of the contract; where any excavation is required in the vicinity of vegetation to be retained, care shall be taken to minimise disruption to the root zone and acceptable arboricultural techniques shall be employed to remove/prune root s; where isolated vegetation is to be protected, the areas within tree drip lines shall be kept free of all plant, material and debris; material shal l not be leaned against trunks.
Performance criteria Clearing has been restricted to the indicated areas, which includes golf holes, tracks, clubhouse zone and associated facilities (refer to Figure 8). Vegetation proposed for retention has been protected and retained undisturbed.
M on i t ori ng Monitoring will be undertaken to ensure construction works have been restricted to the indicated areas. Where works have extended beyond the indicated area a report will be made indicating the extent and nature of disturbance and a plan produced to rehabilitate the disturbed vegetation.
4.13 Element: Flora values (re-vegetation)
Ob j ect i v e Re-vegetation of disturbed areas is a core component of the overall project. The long-term objective for the site is to: enhance the biodiversity values through the gradual removal of weeds, protection of areas of erosion and gradual re-vegetation of disturbed sites with native species.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 31 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Implementation The re-vegetation of disturbed sites must be recognised as a long-term objective. An on-site nursery will be established to propagate locally native species for use in re-vegetation programs. Suitable propagation material will be collected (under appropriate permits) from the local area for re-use in re-vegetation and landscaping. All collection of plant propagation material shall only be done by persons who have a permit to collect native flora, or where such collection is permitted (e.g. outside Crown reserves, not involving threatened flora). Planting of up to 250,000 „cell‟ and „tube stock‟ indigenous plants will be utilised in the initial landscaping of the new golf course. Run-off from higher nutrient areas such as tees & greens will be directed away from areas of remnant vegetation. While the „rough‟ areas of the golf course are t o initially include the existing pasture grasses, the long term planting plans for these areas will include extensive use of indigenous grasses and shrubs of local provenance. The profile of this planting will maintain the open character of the overall golf design and landscape. Additional re-vegetation works will be undertaken related to the establishment of the Shearwater Sanctuary (see separate section of EMP) and weed management works (see next section).
4.14 Element: Flora values (weeds)
Ob j ect i v e The context of this EMP is important to defining short- and longer-term objectives in relation to management of weeds. The current distribution of woody weeds in some places is critical to maintaining a low risk of further soil erosion and for the protection of shearwater burrows, such that immediate removal is not recommended. In addition, the long history of land use for cattle grazing and 4WD access to Victoria Cove means that the subject land is already significantly disturbed. The proposed golf course and associated facilities provides an opportunity to enhance the ecological condition and viability of the si t e. In the short-term (construction phase and immediate post-construction period), the management objectives are to: ensure that construction activities do not exacerbate the current extent and abundance of environmental weeds (principally boxthorn, Ly ci u m ferocissimum , and sea spurge, Euphorbia paralias ); a n d that removal of vegetation for the construction of the permanent features of the golf course result in an overall reduction in the extent and abundance of environmental weeds. In the longer-term (post-construction phase and operational/maintenance phases), the management objectives are to:
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 32 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
progressively reduce the extent and abundance of environmental weeds (principally boxthorn, Ly ci u m ferocissimum , and sea spurge, Eu p h orb i a p a ra l i a s , but also winged thistle, C a rd u u s spp.); and undertake operations that do not result in new infestations of environmental weeds within the project area.
Implementation The distribution of environmental weeds has been mapped (refer to Figure 9). This map will be used to guide management actions (locations and target species) and monitor efficacy and implementation of actions (through updating of the map). Where weeds are present in sites subject to vegetation clearing, all vegetation debris is to be disposed of to minimise the risk of further infestations. This may involve burial and/or burning on-site (subject to local government and Tasmanian Fire Service guidelines) and/or off-site disposal at a recognised municipal facility. No vegetation debris is to be left on-site in areas outside the vegetation clearing zones. Additional management actions are detailed below. At this stage, some of these actions should be considered as indicative as site conditions may constrain some works.
S ea sp u rg e An annual sea spurge removal program will be implemented, involving a minimum of 2 person-days every 6 months, where two people will physically hand-pull sea spurge plants from the site. Sea spurge removal will focus on the coastal reserve area, with progressive eradication across the remainder of the project site. Sea spurge removal will only take place outside the shearwater breeding season, or outside shearwater burrow areas during the breeding season. Sea spurge will be managed in accordance with DPIPWE guidelines – i n relation to the project site, hand-pulling of individuals is considered the most practical option. Sea spurge will be disposed of off-site by bagging and transport to a municipal refuse facility (or allowed to decompose on site in a constructed compost facility). No potentially weed-contaminated material (e.g. chippings, mulches, compost) will be used in future landscaping w ork s. Every two years, the distribution and abundance of sea spurge will be documented, and the updated map used to guide future 6-monthly eradication activities. Where sea spurge is removed and greater than 5 m 2 of bare sand created, within 1-week of removal, the bare area will be revegetated wit h nursery-grown locally indigenous species.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 33 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
African boxthorn In many places, African boxthorn is providing important soil erosion and shearwater burrow protection services. Immediate wholescale removal is not considered a sensible approach. Every 6 months, outside the shearwater breeding season, a minimum of 1 0 “ ol d -growth” African boxthorn individuals will be removed from the coastal reserve and disposed of appropriately off-site. The removal sites will be documented (this activity will continue until no such individuals remain within the project area). W h ere a n “ ol d - growth” boxthorn is removed, the exposed area of bare soil will be revegetated within 1 week of removal using nursery-grown locally indigenous species. Where shearwater burrows are present ben eath the “old - g row t h” boxthorn, every effort will be made to avoid damage during weed removal and subsequent revegetation activities. If disturbance is required it will need to be authorised in the annual disturbance permit. Every 6 months, small (e.g. < 1 m tall) boxthorn individuals will be removed, with an emphasis on the coastal reserve areas that are not associated with shearwater burrows (this is mainly to target the individuals along the rocky foreshore that may act as continual propagules for the rest of the site). Note that the number of individuals is not specified – rather it is intended that the Club utilise its resources to maximise effort to minimise the need for years of ongoing control. Boxthorn will be managed in accordance with DPIPWE guidelines – i n relation to the project site, cutting and pasting (with the recommended herbicide) is likely to be the most practical method (and will minimise the risk of herbicide contamination of soils and non-target species). Every two years, the distribution and abundance of boxthorn will be documented, and the updated map used to guide future 6-monthly eradication activities. Winged thistle Outside the shearwater breeding season, or within the shearwater breeding season but outside the identified colony sites, patches of winged thistle will be treated according to DPIWPE guidelines every 6- m on t h s. Every two years, the distribution and abundance of winged thistle will be documented, and the updated map used to guide future 6-monthly eradication activities. Other declared species Infestations of other declared weed species within the project area will be treated as they are detected, according to DPIPWE guidelines. Any such infestations will be noted on the updated map.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 34 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Re-vegetation after weed control Re-vegetation will be required in some areas subject to weed control, to minimise the risk of new infestations of competitive weeds becoming established, and to minimise the risk of erosion of exposed areas of bare soi l . The following general guidelines will be applied to any re-vegetation works associated with weed management: only locally native indigenous plant species will be used; the on-site nursery personnel will determine the appropriate species to use at any particular site by assessing the adjacent areas and selecting species already present; in the immediate coastal fringe (between the bare rocks and the more exposed grass- covered dunes), where appropriate, species‟ selection will include succulent ground covers and shrubs potentially important as a foraging resource for the orange-bellied parrot; re-planted sites will be monitored by nursery personnel every 6 months – where greater than 20% of individuals have died or are suspected to die within the coming 6 months (based on a subjective health assessment), replacement plants will be planted (this may involve different species with a greater anticipated degree of success, and may occur at a later date, subject to seasonal and site conditions, to maximise the chance of establishment and growth); records will be kept of the species utilised in different aspects of re- vegetation.
Gen era l All road, tracks and building sites (including all forms of structure from accommodation units, maintenance sheds, water tanks, pump stations, etc.) will be assessed on a two-yearly basis for the presence of environmental weeds, which will be documented. All fairways, greens and tees will be assessed on a two-yearly basis for the presence of environmental weeds, which will be documented. Where weed infestations are detected, eradication/control according to DPIPWE guidelines will be undertaken within 7 days of detection. Golf course maintenance staff will be trained in the identification of environmental weeds most likely to be present on the site such that the opportunity to detect and eradicate infestations early in their establishment is maximised. All weed control activities will be undertaken by appropriately qualified personnel.
Performance criteria – short-term (immediate post-construction) African boxthorn, Lycium ferocissimum , and sea spurge, Euphorbia paralias , are no longer present within the vegetation clearance zones.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 35 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Performance criteria – longer-term (operation and maintenance) The extent and abundance of African boxthorn, Lycium ferocissimum , a n d sea spurge, Euphorbia paralias , is progressively reduced, especially in the coastal reserve. The extent and abundance of winged thistle, C a rd u u s sp p . , is progressively red u ced . New infestations of environmental weeds are infrequent and treated rapidly. Treated areas are progressively re-vegetated wit locally native plant sp eci es.
M on i t ori ng Monitoring of establishment of environmental weeds within the vegetation clearance zones will be undertaken every month (for 12 months) following completion of the initial phase of clearance and at regular intervals thereafter. Any detected weeds will be treated within 7 days of detection according to the DPIPWE guidelines for the species. Other monitoring (including treated sites and success of re-vegetation) will be in accordance with the guidelines described under the section on implementation.
F ig u re 9. Distribution of weeds
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 36 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
4.15 Element: Fauna values (vertebrate pest species)
Ob j ect i v e The context of this EMP is important to defining the current objectives in relation to management of pest species. In relation to the project, vertebrate pest species are defined to include any species that cause ongoing environmental harm over and above existing levels. As such, the species include cattle, which currently have access but the project may exacerbate the damage they cause to areas such as the coastal reserve by “re - directing” their grazing activities. Rabbits and wallabies are present but are not expected to create any additional environmental harm. Feral cats are known from the area but the extent of the problem (e.g. numbers, how many shearwaters they take, etc.) is not known. Provided that waste (e.g. scraps) are managed appropriately (see separate section of EMP), the feral cat population is not expected to increase as a result of the project. Dogs are not present but will need to be controlled as part of the project. The long-term objective for the site is to: enhance the biodiversity values through the removal and/or control of vertebrate pest species.
Implementation Stock (cattle) Stock will be entirely removed from the project area (this has already been undertaken). Stock will continue to be excluded from entering the project area, including the coastal reserve and shearwater colony areas (as a minimum) through maintenance of fences and stock surveys. F era l ca t s A feral cat trapping program will be undertaken, in consultation with PWS and the King Island Council. The ongoing presence of feral cats will be monitored during the course of construction, operation and maintenance activities and sightings reported to management for consideration of action. The Club will inform PWS and King Island Council of the number of feral cat sightings at the time of annual reporting, and appropriate actions will be discussed between all relevant parties. W a l l a bi es Over-grazing by wallabies may pose a risk to re-vegetation programs and maintenance of golf course tees, fairways and greens. Wallabies will be principally controlled through provision of wallaby-proof fencing around the boundary of the site. Note, however, that it is unlikely that the erection of the fence will trap a level of individuals likely to cause environmental harm (e.g. over-grazing) or damage to the golf course such that an immediate management strategy will be needed.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 37 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Where wallaby numbers increase to levels where management issues are identified, consultation with DPIPWE and PWS will determine the most appropriate course of action. D og s No dogs will be permitted to enter the coastal reserve at any time. The facility will implement a no dogs policy for all areas or a no dogs off lead policy. No dogs will be permitted on playing areas at any time. No dogs (on- or off-lead) will be permitted in the shearwater sanctuaries at any time.
Performance criteria Stock are no longer present within the project area. The abundance of feral cats is rare. Vertebrate pest species are managed in accordance with expert advice and relevant permit requirements after consultation with the relevant agency.
M on i t ori ng Conduct a two-yearly survey of the whole site to document the levels of vertebrate wildlife, especially pest species, to inform ongoing management. The form of the survey will be determined prior to the survey, in consultation with relevant experts to maximise the use of resources and utility of findings.
4.16 Element: Fauna values (shearwaters)
Ob j ect i v e In the short-term (construction phase and immediate post-construction period), the management objectives are to: minimise disturbance to shearwater burrows by restricting earthworks and vegetation clearing to the areas indicated in the indicative golf course disturbance plan and to minimise impacts within the works area (Figure 8); minimise the long-term impact on the local population of shearwaters by creating new potential breeding areas (shearwater sanctuary areas); and balance facility requirements with the ecology of the shearwater through monitoring attempts to re-use parts of the golf course for burrows and implementing a translocation plan where necessary. In the longer-term (post-construction phase and operational/maintenance phases), the management objective is to: minimise the long-term impact on the local population of shearwaters by maintaining the new potential breeding areas.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 38 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Implementation
P erm i t Any disturbance to individual shearwaters or burrows of shearwaters will be undertaken by appropriately trained or DPIWPE-endorsed personnel under p erm i t . Any conditions of the permit to disturb individual shearwaters or burrows of shearwaters will be adhered at all stages of construction, operation and maintenance of the golf course.
P ers on n el Only Shearwater Supervisors will be permitted to undertake survey, monitoring or handling of shearwaters.
T ra i n i n g In recognition that it is likely to be cost-prohibitive to engage a “Shearwater Expert” full -time, the Club will select appropriate staff to be trained and assessed as competent as “Shearwater Supervisor(s)” by an expert to undertake the actions. The selection of the “Shearwater Expert” will be undertaken in consultation with DPIPWE. The Club will request from DPIPWE a list of suitably qualified individuals/companies and/or suggest its own experts (and demonstrate their expertise to the satisfaction of DPIPWE) to undertake the actions listed below and other actions required to obtain necessary permits and conditioned in permits issued. Once trained to the satisfaction of the expert, the name(s) of the Shearwater Supervisor(s) will be provided to DPIPWE for adding to the permit. The proposed level of pre-construction surveys undertaken by the Shearwater Supervisor is: transects designed to target the mapped high, medium and low density areas of the colony where the burrows intersect the main golf course areas (i.e. holes); the specific locations and lengths of the transects will be determined by the expert, but will include, as a guideline, the following locations: 50 m along hole 3 (high), 120 m along hole 1 (high), 50 m along hole 2 (high, medium, low), 100 m along hole 5 (high, medium, low), 50 m along hole 6 (medium, low), 100 m across holes 16 and 17 (medium/low), and 100 m along hole 4 (medium, low); transects will be assessed during the day using a recognised technique (e.g. hand-searching and/or camera-probe); all burrows along the 2 m transects will be searched in order to determine occupancy status; other evidence of burrow occupation by shearwaters will be assessed (e.g. scratchings, droppings, etc.);
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 39 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
the surveys will be undertaken in the last week of April and continue on a 3-day frequency until burrow occupation is recorded as negative; the Shearwater Supervisor will keep field notes that record occupancy Construction phase Earthworks will not commence within 50m of any area supporting burrows until the Supervisor has reported a negative burrow occupancy status. Earthworks and vegetation removal will be restricted to that required to establish the golf course and facilities as per the design plan (see section 4.12 Vegetation, refer also Figure 8). No major construction works or bulk earth moving will be undertaken within 50m of the colonies during the breeding period or when birds are present. Minor works associated with construction will continue in disturbed areas as part of the ongoing task of planting and the preparation of golf holes. These minor works are essential to prevent unnecessary erosion. Minor works could include activities such as irrigation installation, fertiliser application (with no fertiliser spread into burrows), weed spraying (with no spray drift impacting on burrows) and low level equipment activity such as top dressing, grassing, fine shaping a n d m owi n g . If any major construction works that may affect burrows are required after August, these will be kept to a minimum and a permit extension or new permit will be applied for. Daily evening observations of shearwater activity will commence in September.
Shearwater Sanctuary areas Figure 10 indicates the nominal areas designated as future potential colony areas for displaced breeding birds. These areas will total no less than 8.9Ha in a rea . The construction of the Shearwater Sanctuary will commence in May and be completed by no later than September. The Shearwater Sanctuary comprises three areas (Figure 10): northern (headland), southern (along southern boundary fence), and central (between holes 6, 10, 11 and 12). The southern and central areas do not require any specific construction works. These will be left undisturbed (some re-vegetation will be undertaken in the longer term). The northern area will require active construction works to create a potentially suitable substrate for burrowing. The substrate in this area comprises relatively shallow surface rock (limestone) and thin sandy soil, generally currently unsuitable for burrow formation (low density burrows only at p resen t ) . The surface rock material will be “mined” and utilised elsewhere within the project area to surface roads. Soil/sand removed from elsewhere within the project area (private land titles only) will be shifted to the northern sanctuary area. No off-site soil/sand will be needed. The objective is to create a minimum average potential burrowing depth of at least 60 cm across the northern sanctuary area.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 40 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Re-vegetation of the northern sanctuary area will be undertaken as soon as construction works have ceased. Where environmental weeds are detected, these will be eradicated (see section 4.14 for weed management guidelines). Indigenous plantings, of advanced stock where possible, will be used to re- vegetate the northern sanctuary area with low-growing tussocks (species of P oa ), herbs (e.g. Lepidium foliosum ) and shrubs (e.g. Rhagodia candolleana ) t o minimise the risk of soil erosion, to provide protection to the colony and to provide structure to the soil. In addition to ongoing monitoring by the Shearwater Expert and/or Supervisors , it is understood that DPIPWE may wish to review or monitor the Shearwater Sanctuary‟s periodically. It is also understood that DPIPWE staff will be allowed on site at all times, provided they observe all appropriate OH&S considerations.
Management of returning birds Shearwaters have a strong natural instinct to return to previous nesting/burrow sites, and the young born at those sites do the same. As such returning shearwaters may attempt to reconstruct burrows that have been displaced or construct burrows in the main golf course site i.e. on tees, fairways, greens or walking trails between holes . In an effort to discourage birds from digging into prepared golfing areas, covers (either bird proof chicken wire or plastic bird proof mesh) will be placed on the affected areas and used as physical deterrents to prevent birds from reconstructing their burrows. It is possible that some birds may manage to dig back into golf related areas, but the Shearwater Expert advises this will be minimal with the use of bird proof mesh. The handling, housing and translocation of returning Shearwater birds to Cape Wickham and Cape Farewell will be undertaken by appropriately trained or DPIPWE-endorsed personnel, under conditions imposed upon a DPIPWE permit to disturb wildlife under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 .
Other management issues Lighthouse Properties notes that concerns have been raised about the possibility of shearwater attraction to lighting on buildings at the site. In recognition of these concerns, Lighthouse Properties will avoid the use of floodlights while birds are present in or around the colony. All lighting on external walls of the clubhouse and other buildings will be directed to point below horizontal. Only low level, downward pointing external lighting (approx. maximum height of 1 metre) will be used along paths and car parking areas. All outdoor lighting will be kept as muted as possible, within the constraints of reasonable WH&S requirements for staff and guests. DPIPWE staff will be advised of any WH&S meetings that are scheduled to discuss possible changes to above lighting, that may result in impacts on shearwaters, to provide comment. Any bird strikes into lit windows to be monitored and recorded. Mitigation measures will have to be put into place if monitoring indicates an issue. Mitigation measures could be lower level lighting and use of blinds to reduce light levels on the exterior of the buildings. The illumination of the main buildings will be constrained by the operating hours of the facility (see section 4.3).
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 41 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
To minimise disturbance to shearwaters during the breeding season, the use of the golf course will be strictly controlled to ensure that all users are restricted to walkways, tees, fairways, roughs and greens, where such features are adjacent to burrows. A policy of ball management will be implemented such that retrieval of balls from areas supporting burrows will be actively and firmly discouraged. At the end of the breeding season, a suitably trained staff member may enter the areas and retrieve lost balls. No spraying of herbicides/pesticides in the vicinity of burrows will be permitted during the period when birds are present.
Performance criteria The construction works in the immediate vicinity of shearwater zones are completed during the period of shearwater absence. The Shearwater Sanctuary is established prior to the return of shearwaters in the September following the construction phase. A program of management of displaced birds is implemented.
M on i t ori ng A monitoring program (Course Marshall) will be implemented to ascertain damage to burrows by course users „breaking the rules‟ and retrieving balls from sensitive areas. Where damage is reported, procedures will be modified to minimise further events of a similar nature. Monitoring of the site to ascertain muttonbirding activities will also be undertaken. Currently Cape Wickham is an open rookery and DPIPWE will need to formally close the rookery for muttonbirding to be deemed illegal. Other monitoring will be in accordance with the guidelines described under the section on implementation.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 42 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
F ig u re 10. Location of proposed shearwater sanctuary areas
[legend: pink line = title boundaries ; black lines = holes; red, brown, yellow shading = shearwater burrow density zones – high, medium and low, respectively; green hatched polygons = proposed shearwater sanctuary areas]
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 43 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
4.17 Element: Management of pesticides
Ob j ect i v e The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: utilise turf types and encourage wildlife habitat with native grasses and shrubs to ensure that minimal application of pesticides is required for the on-going health of both course proper and rough areas; to only use chemicals and fertilisers registered for use on turf at any time during construction and on-going maintenance (The Australian Turf Grass Institute publication “Disease Insect and Weed Control i n T u rf” lists these chemicals).
Implementation Correct storage facilities for pesticides must be provided. The Australian Standard AS 2507-The storage and handling of pesticides, should be used as an initial reference. Pesticide group rotation is to be practised to reduce the possibility of pest resistance or the development of pesticide enhanced biodegradation. Ensure club has the appropriate equipment and properly trained staff to use pesticide applications according to product specifications and regulation requirements. Where possible utilise an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) system to manage a particular pest problem. This involves having a detailed understanding of the life cycles of pests, and finding means to control them using a range of low hazard effective techniques. Ensure pesticide application is made at recommended rates and intervals. Ensure signage system and withholding periods are applied rigorously. Establish a record keeping system that includes inventories, application records, accident reporting. Establishment and maintenance of a high quality turfgrass playing surface. Develop damage threshold levels that can be tolerated by golfers and where control will be possible, to determine when a pesticide application is required. Restriction of pesticide applications to turfed areas is to minimise impact of native vegetation in non-playing areas.
Performance criteria Implement and manage ISO140001 Integrated Pesticide Management Policy.
M on i t ori ng Regular inspections of wildlife habitats may indicate if toxic effects on wildlife are occurring.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 44 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
4.18 Element: Public access to coastal reserve
Ob j ect i ve The objective at all stages of the construction works and subsequent operation of the golf course is to: ensure continued public access to the coastal reserve.
Implementation At all times during construction the heritage walking trail, or a deviation of the trail (well sign-posted), will remain open and accessible to visitors. Construction works will be signed to ensure safety of pedestrians and to explain to pedestrians the continued free access to the coastal reserve. In the longer term, the following actions will be implemented: the walking path from Cape Wickham lighthouse to Victoria Cove will be re-built using locally sourced materials that provide a stable, safe and visually pleasing pedestrian surface (refer Figure 11 for route), Local PWS staff will be consulted regarding the location of the walking path, understanding that due consideration be given to the OH&S risks associated with errant golf balls ;
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 45 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
Figure 11. Location of Cape Wickham-Victoria Cove coastal reserve walking trail
[ n o t e : dotted orange line indicates likely coastal reserve walking trail; this trail line is indicative only and subject to change]
where weeds occur within 5 m of the new walking track, these are to be treated within 3-6 months of the track completion (see weed management plan for further details); the old route of the walking trail will be revegetated with nursery-grown locally indigenous species; any areas of active erosion, or where weeds are removed from within 5 m of the walking trail edge, will be revegetated with nursery-grown locally indigenous species.
Performance criteria No member of the public is restricted access to the coastal reserve during construction, except at limited sites for limited periods (as small and short as possible) to address safety risk s. No member of the public is restricted access to the coastal reserve after construction. During and after construction signage will advise pedestrians of safety risks and to exercise due care, including from errant golf balls following the opening of the golf course. Access to the coastal reserve is enhanced in the long-term.
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 46 Lighthouse Properties Australia Pty Ltd
F ig u re 1 2. Location of fencing that requires flash tags or bunting flags
[legend: yellow dotted line = fence where flash tags or bunting flags will be placed at regular interval s (approx 1m apart) to prevent bird strikes]
King Island Golf Links – Environmental Management Plan 47
Planning Submission
Appendix C European Heritage Assessment
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham European Heritage Assessment of a Proposed Golf Course Development at Cape Wickham, King Island, Tasmania
FINAL REPORT
AUTHORS NAME)Stuart Huys 27 Apsley St South Hobart 7004 CLIENT NAME Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd 17.9.2012 Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Executive Summary
Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd (hereafter referred to as "Lighthouse Properties") is proposing to develop an 18 hole professional standard golf links course at Cape Wickham on King Island (see Figures 1, 2 and 3).
CHMA Pty Ltd (Archaeological Consultants) have been engaged by Lighthouse Properties to undertake an historic heritage assessment for the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development.
Heritage Register Listings Two heritage listed historic sites, namely, the Cape Wickham Light house and associated archaeological remains, are located within close proximity to the proposed golf course development. These sites are not thought to be situated within the current boundary of the proposed development.
The Cape Wickham light house is listed on the Australian Heritage Database (Commonwealth Heritage List), Tasmanian Heritage Register, and the Register of the National Estate (RNE). The associated archaeological ruins comprising of the first settlement on King Island are listed on the RNE. Both the light house and the archaeological ruins are also protected under the local government King Island Planning Scheme (1995).
Results of the Field Survey Assessment During the course of the field survey assessment no definitive historic features were identified within the bounds of the proposed golf course development (the study area).
As described in section 4 of this report, the Cape Wickham Lighthouse and associated settlement are located immediately to the north of the proposed golf course development. As part of the present investigations, the field team carried out an extensive survey within this area. The field team noted the locations of the various features associated with the lighthouse settlement complex, and carried out a brief recording of each feature. The primary purpose of the recording was to ascertain and document the exact locations of these features in relation to the proposed development.
Table 1 provides the summary details for the identified features associated with the Cape Wickham Lighthouse settlement. Figure 13 shows the location of the identified features. Virtually all of these features had been previously identified as part of the archaeological assessment of the light station reserve that was undertaken in 1993 by Australian Construction Services (ACS). These include the ruins of the Head Lighthouse Keepers cottage, the ruins of the assistant Lighthouse Keeper’s cottage and a series of more recent concrete foundations. The exceptions are two marked grave sites that are located adjacent to each other, within the existing fence picnic ground, and a possible unmarked grave which is located just to the south-east of the ruins of the assistant lighthouse keeper’s quarters. These do not appear in the records of the ACS recordings.
All of the observed historic features associated with were confirmed as being situated outside the bounds of the proposed golf course development boundaries.
Page | 1
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Archaeological Potential within the Study Area The Cape Wickham light house and archaeological ruins are not thought to be situated within the bounds of the current development proposal. However the exact extent of the archaeological ruins is difficult to determine, owing to the fact that parts of the original settlement may no longer be visible on the surface, and due to the fact that existing plans of the light station settlement are largely conjectural in nature. As such the northern section of the proposed golf course development has a moderate to high potential to contain the buried remains of the light house settlement.
The entire area encompassed by the golf course development has the potential to contain unmarked graves from the numerous ship wrecks that have occurred in the past. Grave sites from the Neva are known to exist within proximity to the light house and the potential for further unmarked graves to exist in the wider vicinity is also present.
Lastly, there is the potential to encounter the remains of early sealers and hunters camps. These camps are likely to have formed ephemeral structures and will be difficult to identify in the modern landscape. Evidence of these camp sites are likely to include old hearths, artefact scatters (rubbish dumps) and potentially the remains of the camp structures themselves. Hunters camps are likely to occur anywhere within the proposed study area as are sealers camps, yet the later is more likely to be found in proximity to Victoria Cove. Owing to the ephemeral nature of these types of sites, the potential to encounter sealers and hunters camps within the study area remains low.
Summary Statement of Significance
Cape Wickham Light House and associated Archaeological Remains The Cape Wickham Lighthouse, built in 1861, is significant as an integral part of Bass Strait's mid-nineteenth century network of lighthouses. This system represents the first example of cooperation by the Australian colonies in sharing the costs and responsibilities of providing navigational aids (Criterion A.4)
The 1861 tower and pre-1918 archaeological remnants of the station settlement are among the oldest structures on King Island (criterion A.4).
The Cape Wickham Lighthouse makes a dramatic contribution to the rural landscape of the northern tip of King Island (Criterion E.1).
The Cape Wickham Lighthouse is a good example of a lighthouse built during the 1860s. It is forty eight metres high, which makes it the tallest lighthouse in Australia. It retains the original H Wilkins and Company lantern house and the original timber staircase, a feature that is not common in a stone lighthouse (Criterion B.2 and D.2).
The lighthouse is valued by the King Island community as a symbol of the earliest permanent, and once isolated, settlement on King Island (criterion G.1).
Heritage Management Plan
1) There are no registered historic sites that occur within the bounds of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development area. A detailed field survey assessment failed to identify any definitive historic sites or features within this area. On the basis of these negative findings it is advised that there are no site
Page | 2
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
specific historic constraints to the golf course development proceeding.
2) The archaeological remains of the Cape Wickham light station settlement are afforded heritage protection under the local King Island planning scheme and under the RNE. As such the original management recommendations as stated in the ACS (1993) report should be followed. Any potential disturbance to buried archaeological remains should be avoided.
The visible extent of the features associated with the historic Cape Wickham Lighthouse settlement are confirmed as being situated outside (to the north) of the designated boundaries of the proposed golf course development, and as such are not under direct threat of impact. However, there is the potential for the proposed golf course development to impact upon undetected sub-surface historic features associated with the settlement. The highest area of potential is along the northern boundary of the golf course development, where it abuts onto the Cape Wickham lighthouse precinct. There is also an elevated potential for sub-surface historic features to be present along the margins of Victoria Cove, where there are unverified reports of boat house structures having been constructed.
To minimise the risk of incidental impacts to undetected historic features associated with the Cape Wickham settlement it is advised that soil disturbance works associated with the proposed golf course development within these two areas (along the northern study area boundary and the margins of Victoria Cove) should be kept to a minimum.
If suspected historic features are un-earthed during the course of the proposed golf course development, it is advised that the Unanticipated Discovery Plan presented in section 9 of this report should be followed.
3) The potential to encounter sealers and/or hunters camps across the study area is low. The field survey did not identify any evidence of this camp site type, while the historic background research and archival research did not reveal the presence of any camp sites within the boundary of the proposed golf course development. Should this site type be encountered the Unanticipated Discovery Plan presented in section 9 of this report should be followed.
4) There remains a low to moderate potential of encountering unmarked grave sites. If unmarked graves or suspected skeletal remains are unearthed, the processes outlined in the Unanticipated Discovery Plan (see section 9 of this report) should be followed.
Page | 3
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Table of Contents
1.0 Project Details ...... 6 2.0 Methodology for the Historic Heritage Assessment ...... 12 2.1 Aims of the Investigation ...... 12 2.2 Project Limitations ...... 12 2.3 Project Methodology ...... 12 3.0 Environmental Setting ...... 14 3.1 Environmental Setting of King Island ...... 14 3.2 Environmental Setting of the Study Area ...... 14 4.0 Historic Background ...... 22 4.1 Historic Overview ...... 22 4.2 Cape Wickham ...... 25 4.2 Heritage Listed Sites ...... 31 4.3 Previous Archaeological Assessments ...... 31 5.0 Survey Results and Discussion ...... 33 5.1 Survey Results ...... 33 5.2 Discussions on Archaeological Potential ...... 31 6.0 Assessment of Significance ...... 44 6.1 Assessment Guidelines ...... 44 6.2 The Burra Charter ...... 44 6.3 Tasmanian Heritage Assessment Criteria ...... 45 6.4 Significance Assessment ...... 47 7.0 Statutory Controls and Legislative Requirements ...... 49 7.1 National Conventions ...... 49 7.2 Commonwealth Legislation ...... 50 7.3 State Legislation ...... 52 8.0 Management Plan ...... 54 9.0 Unanticipated Discovery Plan ...... 56 10.0 References Cited ...... 58
Page | 4
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
List of Figures Figure 1: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 100 000) ...... 9 Figure 2: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 25 000) ...... 10 Figure 3: The proposed layout of the Cape Wickham Golf Course Development ...... 11 Figure 4: Chart of King's Island, in Bass's Strait by Lieut. John Murray, 1802...... 23 Figure 5: Extract of Early map of King Island (Grimes c1802) ...... 23 Figure 6: Drawing by N.M. Petit, 1802, reproduced from Micco (1971) ...... 24 Figure 7:Chart of the north end of King Island Bass Strait, Australasia (to accompany report on lighthouse) 1855...... 27 Figure 8:Extract of map showing Cape Wickham (Butcher 1887) ...... 28 Figure 9: Cape Wickham lighthouse and cottages (Victorian Field Naturalists Expedition 1887) ...... 28 Figure 10: Cape Wickham Light Station. Taken by the Rt. Rev. Dr. Montgomery. Bishop of Tasmania during his visit in 1892 ...... 29 Figure 11: Tasmania Department of Lands and Surveys (1939.) 30 Figure 12: The location of extant historic features associated with the Cape Wickham Lighthouse settlement 32 Figure 13: The location of historic features associated with the Cape Wickham Lighthouse Settlement (as identified through the present survey) 36
List of Plates Plate 1: View south-west at Victoria Cove and Cape Farewell in the background ...... 16 Plate 2:View north-east at Victoria Cove with Cape Wickham lighthouse in the background ...... 16 Plate 3:Sandstone rock outcrops occurring within the study area ...... 17 Plate 4:Sandstone bedrock exposed to the surface in dune deflation area ...... 17 Plate 5:An example of a sandstone overhang that occurs throughout parts of the ...... 18 Plate 6: Granite outcrop that occurs 500m to the east of the study area ...... 18 Plate 7:View north along the crest of north-south orientated fore-dunes ...... 19 Plate 8: View south-west along the crest of prominent north-east to south-west orientated dune systems ...... 19 Plate 9: View south-west at low lying depression between dune systems ...... 20 Plate 10:View west at farm dam ...... 20 Plate 11: View south-west along main vehicle track running through the study area ..... 21 Plate 12: View north across study area showing predominance of introduced grasses . 21 Plate 13: View north at the Cape Wickham Lighthouse 37 Plate 14: View north-west at the cottage foundation ruins 1 (Head Lighthouse Keeper’s Cottage) 38 Plate 16: View south at cement foundations 1 39 Plate 17: View south-west at cement foundations 2 39 Plate 18: View north-west at the cottage foundation ruins 2 40 (Assistant Lighthouse Keeper’s Cottage) Plate 19: View south at the potential unmarked grave site 40 Plate 20: View north at extant fibro cottage 41 Plate 21: View west at brick building (power station) 41 Plate 22: Map showing the location of historic features around the margins of Victoria Cove (see inset in top left corner of map) 42 Plate 23: View north along Victoria Cove showing thick grass cover 43 Plate 24: Cutting in the foredunes on the margins of Victoria Cove 43
Page | 5
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
1.0 Project Details
Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd (hereafter referred to as "Lighthouse Properties") is proposing to develop an 18 hole professional standard golf links course at Cape Wickham on King Island (see Figures 1 and 2). It will be the first such golf course on King Island and one of only three links style courses in Tasmania. The key clientele to be served by the facility will be golf enthusiasts who will likely come from the United States, Asia, Europe and mainland Australia tapping into the lucrative golf tourist market.
The proposed golf course development will be predominantly focused within two parcels of land purchased by Lighthouse Properties, which are located immediately south of the historic Cape Wickham Lighthouse. The two properties are known as PID 2921284 and PID 6497265, and have a combined area of 158ha. The layout of the proposed golf course will also extend beyond the western boundaries of these two properties, and into adjoining 19.2 ha area of Crown Lease Land. This land comprises the southern coastal portion of the Cape Wickham Conservation Area in the vicinity of Victoria Cove and the northern coastal section of the Yellow Beach Conservation Area situated on the Cape Farewell Headland.
The proposed golf course development at Cape Wickham comprises the following elements. • 18 hole championship golf course. This will be a par 72 course occupying some 30% of the site under mown surfaces, the rest under native vegetation. As evidenced by the site plan the course occupies the entire site. Four hectares of native tussock grass will be removed but no trees will be removed.
• A comprehensive landscape strategy involving installation of 50,000 tube stock of indigenous species to establish the landscape.
• Clubhouse/starters pavilion with a total floor area of 142 sq. m and a maximum height of 6.5m situated near the entrance off Cape Wickham Road. This will be single storey with a simple gabled roof and verandah consistent with the style and form of dwellings at the nearby Cape Wickham lighthouse. A pro shop, change rooms, bar, small kitchen and store are to be provided.
• An eco-lodge comprising 8 spa suite bedrooms on two wings with a central hub comprising a dining, lounge, kitchen, library, meeting room, storage and pantry. The concept is that visitors can prepare their own food and/or chef, or bring in caterers as required. This structure will be built into a sand dune as shown on Section A-A of the submission (Appendix 15). Total floor area is 600 sq.m and height is limited to approximately 6m. Beyond the northern facade the building is substantially built into the sand dune/hill with part of the dune backfilled over the roof. The building is situated due south of Victoria Cove near the 18th fairway with water tanks beneath.
• Maintenance facility building. This building measures 40m in length by 20m width at 6.5m height and is used for storage of machinery, a workshop, offices and staff amenities. It will be located near the 4th fairway well remote from Cape Wickham Road.
Page | 6
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
• Car park for 40 spaces adjoining the clubhouse/starters pavilion. It would be a gravel pavement designed to Australian standards.
• Managers’ residence will have a floor area of 145 sq. m and is of a style and form consistent with that of the clubhouse/starter’s pavilion. It is to be located adjoining Cape Wickham Road. It will be the first building seen on the approach to the site from the south.
• Helipad to be located near the 1st and 8th fairway. Design to be confirmed as per Civil Aviation Safety Authority requirements.
• Practice facilities including a practice range, chipping and putting greens adjacent to the clubhouse/starter’s Pavilion.
• At least three golf course shelters measuring 3.5m x 3.5m, weatherboard clad on concrete slab with colour bond roof. To be located in the vicinity of the 12th green, 13th tee, 17th green and 18th tee. One of these will have a composting or chemical toilet installed.
• Installation of a maintenance track some 3m wide, comprising a combination of grassed and sand based tracks with consolidated gravel limited to certain areas where required. This will be established early in the process and will link all of the buildings together to enable construction and maintenance to occur on site.
• Water demand for maintaining the golf course is estimated at 145 ML/year, to be sourced from groundwater plus rainfall. Most of this, about two thirds, will be used on fairways. Water supply to individual habitable buildings will be sourced from tanks attached to roofed areas of respectively buildings, supplemented as necessary with bore water. Tanks will be integrated into the design of the buildings.
• No roads are proposed to the lodge with access by private vehicle limited to the clubhouse/starter’s pavilion. Beyond this access will be via golf cart and similar sized vehicles around the property, largely utilising fairways for ease of access. • Power supply will be via the grid supplemented by solar panels (eco lodge, clubhouse/starters pavilion, managers residence).
• A coastal track is proposed to connect the car park to be established near the Lighthouse (adjoining the Clubhouse/Starters Pavilion) but the alignment, tenure upon which the land is situated and method of construction is not specified.
The following golf tees, landing areas and greens are proposed to be sited in the coastal reserve (see Figure 1): hole 1 (approx. half of landing area and green), hole 2 (tee, landing area and green), hole 3 (tee, landing area and green), hole 4 (tee and approx. half of landing area), hole 5 (landing area and green), hole 6 (tee only - shared tee with hole 13),
Page | 7
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
hole 10 (approx. half of green), hole 11 (landing area and green), hole 12 (landing area and green), hole 13 (tee only - shared tee with hole 6), hole 14 (small portion of landing area), hole 15 (part of green), hole 16 (tee, landing area and green), hole 17 (tee), hole 18 (tee, landing area and green).
Figure 3 shows the proposed layout of the golf course development.
Page | 8
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 1: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 100 000)
Page | 9
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 2: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 25 000)
Page | 10
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 3: The proposed layout of the Cape Wickham Golf Course Development
Page | 11
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
2.0 Methodology for the Historic Heritage Assessment
CHMA Pty Ltd (Archaeological Consultants) have been engaged by Lighthouse Properties to undertake an historic heritage assessment for the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development.
The following provides a description of the methodology employed for the historic heritage assessment of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development.
2.1 Aims of the Investigation
The principal aims of this historic heritage assessment are as follows;
Locate and document places and items of European heritage value within the bounds of the study area; To assess the archaeological sensitivity of the study area; To assess the scientific and cultural values of any identified heritage sites located within the study area; and To develop a detailed set of management recommendations aimed at minimising the impact of the project on heritage sites and values within the study area.
2.2 Project Limitations
All archaeological investigations are subject to limitations that may affect the reliability of the results. The main constraint to the present investigation was restricted surface visibility due primarily to vegetation cover. At the time of the field survey, surface visibility across the entire study area was restricted to an average of between 15-20%. These constraints limited the effectiveness of the survey assessment.
2.3 Project Methodology
A three stage project methodology was implemented for this assessment.
Stage 1 (Pre-Fieldwork Background Work)
Prior to field work being undertaken, the following tasks were completed by CHMA staff: The following documentation was collated for this project.
Previous archaeological reports and research undertaken in the general vicinity of the study area; Topographic and planning maps of the study area and surrounding region; Details of previously recorded heritage sites in the general vicinity of the study area, through the results of searches of relevant heritage databases; Archival research
Page | 12
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Stage 2 (Field Work) Stage 2 entailed the field work component of the assessment. The field survey was undertaken over a period of three days (31-7-2012 to 2-8-2012) by Stuart Huys (CHMA archaeologist).
The field survey was undertaken on foot by walking a series of transects across the study area. In total, 23.4 km of transects were walked within the study area. In the course of the field assessment, any areas of improved surface visibility (such as vehicle and stock tracks, erosion scalds and dune deflation areas) were subject to a detailed inspection. Section 6.1 provides further details as to the survey coverage achieved within the study area.
Stage 3 Stage 3 of the project involves the production of a Draft and Final Report that includes an analysis of the data obtained from the field survey, an assessment of significance and management recommendations. This report has been prepared by Stuart Huys and Cornelia de Rochefort.
Page | 13
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
3.0 Environmental Setting
3.1 Environmental Setting of King Island
King Island is the most geographically isolated of the islands in the Bass Strait located some 85km from Hunter Island. The island measures 65km in length from north to south and 25km in width from east to west, covering an area of approximately 1099km2 (Prior 1987:52). The topography of the Island is characterised by low relief landforms with its highest point, Mt Stanley, measuring less than 159m above sea level (Sim 1991:21). The majority of the northern portion of the island falls below 40m above sea level and is considerably flatter than the plateau area located in the south of the island.
North of the southern plateau region exists low lying swamps and flats with a small rage of hills along the east coast and aeolian coastal dune formations to the west (Sim 1991:21). These aeolian dune formations occur along virtually the entire west and northwest coastal regions and to a lesser extent on the west coastal fringe of the southern plateau area (Sim 1991:21). These dunes form part of an extensive formation, often 70m or more in height and extending up to 3km inland. The study area falls immediately within these areas of dune formations.
3.2 Environmental Setting of the Study Area
The study area is located on the north-west coast of King Island, immediately to the south of the Cape Wickham lighthouse. The study area encompasses a total of 176.2ha. This is comprised of two adjoining properties with a sum total of 158ha that are owned by Lighthouse Properties (PID 2921284 and PID 6497265) and a 19.2ha area of coastal reserve Crown Leased Land that abuts onto the western boundaries of the two properties.
The coastal foreshore fringing the western bounds of the study area is a rocky foreshore system, formed on Precambrian granites and un-metamorphosed sedimentary sandstones which have resulted in the formation of a series of small bays and points. Cape Farewell is the most prominent of points in the vicinity of the study area (see Plate 1). Victoria Cove, which is located just to the north of Cape Farewell is the most prominent of the bay features. This is a small sandy bay which is fringed on either side with rock platforms (see Plates 1 and 2).
The underlying geology throughout the vast majority of the study area comprises un- metamorphosed sedimentary sandstones which exposed to the surface at many locations throughout the study area, in the form of jutting rocky outcrops (see Plate 3) or in areas where there has been a deflation of the overlying sand dune deposits (see Plate 4). In some areas, particularly around the fringes of Victoria Cove, small sandstone escarpments occur within which there are a series of small sandstone overhangs (see Plate 5). Although small, some of these overhangs have the potential to have been utilised as shelters by Aboriginal people.
A discreet outcrop of Precambrian granite was noted to occur approximately 400m to the east of the eastern boundary of the study area (see Plate 6). This granite outcrop was a
Page | 14
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
known quarry source in historic times, and was used as a source of stone for the construction of the Cape Wickham Lighthouse and associated buildings.
The topography within the study area is characteristically gently to moderately undulating, comprising numerous Aeolian sand dune systems. A series of prominent north-south orientated foreshore dune ridges fringes the coastal reserve in the western portion of the study area (see Plate 7). A second series of north-east to south-west trending dune ridges run through the central portions of the study area (see Plate 8). The ridge crests of these dunes are elevated up to 20-30m ASL. The ridge summits are typically narrow and level. The side slopes of the sand dune ridges are generally quite steep, with the slope gradients ranging between 10-35º. Between the dune ridges, the terrain is generally flat and in some instances low lying and prone to inundation (see Plate 9).
The study area is drained by a series of very small, ephemeral drainage gullies. However, there are no major permanent or named fresh water sources that occur within the bounds of the study area. The closest major water source to the study area are Lake Wickham and Cask Lake, both of which are located approximately 1km to the east of the eastern boundary of the study area.
The study area has been used since the 1800s for cattle production. A range of infrastructure associated with cattle farming occurs within the study area; including a series of dams (see Plate 10), fence lines and cattle yards. A series of graded vehicle tracks also run throughout the study area. There is one main track that runs through the study area from Cape Wickham Road south-west through to Victoria Cove (see Plate 11).
The vast majority of the native vegetation within the study area has been cleared for farming purposes and has been re-planted with introduced grass species (see Plate 12). There are small patches of remnant native vegetation located along some dune systems in the central portion of the study area and along the coastal foreshores.
Page | 15
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 1: View south-west at Victoria Cove and Cape Farewell in the background
Plate 2:View north-east at Victoria Cove with Cape Wickham lighthouse in the background
Page | 16
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 3:Sandstone rock outcrops occurring within the study area
Plate 4:Sandstone bedrock exposed to the surface in dune deflation area
Page | 17
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 5:An example of a sandstone overhang that occurs throughout parts of the study area
Plate 6: Granite outcrop that occurs 500m to the east of the study area
Page | 18
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 7:View north along the crest of north-south orientated fore-dunes
Plate 8: View south-west along the crest of prominent north-east to south-west orientated dune systems
Page | 19
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 9: View south-west at low lying depression between dune systems
Plate 10:View west at farm dam
Page | 20
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 11: View south-west along main vehicle track running through the study area
Plate 12: View north across study area showing predominance of introduced grasses
Page | 21
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
4.0 Historic Background
The following comprises of an historic overview of the discovery, settlement and development of King Island, and presents the findings of the primary and secondary archival research and historic registry searches relating to the Cape Wickham study area.
4.1 Historic Overview
King Island is one of the islands that make up the state of Tasmania, Australia. It is located in the Roaring Forties of Bass Strait, off the north-western tip of the main island of Tasmania. According to a note scribbled by Governor King in 1803, King Island was first discovered in 1798 by Mr Ried in the schooner Martha. However, official records indicate that Captain Ried entered the straits in 1799 whilst hunting seals. The Martha is possibly the first sealing ship to ply the Bass Strait (Jones and Sullivan 1989).
Bass Strait was named in 1799 and in January 1801Captain John Black, sailing in the Harbinger, also visited King Island. Black named the island King's Island after Governor Philip Gidley King. In March of that year Governor King ordered Acting Lieutenant John Murray to proceed to Bass Strait in the Lady Nelson to take soundings and samples of the sea bottom. Murray chartered the coast of King Island from Seal Bay to New Year Isles; naming Seal Elephant Bay, Elephant Rock and Cape Farewell (Figure 4). The wider study area at this time is seen to comprise mostly of ‘sand hummocks’.
In November 1802, the French scientific expedition to Australia, commanded by Nicholas Baudin, visited King Island for up to three weeks. Despite the scientific nature of their expedition in the ships Geographe and the Naturaliste, Governor King ordered Lieutenant Charles Robbins to forestall any attempt by the French to lay claim to the island.
Robbins arrived in the sloop Cumberland in December 1802 and made a formal landing on December 14, taking possession of the Island in the name of King George the Third (Monger 1931; Jones and Sullivan 1989). Baudin left the island on December 31, while Robbins party spent six weeks on the island with Robbins’ surveyor, Charles Grimes, making an extensive survey of the Island at this time (Figure 5).
Page | 22
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 4: Chart of King's Island, in Bass's Strait by Lieut. John Murray, 1802
Figure 5: Extract of Early map of King Island (Grimes c1802)
From the initial discovery of King Island, the island was found to abound in both fur seals and elephant seals, which were soon heavily exploited. Indeed, sealing in Tasmanian waters predated the founding of the colony. As early as 1798 the commercial speculation of the Bass Strait Islands was realised, and the exploitation of seals at the
Page | 23
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Furneaux and Kent Group Islands began in earnest (Beattie 1911). King Island was sighted by sealer William Reed in Martha in 1799, and when Baudin visited the island in 1802, gangs gathering elephant seals (Mirounga leonina) for oil were firmly established (Plomley and Henley 1990).
Francis Peron, the historian from the French scientific expedition led by Baudin, met a sealing gang on the northern point of Elephant Bay and provides an account of the sealers camp at that time in 1802.
“These sealers had set up their quarters at the top of a hill, on the north point of Elephant Bay, about six miles from our camp: it consisted of four huts and shanties, constructed with pieces of wood driven into the ground and meeting at an angle at the top; some rough pieces of bark filled the gaps between the pieces of wood” (Peron 1802 in Micco 1971)
Figure 6: Drawing by N.M. Petit, 1802, reproduced from Micco (1971)
(description at base of image reads” The camp of the French scientists at Seal Elephant Bay, King Island. To the left of the nearer tent may be seen the English flag with, below it, a sentry sitting by a fire. On the nearer side of the far tent is the frame of the kitchen, with smoke coming from it. On the beach Mr Grimes at the theodolite, and the other men are carrying out a survey, indifferent to the two seal elephants behind then”).
Page | 24
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Sealing gangs were put ashore at various spots around the coast of King Island, with most gangs establishing their camp sites along the eastern coast, near Sea Elephant Bay. In the years 1826 and 1827, the surveyor G.W. Barnard made six traverses across the Island, west to east. He left an account of the terrain and vegetation on his map, including seven localities where he encountered try pots which were used by the sealers to boil down the blubber for oil (Edgecombe1993).
With the decline of sealing during the 1820’s hunting of wallabies and possums for their skins became the chief occupation for those remaining on the island. Early farming endeavours were disastrous with stock grazing on the then unknown toxic pea flower, resulting in blindness, madness and death. In 1836 Captain Malcolm Laing Smith took up the first lease on the island, establishing a slab hut at Yellow Rock. When his sheep failed to thrive he left the island, to later obtain annual occupation rights to King Island in 1850 (Monger 1931).
In 1855, two Melbourne men, R. and P. Turnbull, took up a seven year grazing lease and erected a stockyard and hut at Yellow Rock. The venture was abandoned four years later owing to the disastrous effects of the toxic pea flower. The next lease to be taken up was in 1862 by Mr. E.H. Hunt, who after several visits to the island simply turned it over to a firm of West Indian merchants who merely paid the annual fee for the currency of the lease. A sub lease during this period, of 18 months, was held by Mr W. Hickmont, on behalf of two or three permanent hunters on the island (Monger 1931).
The following, and last lease was taken up in 1869 by Mr. Woods, Draper and Gregory who stocked the island with sheep, cattle and horses. The centre of operations was held at Surprise Bay with a substation at Yellow Rock. This venture, like all its predecessors, also failed. The island was not held by anyone for over 10 years, until the island was opened for selection in 1887. At this time, the only other inhabitants of the island, aside from the families maintaining the light houses were two hunting families (Edgecombe 1993).Initially land was taken up at Surprise Bay, Boobyalla and at Yellow Rock, however, a township was slowly developing at Currie after the establishment of a light house at that locale in 1880. By 1900, settlement of the island had increased, with a population of 242 people. This number rose to 778 over the next 10 years, when the first land boom saw 92% of the available land taken up (Edgecombe 1993).
After the end of the First World War, a soldier settlement scheme was established at King Island, near, Reekara, however, many of the farms were too small to provide the farmers with a living. In 1948 after World War II, a new scheme was financed to provide fat lamb and dairy farms for returned men. A new farm was completed every fortnight, with blocks of land having been furnished with fencing, a house, a dairy, Dutch barn and water supply. A total of 161 farms were established at Egg Lagoon, Reekara, Yarra Creek, Pegarah and Mount Stanley. Again the blocks of land were too small to be viable, with many of the blocks later amalgamated into more reasonable areas and sold to skilled farmers (Hooper 1980; Edgecombe 1993).
4.2 Cape Wickham
Sealers and hunters appear to be the first European occupants of the island along with the survivors of ship wrecks, of which there were many. Cape Wickham marks the southern end of what is called the "Eye of the Needle," the dangerous narrow western
Page | 25
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
entrance, 84 kilometres wide, that ships had to go through to get into Bass Strait and to Melbourne. The northern end of this entrance is Cape Otway, Victoria. Suddenly from an ocean of thousands of kilometres, ship's captains had to find a gap 84 kilometres wide, which in the absence of a light house on King Island, resulted in numerous shipwrecks along its coast.
In 1835, the Neva carrying mostly convict women and children was wrecked at Cape Wickham, with 225 lives lost. This loss attracted little attention from authorities and it was not until Australia's largest maritime disaster, the wrecking of the Cataraqui with losses of 402 lives in 1845 that, eventually lead to the establishment of Cape Wickham.
Even after the establishment of Cape Wickham and a lighthouse there were still wrecks as some ship's masters mistook the light for Cape Otway. One such ship was the Netherby, wrecked near the current Currie Lighthouse in 1866. This was followed by the Lock Leven in 1871, and the Anna in 1873, and lead to the establishment of the Currie Lighthouse. At these times the Cape Wickham Lighthouse became a refuge to the survivors and a final resting place to the victims (King Island News 1947).
Near the Cape Wickham lighthouse are the unmarked graves of many of the Neva's victims and the marked graves of some later mariners, including the master of the clipper Loch Leven, that attest to these tragedies.
The first official recommendation for the lighting of Bass Strait was made in 1841. In 1846, a Select Committee on Light Houses, appointed by the New South Wales Legislative Council, recommended the establishment of a lighthouse on the northern end of King Island. This recommendation was however withdrawn the following year owing to concerns that a light at Cape Wickham might draw vessels onto Harbinger Reef, several kilometres to the west of the Island. The Committee instead recommended that a light be erected at cape Otway, on the Victorian mainland.
These recommendations were not immediately adopted for financial reasons and in 1845 another committee was established to reconsider the lighting of Bass Strait. In order to clearly mark the western and eastern entrances to the Bass Strait, the committee recommended the construction of four lighthouses, on Cape Wickham, Cape Otway, Deal Island and Gabo Island. Subsequently, permanent lights were established at Deal Island and Cape Otway in 1848. A temporary beacon was erected on Gabo Island in 1853, pending completion of a permanent tower in 1853.
Page | 26
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 7:Chart of the north end of King Island Bass Strait, Australasia (to accompany report on lighthouse) 1855.
Despite the need for a lighthouse at Cape Wickham, its construction continued to be delayed owing to both financial reasons and concerns about the proximity of Harbinger Reef. However, the loss of six ships on King Island between 1854 and 1856 resulted in renewed calls for the establishment of the Cape Wickham light.
Despite the continued loss of life and property, it was not until 1861 that a warning light was erected on King Island's northern tip, twenty years after the initial recommendation had been made. The tower was built by contractors to the New South Wales and Victorian Governments, with a clerk of works from Tasmania. The contractors made a fortune by using good quality granite from a local source, instead of the imported granite specified in their two thousand pound contract (Edgecombe 1993). Figure 7 shows a chart of Cape Wickham produced in 1855, showing the proposed location of the light house and also details the location of the local granite quarry. The study area at this time is seen to be mostly covered in dense scrub land.
The Cape Wickham Lighthouse began operating on 1 November 1861, and was initially manned by a superintendent and three assistants. At the time of its establishment the lighthouse was an isolated outpost on an otherwise undeveloped island (Figure 8). Figures 9 and 10 show photographs of the light station settlement taken in 1878 and 1892 respectively. The settlement included stone cottages, vegetable gardens, stock enclosures (for sheep, cattle, goats and horses), a small timber church, graveyard, signal house, boat shed and jetty. The remainder of the island's population were largely itinerant sealers, fishermen, prospectors and hunters.
Page | 27
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 8:Extract of map showing Cape Wickham (Butcher 1887)
Figure 9: Cape Wickham lighthouse and cottages (Victorian Field Naturalists Expedition 1887)
Page | 28
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 10: Cape Wickham Light Station. Taken by the Rt. Rev. Dr. Montgomery. Bishop of Tasmania during his visit in 1892
Wickham’s first superintendant was Captain F. Drugan who was succeeded one year later by Edward Nash Spong, who was in charge for some twenty years. When the light was first established there seemed to be a certain amount of tension between the light keepers and hunters. Roving bands of hunters began trespassing on the lighthouse reserve and making free use of the facilities the keepers had provided for themselves. Animosity quickly developed between these and the families who lived on the island, with one report in 1873, outlining the difficulties:
“There are certain lawless men who have taken up their residence on the island who make a practice of annoying the Superintendent in every possible way, destroying his cattle, pulling down the fences and taking his hay and in fact they say they are determined to make the place too hot for him, and I much fear it will end in some serious injury to the station or perhaps to the light itself.”
(1873 Report, cited in Stanley 1991)
This tension does not appear to have lasted, as quite a favourable account of life at the Cape Wickham light station is documented in a news item of the time. Jones and Sullivan (1989) quote from a newspaper article;
The position of a light house keeper residing on some out of the way land has often been a subject of commiseration, but the little community of King Island are perfectly happy and contented with their lot in life. The superintendant resides in a good well built eight roomed house, and has all his family around him. The assistants have also stone cottages of their own, neatly and comfortably furnished. There are a few cows, pigs, fowls
Page | 29
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
etc. which belong to the superintendant, and at a short distance from the habitations there are several gardens, in which a few flowers and vegetables of all kinds are grown. The island is full of kangaroo and wallaby, which the assistants hunt three times a week....A small church built in the orthodox ecclesiastical style, and with a steeple too has been constructed...” Jones and Sullivan (1989:37-38)
The small settlement at Cape Wickham continued to be occupied into the twentieth century, however, the settlement was abandoned and the buildings demolished when the light house was de-manned in 1921. The light house reserve was first leased to a F. Cooper and a P. Joubert in 1931, with the adjoining property to the south having been purchased by A Bowling in 1932. Aside from the initial settlement and continued pastoral/agricultural use of the area, the study area has remained largely undeveloped to the current day.
Figure 11: Tasmania Department of Lands and Surveys (1939.)
Page | 30
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
4.2 Heritage Listed Sites
Two heritage listed historic sites, namely, the Cape Wickham Light house and associated archaeological remains, are located within close proximity to the proposed golf course development. These sites are not situated within the current boundary of the proposed development.
Agency databases searched included;
The Australian Heritage Database (AHD) Tasmanian Heritage Register (THR); The Register of the National Estate (RNE) King Island Planning Scheme (1995) Heritage Precinct (H) Schedule 5.2
The Cape Wickham light house is listed on the AHD (Commonwealth Heritage List), THR, and the RNE, while the associated archaeological ruins comprising of the first settlement on King Island are listed on the RNE. Both the light house and ruins are also protected under the King Island Planning Scheme (1995) Heritage Precinct.
4.3 Previous Archaeological Assessments
One previous archaeological assessment of the light station reserve was undertaken in 1993 by Australian Construction Services (ACS). At this time the Australian Maritime Safety Authority was proposing to rationalise the amount of land it required around the Cape Wickham light house, ultimately resulting in the disposal of the surplus land.
The ACS study highlighted the fact that while the light station itself was well documented the associated light keepers cottages and ancillary buildings are not. The current study also did not uncover any archival records relating to the construction and layout of the light house settlement, other than several photographs dating to the late nineteenth century.
The lack of archival documentation aside, the ACS with the assistance of the local historical society determined that the remains of the early settlement were situated both within and outside of the commonwealth boundary. Figure 12 is a reproduction of a plan produced by ACS, showing the location of buildings and sites in relation to the light house and the commonwealth boundary. The building remains identified across the site are associated with the original late nineteenth century settlement and later WWII radar station and beacon structures which were also demolished.
The ACS assessment found that the buildings of the early light house settlement were only demolished to ground level and that further buried archaeological material is present. Despite this fact, the study concluded that while the archaeological excavation of these remains would undoubtedly uncover further information, it was deemed doubtful that any new information would add to or alter the significance of the site or light stations generally. This conclusion was also drawn owing to the fact that any excavations would have to be wide and extensive in scope, and at that time, fell outside of the commonwealth boundary and the then current scope of work.
Page | 31
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
It was concluded that the archaeological remains of the settlement be conserved and that any potential disturbance to the site(s), simply avoided. The ACS study concluded that they had identified the extent of the settlement with a degree of certainty, despite the complete lack of documentary evidence.
Figure 12: The location of extant historic features associated with the Cape Wickham Lighthouse settlement
Page | 32
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
5.0 Survey Results and Discussion
5.1 Survey Results During the course of the field survey assessment no definitive historic features were identified within the bounds of the proposed golf course development (the study area).
As described in section 4 of this report, the Cape Wickham Lighthouse and associated settlement are located immediately to the north of the proposed golf course development. As part of the present investigations, the field team carried out an extensive survey within this area. The field team noted the locations of the various features associated with the lighthouse settlement complex, and carried out a brief recording of each feature. The primary purpose of the recording was to ascertain and document the exact locations of these features in relation to the proposed development.
Table 1 provides the summary details for the identified features associated with the Cape Wickham Lighthouse settlement. Figure 13 shows the location of the identified features. Virtually all of these features had been previously identified as part of the archaeological assessment of the light station reserve that was undertaken in 1993 by Australian Construction Services (ACS). These include the ruins of the Head Lighthouse Keepers cottage, the ruins of the assistant Lighthouse Keeper’s cottage and a series of more recent concrete foundations. The exceptions are two marked grave sites that are located adjacent to each other, within the existing fence picnic ground, and a possible unmarked grave which is located just to the south-east of the ruins of the assistant lighthouse keeper’s quarters. These do not appear in the records of the ACS recordings.
All of the observed historic features associated with were confirmed as being situated outside the bounds of the proposed golf course development boundaries.
There is a map that is located within the fenced picnic ground area that shows a series of three boat houses and a test house that are located along the foreshore margins of Victoria Cove (see Plate 22). No information was found in the historic literature regards these features, and the source of the information has not been substantiated. As part of the field survey assessment, the field team carried out a very detailed survey inspection along the margins of Victoria Cove. No evidence for the physical remains of these structures was noted. The area is heavily grassed in parts, and this obscured surface visibility to some extent (see Plate 23). It is therefore possible that undetected remains of these structures are present in the area. However, given that these structures are likely to have been quite rudimentary, any physical remains are likely to be minimal.
There is a 3m wide cutting in the foredunes of Victoria Cove, leading down to the water’ edge (see Plate 24). This cutting may have been associated with one of the boatsheds reported to have been present in this area. However, there are no physical remains in the form of slipway structures etc to confirm this.
It is noted that the present golf course design does not have any buildings proposed for construction along the foreshore margins of Victoria Cove. However, parts of the area will be landscaped as part of the design of the 18th Fairway (see Figure 3).
Page | 33
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
5.2 Discussions on Archaeological Potential As stated, the Cape Wickham light house and the documented surface extent of the physical remains of the associated lighthouse settlement are situated to the north of the bounds of the current golf course development proposal.
However, it should be noted that the exact spatial extent of the archaeological ruins is difficult to determine, owing to the fact that parts of the original settlement may no longer be visible on the surface, and due to the fact that existing plans of the light station settlement are largely conjectural in nature. As such the northern section of the proposed golf course development has a moderate potential to contain the buried remains of aspects of the light house settlement.
The entire area encompassed by the golf course development also has some potential to contain unmarked graves from the numerous ship wrecks that have occurred in the past. Grave sites from the Neva are known to exist within proximity to the light house and the potential for further unmarked graves to exist in the wider vicinity is also present.
In addition, there is the potential to encounter the remains of early sealers and hunters camps within the study area. These camps are likely to have formed ephemeral structures and will be difficult to identify in the modern landscape. Evidence of these camp sites are likely to include old hearths, artefact scatters (rubbish dumps) and potentially the remains of the camp structures themselves. Hunters camps are likely to occur anywhere within the proposed study area as are sealers camps, yet the latter is more likely to be found in proximity to Victoria Cove. Owing to the ephemeral nature of these types of sites, the potential to encounter sealers and hunters camps within the study area remains low.
Page | 34
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Table 1: Identified Historic Features Associated with the Cape Wickham Lighthouse Complex Feature Grid Reference Description Cape Wickham E752738 N5613766 Cape Wickham Lighthouse. Lighthouse Construction completed in 1861 Constructed from locally quarried granite. 44.2m high 3.4m thick base (see plate 13) Cottage Ruins 1 E752700 N5613650 Foundations and rubble associated with E752705 N5613665 remains of head lighthouse keepers E752682 N5613670 cottage. Ruins spread over 25m x 20m E752678 N5613656 area. Local granite is building stone material. Part of chimney still evident (see plate 14) Cement E752788 N5613592 Series of concrete slabs extending across Foundations 1 E752769 N5613592 an area measuring 25m x 20m. E752789 N5613623 (see Plate 16). E752803 N5613621 Marked Graves E752640 N5613645 Two marked graves located side by side within fenced picnic area. One grave dedicated to George Hickmoll. Second grave to Captain William Branscombe. Both made from local stone, with headstone marker. (see Plate 15) Cement E752834 N5613617 Series of concrete slabs extending across Foundations 2 E752836 N5613631 an area measuring 20m x 10m. E752845 N5613630 (see Plate 17). E752844 N5613619 Cottage Ruins 2 E752863 N5613677 Foundations and rubble associated with E752865 N5613659 remains of Assistant lighthouse keepers E752825 N5613653 quarters. Ruins spread over 35m x 25m E752827 N5613672 area. West wall is most intact part of ruins. (see Plate 18). Possible E752937 N5613609 Feature measures 2m x 1m. Delineated by Unmarked a series of granite stones (30cm high). Grave Daffodils growing within defined area. Wire across top of feature. (see Plate 19). Fibro Cottage E752783 N5613724 Fibro cottage (see Plate 20). Red brick E752755 N5613720 Rd Brick building building (see Plate 21).
Page | 35
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Figure 13: The location of historic features associated with the Cape Wickham Lighthouse Settlement (as identified through the present survey)
Page | 36
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 13: View north at the Cape Wickham Lighthouse
Page | 37
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 14: View north-west at the cottage foundation ruins 1 (Head Lighthouse Keeper’s Cottage)
Plate 15: View east at the marked gravestones
Page | 38
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 16: View south at cement foundations 1
Plate 17: View south-west at cement foundations 2
Page | 39
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 18: View north-west at the cottage foundation ruins 2 (Assistant Lighthouse Keeper’s Cottage)
Plate 19: View south at the potential unmarked grave site
Page | 40
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 20: View north at extant fibro cottage
Plate 21: View west at brick building (power station).
Page | 41
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 22: Map showing the location of historic features around the margins of Victoria Cove (see inset in top left corner of map)
Page | 42
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Plate 23: View north along Victoria Cove showing thick grass cover
Plate 24: Cutting in the foredunes on the margins of Victoria Cove
Page | 43
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
6.0 Assessment of Significance
The following provides an outline of the processes used to assess the significance of sites identified during the field survey.
6.1 Assessment Guidelines
There are several different ways of defining types of significance, and many practitioners have developed their own system of significance assessment. However, as Sullivan and Pearson (1995) point out, there seems to be a general advantage in using a set of criteria which is already widely accepted. In Australia cultural significance is usually assessed against the Burra Charter guidelines and the Australian Heritage Commission guidelines (ICOMOS 1988, 1999).
6.2 The Burra Charter
Under the guidelines of the Burra Charter ‘cultural significance’ refers to the ‘aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations’ of a ‘place’ (ICOMOS 1999:2). The guidelines to the Burra Charter comment: “Although there are a variety of adjectives used in definitions of cultural significance in Australia, the adjectives ‘aesthetic’, ‘historic’, ‘scientific’ and social’ ... can encompass all other values”. The following provides the descriptions given for each of these terms.
Aesthetic Value Aesthetic value includes aspects of sensory perception for which criteria can and should be stated. Such criteria may include consideration of the form, scale, colour, texture and materials of the fabric; the smells and sounds associated with the place and its use (Marquis-Kyle & Walker 1992).
Historic Value A place may have historic value because it has influenced, or has been influenced by, an historic figure, event, phase or activity. It may also have historic value as the site of an important event. For any given place the significance will be greater where evidence of the association or event survives in situ, or where the settings are substantially intact, than where it has been changed or evidence does not survive. However, some events or associations may be so important that the place retains significance regardless of subsequent treatment (Marquis-Kyle & Walker 1992).
Scientific Value The scientific or research value of a place will depend upon the importance of the data involved or its rarity, quality or representativeness and on the degree to which the place may contribute further substantial information. A site or a resource is said to be scientifically significant when its further study may be expected to help current research questions. That is, scientific significance is defined as research potential (Marquis-Kyle & Walker 1992).
Page | 44
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Social Value The social value of a place is perhaps the most difficult value for heritage professionals to substantiate (Johnston 1994). However, social value is broadly defined as ‘the qualities for which a place has become a focus of spiritual, political, natural or other cultural sentimental to a majority or minority group’ (ICOMOS 1988:30). In What is Social Value, Johnston (1994) has provided a clear definition of social value: “Social value is about collective attachment to places that embody meaning important to a community, these places are usually community owned or publicly accessible or in some other way ‘appropriated’ into people’s daily lives. Such meanings are in addition to other values, such as the evidence of valued aspects of history or beauty, and these meanings may not be apparent in the fabric of the place, and may not be apparent to the disinterested observer”. (Johnston 1994:10)
Although encompassed within the criterion of social value, the spiritual value of a place is a new addition to the Burra Charter (ICOMOS 1999:1). Spiritual value is predominantly used to assess places of cultural significance to Indigenous Australians.
The degree to which a place is significant can vary. As Johnston (1994:3) has stated when trying to understand significance a ‘variety of concepts [are] used from a geographical comparison (‘national’, ‘state’, ‘local’) to terms such as ‘early’, ‘rare’, or ‘seminal’’. Indeed the Burra Charter clearly states that when assessing historic significance, one should note that for:
‘any given place the significance will be greater where evidence of the association or event survives in situ, or where the setting is substantially intact, than where it has been changed or evidence does not survive’. (ICOMOS 1988:29)
6.3 Tasmanian Heritage Assessment Criteria
The Tasmanian heritage assessment criteria outlined in the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 encompass the five values in the Burra Charter, which are commonly accepted as generic values by Australian heritage agencies. For the purpose of regulating historic heritage under Tasmanian legislation, the Burra Charter values are expressed through seven assessment criteria with the aim of;
minimising ambiguity in assessing why a place is significant; providing a tighter legal definition of why a place is significant; and maintaining consistency with comparable assessments conducted by other Australian heritage agencies.
Listed below are the seven assessment criteria that need to be considered when assessing a place for possible entry on the Tasmanian Heritage Register.
Page | 45
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Tasmanian heritage assessment criteria (Section 16 Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995)
Criterion (a): It is important in demonstrating the evolution or pattern of Tasmania’s history
Criterion (b): It demonstrates rare, uncommon or endangered aspects of Tasmania’s heritage
Criterion (c): It has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Tasmania’s history
Criterion (d): It is important as a representative in demonstrating the characteristics of a broader class of cultural places
Criterion (e): It is important in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement
Criterion (f): It has strong or special meaning for any group or community because of social, cultural or spiritual associations Criterion (g): It has a special association with the life or work of a person, a group or organisation that was important in Tasmania’s history
In Tasmania, a heritage place may be afforded protection by listing as:
a place of state heritage significance in the Tasmanian Heritage Register; or a place of local heritage significance in a heritage code of a local planning authority.
State heritage significance in relation to a place: means aesthetic, archaeological, architectural, historic, scientific, social, spiritual or technical value to the whole state for past, present or future generations.
Local heritage significance in relation to a place means: aesthetic, archaeological, architectural, historic, scientific, social, spiritual or technical value to a local or regional area for past, present or future generations.
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (July 2011)
Page | 46
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
6.4 Significance Assessment
The Cape Wickham light house is listed on the AHD (Commonwealth Heritage List), THR, and the RNE, while the associated archaeological ruins comprising of the first settlement on King Island are listed on the RNE. Both the light house and ruins are also protected under the King Island Planning Scheme (1995) Heritage Precinct.
Cape Wickham Light House
The following text has been reproduced from the Australian Heritage Database, Commonwealth Heritage Listing, Place ID105567.
Physical Description The Cape Wickham Lighthouse comprises a closed circular painted masonry tower that is constructed of coursed, dressed stonework, which supports a H. Wilkins and Company lantern. Constructed of locally quarried granite, it is the tallest lighthouse in Australia, standing forty eight metres high to the top of the lantern house. The walls at the base are between 3.6 and four metres thick to support the mass. Internally, the tower features a circular wooden stairway around a cylindrical hollow shaft in which the clockwork weights that were used to revolve the original optical apparatus were hung. Each floor is 3.6 metres in diameter and access to the top of the tower is by eleven landings, with twenty wooden steps between each stage, except for the last stage, from which thirteen iron-grating steps lead from the lamp room to the lantern. Statement of Significance Criterion A (Processes) The Cape Wickham Lighthouse, built in 1861, is significant as an integral part of Bass Strait's mid-nineteenth century network of lighthouses. This system represents the first example of cooperation by the Australian colonies in sharing the costs and responsibilities of providing navigational aids.
Attributes The whole of the lighthouse and its landscape setting. Criterion B (Rarity) It is forty eight metres high, which makes it the tallest lighthouse in Australia. It retains the original H Wilkins and Company lantern house and the original timber staircase, a feature that is not common in a stone lighthouse
Attributes The tower's height and its original timber staircase. Criterion D (Characteristic values) The Cape Wickham Lighthouse is a good example of a lighthouse built during the 1860s.
Attributes The lighthouse's form, fabric and coursed stonework. Criterion E (Aesthetic characteristics) The Cape Wickham Lighthouse makes a dramatic contribution to the rural landscape of the northern tip of King Island. Attributes
Page | 47
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Its height, location, painted exterior and visual prominence. Summary Statement of Significance The Cape Wickham Lighthouse, built in 1861, is significant as an integral part of Bass Strait's mid-nineteenth century network of lighthouses. This system represents the first example of cooperation by the Australian colonies in sharing the costs and responsibilities of providing navigational aids (Criterion A.4) (Australian Historic Themes 3.8.1 Shipping to and from Australian ports; 3.8.2 Safeguarding Australian products for long journeys and 3.16.1 Dealing with hazards and disasters).
The Cape Wickham Lighthouse makes a dramatic contribution to the rural landscape of the northern tip of King Island (Criterion E.1).
The Cape Wickham Lighthouse is a good example of a lighthouse built during the 1860s. It is forty eight metres high, which makes it the tallest lighthouse in Australia. It retains the original H Wilkins and Company lantern house and the original timber staircase, a feature that is not common in a stone lighthouse (Criterion B.2 and D.2).
Cape Wickham Archaeological Ruins
The Cape Wickham archaeological remains of the light house settlement are listed on the Register of the National Estate, Place ID 17849- Pre 1918 Ruins.
Physical Description Archaeological remnants of the pre-1918 station settlement are still discernible though some are overgrown with boxthorn. Summary Statement of Significance Historically, the Cape Wickham lighthouse has played an important role in the development of a coastal lighting system and the expansion of commercial activity within the Bass Strait region. The 1861 tower and pre-1918 archaeological remnants of the station settlement are among the oldest structures on King Island (criterion A.4).
The lighthouse is valued by the King Island community as a symbol of the earliest permanent, and once isolated, settlement on King Island (criterion G.1).
Page | 48
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
7.0 Statutory Controls and Legislative Requirements
The following provides a summary overview of the various legislative instruments and statutory requirements relating to historic heritage in Tasmania. The review is presented in order to provide the proponent with a basic understanding of the statutory frameworks and procedures relating to heritage in Tasmania.
7.1 National Conventions
Council of Australian Governments Agreement 1997
In 1997, COAG reached an agreement on Commonwealth, State and local government roles and responsibilities for heritage management. Local government, through the Australian Local Government Association, and the Tasmanian Government were both signatories to this Agreement. The Agreement resulted in the following outcomes: - Acceptance of a tiered model of heritage management, with the definition of places as being of either, world, national, state or of local heritage significance; - Nominations of Australian places for the World Heritage List and management of Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention would be carried out by the Commonwealth Government; - A new National Heritage System on one was created in January 2004, comprising the Australian Heritage Council (AHC), National Heritage List (NHL) and Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL); - The Commonwealth Government, through the Australian Heritage Council would be responsible for listing, protecting and managing heritage places of national significance; - State and Territory Governments would be responsible for listing, protecting and managing heritage places of state significance; and - Local government would be responsible for listing, protecting and managing heritage places of local significance.
Environment Protection and Heritage Council of the Australian and State/Territory Governments 1998
In 1998, the National Heritage Convention proposed a set of common criteria to be used in order to better assess, understand and manage the heritage values of places. The Environment Protection and Heritage Council of the Australian and State/Territory Governments adopted this as a national set of desirable common criteria (known as the HERCON criteria). The adoption of these criteria by Heritage Tasmania has not yet been formalised. These criteria are also based upon the Burra Charter values. The Common Criteria (HERCON Criteria) adopted in April 2008 are summarised below:
A. Importance to the course or pattern of our cultural or natural history. B. Possession of uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of our cultural or natural history. C. Potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of our cultural or natural history. D. Important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of cultural or natural
Page | 49
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
places or environments. E. Importance in exhibiting particular aesthetic characteristics F. Importance in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period. G. Strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. This includes the significance of a place to Indigenous peoples as part of their continuing and developing cultural traditions. H. Special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in our history.
These criteria have been endorsed by the Heritage Chairs and Officials of Australia and New Zealand (HCOANZ) in the Supporting Local Government Project document, “Protecting Local Heritage Places: A National Guide for Local Government and Communities” (March 2009)
Burra Charter 1999
Australia ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) is the peak body of professionals working in heritage conservation in Australia. The Burra Charter was adopted by Australia ICOMOS in 1979 in Burra, South Australia based on other international conventions. Further revisions were adopted in 1981, 1988 and 1999 to ensure the Charter continues to reflect best practice in heritage and conservation management. The current version of the Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter 1999 is the only version that should be used.
The Burra Charter provides guidance for the conservation and management of places of cultural significance (cultural heritage places), and is based on the knowledge and experience of Australian ICOMOS members. The Charter sets a standard of practice for those who provide advice, make decisions about, or undertake works to places of cultural significance, including owners, managers and custodians.
The Charter recognises the need to involve people in the decision-making process, particularly those that have strong associations with a place. It also advocates a cautious approach to changing heritage places: do as much as necessary to care for the place and to make it useable, but otherwise change it as little as possible so that its cultural significance is retained.
7.2 Commonwealth Legislation
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) provides for the listing of natural, historic or indigenous places that are of outstanding national heritage value to the Australian nation as well as heritage places on Commonwealth lands and waters under Australian Government control.
Once a heritage place is listed under the EPBC Act, special requirements come into force to ensure that the values of the place will be protected and conserved for future generations. The following heritage lists are established through the EPBC Act: - National Heritage List - a list of places of natural, historic and indigenous places that are of outstanding national heritage value to the Australian nation
Page | 50
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
- Commonwealth Heritage List - a list of natural, historic and indigenous places of significance owned or controlled by the Australian Government. - List of Overseas Places of Historic Significance to Australia – this list recognises symbolically sites of outstanding historic significance to Australia but not under Australian jurisdiction.
The Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975 The Australian Heritage Commission administered the Register of the National Estate (RNE), which is a list of natural, indigenous and historic heritage places throughout Australia. In 2004, the RNE was frozen and responsibility for maintaining the Register was transferred to the Australian Heritage Council, under the Australian Heritage Council Act 2003.
With legislative changes the RNE will cease in February 2012, by which time all States, Territories and local governments will have completed transferring places to appropriate heritage registers where necessary and to amend legislation that refers to the RNE as a statutory list. The RNE still provides substantial information on a range of heritage places and is useful as a guide to assessing the heritage significance of places.
Australian Heritage Council Act 2003
The Australian Heritage Council is a body of heritage experts that has replaced the Australian Heritage Commission as the Australian Government's independent expert advisory body on heritage matters when the new Commonwealth Heritage System was introduced in 2004 under amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity and Conservation Act 1999.
The Council plays a key role in assessment, advice and policy formulation and support of major heritage programs. Its main responsibilities are to assess and nominate places for the National Heritage List and the Commonwealth Heritage List, promote the identification, assessment, conservation and monitoring of heritage; and advise the Minister on various heritage matters.
Historic Shipwrecks Act 1976
This Act protects shipwrecks and their associated relics within Australian waters that are older than 75 years. The Australian National Shipwrecks Database is a register of historic shipwrecks in Australian waters.
Protection of Movable Cultural Heritage Act 1986
The PMCH Act regulates the export of cultural heritage objects from Australia. The purpose of the Act is to protect, for the benefit of the nation, objects which if exported would significantly diminish Australia's cultural heritage. Some Australian protected objects of Aboriginal, military heritage and historical significance cannot be granted a permit for export. Other Australian protected objects may be exported provided a permit or certificate has been obtained.
Page | 51
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
7.3 State Legislation
Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993
This Act (LUPA) is the cornerstone of the State Resource Management and Planning System (RMPS). It establishes the legitimacy of local planning schemes and regulates land use planning and development across Tasmania. With regard to historic heritage, LUPAA requires that planning authorities will work „… to conserve those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific, aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value‟ [Schedule 1 Part 2(g)].
Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995
The stated purpose of the HCH Act is „to promote the identification, assessment, protection and conservation of places having historic cultural heritage significance and to establish the Tasmanian Heritage Council‟. The HCH Act also includes the requirements to:
- establish and maintain the Tasmanian Heritage Register (THR); - provide for a system for a system of approvals for work on places on the Register; - provide for Heritage Agreements and assistance to property owners; - provide for protection of shipwrecks; - provide for control mechanisms and penalties for breaches of the Act.
Under the HCH Act, „conservation‟ in relation to a place is defined as - the retention of the historic cultural heritage significance of the place; and - any maintenance, preservation, restoration, reconstruction and adaption of the place.
The definition of „place‟ under the HCH Act includes: - a site, precinct or parcel of land; - any building or part of a building; - any shipwreck; - any item in or on, or historically or physically associated or connected with, a site precinct or parcel of land where the primary importance of the item derives in part from its association with that site, precinct or parcel of land; and - any equipment, furniture, fittings, and articles in or on, or historically or physically associated or connected with any building or item.
The Act created the Tasmanian Heritage Council (THC), which came into existence in 1997 and operates within the State RMPS. The THC is a statutory body separate to government, which is responsible for the administration of the HCH Act and the establishment of the Tasmanian Heritage Register (THR), which lists all places assessed as having heritage values of state significance. The THC also assesses works that may affect the heritage significance of places and provides advice to state and local government on heritage matters. The primary task of the THC is as a resource management and planning body which is focused on heritage conservation issues. Any development on heritage listed places requires the approval of the THC before works can commence.
Page | 52
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Heritage Tasmania (HT), which is part of the Department of Primary Industry, Parks, Water and the Environment, also plays a key role in fulfilling statutory responsibilities under the HCH Act. HT has three core roles: - co-ordinating historic heritage strategy and activity for the State Government; - supporting the Tasmanian Heritage Council to implement the HCH Act; and - facilitating the development of the historic heritage register.
In 2005, Richard Mackay undertook a review of heritage legislation in Tasmania and made a number of recommendations on amending the HCH Act and modifying heritage management at both the state and local government level. In September 2007 a Position Paper, “Managing Our Heritage”, was released by Heritage Tasmania outlining the outcomes of consultation arising from Professor Mackay‟s review.
New legislation is presently being prepared for tabling in State Parliament that will address many of the issues raised during the review process and subsequent consultation.
Resource Planning and Development Commission Act 1997
The Resource Planning and Development Commission (now referred to as the Tasmanian Planning Commission) is responsible for overseeing Tasmania‟s planning system, approving planning schemes and amendments to schemes and assessing Projects of State Significance. In terms of heritage management, the TPC will consider the establishment of heritage overlays, precincts or areas as part of the creation of planning schemes.
The RPDC introduced Planning Directive Number 1 - Common Elements Template which came into effect in December 2003. This document requires planning authorities to use a common format and structure in the preparation of new planning schemes, including common provisions, where practicable.
Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal Act 1993
The Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal determines planning appeals and enforces the Acts within the RMPS. The Tribunal plays an important role in the management of heritage places through its determinations on proposed development on, or near to, places of heritage significance.
National Trust Act 2006
The National Trust Act 2006 has reformed the role of the National Trust in Tasmania. Whereas previously the National Trust had created and maintained a listing of heritage places in Tasmania from the 1960s, this Act has ceased this “semi-statutory” role and the Trust no longer classifies places or imposes covenants on heritage places. The National Trust is now seen as a heritage advocacy group as well as an owner and manager of a number of heritage properties in its own right.
Page | 53
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
8.0 Heritage Management Plan
Heritage management options and recommendations provided in this report are made on the basis of the following criteria:
- The legal and procedural requirements as summarized in section 7 of this report; - The results of the investigation as documented in this report; and - Background research into the extant archaeological and historic record for the study area and its surrounding regions.
The recommendations are aimed at minimising the impact of the proposed developments on any potential historic resources present within the study area.
1) There are no registered historic sites that occur within the bounds of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development area. A detailed field survey assessment failed to identify any definitive historic sites or features within this area. On the basis of these negative findings it is advised that there are no site specific historic constraints to the golf course development proceeding.
2) The archaeological remains of the Cape Wickham light station settlement are afforded heritage protection under the local King Island planning scheme and under the RNE. As such the original management recommendations as stated in the ACS (1993) report should be followed. Any potential disturbance to buried archaeological remains should be avoided.
The visible extent of the features associated with the historic Cape Wickham Lighthouse settlement are confirmed as being situated outside (to the north) of the designated boundaries of the proposed golf course development, and as such are not under direct threat of impact. However, there is the potential for the proposed golf course development to impact upon undetected sub-surface historic features associated with the settlement. The highest area of potential is along the northern boundary of the golf course development, where it abuts onto the Cape Wickham lighthouse precinct. There is also an elevated potential for sub-surface historic features to be present along the margins of Victoria Cove, where there are unverified reports of boat house structures having been constructed.
To minimise the risk of incidental impacts to undetected historic features associated with the Cape Wickham settlement it is advised that soil disturbance works associated with the proposed golf course development within these two areas (along the northern study area boundary and the margins of Victoria Cove) should be kept to a minimum.
If suspected historic features are un-earthed during the course of the proposed golf course development, it is advised that the Unanticipated Discovery Plan presented in section 9 of this report should be followed.
3) The potential to encounter sealers and/or hunters camps across the study area is low. The field survey did not identify any evidence of this camp site type, while the historic background research and archival research did not reveal the
Page | 54
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
presence of any camp sites within the boundary of the proposed golf course development. Should this site type be encountered the Unanticipated Discovery Plan presented in section 9 of this report should be followed.
4) There remains a low to moderate potential of encountering unmarked grave sites. If unmarked graves or suspected skeletal remains are unearthed, the processes outlined in the Unanticipated Discovery Plan (see section 9 of this report) should be followed.
Page | 55
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
9.0 Unanticipated Discovery Plan
The following text describes the proposed method for dealing with unanticipated discoveries of Heritage sites and objects during construction works. The plan provides guidance to project personnel so that they may meet their obligations with respect to heritage legislation.
Please Note: There are two different processes presented for the mitigation of these unanticipated discoveries. The first process applies for the discovery of all cultural heritage sites or features, with the exception of skeletal remains (burials). The second process applies exclusively to the discovery of skeletal remains (burials).
Discovery of Cultural Heritage Items Step 1 If any person believes that they have discovered or uncovered cultural heritage materials, the individual should notify any machinery operators that are working in the general vicinity of the area that earth disturbance works should stop immediately.
Step 2 A buffer protection zone of 10m x 10m should be established around the suspected cultural heritage site or items. No unauthorised entry or earth disturbance will be allowed within this ‘archaeological zone’ until such time as the suspected cultural heritage items have been assessed, and appropriate mitigation measures have been carried out.
Step 3 Heritage Tasmania (HT) in Hobart should be contacted immediately and informed of the discovery. HT will make necessary arrangements for the further assessment of the discovery. Based on the findings of the assessment, appropriate management recommendations should be developed for the cultural heritage find.
Page | 56
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Discovery of Skeletal Material
Step 1 Under no circumstances should the suspected skeletal remains be touched or disturbed. If these are human remains, then this area potentially is a crime scene. Tampering with a crime scene is a criminal offence.
Step 2 Any person discovering suspected skeletal remains should notify machinery operators that are working in the general vicinity of the area that earth disturbing works should stop immediately. Remember health and safety requirements when approaching machinery operators.
Step 3 A buffer protection zone of 50m x 50m should be established around the suspected skeletal remains. No unauthorised entry or earth disturbance will be allowed with this buffer zone until such time as the suspected skeletal remains have been assessed.
Step 4 The relevant authorities (police) will be contacted and informed of the discovery.
Step 5 Should the skeletal remains be suspected to be of Aboriginal origin, then Section 23 of the Coroners Act 1995 will apply. This is as follows:
1) The Attorney General may approve an Aboriginal organisation for the purposes of this section. 2) If, at any stage after a death is reported under section 19(1), a coroner suspects that any human remains relating to that death may be Aboriginal remains, the coroner must refer the matter to an Aboriginal organisation approved by the Attorney General (In this instance TALSC). 3) If a coroner refers a matter to an Aboriginal organisation approved by the Attorney-General – (a) The coroner must not carry out any investigations or perform any duties or functions under this Act in respect of the remains; and (b) The Aboriginal organisation must, as soon as practicable after the matter is referred to it, investigate the remains and prepare a report for the coroner. 4) If the Aboriginal organisation in its report to the coroner advises that the remains are Aboriginal remains, the jurisdiction of the coroner under this Act in respect of the remains ceases and this Act does not apply to the remains. In this instance the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 will apply, and relevant Permits will need to be obtained before any further actions can be taken. 5) If the Aboriginal organisation in its report to the coroner advises that the remains are not Aboriginal remains, the coroner may resume the investigation in respect of the remains.
Page | 57
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
10.0 References Cited
Primary Sources
Burgoyne, W. H. (1855) Chart of the north end of King Island Bass Strait, Australasia (to accompany report on lighthouse)., Colonial Engineers Department., Sept., 1855 (National Library of Australia).
Butcher, E. W. N (1887) King's Island [cartographic material]. Melbourne: Field Naturalists' Club of Victoria. (National Library of Australia).
Great Britain Hydrographic Department (1801) Chart of King's Island, in Bass's Strait [sign denoting anchorage] in Elephant Bay Lat. 39°51'17"S. Long. 143°57'45"E / by acting Lieut. John Murray, in the Lady Nelson 1802. [cartographic material]. London, England: Hydrographical Office. (National library of Australia)
Grimes. C. (c.1802) King's Island [cartographic material. C. Grimes, Acting Surveyor New South Wales. (National Library of Australia)
Montgomery (1892) Views in Norfolk Island and Bass Straits [picture]: from negatives taken by the Rt. Rev. Dr. Montgomery. Bishop of Tasmania during his visit in 1892 (Sate Library of NSW).
Tasmania Department of Lands and Surveys (1939) King Island [cartographic material]. Hobart: Surveyor General's Office. (National Library of Australia).
Victorian Field Naturalists' Expedition to King Island, Bass Strait, (1887) Cape Wickham Lighthouse and quarters, King Island, Bass Strait [picture] (National Library of Australia).
Secondary Sources
Australian Construction Services (1993) Heritage Site Report, Cape Wickham Lightstation, King Island. Report Prepared for Australian Maritime Safety Authority, Canberra ACT.
Beattie, J. W. (1911) Our Straits Islands. A sketch of their Discovery and Early Occupation. Paper read by J.W. Beattie before the Royal Society of Tasmania Monday June 12th 1911. Reprinted from the Mercury: Hobart.
Department of Primary Industries, Parks Water and Environment (2011) Assessing Historic Heritage Significance for application with the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995. Draft Version 4 July 2011.
Edgecombe, J. (1993) Discovering King Island Western Bass Strait. Thornleigh: NSW.
Jones, F. And T. Sullivan (1989) In the Path of the Roaring Forties. Memories of King Island. Regal: Launceston, Tasmania.
Page | 58
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development: Historic Assessment CHMA 2012
Hooper, R. H. (1980) The King Island Story. Fuller’s Bookshop: Hobart.
Monger, T.H. (1931) King Island. Currie :King Island.
Micco, H.M. (1971) King Island and the Sealing Trade 1802. A translation of Chapters XXII and XXIII of the narrative by Francios Peron published in the official account of the Voyage of Discovery to the Southern Lands. Roebuck Society Publication No. 3.
Plomley, B. And K.A. Henley (1990) the sealers of Bass Straight and the Cape Barren Island Community. Blubber Head Press: Hobart.
Sim, R. (1991) Prehistoric archaeological investigations on King and Flinders Islands, Bass Strait, Tasmania. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Australian National University.
Stanley, K.M. (1991) Guiding Lights - Tasmania's Lighthouses and Lighthousemen. St David's Park Publishing: Hobart.
Page | 59
Planning Submission
Appendix D Aboriginal Heritage Assessment
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham Aboriginal Heritage Assessment of a Proposed Golf Course Development at Cape Wickham, King Island, Tasmania
FINAL REPORT
AUTHORS NAME)Stuart Huys 27 Apsley St South Hobart 7004 CLIENT NAME Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd 17.9.2012 Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary 1
1.0 Project Outline 9
2.0 Methodology for the Aboriginal Heritage Assessment 12 2.1 Aims of the Investigation 12 2.2 Project Limitations 12 2.3 Project Methodology 12
3.0 Environmental Setting 14 3.1 Environmental Setting of King Island 14 3.2 Environmental Setting of the Study Area 15
4.0 Ethno-historic Background 23 4.1 Overview of Aboriginal Social Structures 23 4.2 Environmental Determinants of Social Organisation 24 4.3 Aboriginal Social Organisation in Tasmania 25 4.4 Aboriginal Social Organisation on King Island ` 26
5.0 Background Archaeology 28 5.1 Overview of Previous Archaeological Research on the Bass Strait Islands 28 5.2 Previous Archaeological Research on King Island 29 5.3 Historic Overview 32 5.4 Registered Aboriginal Sites in the Vicinity of the Study Area 33
6.0 Predictive Modelling 35 6.1 Introduction to Predictive Modelling 35 6.2 Predictive Models; Strengths and Weaknesses 35 6.3 A Predictive Model of Site Type Distribution for the Study Area 35
7.0 Survey Coverage of the Study Area 37
8.0 Survey Results and Discussions 42 8.1 Summary Results 42 8.2 Discussion of the Findings 43 8.3 Detailed Site Descriptions 48
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Table of Contents
Page
9.0 Site Significance Assessments 57 9.1 Assessment Guidelines 57 9.2 The Burra Charter 57 9.3 Significance Criteria Relevant to Indigenous Sites 58 9.4 Scientific (Archaeological) Significance for Sites Identified During the Present Investigations 59
10.0 Consultation With Aboriginal Communities and Statement of Aboriginal Significance 62
11.0 Statutory Controls and Legislative Requirements 65 11.1 State Legislation 65 11.2 Commonwealth Legislation 65
12.0 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan 68
13.0 Unanticipated Discovery Plan 70
References Cited 72
Glossary of Terms 75
List of Figures Figure 1: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 100 000) 6 Figure 2: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 25 000) 7 Figure 3: The proposed layout of the Cape Wickham Golf Course Development 8 Figure 4: The location of the eight registered Aboriginal heritage sites located within a 3km radius of the bounds of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development (map information supplied by AHT) 34 Figure 5: Survey transects walked within the bounds of the study area 38 Figure 6: Registered Aboriginal sites that are recorded within the study area (Map scale 1: 100 000) 45 Figure 7: Google earth image showing the distribution of registered TASI sites within the study area 46 Figure 8: The proposed golf course design showing the location of Registered Aboriginal sites that are recorded within the study area 47
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Table of Contents
Page
List of Tables Table i: Summary details for registered Aboriginal sites in the vicinity of the proposed Golf Course development 1 Table ii: Summary details for Aboriginal sites located within the Study Area 2 Table iii: Summary scientific significance ratings for registered Aboriginal sites located within the study area 3 Table 1: Summary details for registered Aboriginal sites in the vicinity of the proposed Golf Course development 33 Table 2: Effective Survey Coverage achieved within the study area 37 Table 3: Summary details for Aboriginal sites located within the Study Area 43 Table 4: Summary scientific significance ratings for registered Aboriginal sites located within the study area 60
List of Plates Plate 1: View south-west at Victoria Cove and Cape Farewell in the background 17 Plate 2: View north-east at Victoria Cove with Cape Wickham lighthouse in the background 17 Plate 3: Sandstone rock outcrops occurring within the study area 18 Plate 4: Sandstone bedrock exposed to the surface in dune deflation area 18 Plate 5: An example of a sandstone overhang that occurs throughout parts of the study area 19 Plate 6: Granite outcrop that occurs 500m to the east of the study area 19 Plate 7: View north along the crest of north-south orientated fore-dunes 20 Plate 8: View south-west along the crest of prominent north-east to south-west orientated dune systems 20 Plate 9: View south-west at low lying depression between dune systems 21 Plate 10: View west at farm dam 21 Plate 11: View south-west along main vehicle track running through the study area 22 Plate 12: View north across study area showing predominance of introduced grasses 22 Plate 13: View north across the study area, showing typically thick grass cover 39 Plate 14: Vehicle access track through the study area providing a transect of improved surface visibility 39 Plate 15: Stock tracks within the study area providing transects of increased Visibility 40 Plate 16: Large erosion area where there was excellent surface visibility 40 Plate 17: Large dune erosion area providing locales of improved visibility 41 Plate 18: View south at the rock shelter 49 Plate 19: View north from the vicinity of the rock shelter down to Victoria Cove 49 Plate 20: View north at the opening of shelter 1 51 Plate 21: View north at the opening of shelter 2 51 Plate 22: View south-west from the shelters down to the rocky foreshore margins 52 Plate 23: View north at the cliff line where the two shelters are located 52
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Table of Contents
Page
List of Plates (Continued) Plate 24: View west at the location of site TASI 3885 54 Plate 25: Artefact and shell midden material from site TASI 3885 54 Plate 26: View west at the reported location of site TASI 3880 55 Plate 27: View north-west across the reported area for site TASI 2314 56
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Executive Summary
Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd (hereafter referred to as "Lighthouse Properties") is proposing to develop an 18 hole professional standard golf links course at Cape Wickham on King Island (see Figures 1, 2 and 3).
CHMA Pty Ltd (Archaeological Consultants) and Vernon Graham (Aboriginal Heritage Officer) have been engaged by Lighthouse Properties to undertake an Aboriginal heritage assessment for the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development.
Registered Aboriginal Sites in the Vicinity of the Study Area As part of Stage 1 of the assessment process a search was undertaken of the TASI register to determine if there was any registered Aboriginal heritage sites located within or in the general vicinity of the study area. The search shows that there are eight registered Aboriginal heritage sites that area situated within a 3km radius of the proposed golf course development. Table i provides the summary details for these eight sites. Of these eight registered Aboriginal sites, there are four sites that are situated within or in the immediate proximity of the boundaries of the proposed golf course development. These are sites TASI 2314, 3554, 3880 and 3885. The sites are highlighted in red in Table i. Section 5.4 of this report presents the detailed findings of the TASI search results.
Table i: Summary details for registered Aboriginal sites in the vicinity of the proposed Golf Course development Grid Grid TASI Site Reference Reference Number Site Type Easting Northing TASI2776 Artefact scatter 236410 5611184 TASI2314 Isolated artefact 236111 5612984 TASI3554 Unoccupied rock shelter 236911 5612984 TASI3875 Artefact scatter/stone quarry 238710 5611784 TASI3878 Artefact scatter 239110 5612984 TASI3880 Artefact scatter/shell midden 235911 5612784 TASI3883 Artefact scatter/shell midden 239511 5613184 TASI3885 Artefact scatter/shell midden 237211 5613209
Results of the Field Survey Assessment The field survey was undertaken over a period of three days (31-7-2012 to 2-8-2012) by Stuart Huys (CHMA archaeologist) and Vernon Graham (Aboriginal Heritage Officer).
One of the key components of the present field survey assessment was to attempt to re- locate and record the four registered Aboriginal sites that are reported as being situated within the bounds of the study area (sites TASI 2314, 3554, 3880 and 3885). In the course of the field survey, the team were able to positively re-locate two of these sites (TASI 3554 and 3885).
Page | 1
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Despite undertaking an intensive search in the general grid reference locations provided for the other two registered sites (TASI 2314 and 3880), no shell midden material or stone artefacts could be identified at these two site areas.
In the course of the field assessment one additional Aboriginal heritage sites was identified within the study area. The site (VC 1) is a rock shelter that is located within a sandstone escarpment that overlooks the southern end of Victoria Cove; however, a detailed inspection within and in the general vicinity of this shelter failed to detect any evidence of Aboriginal occupation.
Three of the registered TASI sites described above (sites TASI 2314, 3554 and 3880) are located within the 19.2 ha area of Crown Lease Land that is designated as coastal reserve. These sites appear to lie outside the proposed footprint of the golf course design (see Figure 8). The other two sites (TASI 3885 and VC 1) are situated within the immediate vicinity of the proposed footprint of the present golf course design. (see Figure 8).
Table ii provides the summary details for the registered Aboriginal sites located within the study area. Section 8 of this report presents the detailed results of the assessment.
Please note: for the four previously registered Aboriginal sites, two sets of grid references have been provided in Table 3. The first set of grid references are those provided by AHT which are in GDA 94, Zone 55. The second set of grid references are those taken in the field as part of the present assessment, and are provided in GDA 94, Zone 54. This is the zoning that the GPS devices operate in on the Island.
Table ii: Summary details for Aboriginal sites located within the Study Area - Those sites highlighted in red are those that were identified during the present assessment. - Sites highlighted in black were not re-located by the field team. TASI Site Grid Reference Grid Reference Number Site Type (Zone 55 GDA 94) (Zone 54 GDA 94) E236111 E751300 TASI2314 Isolated artefact N5612984 N5613350 E236911 E752163 TASI3554 Unoccupied rock shelter N5612984 N5613318 E235911 E751205 TASI3880 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5612784 N5613250 E751817 VC 1 Unoccupied Rock shelter N5613006 E237211 E752427 TASI3885 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5613209 N5613581
Significance Assessments There are five registered Aboriginal sites that are located within the bounds of the study area
Two of these sites are classified as un-occupied rock shelters (sites TASI 3554 and VC 1). Although these rock shelters are registered as sites on the TASI, no evidence of Aboriginal activity has been confirmed at either site. Given the absence of evidence for
Page | 2
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Aboriginal occupation at either site, it is not feasible at this point to provide a scientific significance rating for these two sites.
The other three Aboriginal sites (TASI 2314, 3880 and 3885) have each been assessed and allocated a rating of scientific significance. A five tiered rating system has been adopted for the significance assessment; low, low-medium, medium, medium-high and high.
When assessing the significance ratings for these three sites, the concepts of rarity and representativeness have been particularly taken into account. Artefact scatter/shell middens and isolated artefacts are two comparatively common site types represented in the site record for Tasmania as a whole. However, as discussed in sections 5 and 8 of this report, there are comparatively few Aboriginal sites that have been recorded on King Island. Given the paucity of recorded Aboriginal sites on the Island, the concept of rarity comes into play for all recorded sites, as each site has the potential to contribute to our understand of the nature of Aboriginal occupation of King Island. The concept of a rarity cannot be easily separated from that of representativeness. If a site is determined to be rare, then it will by definition be included as part of the representative sample of that site type.
It is important to note that the significance assessments are based on the current information available for each site. The significance ratings for any of these sites may alter on the basis of any new information that may come to light in the future.
Table iii provides a summary of the significance ratings allocated to each site. A more detailed account of the rationale used as the basis for determining the scientific (archaeological) significance of each site is presented in section 9 of this report.
Table iii: Summary scientific significance ratings for registered Aboriginal sites located within the study area TASI Site Grid Reference Significance Rating Number Site Type (Zone 54 GDA 94) E751300 Low-medium TASI2314 Isolated artefact N5613350 E752163 Not assessed TASI3554 Unoccupied rock shelter N5613318 E751205 Medium TASI3880 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5613250 E751817 Not assessed VC 1 Unoccupied Rock shelter N5613006 E752427 Medium TASI3885 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5613581
Page | 3
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan Heritage management options and recommendations provided in this report are made on the basis of the following criteria: Consultation with Vernon Graham (Aboriginal Heritage Officer); The legal and procedural requirements as specified in the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 (The ACT); The results of the investigation as documented in this report; and Background research into the extant archaeological and historic record for the study area and its surrounding regions.
The following recommendations are aimed at minimising the impact of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development on Aboriginal cultural heritage resources.
Sites TASI 2314, 3554 and 3880 These three sites are located within the 19.2 ha area of Crown Lease Land that is designated as coastal reserve. The three sites all appear to lie outside the present proposed footprint of the golf course design (see Figure 8). As such, none of these three sites are under direct threat of impact through the proposed golf course development. For these three sites, the general recommendation is to retain these sites in-situ, and to implement appropriate measures to ensure these sites are not incidentally impacted during the course of the golf course development. In order to minimise the risk of incidental impacts to these sites, it is recommended that the proponent notes the location of the sites on planning maps for the proposed golf course development and ensures that development works are not undertaken in the immediate vicinity of the site locations.
If any development works are undertaken within a 30m radius of these three sites, then an interim barricade should be erected around the perimeter of the sites prior to development work proceeding. These barricades should be erected under the guidance of an AHO to ensure that the specified site areas are adequately protected. This barricading should then be removed on completion of the development works.
Sites TASI 3885 and VC 1 These two registered sites are situated within the immediate vicinity of the proposed footprint of the present golf course design.
Site TASI 3885 (artefact scatter/shell midden) is situated right on the northern boundary of the study area, and appears to be situated just outside the footprint of the proposed 15th green (see Figure 8). Site Victoria Cove 1 is situated within a sandstone escarpment that is located between the proposed clubhouse location (positioned to the south of the site) and the proposed 18th green (located to the north of the site). The site appears to be situated outside the footprint of both the clubhouse and the 18th green (see Figure 8).
For these two sites, the general recommendation is to retain these sites in-situ, and to implement appropriate measures to ensure these sites are not incidentally impacted during the course of the golf course development. For both sites there is a significant potential risk of these sites being incidentally impacted during the construction and development process of the golf course. On this basis, it is recommended that temporary
Page | 4
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
protective barricading should be erected around the perimeter of the designated bounds of these two sites prior to construction works commencing. These barriers should be erected under the guidance of an AHO to ensure that the specified site areas are adequately protected. The temporary barricading should be removed at the completion of the golf development works.
If it appears that it is not possible to avoid impacting either of these two sites, then the Proponent will need to obtain a Permit in order to destroy or interfere with these sites. This Permit will need to be issued before construction works in the vicinity of the two sites can commence. It may be the case that AHT will require further investigations to be implemented at these two sites in order to better understand their nature and significance, before they will consider issuing a Permit to Interfere/Destroy.
The Remainder of the Study Area Besides the five registered Aboriginal sites, the remainder of the study area has been assessed as being of low archaeological sensitivity. This is based on the negative survey findings, the high levels of prior land disturbance, and the low potential for undetected Aboriginal heritage resources to be present. It is advised that there are no further archaeological constraints or requirements for the remainder of the study area beyond following the proceeding Unanticipated Discovery Plan (See Section 13).
General Management Recommendations - If, during the course of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development, previously undetected archaeological sites or suspected skeletal remains are located, the processes outlined in the Unanticipated Discovery Plan (see section 13 of this report) should be followed.
- Copies of this report should be submitted to the appropriate Aboriginal groups and Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania (AHT) for review and comment.
Page | 5
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 1: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 100 000)
Page | 6
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 2: The location of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development (Map scale 1 25 000)
Page | 7
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 3: The proposed layout of the Cape Wickham Golf Course Development
Page | 8
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
1.0 Project Details
Lighthouse Properties Pty Ltd (hereafter referred to as "Lighthouse Properties") is proposing to develop an 18 hole professional standard golf links course at Cape Wickham on King Island (see Figures 1 and 2). It will be the first such golf course on King Island and one of only three links style courses in Tasmania. The key clientele to be served by the facility will be golf enthusiasts who will likely come from the United States, Asia, Europe and mainland Australia tapping into the lucrative golf tourist market.
The proposed golf course development will be predominantly focused within two parcels of land purchased by Lighthouse Properties, which are located immediately south of the historic Cape Wickham Lighthouse. The two properties are known as PID 2921284 and PID 6497265, and have a combined area of 158ha. The layout of the proposed golf course will also extend beyond the western boundaries of these two properties, and into adjoining 19.2 ha area of Crown Lease Land. This land comprises the southern coastal portion of the Cape Wickham Conservation Area in the vicinity of Victoria Cove and the northern coastal section of the Yellow Beach Conservation Area situated on the Cape Farewell Headland.
The proposed golf course development at Cape Wickham comprises the following elements. • 18 hole championship golf course. This will be a par 72 course occupying some 30% of the site under mown surfaces, the rest under native vegetation. As evidenced by the site plan the course occupies the entire site. Four hectares of native tussock grass will be removed but no trees will be removed.
• A comprehensive landscape strategy involving installation of 50,000 tube stock of indigenous species to establish the landscape.
• Clubhouse/starters pavilion with a total floor area of 142 sq. m and a maximum height of 6.5m situated near the entrance off Cape Wickham Road. This will be single storey with a simple gabled roof and verandah consistent with the style and form of dwellings at the nearby Cape Wickham lighthouse. A pro shop, change rooms, bar, small kitchen and store are to be provided.
• An eco-lodge comprising 8 spa suite bedrooms on two wings with a central hub comprising a dining, lounge, kitchen, library, meeting room, storage and pantry. The concept is that visitors can prepare their own food and/or chef, or bring in caterers as required. This structure will be built into a sand dune as shown on Section A-A of the submission (Appendix 15). Total floor area is 600 sq.m and height is limited to approximately 6m. Beyond the northern facade the building is substantially built into the sand dune/hill with part of the dune backfilled over the roof. The building is situated due south of Victoria Cove near the 18th fairway with water tanks beneath.
• Maintenance facility building. This building measures 40m in length by 20m width at 6.5m height and is used for storage of machinery, a workshop, offices and staff amenities. It will be located near the 4th fairway well remote from Cape Wickham Road.
Page | 9
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
• Carpark for 40 spaces adjoining the clubhouse/starters pavilion. It would be a gravel pavement designed to Australian standards.
• Managers residence will have a floor area of 145 sq. m and is of a style and form consistent with that of the clubhouse/starter’s pavilion. It is to be located adjoining Cape Wickham Road. It will be the first building seen on the approach to the site from the south.
• Helipad to be located near the 1st and 8th fairway. Design to be confirmed as per Civil Aviation Safety Authority requirements.
• Practice facilities including a practice range, chipping and putting greens adjacent to the clubhouse/starter’s Pavilion.
• At least three golf course shelters measuring 3.5m x 3.5m, weatherboard clad on concrete slab with colorbond roof. To be located in the vicinity of the 12th green, 13th tee, 17th green and 18th tee. One of these will have a composting or chemical toilet installed.
• Installation of a maintenance track some 3m wide, comprising a combination of grassed and sand based tracks with consolidated gravel limited to certain areas where required. This will be established early in the process and will link all of the buildings together to enable construction and maintenance to occur on site.
• Water demand for maintaining the golf course is estimated at 145 ML/year, to be sourced from groundwater plus rainfall. Most of this, about two thirds, will be used on fairways. Water supply to individual habitable buildings will be sourced from tanks attached to roofed areas of respectively buildings, supplemented as necessary with bore water. Tanks will be integrated into the design of the buildings.
• No roads are proposed to the lodge with access by private vehicle limited to the clubhouse/starter’s pavilion. Beyond this access will be via golf cart and similar sized vehicles around the property, largely utilising fairways for ease of access. • Power supply will be via the grid supplemented by solar panels (eco lodge, clubhouse/starters pavilion, managers residence).
• A coastal track is proposed to connect the car park to be established near the Lighthouse (adjoining the Clubhouse/Starters Pavilion) but the alignment, tenure upon which the land is situated and method of construction is not specified.
The following golf tees, landing areas and greens are proposed to be sited in the coastal reserve (see Figure 1): hole 1 (approx. half of landing area and green), hole 2 (tee, landing area and green), hole 3 (tee, landing area and green), hole 4 (tee and approx. half of landing area), hole 5 (landing area and green), hole 6 (tee only - shared tee with hole 13), hole 10 (approx. half of green),
Page | 10
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
hole 11 (landing area and green), hole 12 (landing area and green), hole 13 (tee only - shared tee with hole 6), hole 14 (small portion of landing area), hole 15 (part of green), hole 16 (tee, landing area and green), hole 17 (tee), hole 18 (tee, landing area and green).
Figure 3 shows the proposed layout of the golf course development.
Page | 11
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
2.0 Methodology for the Aboriginal Heritage Assessment
CHMA Pty Ltd (Archaeological Consultants) and Vernon Graham (Aboriginal Heritage Officer) have been engaged by Lighthouse Properties to undertake an Aboriginal heritage assessment for the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development. The following provides a description of the methodology employed for the Aboriginal heritage assessment of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development.
2.1 Aims of the Investigation The principal aims of this Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment are as follows. To locate and document Aboriginal heritage sites within the bounds of the study area (as shown in Figures 2 and 3); To assess the archaeological sensitivity of the study area; To assess the scientific and Aboriginal cultural values of any identified Aboriginal cultural heritage sites located within the study area; and To develop a set of management recommendations aimed at minimising the impact of the proposed dam on any Aboriginal heritage sites within the study area.
2.2 Project Limitations All archaeological investigations are subject to limitations that may affect the reliability of the results. The main constraint to the present investigation was restricted surface visibility due primarily to vegetation cover. At the time of the field survey, surface visibility across the entire study area was restricted to an average of between 15-20%. These constraints limited the effectiveness of the survey assessment. The issue of surface visibility is further discussed in section 6.1 of this report.
2.3 Project Methodology A three stage project methodology was implemented for this assessment.
Stage 1 (Pre-Fieldwork Background Work) Prior to field work being undertaken, the following tasks were completed by CHMA staff:
Consultation with Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania was informed that a field survey was to be undertaken for the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development. Background information was collated, which included the results of previous archaeological investigations in the vicinity of the study area, and the results of a Tasmanian Aboriginal Site Index (TASI) search to ascertain the presence of any previously recorded sites in the vicinity of the study area.
Consultation with Aboriginal Heritage Officer Vernon Graham is the Aboriginal Heritage Officer for this project. As part of Stage 1 works Stuart Huys (CHMA archaeologist) was in regular contact with Vernon Graham. The main purpose of this contact was to discuss the scope of the present investigations, to ratify the proposed methodology for the investigations and to co-ordinate the timeframes for implementing field work.
Page | 12
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Stage 2 (Field Work) Stage 2 entailed the field work component of the assessment. The field survey was undertaken over a period of three days (31-7-2012 to 2-8-2012) by Stuart Huys (CHMA archaeologist) and Vernon Graham (Aboriginal Heritage Officer).
The field survey was undertaken on foot by walking a series of transects across the study area. In total, 23.4 km of transects were walked within the study area. In the course of the field assessment, any areas of improved surface visibility (such as vehicle and stock tracks, erosion scalds and dune deflation areas ) were subject to a detailed inspection. Section 6.1 provides further details as to the survey coverage achieved within the study area.
The results of the field investigation were discussed by Vernon Graham and Stuart Huys. This included the potential cultural and archaeological sensitivity of the proposed development, and possible management options.
Stage 3 Stage three of the project involves the production of a Draft and Final Report that includes an analysis of the data obtained from the field survey, an assessment of archaeological sensitivity and management recommendations. The report has been prepared by Stuart Huys in consultation with Vernon Graham.
Page | 13
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
3.0 Environmental Setting
3.1 Environmental Setting of King Island King Island is the most geographically isolated of the islands in the Bass Strait located some 85km from Hunter Island. The island measures 65km in length from north to south and 25km in width from east to west, covering an area of approximately 1099km2 (Prior 1987:52). The topography of the Island is characterised by low relief landforms with its highest point, Mt Stanley, measuring less than 159m above sea level (Sim 1991:21). The majority of the northern portion of the island falls below 40m above sea level and is considerably flatter than the plateau area located in the south of the island. North of the southern plateau region exists low lying swamps and flats with a small rage of hills along the east coast and aeolian coastal dune formations to the west (Sim 1991:21). These aeolian dune formations occur along virtually the entire west and northwest coastal regions and to a lesser extent on the west coastal fringe of the southern plateau area (Sim 1991:21). These dunes form part of an extensive formation, often 70m or more in height and extending up to 3km inland. Several buried paleosols, forming extensive stratigraphic horizons also exist within some dune sediments, often exposed in eroded sections in dune blowouts along the west coast. These horizons mark episodes of dune mobility in both prehistoric and historic times (Sim 1991:21). The study area falls immediately within these areas of dune formations, suggesting that sites identified in the area are likely to be associated with considerable soil depth.
Geology and Stone Sources Most of the island is covered by Quarternary alluvium and aeolian dune deposits (Sim 1991:22), beneath which lie four major bedrock formations. The western-most geological zone comprises Precambrian granite and extends almost the entire length of the island. The eastern-most geological comprises un-metamorphosed sedimentary bedrock. Between these two zones are two metamorphosed bedrock formations which have been altered to varying degrees by intrusions of the west coast granite formation. Grey quartzite formations occur within the granite contact zone, along with small intrusions of rhyolitic material (Sim 1991:22).
A great number of stone artefact sources are known to exist on King Island. These include hard siliceous rock types such as silcrete and chert which are generally preferred for knapping/flaking. In addition there exist a number of sources of quartzites as well as numerous quartz outcrops associated with the granite formations and widespread float sources of quartz on the island (Sim 1991:22).
Crystal quartz has also been identified as a stone source on the island, with artefacts from this material having been recorded previously on the island (Sim 1990). Large, well- formed quartz crystals have been found in the upper reaches of Sea Elephant River towards the centre of the island (Sim 1991:25). Artefacts have also been observed manufactured from a rhyolitic dyke stone in places along the coastal cliffs of the southwest region and from fine grained hornfels elsewhere on the island (Sim 1991). Outcrops of hornfels occur in the southeast contact zones but are relatively uncommon. Access is however, available in some river channels.
Another source of artefact stone occurs along the southeast coast of the island in the conglomerate tillites found along the strip between Grassy and Naracoopa. The rock has an ancient glacial origin and contains a wide range of knappable stone types
Page | 14
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
including quartzites, jasper, siliceous dolomite and gabbro as well as materials which are good sources of ochre. The consistency of the ochre ranges from soft and powdery to greasy and to more consolidated rock (Sim 1991:26). However, exposures of this formation are limited to a few creek beds and the shore margins and these would have been even less accessible in times of lower sea levels. For the most part, only a few stone sources would have been readily available before the marine transgression: primarily the quartz and quartzite outcrops on the west coast.
Sources of higher quality materials were limited to localized sources exposed by coastal processes in the southeast coast (Sim 1991:27).
Water Sources Fresh water sources are numerous on King Island, including permanent freshwater lagoons and swamp areas. The majority of the lagoons are located inland in depression areas on the geomorphologically older flats and do not appear to be a product of new dunes blocking past drainage channels (Jennings 1957). According to Jennings (1957:61,62) the King Island lagoons were formed around 125 000 years ago during the last inter-glacial period, with their formation related to local water tables and old landforms rather recent dune building episodes.
Vegetation Vegetation on King Island has undergone extensive modification during historic times from widespread firing and clearing for pastoral purposes (Sim 1991:34). However some areas have natural vegetation preserved and historic accounts provide good descriptions of the islands’ vegetation prior to European pastoralism (Barnard 1826-7; Brown 1887a, 1887b; Harris 1988). Large eucalypt butts exist as remnants of the former forests with trees reportedly up to ninety metres high. An historic survey indicates that wet sclerophyll forest was once present over much of the southern part of the island prior to clearing (Hope 1973:164). The predominant vegetation over much of the remaining area of the island was coastal heath and shrub-land, with extensive stands of dense paperbark and tea tree.
3.2 Environmental Setting of the Study Area The study area is located on the north-west coast of King Island, immediately to the south of the Cape Wickham lighthouse. The study area encompasses a total of 176.2ha. This is comprised of two adjoining properties with a sum total of 158ha that are owned by Lighthouse Properties (PID 2921284 and PID 6497265) and a 19.2ha area of coastal reserve Crown Leased Land that abuts onto the western boundaries of the two properties.
The coastal foreshore fringing the western bounds of the study area is a rocky foreshore system, formed on Precambrian granites and un-metamorphosed sedimentary sandstones which have resulted in the formation of a series of small bays and points. Cape Farewell is the most prominent of points in the vicinity of the study area (see Plate 1). Victoria Cove, which is located just to the north of Cape Farewell is the most prominent of the bay features. This is a small sandy bay which is fringed on either side with rock platforms (see Plates 1 and 2).
Page | 15
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
The underlying geology throughout the vast majority of the study area comprises un- metamorphosed sedimentary sandstones which exposed to the surface at many locations throughout the study area, in the form of jutting rocky outcrops (see Plate 3) or in areas where there has been a deflation of the overlying sand dune deposits (see Plate 4). In some areas, particularly around the fringes of Victoria Cove, small sandstone escarpments occur within which there are a series of small sandstone overhangs (see Plate 5). Although small, some of these overhangs have the potential to have been utilised as shelters by Aboriginal people.
A discreet outcrop of Precambrian granite was noted to occur approximately 400m to the east of the eastern boundary of the study area (see Plate 6). This granite outcrop was a known quarry source in historic times, and was used as a source of stone for the construction of the Cape Wickham Lighthouse and associated buildings.
The topography within the study area is characteristically gently to moderately undulating, comprising numerous Aeolian sand dune systems. A series of prominent north-south orientated foreshore dune ridges fringes the coastal reserve in the western portion of the study area (see Plate 7). A second series of north-east to south-west trending dune ridges run through the central portions of the study area (see Plate 8). The ridge crests of these dunes are elevated up to 20-30m ASL. The ridge summits are typically narrow and level. The side slopes of the sand dune ridges are generally quite steep, with the slope gradients ranging between 10-35º. Between the dune ridges, the terrain is generally flat and in some instances low lying and prone to inundation (see Plate 9).
The study area is drained by a series of very small, ephemeral drainage gullies. However, there are no major permanent or named fresh water sources that occur within the bounds of the study area. The closest major water source to the study area are Lake Wickham and Cask Lake, both of which are located approximately 1km to the east of the eastern boundary of the study area.
The study area has been used since the 1800s for cattle production. A range of infrastructure associated with cattle farming occurs within the study area; including a series of dams (see Plate 10), fence lines and cattle yards. A series of graded vehicle tracks also run throughout the study area. There is one main track that runs through the study area from Cape Wickham Road south-west through to Victoria Cove (see Plate 11).
The vast majority of the native vegetation within the study area has been cleared for farming purposes and has been re-planted with introduced grass species (see Plate 12). There are small patches of remnant native vegetation located along some dune systems in the central portion of the study area and along the coastal foreshores.
Page | 16
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 1: View south-west at Victoria Cove and Cape Farewell in the background
Plate 2: View north-east at Victoria Cove with Cape Wickham lighthouse in the background
Page | 17
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 3: Sandstone rock outcrops occurring within the study area
Plate 4: Sandstone bedrock exposed to the surface in dune deflation area
Page | 18
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 5: An example of a sandstone overhang that occurs throughout parts of the study area
Plate 6: Granite outcrop that occurs 500m to the east of the study area
Page | 19
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 7: View north along the crest of north-south orientated fore-dunes
Plate 8: View south-west along the crest of prominent north-east to south-west orientated dune systems
Page | 20
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 9: View south-west at low lying depression between dune systems
Plate 10: View west at farm dam
Page | 21
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 11: View south-west along main vehicle track running through the study area
Plate 12: View north across study area showing predominance of introduced grasses
Page | 22
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
4.0 Ethno-historic Background
4.1 Overview of Aboriginal Social Structures The following provides a brief overview of the nature of pre-contact Aboriginal groupings, Aboriginal concepts of land ownership, and the relationship of both these to Aboriginal land use in Australia. The purpose is to establish a basic framework of understanding regarding Aboriginal social organisation, within which the archaeology of the study area may be viewed. The overview presented here reveals the complexities of Aboriginal societies across Australia. It indicates the interrelated nature of the environment, religion and social structure in pre-contact Aboriginal societies and has implications for discussions of the archaeological record.
The model of Aboriginal society divided into a series of tribes, based on Tindale’s 1974 is considered by contemporary anthropologists as largely defunct. However, this model permeates concepts of Australian Aboriginal social organisation and warrants a brief discussion.
The tribe is described by early anthropologists as having rights over a defined tract of land, that included control over entry to people from outside and the right to hunt and extract resources from within the bounds of that area (Keen 2010:46). Several researchers have argued that this concept does not account for the complexities of social interaction and organisation found in Aboriginal society (eg. Keen 2004). There has recently been a shift to attempts to describe Aboriginal society as multi layered and to explore the interconnected relationships that operated within broad social groups.
It is the band that is generally considered by anthropologists as the basic social and economic unit in Australian Aboriginal society (Peterson 1976). The band is defined as a small scale population, comprised of between two to six extended family units, or about 14 – 33 people who cooperate in the food quest (Keen 2004:106). The composition of this group (in terms of numbers) was not rigid; group size fluctuated in response to factors such as the availability of resources and visiting kin (Peterson 1975).
Individual bands are seen to occupy and exploit a specific range (Keen 2004:106). The concept of a band’s ‘range’ is not easily defined, and is therefore somewhat problematical to delineate. The ideal method of defining range would be to identify the outermost points of an area used by a group in order to demonstrate the total area, or range, in which that band operated. Yet, as Peterson (1986) points out, the kind of evidence needed to achieve this, (details of daily movements over several years) is not available for any group within Australia. Nor is such evidence likely to be discernible in the archaeological record. The practical alternative, both from an archaeological and an anthropological perspective, is to identify the base camps used over a period of time by a group. This provides a rough equivalent of a band’s range.
Bands were not socially or culturally isolate, but rather interacted with each other in a variety of ways. Typically, these interactions involved visitations, marriage, ceremonies and trade. Through these interactions, links were established or re-affirmed between neighbouring bands. The result was the formation of a cluster of bands, wherein there was some sense of collective identity, often expressed in terms of possessing a common and distinctive language (White & Cane 1986). It is these groups of interrelated bands
Page | 23
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
that form the basic understanding of the ‘tribe’, but which are perhaps more usefully considered as broad social groups with loose geographical and cultural affiliations.
Keen (2004:135) argues that a shared language did not necessarily indicate shared cosmic beliefs or social customs, nor did language or dialect clearly define social groups. Linguistic inheritance could be multi-layered. Trigger (1992:104) records how in some northern Australian societies most people were (a) multi-lingual and (b) adopted a primary linguistic label based on whether their present circumstances were aligned. This implies that linguistic affiliation was perhaps a les formal and more adaptive social mechanism. Trigger (1992:105) suggests that this undermines the concept of linguistic groups, which was a characteristic often used in the past to define ‘tribes’.
Interestingly, Keen (2004:170) suggests that group identity was ‘most clearly defined’ in areas rich in resources, such as coastal zones, while people in more arid environments had less strongly applied rules governing identify. This reflects the imperative for desert people to be on solid relationships with their neighbours, to ensure economic support when resources were low. The following section discusses issues of Aboriginal connection to the land in more detail.
4.2 Environmental Determinants of Social Organisation In cultures across the world it is impossible to separate natural landscapes from cultural landscapes (White 2003:188). From an archaeological perspective, it is equally impossible to discuss economy and subsistence without reference to the environment.
As Sutton (2008:170) explains, WEH Stanner explored the connectedness of economy, environment and spirituality over forty years ago. This has come to the fore in contemporary anthropology. Stanner’s famous paper ‘Aboriginal territorial organisation: estate, range, domain and regime’ published in Oceania in 1965 was a benchmark as it provided a new framework within which to define and discuss Aboriginal land ownership (Peterson 2008:185). This framework separated concepts of land ownership from the land that people actually used. Peterson (2008:185) suggests that this was a fundamental shift that has influenced the last forty years of anthropological debate.
In coastal and riverine environments where a higher population densities could be supported compared to desert environments, people could lead more sedentary lives (Keen 2004:103). In these situations the social organisation of neighbouring groups could become more individualised; whereas in more arid climates people relied on being able to traverse vast tracts of land to access food and water, requiring closer social relations with neighbouring people (Keen 2004:103).
This argument reflects Louis Binford’s model of ‘foragers’ and ‘collector’ societies. Foragers are highly mobile groups that move regularly and as a whole to new locations on order to exploit resources. In contrast, collector societies may move less often but rely on individual members of a society venturing out beyond the camp site location in order to provide the group with resources to continue residing at the location (Keen 2004:104). Keen (2004:104) suggests that most Australian Aboriginal societies fall within Binford’s ‘collectors’ model: forming home bases and voyaging out from these bases to exploit resources from the surrounding area, which could be very large.
It was economically vital for Aboriginal people to be organised into bands, as this made groups more effective at surviving. Subsistence is more efficient and reliable if people
Page | 24
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
are organised into groups that are larger than the nuclear family. This increases the number of ‘producers’ (people who can actively provide food for a group) and acts as a buffer against the sickness, injury or death of any one individual (Keen 2004:105). However, these groups could never become too large, as increased numbers reduce the mobility level of the band, as well as potentially leading to broader social disintegration (Keen 2004:106).
The range of a band had to be capable of providing for the survival of the group for much of the year. Keen (2004) takes an economic view of range and presents a case for the range of a group to be determined by access to preferred food resources. As Keen argues, availability of foods, food preferences, production techniques and methods of transport all affect the means by which Aboriginal people across Australia were able to access food resources at varying times of the year. These factors therefore greatly affected mobility; groups had to be able to mobilise and move to where the preferred, available and accessible foods were located (Keen 2004:23).
The factors that influence selection of a ‘home base’ are varied and illustrate the nature of pre-contact Aboriginal societies. Access to fresh water is probably the most fundamental requirement, and will be common to all home base sites. Distance to food resources is the next consideration. As Keen (2004:104) notes, it may be that home sites are better located adjacent to less transportable resources, rather than in areas where there is the highest abundance of food. The distance that an individual collector can travel within a single day forms an important scope of the range of the home base, and therefore the size of the resource pool available. Keen (2004:104) suggests that in hunter gatherer societies around the world, a distance of 20-30km is considered the maximum foraging distance from a home base. People could then establish smaller temporary camps away from the central home site to enable longer foraging journeys (Keen 2004:105).
Despite the difficulties faced in defining ranges, Peterson (1986) believes there is good evidence for supposing that bands are localised and generally have bounded and exclusive ranges. The most significant evidence is ethnographic accounts recording the elaborate rites of entry accorded to visitors when entering a band’s range (see Peterson 1986). However, there is no evidence to suggest that members of a band actively defended the boundaries of these ranges (Peterson 1986). Rather, it appears that the boundaries of a group’s ‘range’ were not necessarily clearly demarcated lines. Trigger describes these overlapping boundaries as ‘zones of transition’ (Trigger 2010:155).
Ancestral law was the defining principle that controlled access to country and landmarks, including water sources (Keen 2004:299). Tied to this notion are concepts of cosmology, religion and the ongoing influence of the ancestors (Keen 2004:303). Keen suggests that: ‘ancestral significance integrated country, resources and technologies into the all-encompassing framework of ancestral law, not only as a mode of control, but as a way of being.’ (Keen 2004:303). Myers has also argued that ownership of territory was largely vested in knowledge of the ‘stories, objects, and ritual associated with the mythological ancestors of the Dreaming at a particular place (in Peterson 2008:192).
4.3 Aboriginal Social Organisation in Tasmania Despite difficulties with the concept of the tribe as the basis of understanding pre-contact Aboriginal society outlined above, it is a useful term to describe the broadly grouped people who occupied a certain geographical area. In Tasmania, the most
Page | 25
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
comprehensive account of pre-contact Aboriginal society is provided by Ryan (1996). Ryan uses the term tribe in a largely geographical sense, and that is the position adopted in the following discussion. In this way, ‘tribe’ is not intended to reflect a lack of social dynamism or a defined social institution.
According to Ryan (Ryan 1996:14), the Aboriginal population of Tasmania was aligned within a broad framework of nine tribal groups, each comprising between six to fifteen bands. The mean population of each group is estimated to have been between 350 and 470 people, with overall population estimates being in the order of between three to five thousand people prior to European occupation (Ryan 1996:14).
Jones (1974) suggests that the social organisation of Tasmanian Aboriginal society appears to have consisted of three social units, these being the hearth group, the band and the tribe. The hearth group was the basic family unit and would generally have consisted of a man and woman, their children, aged relatives and sometimes friends and other relatives. The size of hearth groups would generally range from between 2-8 individuals (Jones 1974: Plomley 1983). Plomley (1983) provides a description made by Peron of a hearth group he encountered at Port Cygnet:
There were nine individuals in this family, and clearly they represented a hearth group, because Peron visited their campsite with its single hut. The group comprised an older man and wife, a younger man and wife, and five children, one a daughter (Oure-Oure) of the older man and wife, and the other four the children of the younger man and wife. (Plomley 1983:168)
The band comprised a number of hearth groups (Jones 1974). Whilst the band often resided within its own territory, it also foraged widely within the territories of other bands. Brown (1986:21) states that the band was led by a man, usually older that the others and who had a reputation as a formidable hunter and fighter. Brown (1985) also suggests that the band (as well as the hearth group) was ideally exogamous, with the wife usually moving to her husband’s band and hearth group.
It appears that there were two broad language groups in Tasmania, the northern and southern Tasmanian languages (Ryan 1996). Labilliarere recorded a vocabulary of 120 words that is probably the best source for the language of the south east people (AT 2010:24).
4.4 Aboriginal Social Organisation on King Island The Aboriginal social organisation on King Island is poorly understood. There is archaeological evidence that the Island was occupied during the Pleistocene, when King Island was connected to Tasmania (see Sim 1990 and 1991). However, we are uncertain of the Aboriginal social structure of Tasmania at this time.
There is also definitive archaeological evidence to show that Aboriginal people continued to occupy the area during the Holocene period, once the Island was formed (see Sim 1990 and 1991). However, the nature of this occupation is uncertain. Sim (1991:229- 235) is of the opinion that King Island was occasionally visited by Aboriginal people travelling via canoe from the North West Coast of Tasmania, and that this visitation is likely to have occurred only in the last 2000 years.
Page | 26
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Earliest European observations of the more remote islands of Bass Strait, such as the Furneaux Group, King and Flinders Islands occurred towards the end of the 18th century. At the time, each of these islands was recorded as being devoid of human inhabitants (Baudin 1803; Cumptson 1973:44-45, Flinders 1801, 1814; Peron in Micco 1971).
Aspects of Aboriginal occupation of King Island are discussed further in sections 5 and 7 of this report.
Page | 27
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
5.0 Background Archaeology
5.1 Overview of Previous Archaeological Research on the Bass Strait Islands The first archaeological evidence of Aboriginal use of the Bass Strait islands was found on Flinders Island in the 1930s (Mackay 1946: Sim 1991:6). However, given that stone artefacts had been left on the island following the movement of Aboriginal Tasmanians to Flinders Island in historic times (1830s) by G.A. Robinson, the artefacts were not immediately recognized as being prehistoric in nature. While a number of stone artefacts continued to be identified on the Island during the 1930s and 40s, archaeological work was not undertaken for several decades, until Rhys Jones’ 1960s excavations at Rocky Cape brought focus to the Bass Strait.
Bowdler’s subsequent work at Cave Bay Cave on Hunter Island provided the first evidence of Pleistocene occupation in Tasmania with the discovery of 23,000 year old occupation layers (Jones 1965, 1971; Bowdler 1979). The discovery also confirmed the generally accepted belief that mainland Aboriginal populations colonized Tasmania via a Bassian Landbridge (Sim 1991). Prior to Bowdler’s discovery, the oldest dated Tasmanian archaeological site was Rocky Cape, where the lowest levels of cultural remains achieved radiocarbon dates of 8120 +/_ 165 BP and 7465 +/_ 150 BP (Jones 1971:198).
Following Jones (1965), further stone artefacts were identified on Flinders and several other Bass Strait islands between 1975 and 1979 (Jones 1979; Jones and Lampert 1978; Sim 1991). Shell middens were also discovered in various locations along the west coast of the island (Orchiston and Glenie 1978). The best investigated of these middens were those excavated by Orchisoton at Palana, on the northwest coast of Flinders Island (Orchiston and Glenie 1978, Orchiston 1979a, 1979b, 1984). However a full report of the primary data has yet to be published.
Robin Sim recorded a series of shell middens in more than 10 localities along the west coast of Flinders Island in 1989. The survey recorded a strong coincidence between the location of shell middens and places where the sea floor drops away sharply (Sim 1991:12). Given the absence of middens in other areas it was argued that these middens had been deposited in times of lower sea levels but when the shoreline was in close proximity to the shellfish middens (Sim 1991). Sim therefore argued that the island was abandoned either before the last land link to mainland Tasmania was inundated, or sometime shortly after when the islands had already formed but sea levels were lower than the present (1990).
Excavations at Mannalargenna Cave on Prime Seal Island, located approximately 5km west of Flinders Island, also revealed a long history of site use (Brown 1990). Sporadic site use is recorded from at least 20,000 years ago until roughly 8,500 years ago. Occupation is thought to have ceased when the islands comprising the greater Furneaux Group would have become islands with the last sea level rise (Sim 1991:11). It is thought likely that for several hundred or even a thousand year, it may have been possible to use prehistoric watercraft to travel between the Furneaux Group and mainland Tasmania. However, ultimately, as sea levels rise and the distances between the islands became increasingly greater, the islands would have become beyond the range of watercraft. Visits to the islands were thus argued to have ceased sometime before 6,600 years ago when the sea reached its current level (Sim 1991:12).
Page | 28
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
5.2 Previous Archaeological Research on King Island The first evidence of Aboriginal occupation of King Island (the western side of Bass Strait) was recorded by Jones in 1979 who found stone artefacts at the Petrified Forrest located on the southwest of the island. The discovery came some 50 years after the first recorded stone artefacts on Flinders Island. Jones argued that the artefacts were the product of people who had been ‘stranded’ on the island for several thousand years due to rising sea levels throughout the Holocene (1979:92).
A number of years later Sim conducted an Aboriginal site survey on King Island (1990) and recorded a number of prehistoric sites. In a preliminary reconnaissance trip to the island, Sim identified a series of prehistoric sites along with the islands distinctive depositional landforms. ‘The presence of artefacts in, and on, different dune formations and exposed paleosols, suggested that geomorphological events or phases on King Island could provide an interpretive framework for the investigation of archaeological sites’ (Sim 1990:36-37). The geomorphological contexts of many sites on the island suggested that they could thus provide approximate termination dates for the sites. They further allowed a degree of chronological control to be exercised over exposed/deflated sites, which is rarely possible with surface sites. Her survey strategy was therefore heavily guided by the geomorphology of the area (the geomorphology of the area is discussed in detail in the following section).
Survey zones were established according to discrete geomorphological or landform units, with survey areas within them selected by archaeological visibility. A total of 22 prehistoric and four historic sites were discovered during the survey, in both coastal and inland environments. Importantly, many of the sites now regarded as coastal are likely to have been inland sites in prehistoric times when the sea levels were lower. A single prehistoric shell midden was found, along with several other historic middens attributed to the sealing period. The historic middens were differentiated from prehistoric middens by their spatial relationship with historic sealers’ camps and by their deposition within modern geomorphological contexts. All the other identified sites comprised stone artefact scatters and isolated finds.
The 22 stone artefact sites were primarily located along the south west coast, as well as around lagoons and watercourses further inland. The majority of the artefact scatters comprised deflated lag deposits in the west coast dune blowouts. Some artefacts occurred in association with dense scatters of faunal remains including shellfish and the bones of extinct terrestrial animals, however Sim concludes that with the exception of the midden sites, it is possible ‘that natural deaths and non-human animal predation by carnivores and birds, could account for virtually all faunal remains in dune deposits’ (1990:37). In general the sites on the island are characterized by a paucity of artefacts with only three sites containing more than 12 artefacts. However, artefact numbers at these sites are considerably higher, comprising more than 50 artefacts (Sim 1990:39). Quartz was the most commonly raw material encountered, which, due it its natural fracturing qualities can often be hard to identify artefactually. Sim was necessarily cautious in the identification of artefacts made from quartz and as such felt that recorded artefact densities may have been underestimated at most sites, given that numerous fractured pieces, which could have been artefactual, were not recorded since they lacked diagnostic stone working features (1990:40).
Page | 29
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Due to the age of the research, descriptions of the contents of the sites rely upon out- dated typological concepts that have more recently been proven to be useless in terms of understanding stone technologies (Hiscock 2007). However these descriptions can be modified in the following loose terms to include 4 site types.
Type 1. Sites evidencing expendient technologies, utilizing local materials and adopting reduction strategies that make no attempt to conserve available materials or to resharpen utilized edges. Un-retouched flakes and minimally reduced cores dominate these assemblages.
Type 2. Sites evidencing curated technologies utilising exotic raw materials that have been consciously conserved through edge maintenance and rejuvenation. Retouched flakes and formal tool types occur in these assemblages along with un- retouched flakes and cores.
Type 3. Sites evidencing both of the two technologies detailed above
Type 4. Isolated finds consisting of pitted cobbles, unmodified manuports and quartz flakes.
Importantly, Sim observed a correlation between the site type (as described above) and the age of the geomorphological contexts in which they were discovered. Type 1 sites occurred most commonly in sediments overlain by quartzose and Holocene calcareous aeolian dunes, while type 2 sites occurred resting on sediments underlying the calcareous and quartzose dune sediments (thought to be Pleistocene in age). However these site types were visible in exposed sections and stumps of the quartzose dune sediments (Sim 1990:41). Site type 3 was found in all contexts and are assumed to be conflations of material from the different occupation periods.
On this basis, Sim argued that variations in assemblage structure could be explained by differences in the age. Whilst the assemblage sizes are too small to argue statistically, she concludes that ‘sites with artefacts in situ, in geomorphologically more recent contexts were of type 2 (curated assemblages, with smaller retouched implements), and those in geomorphologically older contexts were of type 1 (un-retouched, expedient assemblages) (Sim 1990:41).’ Most importantly, all the stone artefact sites could be attributed to a time when King Island was part of a land-bridge or a north-western Tasmanian peninsular (Sim 1990:42).
The single prehistoric midden site identified occurred at Quarantine Bay, where geomorphological interpretations of the dune units in this vicinity (Murray et al. 1982) suggests the shellfish remains were deposited more recently than 6500 years ago but are substantially older than the historic sealing period (Sim 1990:39). This site provided the only evidence of occupation of the island following the last sea level rise and it became a remote Bassian Island.
In 1991 Sim returned to King Island to complete a masters thesis exploring Aboriginal occupation of the Bassian Region with a specific focus on Flinders and King Islands. Returning to the sites she’d identified previously, Sim undertook test excavations on three stratified open sites, a midden site and in three sea caves off the south-western, cliff-faced side of the island (Sim 1990).
Page | 30
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
The first of the open sites excavated was at the Cataraqui Airstrip; the site constituted the largest artefact scatter recorded on the island. The surface assemblage was dominated by quartz and rhyolitic stone types, which indicated use of locally available materials, however a number of exotic materials were also present. A number of small formal tool types were identified, as were a handful of artefacts manufactured from spongelite sourced from Rebecca Creek on the Tasmanian mainland. Excavation recovered an additional five quartz artefacts from the relatively disturbed deposit.
The second open site – the Cataraqui Monument Site occurred on the surface of an exposed paleosol on a dune ridge approximately 7m above sea level and extending some 200m inland. The site is in the immediate vicinity of a prominent outcrop of grey quartzite. Site disturbance is evident, having been grazed by cattle for at least 50 years. Surface artefacts predominately comprised large quartzite flakes and cores from the nearby source, with some volcanics sourced to 10km away. Excavation proceeded to a depth of 60cm at the site, recovering more than 54 artefacts, 50 fractured quartz pieces (thought to be the bi-product of manufacture) and a further 91 pieces of unworked weathered quartz. Overall, the site lacked any of the formal tool types identified at the Airstrip site, instead comprising an amorphous assemblage of un-retouched flaked stone. Dating of paleosols either side of the deposit provided a site age of approximately 10,200BP with the possibility of continued use into more recent Holocene times. However two occupation phases are suggested, with the expedient quartzite surface assemblage argued to be a considerably younger but un-datable deposit.
The third open site was excavated on New Year Island, a small island located approximately 5km to the west of King Island. Deposits here extended less than 30cm in depth. The site was originally identified by a surface scatter (Sim 1990), however when Sim returned to excavate dune movement had covered these surface artefacts. Excavation failed to uncover any additional subsurface artefacts.
Three cave sites were also excavated: Iron Monarch, Blister Cave and Cliff Cave. All three were sea caves located in the cliffs along the southwest coast and comprise the only known caves accessible on the island (Sim 1991:178). None of the caves showed any surface expressions of use by people in prehistoric times.
Excavations of the caves identified two major aeolian depositional phases; one of pleistocene antiquity and another more recent early Holocene deposit dated to between 8500 and 700BP (Sim 1991:194). However, with the exception of the human remains recovered in Cliff Cave, excavation failed to recover any evidence to suggest any of these caves had been visited by people in prehistoric times.
A radiocarbon date of 14,270+/-640BP has been provided for the human skeletal remains, which are thought to be those of a male aged between 25 and 35 years. (Sim and Thorne 1990:49). Interestingly, despite the appearance of a ceremonial burial for the body found within the cave, no stone artefacts, food debris or any other evidence of prehistoric occupation of the cave was discovered.
Based on the stratigraphic sequences of the Iron Monarch and Blister Caves, Sim concludes that these cave sites were inaccessible for an extended period of time spanning from the late Pleistocene until mid-Holocene times; at which point sea levels made the island itself largely inaccessible. This explains the lack of occupation of these sites.
Page | 31
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Summary of Sim’s (1991) Results Sim’s work provided the following secure dates for prehistoric human occupation on the island: 1. human skeletal remains about 14,000BP from Cliff Cave 2. use of a quartz outcrop site at Cartarqui Monument approximately 10,000BP 3. and midden sites at Quarantine Bay and Cataraqui Point dated to 1,100 and 1,980BP
In combination these sites evidence human occupation respectively from the time when King Island: 1. was part of the Bassian land bridge connecting Tasmania to Australia 2. was in final peninsula or initial island phase 3. was an isolated island, separated from Tasmania by 85km of sea for some thousands of years (Sim 1991:205).
In addition to the midden sites, the deposit from Cataraqui monument dates to occupation more recent than the 10180BP deposit, suggesting middens are not the only evidence of island occupation during more recent times.
5.3 Historic Overview Earliest European observations of the more remote islands of Bass Strait, such as the Furneaux Group, King and Flinders Islands occurred towards the end of the 18th century. At the time, each of these islands was recorded as being devoid of human inhabitants (Baudin 1803; Cumptson 1973:44-45, Flinders 1801, 1814; Peron in Micco 1971).
Flinders noted that while there were constant Aboriginal ‘smokes’ being sighted around Tasmania, there was ‘none upon the islands’ (Flinders 1814:cxxxvi in Sim 1991). The first European visitors supported these observations, by failing to find shell middens or any other evidence to suggest previous occupation by Aboriginal people (Sim 1991). Given the richness of food resources available on the larger islands throughout the Bass Straight, Flinders found the lack of Aboriginal inhabitants on the islands puzzling. The French Scientific Expedition who visited the Bass Strait under the command of Nicolas Baudin in 1801-2 were similarly confused, with naturalist Peron commenting: ‘Over the whole extent of King Island we saw no trace of humans, and everything indicates that this island is equally unknown both to the wild tribes of Van Diemen’s Land and of New Holland…On the other hand there are few places in the southern regions that nourish so many useful animals’ (Peron in Micco 1973:11).
Aboriginal people were, however observed visiting the less isolated and geographically closer Hunter Islands (Bowdler 1980:12-13; Meston 1936). These islands occur within 5km of mainland Tasmania and according to historic accounts, Aboriginal people visiting the Hunter Islands swam between the islands within the Hunter group (Bowdler 1980:12- 13; Sim 1991). The use of watercraft in prehistoric times seems highly likely, despite the lack of historic accounts of watercraft use by Tasmanian Aborigines living along the north-western coastal areas. The strait between Hunter Island and northwest Tasmania is sufficiently treacherous as to make swimming unlikely (Bowdler 1988 and Meston 1936).
A number of historic sites have also been identified on the island, relating to the Aboriginal sealers’ women who lived on King Island during the early 19th century, and to
Page | 32
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
a more recent 20th century mutton birding site at Whistler Point (Sim 1990:37). Early historic accounts place the first mutton bird rookeries on the island after 1890 (Skira and Davis 1987:1), making them relatively recent events.
5.4 Registered Aboriginal Sites in the Vicinity of the Study Area As part of Stage 1 of the assessment process a search was undertaken of the TASI register to determine if there was any registered Aboriginal heritage sites located within or in the general vicinity of the study area. The search shows that there are eight registered Aboriginal heritage sites that area situated within a 3km radius of the proposed golf course development. Table 1 provides the summary details for these eight sites, whilst Figure 4 shows the location of the sites.
Of these eight registered Aboriginal sites, there are four sites that are situated within or in the immediate proximity of the boundaries of the proposed golf course development. These are sites TASI 2314, 3554, 3880 and 3885. The sites are highlighted in red in Table 1. Figure 4 shows the location of these four sites in relation to the plans for the proposed golf course development.
Three of these sites (TASI 2314, 3554 and 3880) appear to be located on the coastal fringes just outside the eastern boundaries of the proposed golf course development. The remaining site (TASI 3885) which is classified as an Artefact scatter/shell midden is plotted as being within the proposed golf course development. Based on the available information it does not appear that the site is situated within the foot print of any of the proposed buildings associated with the development.
Table 1: Summary details for registered Aboriginal sites in the vicinity of the proposed Golf Course development Grid Grid TASI Site Reference Reference Number Site Type Easting Northing TASI2776 Artefact scatter 236410 5611184 TASI2314 Isolated artefact 236111 5612984 TASI3554 Unoccupied rock shelter 236911 5612984 TASI3875 Artefact scatter/stone quarry 238710 5611784 TASI3878 Artefact scatter 239110 5612984 TASI3880 Artefact scatter/shell midden 235911 5612784 TASI3883 Artefact scatter/shell midden 239511 5613184 TASI3885 Artefact scatter/shell midden 237211 5613209
Page | 33
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 4: The location of the eight registered Aboriginal heritage sites located within a 3km radius of the bounds of the proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course development (map information supplied by AHT).
Page | 34
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
6.0 Predictive Modelling
6.1 Introduction to Predictive Modelling Predictive modelling, in an archaeological context, is a fairly straight forward concept and has been utilised by archaeologists in Australia for a number of years as a tool for undertaking research into Aboriginal heritage sites. In summary, predictive modelling involves the collation of information generated from previous archaeological research in a given region, and using this information to establish patterns of Aboriginal site distributions within the landscape of that particular region. On the basis of perceived patterns of site distribution, Archaeologists can then make predictive statements regarding the potential for various Aboriginal site types to occur within certain landscape settings, and can make preliminary assessments regarding the potential archaeological sensitivity of landscape types within a given region.
6.2 Predictive Models; Strengths and Weaknesses It should be acknowledged that most, if not all predictive models have a number of potential inherit weaknesses which may serve to limit their value. These include, but may not be limited to the following. 1) The accuracy of a predictive model is directly influenced by the quality and quantity of available site data and information for a given region. The more data available and the greater the quality of that data, the more likely it is that an accurate predictive model can be developed. 2) Predictive modelling works very well for certain types, most particularly isolated artefacts and artefact scatters, and to a lesser extent scarred trees. For other site types it is far more difficult to accurately establish distribution patterns and therefore make predictive modelling statements. Unfortunately, these site types are generally the rarer site types (in terms of frequency of occurrence) and are therefore generally the most significant sites. 3) Predictive modelling (unless it is very sophisticated and detailed) will generally not take into account micro-landscape features within a given area. These micro features may include (but is certainly not limited to) slight elevations in the landscape (such as small terraces) or small soaks or drainage depressions that may have held water. These micro features have been previously demonstrated to occasionally be focal points for Aboriginal activity. 4) Predictive modelling to a large extent is often predicated on the presence of water courses. However, in some instances the alignment of these water courses has changed considerably over time. As a consequence the present alignment of a given water course may be substantially different to its alignment in the past. The consequence of this for predictive modelling (if these ancient water courses are not taken into account) is that predicted patterns of site distributions may be greatly skewed.
6.3 A Predictive Model of Site Distribution for the Study Area Approximately 20 prehistoric sites have been recorded on King Island, including surface and stratified stone artefact sites, deflated shellfish scatters in dune blowouts, one stratified midden and human skeletal remains discovered from a cave deposit. Sites are generally of a low density and there is little evidence to suggest intensive occupation of the island at any stage of its history. The density of artefact scatters and middens is generally lower than that on mainland Tasmania. The site distribution pattern reflects
Page | 35
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
low intensity occupation of the west coast and a somewhat enigmatic absence of sites in the estuarine environments along the east coast. Thus the density and sparse nature of the sites on the island do not suggest long term, continuous island occupation.
On the basis of this information, the following predictive statement is made for the study area. Sites will occur most commonly on the west coast dunes, around lagoons and near inland water sources, in dune deflations. The most likely localities for sites to be encountered within the study area is along the coastal foreshores. The most common site types expected are low-density artefact scatters, isolated artefacts and shell middens. It is also possible, although less likely that stone quarry sites may be encountered. ; Quartz and quartzite stone materials are expected to dominate site assemblages, however a wide range of materials types may be represented from localised sources curated and used across the island.
Page | 36
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
7.0 Survey Coverage of the Study Area
Survey coverage refers to the estimated portion of a study area that has actually been visually inspected during a field survey. For the purpose of this assessment, it is estimated that the two member survey team walking a single transect can achieve a ten metre wide survey inspection coverage. A total of 23.4km of survey transects were walked within the bounds of the study area (see Figure 5). This equates to a coverage of 234 000m². The survey transects were aligned so as to achieve coverage of all of the environment and landscape units that occur within the study area; these being dune ridges, dune side slopes, low lying areas, foreshore margins and coastal hinterland areas. During the course of the field survey assessment specific attention was paid to the following areas: - The proposed building and infrastructure locations within the study area (eg club house, tourist lodges, maintenance buildings, access roads etc) - The locations where previously registered Aboriginal heritage sites had been recorded. - Those locales within the study area where there were improved conditions of surface visibility. This included dune deflation areas, erosion scalds, graded vehicle tracks etc.
Surface Visibility refers to the extent to which the actual soils of the ground surface are available for inspection. There are a number of factors that can affect surface visibility, including vegetation cover, surface water and the presence introduced gravels or materials. Surface visibility throughout the study area was generally constrained to an estimated average of around 30% due primarily to presence of thick grass cover (see Plate 13). However, there were a large number of areas of increased surface visibility that were present throughout various parts of the study area, in the form of vehicle tracks (see Plate 14), stock tracks (see Plate 15), erosion scalds, and dune erosion areas (see Plate 16). In order to increase the effective survey coverage within the study area, all areas where there was improved conditions of visibility were inspected.
Variations in both survey coverage and surface visibility have a direct bearing on the ability of a field team to detect Aboriginal heritage sites, particularly site types such as isolated artefacts, artefact scatters and midden sites, which are the site types anticipated to occur in the study area. The combination of survey coverage and surface visibility is referred to as effective survey coverage. Table 2 presents the estimated effective survey coverage achieved within the study area.
Table 2: Effective Survey Coverage achieved within the study area Total Area Estimated Average Effective Survey Coverage Surveyed Surface Visibility 234 000m² 30% 70 200m²
Page | 37
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 5: Survey transects walked within the bounds of the study area
Page | 38
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 13: View north across the study area, showing typically thick grass cover
Plate 14: Vehicle access track through the study area providing a transect of improved surface visibility
Page | 39
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 15: Stock tracks within the study area providing transects of increased visibility
Plate 16: Large erosion area where there was excellent surface visibility
Page | 40
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 17: Large dune erosion area providing locales of improved visibility
Page | 41
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
8.0 Survey Results and Discussion
8.1 Summary Results One of the key components of the present field survey assessment was to attempt to re- locate and record the four registered Aboriginal sites that are reported as being situated within the bounds of the study area (sites TASI 2314, 3554, 3880 and 3885).
In the course of the field survey, the team were able to positively re-locate two of these sites (TASI 3554 and 3885).
Site TASI 3554 is classified as unoccupied rock shelter that is situated within a rock overhang on the northern fringes of Victoria Cove. There are two separate rock shelters that occur within this single rock overhang. Both shelters are comparatively small. The field team carried out a detailed inspection within each shelter, and in the immediate surrounds of the shelters. No evidence of Aboriginal occupation was detected. This is consistent with the findings of Sim (1990) who made the original recording of the shelters.
Site TASI 3885 is classified as an artefact scatter with an associated shell midden deposit. The site is located in the north-west portion of the study area, just to the south of the Cape Wickham Lighthouse historic precinct. The field team identified one stone artefact and a very sparse scatter of shell material in this general site locality.
Despite undertaking an intensive search in the general grid reference locations provided for sites TASI 2314 and 3880, no shell midden material or stone artefacts could be identified at these two site areas.
In the course of the field assessment one additional Aboriginal heritage sites was identified within the study area. The site (VC 1) is a rock shelter that is located within a sandstone escarpment that overlooks the southern end of Victoria Cove; however, a detailed inspection within and in the general vicinity of this shelter failed to detect any evidence of Aboriginal occupation. There is a reasonable depth of soil deposit (around 5cm) within the shelter, which has some potential to comprise sub-surface artefact material. But based on the very sparse density of Aboriginal sites throughout the study area, the potential for sub-surface archaeological deposits is considered to be minimal. Even though there is no direct evidence for Aboriginal occupation of the rock shelter, it has been registered as a TASI site, based on advice received from AHT.
Three of the registered TASI sites described above (sites TASI 2314, 3554 and 3880) are located within the 19.2 ha area of Crown Lease Land that is designated as coastal reserve. These sites appear to lie outside the proposed footprint of the golf course design (see Figure 8).
The other two sites (TASI 3885 and VC 1) are situated within the northern property owned by Lighthouse Properties (PID 2921284). Site TASI 3885 (artefact scatter/shell midden) is situated right on the northern boundary of the study area. The site appears to be situated just outside the footprint of the proposed 15th green (see Figure 8). Site VC 1 is situated within a sandstone escarpment that is located between the proposed clubhouse location (positioned to the south of the site) and the proposed 18th green
Page | 42
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
(located to the north of the site). The site appears to be situated outside the footprint of both the clubhouse and the 18th green (see Figure 8).
Table 3 provides the summary details for the registered Aboriginal sites located within the study area, together with the summary details for the newly recorded unoccupied shelter. Those sites highlighted in red are those that were identified during the present assessment. Figures 6, 7 and 8 show the locations of these sites. The detailed descriptions for each of these sites are presented in section 8.3 of this report.
Please note: for the four previously registered Aboriginal sites, two sets of grid references have been provided in Table 3. The first set of grid references are those provided by AHT which are in GDA 94, Zone 55. The second set of grid references are those taken in the field as part of the present assessment, and are provided in GDA 94, Zone 54. This is the zoning that the GPS devices operate in on the Island.
Table 3: Summary details for Aboriginal sites located within the Study Area - Those sites highlighted in red are those that were identified during the present assessment. - Sites highlighted in black were not re-located by the field team. TASI Site Grid Reference Grid Reference Number Site Type (Zone 55 GDA 94) (Zone 54 GDA 94) E236111 E751300 TASI2314 Isolated artefact N5612984 N5613350 E236911 E752163 TASI3554 Unoccupied rock shelter N5612984 N5613318 E235911 E751205 TASI3880 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5612784 N5613250 E751817 VC 1 Unoccupied Rock shelter N5613006 E237211 E752427 TASI3885 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5613209 N5613581
8.2 Discussion of the Findings The results of the field survey assessment indicate that Aboriginal site densities within the study area are very sparse. Only five registered sites have been confirmed as occurring within the study area. These consist of two small artefact scatters with associated midden deposits, an isolated artefact, and two rock shelters where, as yet, no evidence of occupation has been confirmed. The observed expression of site densities is consistent with the study area having visited sporadically by Aboriginal people.
As detailed in section 6.1 of this report, surface visibility throughout the study area was constrained to an estimated average of 30%, due to thick grass cover. There is no doubt that these constraints in visibility restricted the effective survey coverage achieved by the field team, and may have contributed to some extent to the observed expression of sparse site densities within the study area.
This acknowledged, the field survey assessment still did achieve effective survey coverage of an estimated 70 200m² across the study area. The areas of improved visibility were distributed throughout the study area, and occurred in all of the various
Page | 43
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
landscape settings present (dune crests and side slopes), low lying basins, inland areas and foreshore margins). Significantly, many of the areas of improved surface visibility were focused along the foreshore margins where it was anticipated that Aboriginal sites would be most likely to occur.
In the author’s opinion the effective survey coverage achieved within the study area was sufficient to gain an accurate insight as to the expression of Aboriginal sites in the study area, and the survey findings can be reasonably viewed as indicative of the fact that site and artefact densities throughout the study area are likely to be low to very low, reflecting sporadic Aboriginal activity.
The explanation as to why Aboriginal activity within the study area was likely to be sporadic is most probably linked directly to Holocene sea level rises and the resultant impacts on not only Aboriginal sites, but also the Aboriginal people who occupied the area.
Palaeo-environmental data indicates that King Island probably became separated from Tasmania around 10 000 to 11 000 years ago, as a result of sea level rises associated with the onset of the Holocene period (Sim 1991:226). As a result of the sea level rise, the Aboriginal sites that would have been originally located along the coastal margins and associated low lying Bassian Plains will have been submerged, making them undetectable to archaeologists using conventional survey techniques.
There is definitive archaeological evidence to show that Aboriginal people continued to occupy the area during the Holocene period, once the Island was formed. The two sites which provide this evidence is a dated shell midden site at Quarantine Bay which provided a date of 1100BP, and a shell midden site at Catariqui Point which yielded a date of 1980BP (Sim 1991:228).
Whilst Aboriginal occupation of King Island during the Holocene has been demonstrated, the nature of this occupation is uncertain. It is possible that these two sites provide testimony of a stranded remnant Aboriginal population continuing to exist on King Island post sea level rise. However, Sim (1991:229-235) is of the opinion that the paucity of sites on the Island, and the nature of the contents of the sites is more reflective of the sites being the product of occasional visitation of the Island by Aboriginal people travelling via canoe from the North West Coast of Tasmania. This visitation is likely to have occurred only in the last 2000 years.
Whichever interpretation provides correct, the available evidence clearly indicates that site densities on King Island are sparse, reflecting sporadic activity. In this sense, the findings of the present field survey assessment are generally consistent with this sparse pattern of site distribution observed for the broader Island.
Page | 44
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 6: Registered Aboriginal sites that are recorded within the study area (Map scale 1: 100 000)
Page | 45
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 7: Google earth image showing the distribution of registered TASI sites within the study area
Page | 46
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Figure 8: The proposed golf course design showing the location of Registered Aboriginal sites that are recorded within the study area
Page | 47
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
8.3 Detailed Site Descriptions
Site Name: VC 1 Grid Reference: E751817 N5613006 Site Type: Un-occupied rock shelter Description The rock shelter/overhang is located within a sandstone escarpment that fringes the southern margins of Victoria Cove. The escarpment is situated approximately 100m south of the foreshore margins of the Cove.
The rockshelter/overhang is positioned in the upper portion of the escarpment (just below the flat summit of the escarpment), at an elevation of approximately 20m above sea level (asl). The shelter measures 5.3m in length (east-west), has a maximum height of 1.4m, and a maximum depth of 1.8m. It enjoys a northerly aspect, with sweeping views over Victoria Cove.
The floor of the shelter is flat to very gently sloping. There is no evidence of roof fall on the shelter floor. There is a shallow build-up of soil deposits, with the average depth estimated to be between 5-10cm. Surface visibility within the shelter was generally very good averaging 80-90%.
Beyond the shelter, (to the north) the escarpment slopes steeply away down towards Victoria Cove, at a gradient of around 50º. There are a large number of bushes on these escarpment side slopes which serve to partially obscure the shelter from view. Just above the shelter is the flat summit of the escarpment. The sand dune deposits on the escarpment have been deflated, and the sandstone bedrock is exposed to the surface across a broad area measuring around 60m x 30m. Surface visibility in this area was excellent (90%).
The field team carried out an extensive inspection within the shelter itself, as well as on the flat summit of the escarpment and the northern escarpment side slopes, within a 50m radius of the shelter. No evidence of Aboriginal occupation was detected either within the shelter, or in the general surrounds. As described above, surface visibility in these areas was very good, so the negative results cannot be attributed to poor surface visibility. There is a possibility that undetected sub-surface archaeological deposits are present within the soil deposits of the shelter. However, given the absence of surface expressions of archaeological materials, this potential is considered to be low. Any archaeological deposits that are present are unlikely to be stratified, given the shallow soil deposits in the shelter.
Page | 48
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 18: View south at the rock shelter
Plate 19: View north from the vicinity of the rock shelter down to Victoria Cove
Page | 49
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Site Name: TASI 3554 Grid Reference: E752163 N5613318 Site Type: Un-occupied rock shelter Description The rock shelter/overhang is located within a sandstone cliff line that fringes the northern margins of Victoria Cove. The cliff line is situated approximately 10m east of the rocky foreshores that fringe the northern edge of the sandy beach of Victoria Cove. The cliff line is only small, measuring approximately 30m in length (north-west to south-east), and is 3-4m high.
There are two separate rockshelters that are situated within this cliff line. The first is located at the base of the north-western edge of the cliff line, at grid reference E752163 N5613318. This shelter measures 2.2m in length, with a maximum height of 1.1m and a maximum depth of 3.2m. The shelter has a south-west orientation and is elevated around 3m asl, which is just above the high tide mark. The floor of the shelter is flat to gently sloping. The floor is strewn with roof fall and rocks. There appears to be some shallow deposits of soil build up on the shelter floor. The exact depth is unknown, but would appear to be less than 20cm. Surface visibility in the shelter was very good (70- 80%).
The second shelter is positioned at the base of the south-east edge of the cliff line, at grid reference E752175 N5613325. This shelter measures 1.9m in length, with a maximum height of 1.4m and a maximum depth of 1.8m. The shelter has a south-west orientation and is elevated around 3m asl, which is just above the high tide mark. The floor of the shelter is flat to gently sloping. There appears to be some shallow deposits of soil build up on the shelter floor. The exact depth is unknown, but would appear to be less than 20cm. Surface visibility in the shelter was very good (70-80%).
The slope gradient from the base of the cliff line down to the rocky foreshore is quite gentle (gradient 3-4º). The slope is very rocky. The top of the cliff line is flat. The sand dune deposits on the escarpment have been deflated, and the sandstone bedrock is exposed to the surface across a broad area measuring around 40m x 20m. Surface visibility in this area was fair (40%).
The field team carried out an extensive inspection within both shelters, as well as on the flat summit of the cliff line, within a 50m radius of the shelters. No evidence of Aboriginal occupation was detected either within the shelters, or in the general surrounds. As described above, surface visibility in these areas was very good, so the negative results cannot be attributed to poor surface visibility. There is a possibility that undetected sub- surface archaeological deposits are present within the soil deposits of the shelters. However, given the absence of surface expressions of archaeological materials, this potential is considered to be low. Any archaeological deposits that are present are unlikely to be stratified, given the shallow soil deposits in the shelters.
The negative survey findings at these two shelters are consistent with the original recording of the rock shelters carried out by Sim (1990) who also failed to detect any evidence of occupation.
Page | 50
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 20: View north at the opening of shelter 1
Plate 21: View north at the opening of shelter 2
Page | 51
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 22: View south-west from the shelters down to the rocky foreshore margins
Plate 23: View north at the cliff line where the two shelters are located
Page | 52
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Site Name: TASI 3885 Grid Reference: E752427 N5613581 Site Type: Artefact scatter/shell midden Description Site TASI 3885 is classified as an artefact scatter with an associated sparse scatter of shell material.
The site is located approximately 200m inland (east) of the coast line, and 300m south- west of the Cape Wickham lighthouse.
The site is situated within a low relief deflated dune system. The deflation area measures approximately 70m x 60m, within which the underlying sandstone bedrock is exposed to the surface in numerous locations. Surface visibility across the dune deflation area was generally good, with a series of large erosion scalds present. Visibility was estimated to average 70-80%. Away from the deflation area surface visibility was restricted to 5-10% due to thick grass cover.
As part of the field survey assessment, the field team walked a series of tight survey transects within the dune deflation area, and in the general surrounds of the area. The team were able to identify one stone artefact. The artefact is a grey quartzite flake piece measuring 20mm x 17mm x 4mm. In addition some small fragments of Wherrina shell material was identified. The artefact and the shell material were all concentrated within a 5m x 4m area, on a large erosion scald measuring 25m x 20m. Surface visibility on the scald was 80%.
It is possible that additional undetected artefacts are present in this area. However, given the generally good conditions, densities are likely to be low to very low.
As mentioned previously, this is a deflated dune system area, where soil deposits are very shallow, and bedrock sandstone is exposed in many areas. Given the skeletal nature of the soils it is highly unlikely that sub-surface artefact deposits are present in this area.
Page | 53
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Plate 24: View west at the location of site TASI 3885
Plate 25: Artefact and shell midden material from site TASI 3885
Page | 54
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Site Name: TASI 3880 Grid Reference: E751205 N5613250 Site Type: Artefact scatter/shell midden Description Site TASI 3880 is classified as an artefact scatter with an associated sparse scatter of shell material.
The reported location of the site is on the crest of a low relief sand dune which fringes a small gulch along a rocky foreshore. The site area is around 30m east of the shoreline, at an elevation of approximately 7m asl.
Surface visibility across this dune system was poor (5-10) due to the presence of thick vegetation cover. The only improved visibility in this general area was within a series of mutton bird holes that are dotted across the dune system, and on the rocky foreshores themselves.
The team carried out a detailed search within a 100m radius of the site location, however no stone artefacts or shell midden material could be re-located.
In this instance, the negative survey results are very likely to be a result of the constrained surface visibility.
Plate 26: View west at the reported location of site TASI 3880
Page | 55
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Site Name: TASI 2314 Grid Reference: E751300 N5613350 Site Type: Artefact scatter/shell midden Description Site TASI 2314 is classified as an isolated artefact. The reported location of the site is on a large deflated fore-dune system which fringes the rocky coastal shoreline. This area is situated around 40m from the foreshore and 15m asl.
The deflation area measures approximately 30m x 25m, across which the underlying sandstone bedrock is exposed to the surface in numerous locations. Surface visibility across the dune deflation area was generally very good, averaging 80-90%. Away from the deflation area surface visibility was restricted to 5-10% due to thick grass cover.
The team carried out a detailed search within a 100m radius of the site location, however no stone artefacts could be re-located.
Plate 27: View north-west across the reported area for site TASI 2314
Page | 56
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
9.0 Site Significance Assessments
The following provides an outline of the processes used to assess the significance of any cultural heritage sites that were identified during the course of the assessment.
9.1 Assessment Guidelines There are several different ways of defining types of significance, and many practitioners have developed their own system of significance assessment. However, as Sullivan and Pearson (1995) point out, there seems to be a general advantage in using a set of criteria which is already widely accepted. In Australia cultural significance is usually assessed against the Burra Charter guidelines and the Australian Heritage Commission guidelines (ICOMOS 1988, 1999, Lennon and Mathews 1996).
9.2 The Burra Charter Under the guidelines of the Burra Charter ‘cultural significance’ refers to the ‘aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations’ of a ‘place’ (ICOMOS 1999:2). The guidelines to the Burra Charter comment : “Although there are a variety of adjectives used in definitions of cultural significance in Australia, the adjectives ‘aesthetic’, ‘historic’, ‘scientific’ and social’ ... can encompass all other values”. The following provides the descriptions given for each of these terms.
Aesthetic Value Aesthetic value includes aspects of sensory perception for which criteria can and should be stated. Such criteria may include consideration of the form, scale, colour, texture and materials of the fabric; the smells and sounds associated with the place and its use (Marquis-Kyle & Walker 1992).
Historic Value A place may have historic value because it has influenced, or has been influenced by, an historic figure, event, phase or activity. It may also have historic value as the site of an important event. For any given place the significance will be greater where evidence of the association or event survives in situ, or where the settings are substantially intact, than where it has been changed or evidence does not survive. However, some events or associations may be so important that the place retains significance regardless of subsequent treatment (Marquis-Kyle & Walker 1992).
Scientific Value The scientific or research value of a place will depend upon the importance of the data involved or its rarity, quality or representativeness and on the degree to which the place may contribute further substantial information.
A site or a resource is said to be scientifically significant when its further study may be expected to help current research questions. That is, scientific significance is defined as research potential (Marquis-Kyle & Walker 1992).
Social Value The social value of a place is perhaps the most difficult value for heritage professionals to substantiate (Johnston 1994). However, social value is broadly defined as ‘the
Page | 57
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
qualities for which a place has become a focus of spiritual, political, natural or other cultural sentimental to a majority or minority group’ (ICOMOS 1988:30). In What is Social Value, Johnston (1994) has provided a clear definition of social value: “Social value is about collective attachment to places that embody meaning important to a community, these places are usually community owned or publicly accessible or in some other way ‘appropriated’ into people’s daily lives. Such meanings are in addition to other values, such as the evidence of valued aspects of history or beauty, and these meanings may not be apparent in the fabric of the place, and may not be apparent to the disinterested observer”. (Johnston 1994:10) Although encompassed within the criterion of social value, the spiritual value of a place is a new addition to the Burra Charter (ICOMOS 1999:1). Spiritual value is predominantly used to assess places of cultural significance to Indigenous Australians.
The degree to which a place is significant can vary. As Johnston (1994:3) has stated when trying to understand significance a ‘variety of concepts [are] used from a geographical comparison (‘national’, ‘state’, ‘local’) to terms such as ‘early’, ‘rare’, or ‘seminal’’. Indeed the Burra Charter clearly states that when assessing historic significance, one should note that for: any given place the significance will be greater where evidence of the association or event survives in situ, or where the setting are substantially intact, than where it has been changed or evidence does not survive. (ICOMOS 1988:29)
9.3 Significance Criteria Relevant to Indigenous Sites Indigenous heritage sites and places may have educational, tourism and other values to groups in society. However, their two principal values are likely to be in terms of their cultural / social significance to Aboriginal people and their scientific / archaeological significance. These are the two criteria that are commonly used in establishing the significance of Aboriginal sites. The following provides an explanation of these criteria.
1) Aboriginal Cultural / Social Significance This relates to the value placed upon a site or suite of sites by the local or regional Aboriginal community. The identification and assessment of those sites that are significant to Aboriginal people is a matter for Aboriginal people. This assessment can only be made by the appropriate Aboriginal representatives of the relevant communities.
2) Scientific (Archaeological) Significance Archaeological significance values (or scientific values) generally are assessed on the potential of a site or place to generate knowledge through archaeological research or knowledge. Bowdler (1984) states that the scientific significance should be assessed according to timely and specific research questions (research potential) and site representativeness.
Research potential entails the potential of a site or suite of sites for scientific research and excavation. This is measured in terms of a site's ability to provide information on aspects of Aboriginal culture. In this respect, the contents of a site and their state of preservation are important considerations.
Representativeness takes account of how common a site type is (Bowdler 1984). That is, it allows sites to be evaluated with reference to the known archaeological record within the given region. The primary goal of cultural resource management is to afford the greatest protection to a representative sample of sites throughout a region. The
Page | 58
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
corollary of a representative site is the notion of a rare or unique site. These sites may help to understand the patterning of more common sites in the surrounding area, and are therefore often considered of archaeological significance. The concept of a rarity cannot be easily separated from that of representativeness. If a site is determined to be rare, then it will by definition be included as part of the representative sample of that site type.
The concepts of both research potential and representativeness are ever changing variables. As research interests shift and archaeological methods and techniques change, then the criteria for assessing site significance are also re-evaluated. As a consequence, the sample of site types which are used to assess site significance must be large enough to account for the change in these variables.
9.4 Scientific (Archaeological) Significance for Sites Identified During the Present Investigations There are five registered Aboriginal sites that are located within the bounds of the study area.
Two of these sites are classified as un-occupied rock shelters (sites TASI 3554 and VC 1). Although these rock shelters are registered as sites on the TASI, no evidence of Aboriginal activity has been confirmed at either site. Given the absence of evidence for Aboriginal occupation at either site, it is not feasible at this point to provide a scientific significance rating for these two sites.
The other three Aboriginal sites (TASI 2314, 3880 and 3885) have each been assessed and allocated a rating of scientific significance, based on the criteria presented in section 9.3. A five tiered rating system has been adopted for the significance assessment; low, low-medium, medium, medium-high and high.
When assessing the significance ratings for these three sites, the concepts of rarity and representativeness have been particularly taken into account. Artefact scatter/shell middens and isolated artefacts are two comparatively common site types represented in the site record for Tasmania as a whole. However, as discussed in sections 5 and 8 of this report, there are comparatively few Aboriginal sites that have been recorded on King Island. Given the paucity of recorded Aboriginal sites on the Island, the concept of rarity comes into play for all recorded sites, as each site has the potential to contribute to our understand of the nature of Aboriginal occupation of King Island. The concept of a rarity cannot be easily separated from that of representativeness. If a site is determined to be rare, then it will by definition be included as part of the representative sample of that site type.
It is important to note that the significance assessments are based on the current information available for each site. The significance ratings for any of these sites may alter on the basis of any new information that may come to light in the future.
Table 4 provides a summary of the significance ratings allocated to each site. A more detailed account of the rationale used as the basis for determining the scientific (archaeological) significance of each site is presented below.
Page | 59
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Table 4: Summary scientific significance ratings for registered Aboriginal sites located within the study area TASI Site Grid Reference Significance Rating Number Site Type (Zone 54 GDA 94) E751300 Low-medium TASI2314 Isolated artefact N5613350 E752163 Not assessed TASI3554 Unoccupied rock shelter N5613318 E751205 Medium TASI3880 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5613250 E751817 Not assessed VC 1 Unoccupied Rock shelter N5613006 E752427 Medium TASI3885 Artefact scatter/shell midden N5613581
Site TASI 3880 and 3885 These two sites are both classified as artefact scatters/shell middens. This site type is comparatively common for the coastal regions of Tasmania. The scientific values attributed to these sites are therefore usually based primarily on the information that can be generated from these sites regarding Aboriginal settlement patterns in the region (research potential).
When assessing the research potential of a site, the contents of a site and their state of preservation are important considerations. As a general rule for the present assessment, the larger the site (in terms of spatial extent), the thicker the deposit of midden material, and the more intact the site is, the higher the research potential and associated significance that is attributed to the site. The sites rated the highest significance were those that displayed all these qualities, and also had evidence of stratified midden deposit, which could in future inform researchers as to changes in occupation patterns at the site over time
Sites TASI 3880 and 3885 are both comprise sparse scatters of stone artefacts with associated shell midden deposits. Both sites have limited potential to comprise extensive in-tact sub-surface archaeological deposits. This factor limits the research potential of the two sites. However, as discussed above, there is a paucity of Aboriginal sites recorded on King Island. For this reason, the concepts of rarity and representativeness come in to consideration. Both sites are assessed as being comparatively rare for King Island, and are therefore also assessed as being reasonable representations of this site type. Both sites also have the potential to contribute to our present understanding of the nature of Aboriginal occupation on King Island. On the basis of rarity and representativeness, these two sites have been accorded a rating of medium scientific significance.
Site TASI 2314 Site TASI 2314 is classified as an isolated artefact. The artefact could not be re-located during the present investigation. However, an inspection of the recorded site area indicates that there is a very limited potential for additional artefacts to be present in this area.
Page | 60
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Isolated artefacts are one of the most common site types recorded in Tasmania. As such, the scientific significance of isolated artefacts usually relates primarily to their research potential as opposed to the rarity of the site type. The potential exception to this is where comparatively rare artefact types (either tool or stone material types) are represented in assemblages. In this instance, the research potential for site TASI 2314 is limited by the low potential for additional artefacts to be associated with this site. However, once again the concept of rarity comes into play, and the site has been assessed as being of low-medium scientific significance, based primarily on this notion of rarity.
Site TASI VC 1 and 3554 These two sites are all classified as un-occupied rock shelters. Although these rock shelters are registered as sites on the TASI, no evidence of Aboriginal activity has been confirmed at either site. Given the absence of evidence for Aboriginal occupation at either site, it is not feasible at this point to provide a scientific significance rating for these two sites. A rating of significance may be attributed to these two sites, based on the outcomes of any future investigations that may be implemented at these site locations.
Page | 61
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
10.0 Consultation with Aboriginal Communities and Statement of Aboriginal Significance
The designated Aboriginal Heritage Officer (AHO) for this project is Vernon Graham. One of the primary roles of the Aboriginal Heritage Officer is to consult with Aboriginal community groups. The main purpose of this consultation process is: - to advise Aboriginal community groups of the details of the project, - to convey the findings of the Aboriginal heritage assessment, - to document the Aboriginal social values attributed to Aboriginal heritage resources in the study area, - to discuss potential management strategies for Aboriginal heritage sites, and - to document the views and concerns expressed by the Aboriginal community representatives.
Vernon Graham is in the process of implementing the Aboriginal community consultation component for this project. This has involved informing Aboriginal community groups of the outcomes of the assessment and sending draft copies of the report to Aboriginal community groups for review and comment.
A statement of social significance provided by Vernon Graham for the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development is presented below.
Page | 62
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Palawa Heritage Services Pty Ltd- Aboriginal Archaeology ACN 112 128 015 - ABN 97 112 128 015 Aboriginal Heritage Consultant Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Survey Cross Cultural Awareness Training, Arts Traditional Crafts & Photography
Vernon Graham Aboriginal Heritage Consultancy & Photographer 61 Galvin Street South Launceston Tasmania 7249 Phone 03 63 431 036
Mobile 0417 378031or 0408 035884
5th August 2012
Proposed Cape Wickham Golf Course Development Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Social Significance Statement
In July and August 2012 I was involved in the undertaking an Aboriginal heritage assessment for a proposed golf course development at Cape Wickham, on King Island. The assessment was carried out together with CHMA.
There are four registered sites in the golf course study area. We managed to re-locate two of these sites. We also recorded a new unoccupied rock shelter. This means there are five recorded Aboriginal sites in the study area.
The following provides my views as an Aboriginal representative on the social significance of these five sites and the land encompassed by the proposed golf course development as a whole.
Aboriginal heritage/relics are not renewable. Hence any cultural heritage values provide a direct link to past occupation undertaken by traditional Indigenous ancestors to the region of the project proposal. This provides a story or link for the Aboriginal community today, and facilitates the connection to social cultural heritage values, ethno history /story and the relationship pertaining to country. This is an integral part of regaining knowledge so it can be encapsulated and retained by the both individual Aboriginal people and for the Aboriginal community collectively.
The five Aboriginal sites recorded within the golf course study area have survived many years of impact and are a precious link with our ancestral past. The sites are held by me and the Aboriginal community to be of high significance and the community will want to make sure that efforts are made to protect these sites from any further damage. It is understood that each of these five sites are not under direct threat of impact through the golf course development, and will be retained in- situ within the landscape. This is supported. It is also understood that management strategies have also been put place to ensure these sites are not accidentally disturbed during the development of the golf course. This is also supported.
Page | 63
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Even if the site of the project proposal contains no evidence of Aboriginal heritage there is always the cultural resources (flora, fauna, aquaculture or any other resource values that the earth may offer) and the living landscape, which highlight the high significance to the Aboriginal cultural heritage values to the country.
In this instance the area encompassed by the proposed golf course development has been mostly cleared of native vegetation and is utilised for grazing. As a consequence, much of the bush food resources that may once have been present in this area has been largely destroyed. The exception is along the coastal reserve where there is evidence of mutton bird rookeries and there is an abundance of shell fish and other marine resources. These are important food resources for our community, and any impacts on these should be minimalised.
Thank You Sign
Vernon Graham Senior Aboriginal Heritage Consultant
Page | 64
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
11.0 Statutory Controls and Legislative Requirements
Five registered Aboriginal sites have been recorded within the bounds of the study area. It is also noted that there is a possibility that additional undetected Aboriginal sites may be present within the study area. The following provides an overview of the relevant State and Federal legislation that applies for Aboriginal cultural heritage in Tasmania.
11.1 State Legislation The protection of Aboriginal cultural heritage in Tasmania is principally governed by the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 (The ACT). It should be noted that this Act is presently under review. Under the Act, Aboriginal cultural heritage is defined as any place, site or object made or created by, or bearing the sign of the activities of the original inhabitants of Australia or descendants of such inhabitants on or before 1876.
The Department of Environment, Parks, Heritage and the Arts (DEPHA), through Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania (formerly the Aboriginal Heritage Office) is the state government body that is responsible for administering the Act. The main provisions of the Act are as follows. - All Aboriginal relics are protected under the Act and it is illegal to destroy, damage, deface, conceal or otherwise interfere with a relic, unless in accordance with the terms of a permit granted by the Minister. - It is illegal to cause an excavation to be made or any other work to be carried out on Crown Land for the purpose of searching for a relic without a permit. - It is illegal to sell or offer for sale a relic, or to cause or permit a relic to be taken out of Tasmania without a permit. - Persons who own or have knowledge of a relic have an obligation to inform the Parks and Wildlife Service and to provide information regarding the location of the relic(s). - Under Section 7 of the Act, the Minister may, on the recommendation of the Director, declare an area of land containing an Aboriginal relic to be a protected site. It should be noted that with regard to the discovery of suspected Aboriginal skeletal remains, the Coroners Act 1995 takes precedence.
11.2 Commonwealth Legislation There are also a number of Federal Legislative Acts that pertain to cultural heritage. The main Acts being The Australian Heritage Council Act 2003, The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1987 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
Australian Heritage Council Act 2003 (Comm) The Australian Heritage Council Act 2003 defines the heritage advisory boards and relevant lists, with the Act’s Consequential and Transitional Provisions repealing the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975. The Australian Heritage Council Act, like the Australian Heritage Commission Act, does not provide legislative protection regarding the conservation of heritage items in Australia, but has compiled a list of items recognised as possessing heritage significance to the Australian community. The Register of the National Estate, managed by the Australian Heritage Council, applies no legal constraints on heritage items included on this list.
Page | 65
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1987. This Federal Act is administered by the Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH) with the Commonwealth having jurisdiction. The Act was passed to provide protection for the Aboriginal heritage, in circumstances where it could be demonstrated that such protection was not available at a state level. In certain instances the Act overrides relevant state and territory provisions.
The major stated purpose of the Act is to preserve and protect from injury and desecration, areas and objects of significance to Aborigines and Islanders. The Act enables immediate and direct action for protection of threatened areas and objects by a declaration from the Commonwealth minister or authorised officers. The Act must be invoked by, or on behalf of an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander or organisation. Any Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person or organization may apply to the Commonwealth Minister for a temporary or permanent 'Stop Order' for protection of threatened areas or objects of significant indigenous cultural heritage.
The Commonwealth Act 'overrides' State legislation if the Commonwealth Minister is of the opinion that the State legislation (or undertaken process) is insufficient to protect the threatened areas or objects. Thus, in the event that an application is made to the Commonwealth Minister for a Stop Order, the Commonwealth Minister will, as a matter of course, contact the relevant State Agency to ascertain what protection is being imposed by the State and/or what mitigation procedures have been proposed by the landuser/developer.
In addition to the threat of a 'Stop Order' being imposed, the Act also provides for the following: . If the Federal Court, on application from the Commonwealth Minister, is satisfied that a person has engaged or is proposing to engage in conduct that breaches the 'Stop Order', it may grant an injunction preventing or stopping such a breach (s.26). Penalties for breach of a Court Order can be substantial and may include a term of imprisonment; . If a person contravenes a declaration in relation to a significant Aboriginal area, penalties for an individual are a fine up to $10,000.00 and/or 5 years gaol and for a Corporation a fine up to $50,000.00 (s.22); . If the contravention is in relation to a significant Aboriginal object, the penalties are $5,000.00 and/or 2 years gaol and $25,000.00 respectively (s.22); . In addition, offences under s.22 are considered 'indictable' offences that also attract an individual fine of $2,000 and/or 12 months gaol or, for a Corporation, a fine of $10,000.00 (s.23). Section 23 also includes attempts, inciting, urging and/or being an accessory after the fact within the definition of 'indictable' offences in this regard.
The Commonwealth Act is presently under review by Parliament and it is generally accepted that any new Commonwealth Act will be even more restrictive than the current legislation.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Comm) This Act has recently been amended, through the Environment and Heritage Legislation Amendment Act (No1) 2003 to provide protection for cultural heritage sites, in addition to the existing aim of protecting environmental areas and sites of national significance. The Act also promotes the ecologically sustainable use of natural resources, biodiversity and the incorporation of community consultation and knowledge.
Page | 66
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
The 2003 amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 have resulted in the inclusion of indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage sites and areas. These heritage items are defined as: ‘indigenous heritage value of a place means a heritage value of the place that is of significance to indigenous persons in accordance with their practices, observances, customs, traditions, beliefs or history;
Items identified under this legislation are given the same penalty as actions taken against environmentally sensitive sites. Specific to cultural heritage sites are §324A- 324ZB.
Environment and Heritage Legislation Amendment Act (No1) 2003 (Comm) In addition to the above amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to include provisions for the protection and conservation of heritage, the Act also enables the identification and subsequent listing of items for the Commonwealth and National Heritage Lists. The Act establishes the National Heritage List, which enables the inclusion of all heritage, natural, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, and the Commonwealth Heritage List, which enables listing of sites nationally and internationally that are significant and governed by Australia.
In addition to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1987, amendments recently made to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) enables the identification and subsequent listing of indigenous heritage values on the Commonwealth and/or National Heritage Lists (ss. 341D & 324D respectively). Substantial penalties (and, in some instances, gaol sentences) can be imposed on any person who damages items on the National or Commonwealth Heritage Lists (ss. 495 & 497) or provides false or misleading information in relation to certain matters under the Act (ss.488-490). In addition, the wrongdoer may be required to make good any loss or damage suffered due to their actions or omissions (s.500).
Page | 67
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
12.0 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan
Heritage management options and recommendations provided in this report are made on the basis of the following criteria: Consultation with Vernon Graham (Aboriginal Heritage Officer); The legal and procedural requirements as specified in the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 (The ACT); The results of the investigation as documented in this report; and Background research into the extant archaeological and historic record for the study area and its surrounding regions.
The following recommendations are aimed at minimising the impact of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development on Aboriginal cultural heritage resources.
Sites TASI 2314, 3554 and 3880 These three sites are located within the 19.2 ha area of Crown Lease Land that is designated as coastal reserve. The three sites all appear to lie outside the present proposed footprint of the golf course design (see Figure 8). As such, none of these three sites are under direct threat of impact through the proposed golf course development. For these three sites, the general recommendation is to retain these sites in-situ, and to implement appropriate measures to ensure these sites are not incidentally impacted during the course of the golf course development. In order to minimise the risk of incidental impacts to these sites, it is recommended that the proponent notes the location of the sites on planning maps for the proposed golf course development and ensures that development works are not undertaken in the immediate vicinity of the site locations.
If any development works are undertaken within a 30m radius of these three sites, then an interim barricade should be erected around the perimeter of the sites prior to development work proceeding. These barricades should be erected under the guidance of an AHO to ensure that the specified site areas are adequately protected. This barricading should then be removed on completion of the development works.
Sites TASI 3885 and VC 1 These two registered sites are situated within the immediate vicinity of the proposed footprint of the present golf course design.
Site TASI 3885 (artefact scatter/shell midden) is situated right on the northern boundary of the study area, and appears to be situated just outside the footprint of the proposed 15th green (see Figure 8). Site Victoria Cove 1 is situated within a sandstone escarpment that is located between the proposed clubhouse location (positioned to the south of the site) and the proposed 18th green (located to the north of the site). The site appears to be situated outside the footprint of both the clubhouse and the 18th green (see Figure 8).
For these two sites, the general recommendation is to retain these sites in-situ, and to implement appropriate measures to ensure these sites are not incidentally impacted during the course of the golf course development. For both sites there is a significant potential risk of these sites being incidentally impacted during the construction and development process of the golf course. On this basis, it is recommended that temporary
Page | 68
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
protective barricading should be erected around the perimeter of the designated bounds of these two sites prior to construction works commencing. These barriers should be erected under the guidance of an AHO to ensure that the specified site areas are adequately protected. The temporary barricading should be removed at the completion of the golf development works.
If it appears that it is not possible to avoid impacting either of these two sites, then the Proponent will need to obtain a Permit in order to destroy or interfere with these sites. This Permit will need to be issued before construction works in the vicinity of the two sites can commence. It may be the case that AHT will require further investigations to be implemented at these two sites in order to better understand their nature and significance, before they will consider issuing a Permit to Interfere/Destroy.
The Remainder of the Study Area Besides the five registered Aboriginal sites, the remainder of the study area has been assessed as being of low archaeological sensitivity. This is based on the negative survey findings, the high levels of prior land disturbance, and the low potential for undetected Aboriginal heritage resources to be present. It is advised that there are no further archaeological constraints or requirements for the remainder of the study area beyond following the proceeding Unanticipated Discovery Plan (See Section 13).
General Management Recommendations - If, during the course of the proposed Cape Wickham golf course development, previously undetected archaeological sites or suspected skeletal remains are located, the processes outlined in the Unanticipated Discovery Plan (see section 13 of this report) should be followed.
- Copies of this report should be submitted to the appropriate Aboriginal groups and Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania (AHT) for review and comment.
Page | 69
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
13.0 Unanticipated Discovery Plan
The following section describes the proposed method for dealing with unanticipated discoveries of Aboriginal sites and objects. The plan provides guidance to the proponent so that they may meet their obligations with respect to heritage in accordance with the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 and the Coroners Act 1995.
Please Note: There are two different processes presented for the mitigation of these unanticipated discoveries. The first process applies for the discovery of all cultural heritage sites or features, with the exception of skeletal remains (burials). The second process applies exclusively to the discovery of skeletal remains (burials).
Discovery of Cultural Heritage Items Section 14 (1) of the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 states that “Except as otherwise stated in this Act, no person shall, otherwise than in accordance with the terms of a Permit granted by the Minister on the recommendation of the Director – destroy, damage, deface, conceal or otherwise interfere with a relic.”
Accordingly, the following processes should be implemented if a suspected relic is encountered.
Step 1 If any person believes that they have discovered or uncovered Aboriginal cultural heritage materials, the individual should notify any machinery operators that are working in the general vicinity of the area that earth disturbance works should stop immediately.
Step 2 A buffer protection zone of 10m x 10m should be established around the suspected cultural heritage site or items. No unauthorised entry or earth disturbance will be allowed within this ‘archaeological zone’ until such time as the suspected cultural heritage items have been assessed, and appropriate mitigation measures have been carried out.
Step 3 Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania (AHT) in Hobart (ph 6233 6613) should be contacted immediately and informed of the discovery. AHT will make necessary arrangements for the further assessment of the discovery. Based on the findings of the assessment, appropriate management recommendations should be developed for the cultural heritage find.
Page | 70
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Discovery of Skeletal Material Step 1 Under no circumstances should the suspected skeletal remains be touched or disturbed. If these are human remains, then this area potentially is a crime scene. Tampering with a crime scene is a criminal offence.
Step 2 Any person discovering suspected skeletal remains should notify machinery operators that are working in the general vicinity of the area that earth disturbing works should stop immediately. Remember health and safety requirements when approaching machinery operators.
Step 3 A buffer protection zone of 50m x 50m should be established around the suspected skeletal remains. No unauthorised entry or earth disturbance will be allowed with this buffer zone until such time as the suspected skeletal remains have been assessed.
Step 4 The relevant authorities (police) will be contacted and informed of the discovery.
Step 5 Should the skeletal remains be suspected to be of Aboriginal origin, then Section 23 of the Coroners Act 1995 will apply. This is as follows:
1) The Attorney General may approve an Aboriginal organisation for the purposes of this section. 2) If, at any stage after a death is reported under section 19(1), a coroner suspects that any human remains relating to that death may be Aboriginal remains, the coroner must refer the matter to an Aboriginal organisation approved by the Attorney General (In this instance TALSC). 3) If a coroner refers a matter to an Aboriginal organisation approved by the Attorney-General – (a) The coroner must not carry out any investigations or perform any duties or functions under this Act in respect of the remains; and (b) The Aboriginal organisation must, as soon as practicable after the matter is referred to it, investigate the remains and prepare a report for the coroner. 4) If the Aboriginal organisation in its report to the coroner advises that the remains are Aboriginal remains, the jurisdiction of the coroner under this Act in respect of the remains ceases and this Act does not apply to the remains. In this instance the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 will apply, and relevant Permits will need to be obtained before any further actions can be taken. 5) If the Aboriginal organisation in its report to the coroner advises that the remains are not Aboriginal remains, the coroner may resume the investigation in respect of the remains.
Page | 71
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
References Cited
Barnard, G. 1826-27. A descriptive map of rocks, timber ad soil on King’s Island. Lt. Gov. Arthur’s Despatch 73. Govern’rs dispatches, October to December 1827. Colonial Office Records, London.
Baudin, N.T. 1803. The Journal of Post Captain Nicolas Baudin (1974 trans.). Libraries Board of South Australia, Adelaide.
Bowdler, S. 1979. Hunter Hill, Hunter Island. Unpublished PhD thesis. Australian National University.
Bowdler, S. 1980. Hunters and Farmers in the Hunter Islands: Aboriginal and European land-use of north-west Tasmanian islands in the historical period. Records of the Queen Victoria Museum 70:1-17.
Brown, J.W. 1887a. Report on Flinders Island, Tasmania. Journals and Papers of Parliament, Volume 12.
Brown, J.W. 1887b. Report on King Island, Tasmania. Journals and Papers of Parliament, Volume 12.
Brown, S. 1990. Archaeological investigations on Prime Seal Island, new update. Unpublished manuscript.
Cumpston, J.S. 1973. First visitors to Bass Strait. Roebuck, Canberra.
Flinders, M. 1801. Observations on the coasts of Van Dieman’s Land, on Bass’s Strait and its islands, and on part of the coasts of New South Wales. Nicol, London.
Flinders, M. 1814. A voyage to Terra Australis.. 2 vols plus atlas. Nicol, London.
Flood, J. 1980. The Moth Hunters. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies: Canberra.
Gaffney, D.O.1986. In G. Parkinson (ed.) Atlas of Australian Resources. 3rd Series Vol 4. Climate Division of National Mapping. Canberra.
Harris, S. 1988. A catalogue of some cultural relics in the outer Furneaux Islands. Unpublished report to the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Hiscock, P. 2007. Looking the other way. A materialist/technological approach to classifying tools and implements, cores and retouched flakes. In (S. McPherron and J. Lindley Eds) Tools or Cores? The Identification and Study of Alternative Core Technology in Lithic Assemblages. University of Pennsylvania Museum.
Hope, J.H. 1973. Mammals of the Bass Strait islands. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria. 85:163-195.
Jennings, J.N. 1957. Coastal dune lakes as exemplified from King Island, Tasmania. Geographical Journal 123:59-70.
Page | 72
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Jones, R. 1965. Archaeological reconnaissance in Tasmania, summer 1963/64. Oceania 35:191-201.
Jones, R. 1971. Rocky Cape and the problem of the Tasmanians. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sydney.
Jones, R. 1974. Tasmanian Tribes. Appendix in Tindale, N.B. Aboriginal Tribes of Australia. University of California Press.
Jones, R. and R.J. Lampert 1978. A note on the discovery of stone tools on Erith Island, the Kent Group, Bass Strait. Australian Archaeology 8:146-149.
Keen, Ian. 2010. Indigenous Participation in Australian Economies: historical and anthropological perspectives. ANU E Press: Canberra.
Keen, Ian. 2004. Aboriginal Economy and Society: Australia at the threshold of colonisation. Oxford University Press: Melbourne.
Mackay, D. 1946. The prehistory of Flinders Island. Present Opinion (Melbourne University) 1:48-50.
Meston, A.L. 1936. Observations on visits of the Tasmanian Aboriginnes to the Hunter Islands. Papers of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania 1935: 155-162.
Micco, H.M. 1971. King Island and the Sealing Trade 1802. Roebuck, Canberra.
Murray, P.,. Wallace, A. and Goede, A. 1982. Prehistoric human remains from an islet in the Bass Strait. Archaeology in Oceania 17(2):83-89.
Orchiston, D.W. 1979a. Pleistocene sea level changes, and the initial Aboriginal occupation of the Tasmanian region. Modern Quarternary Research in Southeast Asia 5:91-103.
Orchiston, D.W. 1979b. Prehistoric man in the Bass Strait region. See Australia 2:130- 135
Orchiston, D.W. 1984. Quarternary environmental changes and Aboriginal man in Bass Strait, Australia. Man and Environment 8:49-60.
Orchiston, D.W. and Glenie, R.C. 1978. Residual Holocene populations in Bassiania: Aboriginal man at Palana, northern Flinders Island. Australian Archaeology 8:127-141.
Peterson, Nicholas. 2008. ‘Too Sociological’? Revisiting ‘Aboriginal Territorial Organisation’. In Hinkson, Melinda and Jeremy Beckett (eds). Appreciation of Difference: WEH Stanner and Aboriginal Australia. Aboriginal Studies Press: Canberra.
Peterson, N. 1986. Australian Territorial Organization. Oceania Monograph. University of Sydney.
Page | 73
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Peterson, N. 1976. The Natural and Cultural Areas of Aboriginal Australia: a preliminary analysis of population groupings with adaptive significance. N. Peterson (ed). Tribes and Boundaries in Australia. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies: Canberra.
Peterson, N. 1975. Hunter-Gatherer Territoriality: the Perspective from Australia. American Anthropologist Vol. 77, No. 1.
Plomley, N.J.B. (ed). 1983. The Baudin Expedition and the Tasmanian Aborigines 1802. Blubberhead Press: Hobart.
Plomley, N.J.B 1966. Friendly Mission: The Journals of Augustus Robinson 1829-1834. Tasmanian Historical research Association, Hobart.
Pryor, R.J. 1987. Land use in the Bass Strait. In S. Murray-Smith (ed.) Bass Strait: Australia’s Last Frontier. Australlian Broadcasting Corporation, Sydney. Pp. 52-61.
Ryan, L. 1996, The Aboriginal Tasmanians, Allen and Unwin, Crow’s Nest. Sutton, Peter. 2008. ‘Stanner and Aboriginal Land Use: Ecology, economic change and enclosing the commons’. In Hinkson, Melinda and Jeremy Beckett (eds). Appreciation of Difference: WEH Stanner and Aboriginal Australia. Aboriginal Studies Press: Canberra.
Sim, R. 1990. Prehistoric Sites on King Island in the Bass Strait: Results of an Archaeological Survey. Australian Archaeology 31:34-43.
Sim, R. 1990. 1991. Prehistoric archaeological investigations on King and Flinders Islands, Bass Strait, Tasmania. Unpublished masters thesis, Australian National University.
Sim, R. and Thorne, A. 1990. Pleistocene human remains from King Island, southeastern Australia. Australian Archaeology 31:44-51. Skira, I.J. and Davis, G. 1987. The short-tailed shearwater colonies of King Island. The Tasmanian Naturalist 90:1-6.
Stockton, J. 1977 Bay of Fires Stone Alignment. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tindale, Norman. 1974. Tribal boundaries in Aboriginal Australia [cartographic material]. Division of National Mapping, Dept. of National Development: Canberra.
Trigger, David. 2010. ‘Anthropology and native title: Issues of method, claim group membership and research capacity’. In Bauman, Toni (ed). Dilemmas in Applied Native Title Anthropology in Australia. AIATSIS: Canberra.
Trigger, David. 1992. Whitefella Comin’: Aboriginal responses to colonialism in northern Australia. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
White, I. & Cane, S. 1986. An Investigation of Aboriginal Settlements and Burial Patterns in the Vicinity of Yass. A report to the NSW NPWS.
White, Neville. 2003. Meaning and Metaphor in Yolngu landscapes, Arnhem Land, northern Australia. In David Trigger and Gareth Griffiths (eds). Disputed Territories: Land, Culture and Identity in Settler Societies. Hong Kong University Press: Hong Kong.
Page | 74
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
Glossary of Terms
Aboriginal Archaeological Site A site is defined as any evidence (archaeological features and/or artefacts) indicating past Aboriginal activity, and occurring within a context or place relating to that activity. The criteria for formally identifying a site in Australia vary between States and Territories.
Artefact A portable object that has been humanly made or modified (see also stone artefact).
Assemblage (lithic) A collection of complete and fragmentary stone artefacts and manuports obtained from an archaeological site, either by collecting artefacts scattered on the ground surface, or by controlled excavation.
Broken Flake A flake with two or more breakages, but retaining its area of break initiation.
Chert A highly siliceous rock type that is formed biogenically from the compaction and precipitation of the silica skeletons of diatoms. Normally there is a high percentage of cryptocrystalline quartz. Like chalcedony, chert was valued by Aboriginal people as a stone material for manufacturing stone tools. The rock type often breaks by conchoidal (shell like) fracture, providing flakes that have hard, durable edges.
Cobble Water worn stones that have a diameter greater than 64mm (about the size of a tennis ball) and less than 256mm (size of a basketball).
Core A piece of stone, often a pebble or cobble, but also quarried stone, from which flakes have been struck for the purpose of making stone tools.
Core Fragments A piece of core, without obvious evidence of being a chunky primary flake.
Cortex The surface of a piece of stone that has been weathered by chemical and/or physical means.
Debitage The commonly used term referring to the stone refuse discarded from knapping. The manufacturing of a single implement may result in the generation of a large number of pieces of debitage in an archaeological deposit.
Flake (general definition) A piece of stone detached from a nucleus such as a core. A complete or substantially complete flake of lithic material usually shows evidence of hard indenter initiation, or occasional bending initiation. The most common type of flake is the ‘conchoidal flake’.
Page | 75
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
The flake’s primary fracture surface (the ventral or inside surface) exhibits features such as fracture initiation, bulb of force, and undulations and lances that indicate the direction of the fracture front.
Flake fragment An artefact that does not have areas of fracture initiation, but which displays sufficient fracture surface attributes to allow identification as a stone artefact fragment.
Flake portion (broken flake) The proximal portion of a flake retaining the area of flake initiation, or a distal portion of a flake that retains the flake termination point.
Flake scraper A flake with retouch along at least one margin. The character of the retouch strongly suggests shaping or rejuvenation of a cutting edge.
Nodules Regular or irregular cemented masses or nodules within the soil. Also referred to as concretions and buckshot gravel. Cementing agents may be iron and/or manganese oxides, calcium carbonate, gypsum etc. Normally formed in situ and commonly indicative of seasonal waterlogging or a fluctuating chemical environment in the soil such as; oxidation and reduction, or saturation and evaporation. Nodules can be redistributed by erosion. (See also 'concretion').
Pebble By geological definition, a waterworn stone less than 64 mm in diameter (about the size of a tennis ball). Archaeologists often refer to waterworn stones larger than this as pebbles though technically they are cobbles.
Quartz A mineral composed of crystalline silica. Quartz is a very stable mineral that does not alter chemically during weathering or metamorphism. Quartz is abundantly common and was used by Aboriginal people throughout Australia to make light-duty cutting tools. Despite the often unpredictable nature of fracture in quartz, the flakes often have sharp cutting edges.
Quartzite A hard silica rich stone formed in sandstone that has been recrystallised by heat (metaquartzite) or strengthened by slow infilling of silica in the voids between the sand grains (Orthoquartzite).
Retouch (on stone tools) An area of flake scars on an artefact resulting from intentional shaping, resharpening, or rejuvenation after breakage or blunting of a cutting edge. In resharpening a cutting edge the retouch is invariably found only on one side (see also 'indeterminate retouched piece', retouch flake' etc).
Scraper A general group of stone artefacts, usually flakes but also cores, with one or more retouched edges thought to have been used in a range of different cutting and scraping activities. A flake scraper is a flake with retouch along at least one margin, but not
Page | 76
Cape Wickham, King Island Golf Course Development CHMA 2012
qualifying for attribution to a more specific implement category. Flake scrapers sometimes also exhibit use-wear on the retouched or another edge.
Silcrete A hard, fine grained siliceous stone with flaking properties similar to quartzite and chert. It is formed by the cementing and/or replacement of bedrock, weathering deposits, unconsolidated sediments, soil or other material, by a low temperature physico-chemical process. Silcrete is essentially composed of quartz grains cemented by microcrystalline silica. The clasts in silcrete bare most often quartz grains but may be chert or chalcedony or some other hard mineral particle. The mechanical properties and texture of silcrete are equivalent to the range exhibited by chert at the fine-grained end of the scale and with quartzite at the coarse-grained end of the scale. Silcrete was used by Aboriginal people throughout Australia for making stone tools.
Site Integrity The degree to which post-depositional disturbance of cultural material has occurred at a site.
Stone Artefact A piece (or fragment) of stone showing evidence of intentional human modification.
Stone procurement site A place where stone materials is obtained by Aboriginal people for the purpose of manufacturing stone artefacts. In Australia, stone procurement sites range on a continuum from pebble beds in water courses (where there may be little or no evidence of human activity) to extensively quarried stone outcrops, with evidence of pits and concentrations of hammerstones and a thick layer of knapping debris.
Stone tool A piece of flaked or ground stone used in an activity, or fashioned for use as a tool. A synonym of stone tool is ‘implement’. This term is often used by archaeologists to describe a flake tool fashioned by delicate flaking (retouch).
Use wear Macroscopic and microscopic damage to the surfaces of stone tools, resulting from its use. Major use-wear forms are edge fractures, use-polish and smoothing, abrasion, and edge rounding bevelling.
Page | 77
Planning Submission
Appendix E Traffic Circulation Flow Diagram Traffic Impact Assessment
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
CAPE WICKHAM GOLF COURSE – ACCOMMODATION DEVELOPMENT, KING ISLAND
TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT
OCTOBER 2018
Traffic Impact Assessment
Cape Wickham Golf Course - Accommodation Development, King Island
TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT
◼ Final October 2018
Traffic & Civil Services ABN 72617648601 1 Cooper Crescent, RIVERSIDE Launceston TAS 7250 Australia P: +61 3 634 8168 M: 0456 535 746 E: [email protected] W: www.trafficandcivil.com.au
1 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Contents
1. Introductiom 5 1.1 Background 5 1.2 Objectives 5 1.3 Scope of Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) 5 1.4 References 5 2. Site Description 6 3. The Proposal, Planning Scheme and Road Owner Objectives 9 3.1 Description of Proposed Development 9 3.2 Council Planning Scheme 9 3.3 Local Road Network Objectives 9 3.4 State Road Network Objectives 9 4. Existing Conditions 12 4.1 Transport Network 11 4.2 Traffic Activity 13 4.3 Crash History 13 5. Traffic Generation and Assignment 14 5.1 Traffic Growth 14 5.2 Trip Generation 14 5.3 Trip Assignment 15 5.4 Pavement Design 15 6. Traffic Impact Analysis 16 6.1 Traffic Impact 16 6.2 Impact on liveability, safety, and amenity of local area 16 6.3 Pavement Life 17 6.4 Traffic Safety 17 6.5 King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 - Traffic Gen.Use & Parking Code E9 18 6.6 Other impacts 19 6.7 Development site internal access roads and pedestrians 20 7. Recommendations and Conclusions 21 Appendices
Appendix A - Traffic Counts 23 Appendix B - State Road Link Map 24 Appendix C - Safe System Assessment 25 Appendix D - King Island Council Policy on Council Road Access 26
2 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix E - Stock Crossing Road Rules 27 Appendix F - Australian Standard Stock Crossing Ahead Signage 29
3 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Document history and status
Revision Date issued Reviewed by Approved by Date approved Revision type 1 23rd Oct 2018 R Burk R Burk 23rd Oct 2018 Draft #1 2 24th Oct 2018 R Burk R Burk 24th Oct 2018 Final 3 25th Oct 2018 R Burk R Burk 25th Oct 2018 Final
Distribution of copies Revision Copy no Quantity Issued to Draft #1 1 1 George Walker, 6ty Final 1 1 George Walker, 6ty
Printed: 25 October 2018 Last saved: 25 October 2018 01:25 PM File name: Cape Wickham TIA
Author: Richard Burk Project manager: Richard Burk Name of organisation: TBA
Name of project: Cape Wickham TIA Name of document: Cape Wickham TIA Document version: Final
Project number:
4 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
This TIA reviews the impact of the proposed 89 lot accommodation at Cape Wickham, King Island on the road network providing access to the site.
1.2 Objectives
This TIA assesses impact of the proposals in terms of: ◼ Safety and capacity
◼ Future development with traffic projections for 20 years
1.3 Scope of Traffic Feasibility Assessment (TFA)
This TFA primarily considers impact on Cape Wickham Road and to a lesser extent King Island Main Road (North Road) in terms of road user amenity, traffic activity and compliance with the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013. This assessment is based on desktop observations only.
1.4 References
1. RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments – 2002 2. King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 3. Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design (2012) 4. Traffic Engineering and Management KW Ogden and SY Taylor
5 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
2. Site Description
The proposed development site and layout are shown in figures 1-3.
Figure 1 - Location of proposed development
King Island Main Road (North Road)
6 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Figure 2 - Location of proposed development
Council Roads
7 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Figure 3 – Proposed subdivision layout
8 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
3. Proposed Development, Planning Scheme and Road Owner objectives
3.1 Description of Proposed Development
The proposal is to develop 89 Villa units of various sizes and ancillary facilities including: • Wellbeing centre • Clubhouse • Conference centre • 18 Hole golf course
Figure 10 summarises the expected traffic generation given the available transport options on King Island.
3.2 Council Planning Scheme
The proposed development involves land currently zoned Rural Resource in accordance with the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 shown in Figure 4.
3.3 Local Road Network Objectives
See Council Policy Statement on Council Road accesses in Appendix D.
3.4 State Road Network Objectives
King Island Main Road is a Category 5 State Road in the State Road Hierarchy. The Department of State Growth (DSG) manages the state road network and the objectives for King Island Main Road are to maintain transport safety and efficiency. The AADT at Reekara was 86vpd (1995) according to DSG records.
9 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Figure 4 – King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2015 – Cape Wickham
10 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
4. Existing Conditions
4.1 Transport Network Cape Wickham is accessible from Currie and the King Island Airport via King Island Main Road and Cape Wickham Road. It is assumed the Rural Default Speed Limits of 100km/h and 80km/h apply on the sealed and unsealed roads except where signed otherwise.
4.1.1 King Island Main Road (North Road) - 38km from Currie to Haines Road Figures 5 shows the road cross section and roadsides.
Figure 5 – Looking North along King Island Main Road
5.5m seal with between 2.5 and 5m wide verge from edge of seal to fence line.
Line marking is faded and there appear to be no guideposts.
4.1.2 Cape Wickham Road – 8km from Haines Road to the Light house Figures 6 shows the road cross section and roadsides.
Figure 6 Looking North along Cape Wickham Road 6.0m seal with between 2.5 and 5m wide verge from edge of seal to fence line.
There appears to be no line marking or guideposts
The sealed section extends North from Haines Road for 7.3km and is then unsealed 11 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
4.1.3 Proposed Access Figures 7 and 8 show the unsealed northern west end of Cape Wickham Road. It appears that there is adequate sight distance, but the speed environment needs to be checked, especially of the road is sealed. For this unsealed road a speed environment of 70km/h appears realistic.
Figure 7 Looking East/South East at the Cape Wickham Road access to the proposed development
Available sight distance looking left and right from the access appears to be 150m.
Austroads Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) for an 80km/h speed environment is 181m and for 70km/h is 151m.
Figure 8 Looking West/Northwest at the Cape Wickham Road access to the proposed development
Approach sight distance to Cape Wickham Road appears to be 100m.
Austroads Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) for an 80km/h speed environment is 105m.
12 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
4.2 Traffic Activity
Traffic activity on Cape Wickham Road due to the proposal is estimated to peak at 220vpd during the Tourist Season. Traffic activity on King Island Main Road is estimated at 100vpd based on DSG data provided, see Appendix A.
4.3 Crash History
The Department of State Growth is supplied with reported crashes by Tasmania Police. The Department maintains a crash database from the crash reports which is used to monitor road safety, identify problem areas and develop improvement schemes. The 5-year reported crash history for Cape Wickham Road records no crashes.
13 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
5. Traffic Generation and Assignment
This section of the report describes how traffic generated by the proposal is distributed within the adjacent road network.
5.1 Traffic Growth Background traffic growth on King Island Main Road is assumed to be 2% per annum.
5.2 Trip Generation With conventional traffic generation rates the proposal would generate 509 vpd as shown in Figure 9 however these are not considered realistic on King Island as visitors arrive by air. Accordingly, a peak guest rate has been used to estimate traffic generated, see figure 10.
Figure 9 – Estimated traffic with full development of the proposal
Figure 9 uses traffic generation rates for key land uses sourced from the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments. However, tourists visiting King Island must use local transport options for access, so transport demand should be assessed in terms of available supply. Table 10 provides an estimated equivalent traffic in terms of hire cars and shuttle bus services.
Figure 10 – Estimated traffic arriving per day with full development of the proposal
14 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
5.3 Trip Assignment It is expected that all traffic will travel between Currie and Cape Wickham via King Island Main Road and Cape Wickham Road.
5.4 Pavement Design
Figure 11 – Estimated traffic with full development of the proposal
15 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
6. Impact on Road Network
6.1 Traffic impact
The proposal will contribute an additional 160 car trips and 40 shuttle bus trips per day in total during the tourist season to transport 369 guests to and from Cape Wickham. The traffic impact is considered medium as sealing of the unsealed roads could be triggered. This trigger would be amenity based. If the unsealed roads perform satisfactorily and don’t generate too much dust amenity may not be an issue.
6.2 Traffic Capacity
King Island Main Road
Traffic capacity on sealed 2 lane 2-way rural roads is up to 1800 vpd per lane.
The expected traffic activity is estimated to increase from 100vpd to 300vpd i.e. 150vpd per lane. This means the road will be operating at 8.3 % of capacity i.e. at Degree of Saturation (DOS) 0.083. At this level of saturation there are no traffic capacity issues with queuing or delays.
Cape Wickham Road
Traffic capacity on sealed 2 lane 2-way rural roads is up to 1800 vpd per lane.
The expected traffic activity is estimated to increase from 20vpd to 220vpd i.e. 110vpd per lane. This means the road will be operating at 6.1% of capacity i.e. at Degree of Saturation (DOS) 0.061. At this level of saturation there are no traffic capacity issues with queuing or delays.
Unsealed rural roads carry traffic in the order of up to 200-300 vpd. Once traffic volumes exceed 200 vpd, amenity, environmental and traffic safety issues arise which can trigger sealing of the road. This is especially the case where there are roadside residences, sections of road expensive to maintain or there are tourist attractions on the route. Depending on the quality of road gravels available, unsealed roads can generate considerable dust during the tourist season which may not be palatable for tourists and Villa guests.
It is estimated that the unsealed section of Cape Wickham Road will experience in the order of 220vpd once full developed over the tourist season. This volume would be lower during the off-tourist season. The estimated traffic volumes indicate that sealing of gravel roads is not required but could trigger amenity concerns.
16 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
6.3 Pavement Life From 5.3.1 and figure 11, a pavement depth ranging between 200 and 375mm for insitu subgrade conditions between CBR 15 and 5 respectively should be adequate.
It appears from the photos supplied that CBRs of 10 may be characteristic and if this is the case a 250mm pavement would be adequate for 20year design traffic.
It is unknown what pavement depth has been used for the sealed section of Cape Wickham Road.
6.4 Traffic Safety
The proposal appears to satisfy sight distance requirements, see figures 7 and 8. The speed environment on gravel roads can vary considerably depending on conditions. It is anticipated that the characteristic speed environment would be 70km/h or less. If the access approaches are sealed then sight distances will need to be checked on site as the speed environment would increase significantly, possibly from 70 to 100km/h.
A Safe System Assessment (SSA)has been prepared from desktop review uisng the Austroads Safe System Assesment Framework, see Appendix C. The SSA has been prepared for Cape Wickham Road only. King Island Main Road from Cape Wickham to Currie is 38km long and cannot be assessed by desktop from one site photograph.
In summary, the very low volume of traffic and generally good sealed rural road standard results in a safe score despite the high speed environment. The low number of vulnerable road users e.g. motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians, due to the remoteness of the area, is a contrubutiung factor to the low risk score. The roadsides also appear to be relatively level and clear of hazards which is also supports the low risk score.
The highest risk appears to be for run off road crashes as there are no shoulders and no delineation. Installation of a centreline and guideposts is recommended.
The SSA risk score was is 36 / 448 which is at the safe end of the risk spectrum.
There can be safety hazards due to animals on the road in remote areas at night. In such situations Dusk to Dawn Advisory Speed Limit signage serves to warn road users and potentially helps to reduce crash severity by lowering vehicle speeds . If animals on the road are a concern the sigange shown in figure 12 could be considered.
17 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Figure 12 – Example of use of Dusk to Dawn Advisory Speed signage.
6.5 King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 – Traffic Generating Use and Parking Code E9
This TIA assesses the impact of the proposal on King Island Main Road and the sealed section of Cape Wickham Road and the proposed access approaches which are unsealed. Parking provisions are not assessed as this stage and are not expected to be an issue provided facilities comply Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890 (2004) in accordance with Code E9.6.1 - Design of vehicle parking and loading areas.
Code E9 Traffic Generating Use and Parking Code E9.1.1 The purpose of this provision is to- (a) Assist to protect the operational efficiency and safety of roads (b) Assist to protect public investment in road assets (c) Require on-site arrangements for – i. Circulation and passage of vehicles; ii. Loading and unloading of freight and people; iii. Parking not service vehicles having business in the site; (d) Specify design standard for circulation, loading and unloading, and parking areas within a site; and (e) Accommodate Local Area Parking Schemes
This TIA indicates from desktop assessment that the proposal can: • Operate efficiently and safely • Is not likely to disaffect public investment in road assets.
18 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
6.6 Other impacts
6.6.1 Environmental There are potential minor environmental impacts if the approaches to the proposed access and internal access roads are not sealed. Dust generated by gravel roads can affect: • Visual impact • Pedestrian amenity near the villas • Level of air pollution, presence of dust and dirt • Conservation values
6.6.2 Street Lighting and Furniture
The proposal does not require street lighting. Shelters for guests waiting for Shuttle Buses may be of advantage if shuttle bus operation is the primary transport mode.
6.6.3 Stock Crossing
Tourists may encounter livestock. There are protocols for farmers leading livestock on roads. Tasmanian Road Rules 2009 are applicable and Australian Standards specify Stock Ahead sign details.
The following conditions apply when leading livestock across the road:
• Stock must be attended when crossing a road. The operator must comply with all relevant road rules whilst undertaking crossing activities, See Appendix E – Stock Crossing Road Rules #356 - #359.
• Advance “Stock Crossing Ahead” warning signs must be displayed during active crossing times as per requirements of Australian Standard AS1742.2 – 2009, see Appendix F – Australian Standard Stock Ahead Signage. These signs may be displayed via temporary stands or folding closable type signs in permanent posts depending on operator preference
• Council may require road surface treatment and / or an appropriate water supply point to facilitate wash down and removal of any debris following crossing activity.
• The crossing point is to be located where there is adequate sight distance for oncoming traffic.
19 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
6.7 Development site internal access roads and pedestrians
From figure 3 it appears the access roads to the villas and facilities involve existing and new unsealed roads over some 1.5km. In addition, the access road alignments appear to follow the natural surface contours resulting in a winding road alignment. It is recommended that the access roads have a minimum trafficable width for two-way flow of 5m.
It is unclear what provisions will be made for pedestrians.
If pedestrian facilities are provided separate from the access roads, Area 50km/h speed limit signage is recommended at the road entry points to the complex.
If pedestrian facilities are provided adjacent to the access roads Area 40km/h speed limit signage is recommended at the road entry points to the complex. A 40 km/h speed limit provides a safer environment for pedestrians and could help reduce dust generated by traffic.
20 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
7. Recommendations and Conclusions
This report has been prepared to determine the feasibility of the proposal in terms of impact on King Island Main Road, Cape Wickham Road and the property access, King Island. The assessment has reviewed:
• Current crash history and traffic activity levels • existing road conditions • road safety on Cape Wickham Road using Austroads Safe System Assessment methodology • traffic likely to be generated by the proposal • implications for the new road pavement and existing gravel road access • objectives of the Planning Scheme in regards traffic efficiency and safety
The 5year reported crash history records no crashes on Cape Wickham Road and very low traffic activity levels on the King Island Main Road approach to Cape Wickham Road in the order of 80 vpd.
The existing State and Council roads are sealed but appear to have no shoulders or delineation. The roadsides appear to be relatively forgiving however with flat verges and no roadside hazards. Delineation is recommended with Rural Separation (S) line and guideposts. The delineation of Council and State Roads is a responsibility of the respective road authorities. The Safe System Assessment returned a low risk score for Cape Wickham Road. Leaving the road crashes are identified as the highest risk. Delineation improvements would reduce the risk of leaving the road type crashes.
The extent of animals on the road, which can be a hazard, is unknown. Dusk to Dawn Advisory Speed Signage as shown in figure 12 should be considered if the extent of animals on the road is or becomes a concern.
Given the proposal is on an island and has limited transport options the normal conventions for assessing traffic generation do not apply. Accordingly, the traffic generation has been calculated assuming available transport i.e a mix of hire car and 8-12-seater shuttle buses provide access for the estimated number of guests arriving and departing each day.
It is estimated that at peak operation, with 100% utilisation of the proposed Villa accommodation, 369 guests would require transport to and from Cape Wickham per day. It is estimated that this could be achieved with 80 hire cars and 20 shuttle bus trips to the site and the same on return i.e 200 vehicle movements per day.
In terms of traffic capacity, the proposal will increase the degree of traffic saturation from 3% to 10% on the sealed roads which means that there will be negligible impact on delays or queuing. In terms of the durability of the road, if the pavement depth on the recently sealed
21 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
section is 250mm or more it should be more than adequate for a 20year life assuming insitu subgrade CBRs of 10, which appears likely to be the case.
This situation is different however for the unsealed Council road and unsealed internal access roads. Traffic activity beyond 200 vpd could trigger amenity concerns for resident guests and tourists and can make some sections of the road expensive to maintain. The acceptable amenity level depends on the quality of the gravel used on the road and how much dust is generated which in turn depends on the quality of gravel available on King Island.
Council could consider reminding farmers of their obligations when leading stock across roads affected by the proposal.
Area speed limit signs are recommended at the entry points to the development site. If pedestrian facilities are proposed: • adjacent to the access roads then provide 40km/h Area speed limit signs. • separate from the access roads then provide 50 km/h Area speed limit signs.
A minimum internal access road width of 5m is recommended to support two-way flow.
It is considered that the proposal satisfies the objectives of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 described in Traffic Generating use and Parking Code 9. From desktop assessment the proposal can operate efficiently and safely and is not likely to disaffect public investment in road assets.
Conclusion: Overall, it is considered unlikely that the proposed development will create any traffic capacity or safety issues and the roads should continue to operate safely and efficiently.
Based on the evidence received and subject to the recommendations and assumptions made the proposal is supported on traffic grounds.
22 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendices
Appendix A – Traffic Count Data
King island Main Road AADT data supplied by DSG 23 October 2018
23 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix B – DSG Link Map
24 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix C – Safe System Assessment
25 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix D – King Island Council Policy on Council Road Access
26 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix E – Stock Crossing Road Rules
27 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
28 | P a g e
Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix F – Australian Standard Stock Ahead signage
29 | P a g e
CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT | KING ISLAND ROAD SECTION
3000 6000 3000 2000 4000 300
PASSING BAYS PLAN C3 scale: 1 : 50 sect
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR COMPACTED SAND ROAD SURFACE 45 CONCRETE KERB 546 FALL
300 4000 2000 CROSS SECTION C1 0 1 2 5 scale: 1 : 50
copyright by CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT | KING ISLAND ROAD SECTION
ROAD SURFACE
COMPACTED SAND 45° CONCRETE KERB 948 fall
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR CROSS SECTION C-2 300 4000 scale: 1 : 50
ROAD SURFACE
COMPACTED SAND 45° CONCRETE KERB 1581
fall
45°
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR CROSS SECTION C-3 4000 300 scale: 1 : 50
ROAD SURFACE
COMPACTED SAND 45° CONCRETE KERB
fall 347
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR CROSS SECTION B-1 4000 300 scale: 1 : 50 0 1 2 5
copyright by CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT | KING ISLAND ROAD SECTION
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR 45 COMPACTED SAND 2111 ROAD SURFACE CONCRETE KERB
FALL
CROSS SECTION H1-1 4000 300 scale: 1 : 50
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR COMPACTED SAND ROAD SURFACE 45 CONCRETE KERB
FALL 264
300 4000 CROSS SECTION H1-2 scale: 1 : 50
0 1 2 5
copyright by CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT | KING ISLAND ROAD SECTION
ROAD SURFACE ROAD SURFACE
COMPACTED SAND COMPACTED SAND 45° 45° CONCRETE KERB CONCRETE KERB 1024 fall fall 442
TO STORM WATER TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR 4000 300 COLLECTOR 4000 300 CROSS SECTION H2-1 CROSS SECTION H2-3 scale: 1 : 50 scale: 1 : 50
ROAD SURFACE ROAD SURFACE COMPACTED SAND COMPACTED SAND 45° 1823 CONCRETE KERB 45° CONCRETE KERB
fall 831 fall
TO STORM WATER TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR COLLECTOR 300 4000 300 4000 CROSS SECTION H2-2 CROSS SECTION H2-4 scale: 1 : 50 scale: 1 : 50
0 1 2 5
copyright by CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT | KING ISLAND ROAD SECTION
ROAD SURFACE
COMPACTED SAND
45° 2126 CONCRETE KERB
fall
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR CROSS SECTION H3-1 scale: 1 : 50 4000 300
ROAD SURFACE
COMPACTED SAND 45° CONCRETE KERB 1598
fall
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR CROSS SECTION H3-2 4000 300 scale: 1 : 50
ROAD SURFACE
COMPACTED SAND 45° 2272 CONCRETE KERB
fall
TO STORM WATER COLLECTOR CROSS SECTION H3-3 6000 300 scale: 1 : 50 0 1 2 5
copyright by
Planning Submission
Appendix F Water, On-site Wastewater and Stormwater Assessment
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham Environmental Service and Design Pty Ltd ABN 97 107 517 144 ACN 107 517 144
Office Postal 80 Minna Road PO Box 651 Heybridge TAS 7316 Burnie TAS 7320 Phone : (03) 6431 2999 Fax: (03) 6431 2933 www.esandd.com.au
8 November 2018
George Walker 6ty0 PO Box 63 RIVERSIDE TAS 7250
Mr Walker,
Development Proposal – Cape Wickham Project
Water, On-site waste water disposal and stormwater: Assessment against Acceptable Solutions and Performance Criteria
The development proposes construction on land at Cape Wickham Road. Proposal to include the following:
Sanctuary Villa – Villas 15 x 3 bed room; Clubhouse and Villas – Villas 13 x 2 bed room and new clubhouse with bar, restaurant and toilets; Hillside 1 – Villas 6 x 3 bed room and 10 x 4 bed room plus spa and gym with toilets and pool; Hillside 2 – Villas 19 x 3 bed room and 5 x 4 bed room; and Hillside 3 – Villas 13 x 3 bed room and 7 x 4 bed room; and King Villa – 6 bed room including pool; and Conference Building - 250 seat capacity; and Staff Area – Staff accommodation 80 people.
There is a requirement to demonstrate the proposed development can comply with the rural resource development standards, section 26.0, of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 relating to water, waste water disposal and stormwater. Page 1
A site visit was conducted on 29 March 2018, concurrent with other tasks on King Island, to note any major constraints on the land in relation to water, waste water and stormwater.
26.4.1 Development Standards
P3 – Water Supply
(a) There must be a water supply available for the site or for each lot on a plan of subdivision with an adequate level of reliability, quality, and quantity to service the anticipated use of the site or the intended use of each lot on a plan of subdivision; or
(b) It must be unnecessary to require a water supply
P3 – Assessment – Water Supply
It is proposed that the roof areas of the proposed buildings be utilised to harvest rainwater for storage in underground tanks for re-use as a rechargeable drinking water supply.
Rainwater harvesting results in a good quality supply that can be stored to produce a reliable drinking water supply. Sterilisation of the stored water prior to delivery to the user will improve the quality of the supply and protect public health.
Use of a rechargeable water supply will reduce the reliance of the existing water source from the nearby natural spring and therefore reduce usage of the existing groundwater.
A roof area can harvest 1L of rainfall for each square meter of roof. Calculating a reliable rechargeable water supply based on the average rainfall with adequately sized storage ensures there is drinking water for the potential occupancy.
Bureau of Meteorology data for King Island airport (1974-2017) has been utilised to calculate the average rainfall harvest for each area. Table 1 below details the potential rainfall harvest for each of the areas of the proposed development.
Page 2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sanctuary Villas 72540 57660 96720 104160 165540 182280 217620 215760 161820 133920 102300 91140 Clubhouse, clubhouse Villas and King Villa 125112 99448 166816 179648 285512 314384 375336 372128 279096 230976 176440 157192 Hillside 1 Villas and Spa 148746 118234 198328 213584 339446 373772 446238 442424 331818 274608 209770 186886 Hillside 2 Villas and Conference building 216177 171833 288236 310408 494327 543214 648531 642988 482241 439096 304865 271607 Hillside 3 157053 124837 209404 225512 358403 394646 471159 467132 350349 289944 221485 197323 Staff Area 45552 36208 60736 65408 103952 114464 136656 135488 101616 84096 64240 57232 Table 1 – Average rainfall harvest
The occupancy of the site is estimated to be 80% within 2-3 years.
Recommended water usage for villas connected to a rechargeable water supply is 120L/person/day.
The average daily water usage of the proposed clubhouse and restaurant is based on the following:
100 patrons/day using toilets at 10L/person/day; and 30 meals per day at 40L/seat; and Restaurant function 1 per week at 40L/seat.
The average daily water usage of the proposed spa and gym is based on the following:
20 patrons/day using toilets at 10L/person/day; and Pool refill volume of 200L/day.
The average daily usage of the staff accommodation and the King Villa is 120L/person/day due to the fulltime occupation.
Average daily usage of the conference building is calculated on 2 functions per week at 30L/person/day. At full capacity of 250 seats and 5 staff the average weekly wastewater flow is 210 x 30L = 6,300L/week or an average of 900L/day.
The clubhouse is positioned within an area that contains the upslope clubhouse villas and the King Villa. Water usage for the clubhouse, clubhouse villas and King Villa includes all associated buildings and uses.
The spa and gym building is in close proximity to the Hillside 1 villas therefore water usage for this area is combined.
The Hillside 2 villas are upslope from the conference building and water usage for these buildings are combined. Page 3
Table 2 details the estimated monthly water usage for each area based on the mix of villas and other building uses and the monthly rainwater harvest excess (green) or deficit (red) for each area.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sanctuary 267840 241920 267840 259200 267840 259200 267840 267840 259200 267840 259200 267840 Villas (195300) (184260) (163680) (155040) (102300) (76920) (50220) (52080) (97380) (133920) (156900) (176700) Clubhouse, Villas and 344224 310914 344224 333120 344224 333120 344224 344224 333120 344224 333120 344224 King Villa (219112) (211466) (177408) (153472) (58712) (18736) (31112) (27904) (54024) (113248) (156440) (187032) Hillside 1 355136 320768 355136 343680 355136 343680 355136 355136 343680 355136 343680 355136 Villas and Spa (206390) (202534) (156808) (130096) (15690) (30092) (91102) (87288) (11862) (80528) (133910) (168250) Hillside 2 Villas and Conference 482112 435456 482112 466560 482112 466560 482112 482112 466560 482112 466560 482112 building (265935) (263623) (193876) (156152) (12215) (76654) (166419) (160876) (15681) (43016) (161695) (210505) Hillside 3 398784 360192 398784 482112 398784 482112 398784 398784 482112 398784 482112 398784 Villas (241731) (235355) (189380) (256600) (40381) (87466) (72375) (68348) (131763) (108840) (260627) (201461) 297600 268800 297600 288000 297600 288000 297600 297600 288000 297600 288000 297600 Staff Area 252048 232592 236864 222592 193648 173536 160944 162112 186384 213504 223760 240368 Total Excess/Deficit 1.38ML 1.33ML 1.1ML 1.0ML 0.4ML 0.25ML 0.15ML 0.13ML 0.15ML 0.69ML 1.1ML 1.2ML Table 2 – Average rainfall excess and deficit
Based on the projected average water usage of each distinct area and the rainfall harvesting deficits noted in Table 2 the following storage capacity will be required:
Sanctuary Villas – 300,000L Clubhouse and Villas – 350,000L Hillside 1 Villas and Spa – 350,000L Hillside 2 Villas and Conference Building – 450,000L Hillside 3 Villas – 450,000L Staff Accommodation Area – 250,000L
The position of the storage tanks and associated infrastructure should be positioned downslope of the buildings so that the visual amenity of the areas are not compromised. Final positioning will depend upon slope and final position of the buildings.
The rainfall deficits from October to June will require drinking water to be supplemented from the existing natural spring.
The total drinking water volume required from the existing spring supply is 8.6ML per year. The average rainwater harvesting from the various buildings is 25.7ML per year. Drinking water volume required from the existing spring equates to 33% of the total water requirement.
Storage tank overflows can be directed to the static water supply for firefighting purposes to ensure these tanks remain at the required levels.
Page 4
Overflow from static water supply for firefighting tanks can be directed to:
Irrigation storage dams for the Hillside 3 Villas; and On-site trenches for all other areas.
It is proposed that the water storage in each area is to be delivered to the various buildings through a pressure distribution system. To enable the stored water to be used within the villas, restaurant, staff accommodation and conference centre it is recommended that each tank be fitted with a filtration and steriliser unit to protect public health.
Gutter guards installed on each building will reduce the amount of debris entering the storage tanks. This reduces the load on the filtration unit and assists with effective sterilisation of the water.
Utilising a rechargeable water supply for the development will require the developer or owner to register with the Council and comply with the requirements of the Tasmanian Drinking Water Guidelines. Compliance with the guidelines requires a drinking water management plan and associated monitoring.
Although not a requirement under the Planning Scheme it must be noted that a static water supply for firefighting purposes may be required under the ‘Director’s Determination – Requirements for Building in Bushfire-Prone Areas’. The volume required and position of the static water supply tanks is dependent upon a full site specific bushfire hazard management plan by an accredited assessor.
Water Supply Assessment - Recommendations
It is recommended that the proposed development obtain drinking water through rainwater harvesting to reduce reliance on ground water by:
Rainwater to be harvested from building roofs and delivered by 90mm poly pipe to underground storage tanks; Storage tanks can be poly or concrete and either delivered to site or manufactured in-situ; Underground water storage tank volumes for each area are those determined from rainfall harvesting and projected water usage deficits derived from Table 2 above; Above ground pump shed to house filtration and sterilisation system with visual alarm; Submersible pumps with sufficient ‘head’ and pressure to supply water to each villa or building; Pump capacity will depend upon distance and rise in elevation dependent upon final location of buildings and water tanks; Installation of filters for suspended solids and charcoal filters for taste (if necessary); UV sterilisation prior to delivery to reticulation system; UV sterilisation system to be determined by volume of water to be treated for each distinct area; Pump house will require an alarm system in conjunction with the visual alarm. This can be achieved via SMS to maintenance personnel to alert of pump or steriliser failure;
Page 5
Pumps, filters and UV sterilisers must be added to the maintenance schedule based on manufacturers recommendations.
The Tasmanian Drinking Water Guidelines require compliance with Part 3 for ‘Private Drinking Water Suppliers’. There is no requirement in Part 3 for monitoring of biological or non-biological parameters. It requires visual inspection at least every 12 months. However, to ensure protection of public health for staff and visitors, it is recommended that:
Applicant apply to Council for registration as a Private drinking water supplier; Application for registration will include a drinking water management plan; Management plan will include a monitoring program for commissioning and ongoing operation; Water quality monitoring parameters will be based on Australian Drinking Water Quality (ADWQ) guidelines and any further requirements of Council registration.
A conceptual plan showing the potential location of the underground drinking water tanks and associated pump and sterilisation unit sheds is attached at appendix A.
The proposal has the capacity to meet the requirements of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme clause 26.4.1 P3 to provide drinking water with an adequate level of reliability, quality, and quantity to service the anticipated use of the site.
Page 6
P4 - On-site Waste Water Disposal
(a) A site or each lot on a plan of subdivision must drain and dispose of sewage and liquid trade waste –
(i) in accordance with any prescribed emission limits for discharge of waste water;
(ii) in accordance with any limit advised by the Tasmanian Environmental Protection Agency;
(iii) without likely adverse impact for the health or amenity of the land and adjacent land;
(iv) without compromise to water quality objectives for surface or ground water established under the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997; and
(v) with appropriate safeguards to minimise contamination if the use or development has potential to –
a. indirectly cause the contamination of surface or ground water; or
b. involve an activity or process which requires the use, production, conveyance or storage of significant quantities of sewage or liquid trade waste that may cause harm to surface or ground water if released through accident, malfunction, or spillage; or
(b) It must be unnecessary to require the drainage and disposal of sewage or liquid trade waste
P4 – Assessment - Wastewater
Sustainable wastewater re-use is beneficial to land as it contributes to the water, nutrient and trace element requirements of the grasses being irrigated, without endangering public health, causing contamination of ground or surface waters, or contributing to long term land degradation.
The over-riding factors determining the selection of an appropriate wastewater treatment system for the entire development proposal are: Projected wastewater volumes from the various building areas of the proposal; Sandy soil type that has potential to allow accession of nutrients to the groundwater; and Proximity to Victoria Cove.
Page 7
Based on the scope of the proposed development and the projected wastewater volumes from the various areas there are a number of options available for disposal of wastewater.
Taking into account the varied uses and occupancy rates of the proposed areas the average daily wastewater flow allowance of 69,216L/day, have been calculated as:
Sanctuary Area – 8640L; Clubhouse and Villas (including full restaurant 1 per week) – 11,104L; Hillside 1 Villas and Spa – 11,456L; Hillside 2 Villas and Conference Centre – 15,552L; Hillside 3 Villas 12,864L Staff Accommodation – 9,600L.
Both the clubhouse restaurant and the conference centre will require adequately sized grease traps to reduce the volume of fats, grease and solids entering the treatment system.
A wastewater re-use proposal for this development would have a daily wastewater flow of 69,216L which is less than 100kL per day and therefore is not a Level 2 activity under the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994. Wastewater re-use schemes are not considered level 2 activities and are the responsibility of Local Government with input from State Government agencies if considered appropriate by Council.
Option 1 – Wastewater Re-use Scheme
An effluent re-use scheme that complies with all the requirements of the “Environmental Guidelines for the Re-use of Recycled Water in Tasmania” requires a full assessment of the scheme leading to an Environmental Management Plan to be submitted for approval by Council.
The environmental management plan required to be submitted to Council will encompass and comply with all the requirements of the Environmental Guidelines for the Re-use of Recycled Water in Tasmania in relation to: Public health – o Class B recycled water re-use at 1000 colony forming units or less per 100ml; o Warning signs; o Potential for sterilisation of necessary; o Storage in re-use dam to expose to sunlight and reduce bacterial load; o Critical distances relating to public health; Environment protection – o total phosphorus less than 10mg/L; o maximum concentration of metals in irrigation water as per table 4.2 of the guidelines; o salinity below 800ppm; o irrigation rates determined by plant tolerance and soil structure; o nutrient balance and uptake by grasses;
Page 8
Treatment and Distribution: o Treatment to at least class B recycled water – BOD5 40 or less; o Faecal coliforms 1000 or less per 100ml; o Total phosphorus 10mg/L or less; o Total dissolved solids 600 or less; o Bio-augmentation for nutrient and odour reduction through nitrification and denitrification; o Cross connection control; o Emergency storage and re-treatment controls including minimum 24 hours storage capacity. Site requirements – o Site assessment including; . Soil and plant suitability; . Salinity risk assessment; . Cultural heritage; . Water movement (ground water); and . Off-site effects; Location of groundwater monitoring bores; Storage and irrigation requirements; Irrigation scheduling; Treatment Reliability, monitoring and maintenance; Technical information and training; Contingency planning and emergency discharges; Environmental monitoring program; o In-flow and out-flow; o Wastewater quality; o Soil; o Ground water; o Surface water; and Incident response and reporting.
Re-use of treated wastewater to irrigate the fairways and greens of the golf course will reduce reliance on the groundwater and existing spring supply.
It is feasible to utilise wastewater for a re-use scheme by treating effluent through a commercially available secondary treatment system. A number of systems are accredited for domestic use in Tasmania and can be expanded to treat commercial volumes of wastewater.
Alternatively, secondary treatment of the wastewater prior to deliver to the re-use storage ponds, can be achieved through a bio-reactor treatment plant. The For Earth bio-reactor is modern secondary treatment technology acceptable to both the New South Wales and Victorian EPA with systems installed and operating in both states and overseas.
Page 9
The for Earth bio-reactor, for this proposal, will take the form of 4 x 40,000L in-ground aerobic- anaerobic bio-reactors capable of treating up to 80,000L per/day. Secondary treated effluent quality from the bio-reactor is:
Total phosphorus 10mg/L or less; Faecal coliforms 1000 colony forming units or less; Total dissolved solids 600 or less; BOD540g or less.
The preferred effluent treatment option is to utilise the For Earth bio-reactor in conjunction with the storage dam with a low energy aeration system. Auto dosing bio-augmentation within the treatment/storage pond will be included to reduce both nutrient levels and H2S and other odours.
Bio-augmentation is the addition of selected bacteria to improve nitrification (ammonia reduction), denitrification, biological nutrient removal and odour reduction.
Conceptual system design for the entire site includes the following:
Gravity feed effluent to a central catch/balance tank; Catch/balance tanks to have a minimum capacity of 4,500L each location; Catch/balance tanks for each area to be positioned downslope of drinking water storage tanks; Effluent to be screened through a drum screen prior to entry to the catch/balance tank; Effluent from the balance tank to be pumped to the treatment system tanks via a macerator pump; Treated effluent to be pumped to the re-use ponds; Catch/balance tank and bio reactor to have a visual alarm and SMS notification alarm system for pump failure; Effluent to be delivered to the re-use ponds via a 400mm poly pipe; Bio-augmentation bacteria to be auto dosed to the treatment area; Aerobic zone to be created low energy aeration system; Treated effluent to be retained within the storage ponds for golf course irrigation.
To ensure protection of the groundwater and surface water from indirect contamination the existing storage dams will require re-lining. Re-lining the storage ponds will reduce the potential for seepage to the groundwater.
An increase in the depth and overall capacity of the storage dams will reduce the potential for overflows during peak usage, allow for 24 hours emergency storage as well as above average rainfall events. Any increase in storage capacity will be calculated by a hydrogeologist as part of the re-use scheme design and management plan.
Wastewater will be directed to the existing irrigation dams/ponds within the property which have an existing reticulation system to the golf course irrigation system.
Page 10
Monthly wastewater input to the proposed re-use dams are shown in Table 3 below.
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Output 2.2 1.94 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.2 25.74 ML Table 3 – Monthly wastewater input to storage dams
Annual input of stormwater to the storage dams from Hillside 3 Villas is calculated from rainfall excesses noted in Table 2 as 0.14ML.
This results in an annual total input to storage dams of 25.88ML.
Information supplied by the golf course superintendent shows that the combined storage capacity of the existing dams is 16.4ML and that there is no irrigation of the golf course between May and September.
Inflow of wastewater to the storage dams during the winter/early spring non-irrigation period (May to September inclusive) is estimated at 12.9ML.
Allowing for low storage dam levels due to irrigation in the preceding months, winter rainfall and stormwater run-on from the surrounding area of 1.0ML and stormwater inputs from the Hillside 3 Villas of 0.14ML there is adequate excess capacity of approximately 1.4ML in the storage dams to accommodate non-irrigation period storage without overflow.
From October to April areas of the golf course are irrigated when required. Irrigation of the course can use between 1-3ML per day depending upon soil moisture requirements. Over the irrigation period of October to April total volumes used are approximately 240ML. This is an average of 34.3ML per month.
Storage of wastewater and stormwater run-on over the winter months of approximately 12.9ML would account for approximately 37% of the October irrigation requirement. During the main irrigation period of November to April wastewater re-use would account for approximately 6% (or 12.74ML) of the irrigation requirement.
The master plan shows that Hillside 2 villas, Hillside 3 villas and the staff accommodation area are within the recommended 250m buffer zone required under the re-use guidelines for odour control. The use of bio-augmentation significantly reduces odour from re-use storage dams and allows for a reduction in the buffer zone.
A wastewater re-use scheme complies with the performance criteria P4 of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 in that:
P4 (a) (i) & (ii) An Environmental management plan under the “Environmental Guidelines for the Re-use of Recycled Water in Tasmania” will comply with prescribed emission limits for discharge of wastewater and any limits advised by Tasmanian EPA; and (a) (iii) Use of secondary treated wastewater complying with discharge limits would not likely have adverse impact on the health or amenity of the land and adjacent land; and (a) (iv) The ‘State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997’ encourages the recycling and re- use of wastewater and where appropriate the irrigation to land to maximise it beneficial use and Page 11
that land application of wastewater be carried out in accordance with the current Tasmanian guidelines. o An environmental management plan approved for wastewater re-use under the guidelines complies with this requirement. (a) (v) (a) Re-lining the existing dams will reduce the potential for seepage and eventual entry to groundwater. Irrigation rates and the low secondary treated wastewater volumes also combine to reduce the overall potential for surface water and groundwater contamination; (a) (v) (b) Wastewater directed to storage dams is secondary treated and would meet the water quality limits specified in the wastewater re-use plan. Treatment units have audible and visual alarms to alert failures and reduce potential for accidental release. All treatment units have specified sampling and maintenance schedules to ensure regular servicing and that water quality limits are maintained. The environmental management plan requires emergency procedures in the event of malfunctions, accidents and spillage.
The option to re-use of treated wastewater for irrigation meets the requirements of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme clause 26.4.1 P4 (a) to drain and dispose of sewage.
The proposal does not involve the release of or requirement to treat liquid trade waste.
Option 2 – Domestic secondary treatment units upgraded for commercial application with sub-surface irrigation
Similar to the wastewater re-use proposal these systems utilise the treated wastewater to irrigate garden beds and lawns surrounding the buildings. However, in this instance the wastewater is pumped directly to the sub-surface irrigation drippers without storage and would not be utilised on the fairways or greens.
Large commercial treatment units such as the GRAF, Taylex or Kelair systems have the capacity to treat the wastewater to a secondary level for sub-surface irrigation. These systems have nutrient reduction capabilities of 54% for phosphorus and 50% for nitrogen.
Wastewater flow rates are the same for each area as noted in option 1 and would require large areas for irrigation.
For example, the Hillside 3 villas, based on a sandy soil profile and daily flow allowance of 12,864L, would require approximately 2,671m2 of sub-surface irrigation. The Hillside 2 villas and conference centre with a sandy soil profile and daily flow allowance of 15,552L, would require approximately 3,110m2 of sub-surface irrigation.
There is adequate land surrounding the various proposed building locations for the land application areas to be installed. This includes the required horizontal separation distances from boundaries and surface waters.
Page 12
A secondary wastewater and sub-surface irrigation system complies with the performance criteria P4 of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 in that:
P4 (a) (i) & (ii) Secondary treated effluent meets the emission limits for discharge of wastewater determined by the Director of Building Control and the Tasmanian EPA; and (a) (iii) Use of secondary treated wastewater complying with discharge limits would not have adverse impact on the health or amenity of the land and adjacent land and there is adequate land available to meet the required horizontal setback distances from title boundaries and surface waters; and (a) (iv) The ‘State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997’ encourages the recycling and re- use of wastewater and where appropriate the irrigation to land to maximise it beneficial use and the shallow sub-surface irrigation would meet the vertical separation distances to groundwater and horizontal separation from surface water; (a) (v) (a) Vertical separation from the groundwater and conservative irrigation bed sizing for the treated effluent along with compliant horizontal separation from surface waters combine to reduce the overall potential for surface water and groundwater contamination; (a) (v) (b) Proposal does not require storage of significant quantities of sewage. Secondary treatment units have both audible and visual alarms, regular water quality monitoring and frequent servicing requirements. All these systems combined minimise the potential for contamination due to malfunctions, accidents or spillage.
The proposal does not involve the release or requirement to treat liquid trade waste.
The option to utilise up-scaled domestic secondary treatment units and direct wastewater to sub- surface irrigation meets the requirements of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme clause 26.4.1 P4 (a) to drain and dispose of sewage.
Wastewater Disposal Recommendations
There are two options noted above for treatment and dispose of wastewater from the proposed development:
Design of a wastewater re-use scheme that complies with the Tasmanian Re-use guidelines for irrigation to fairways and greens; and Secondary treatment of effluent with sub-surface irrigation for gardens and lawn areas.
Both options will require grease traps connected to the clubhouse restaurant and the conference centre.
Both options meet the performance criteria requirements of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 clause 26.4.1 P4.
Page 13
Recommended Option
The preferred wastewater treatment and disposal system is the installation of a ‘For Earth’ bio reactor and wastewater re-use scheme utilising the existing irrigation ponds and irrigation reticulation system.
An environmental management plan including, but no limited to, the information noted on page 8 will be submitted to Council for approval in conjunction with the building and plumbing permit applications.
The overall conceptual design of the recommended bio reactor treatment system and wastewater re- use scheme is detailed on page 9 of this report. A conceptual plan showing potential location of the main system components such as catch/balance tanks, drum screen and bio-reactor is at attachment A.
A5 - Stormwater
Unless for agricultural use other than controlled environment agriculture which permanently precludes the land for an agricultural use dependent on the soil as a growth medium, a site or each lot on a plan of subdivision must be capable of draining and disposing of stormwater –
(a) to a stormwater system provided in accordance with the Urban Drainage Act 2013; or
(b) if stormwater cannot be drained to a stormwater system – (i) for discharge to a natural drainage line, water body, or watercourse; or (ii) for disposal within the site if – a. the site has an area of not less than 5000m2; b. the disposal area is not within any defined building area; c. the disposal area is not within any area required for the disposal of sewage; d. the disposal area is not within any access strip; and e. not more than 50% of the site is impervious surface
Page 14
A5 – Assessment - Stormwater
There is no stormwater system provided, therefore on-site disposal of stormwater is required.
Stormwater disposal is required for water storage tank overflows and impervious areas of the proposed development.
Water Storage Tank Overflows
Overflows from drinking water storage tanks from all areas of the proposed development and any required static water supply tanks for firefighting can be disposed of on-site through sub-surfaces trenches.
Directing water tank overflows to an outfall at either the eastern or western end (or both) of Victoria Cove is not recommended as on-site works have the potential to damage existing fairways. An outfall pipe would also require authority for works within the Crown reserve.
The area of the land exceeds 15 acres resulting in adequate area to install sub-surface trenches clear of defined building areas, wastewater disposal areas and clear of access and driveways. Engineering design and sizing of overflow pipes and on-site disposal trenches is required by a qualified engineer.
Disposing of water storage tank overflow to sub-surface trenches meets the acceptable solutions of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 clause 26.4.1 (b)(ii).
Impervious Areas Stormwater
Impervious areas of the proposed development such as roads, carports and parking areas account for less than 50% of the site. The site has an area greater than 15 acres.
Stormwater from the roads, carports and parking areas can be directed open or grated drains and gravity fed to stormwater pits to capture sediments. Stormwater from the pits can then be directed to sub-surface trenches for on-site disposal.
On-site disposal trenches can be positioned clear of defined building areas, wastewater disposal areas and clear of access and driveways.
Engineering design and sizing of sediment pits and gross pollutant traps, pipes and on-site disposal trenches is required by a qualified engineer.
Disposing of stormwater from impervious area to sub-surface trenches meets the acceptable solutions of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 clause 26.4.1 (b)(ii).
Page 15
Stormwater Disposal Recommendations
The site has adequate areas for disposal of stormwater on-site and to direct water tank overflows and impervious areas run-off to on-site disposal trenches. As noted above this complies with the acceptable solutions of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 clauses 26.4.1 A5 (b)(i) and (ii).
Conclusion
The proposed development is capable of complying with the relevant Performance Solutions and Acceptable Solutions of the King Island Interim Planning Scheme 2013 section 26.4 Development Standards as described in clauses 26.4.1 P3, P4 and A5.
Yours faithfully
Bruce Harpley Technical Consultant
Page 16
Attachment A – Conceptual Layout - Drinking Water and Wastewater Treatment System Components
Page 17
Planning Submission
Appendix G Villa Development Plans
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Appendix H Clubhouse Development Plans
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
CLUB HOUSE CLUB HOUSE CLUB HOUSE
Planning Submission
Appendix I Conference Building Development Plans
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Appendix J Wellbeing Centre Development Plans
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Appendix K Staff Accommodation Development Plans
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT | KING ISLAND
13500 4000 To Cape Wickham Road 25200
45000
17400 30000
10600
6000 25000
17400 To staff Area To Maintenance Area
8500 F1
17400
F2 6000
17400
SITE PLAN STAFF ACCOMMODATION AND MAINTENANCE AREA
N NEW ROAD F1 STAFF ACCOMODATION 0m 10m 20m 50m
LAND DIVISION F2 MAINTENANCE AREA scale 1:1000
CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT | KING ISLAND
copyright by
Planning Submission
Appendix L Masterplan
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham CAPE WICKHAM PROJECT D.A. SUBMISSION 14 SEPTEMBER 2018
2018
Planning Submission
Appendix M Site Specific Precinct Plans
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham
Planning Submission
Appendix N Photomontages
Cape Wickham Golf Links Clubhouse and Villa Development Cape Wickham Road, Wickham VIEW FROM VICTORIA COVE VIEW FROM ROAD CLOSE TO HILL SIDE 2 VIEW FROM THE ROAD TOWARD CONFERENCE BUILDING AND HILLSIDE 1 VIEW FROM LIGHTHOUSE TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT VIEW FROM THE ROAD TO THE STAFF ACCOMODATION VIEW FROM CAPE WICKHAM ROAD TOWARD HILL SIDE 3 CLUBHOUSE VILLA HILL SIDE VILLA 1 HILL SIDE VILLA 3 SANCTUARY VILLA