4.12 Scenic Amenity Summary - Logan City Council · The major gateway is ... cultural, amenity and ecological values ... • Some areas coincide with the lower slopes of Landscape

SP094801_100809_Scenic Amenity Report V10 54

4.12 Scenic Amenity Summary

This Scenic Amenity analysis provides a comprehensive review and refinement of the scenic amenity values within the Bahrs Scrub LDA based on the procedures outlined in Implementation Guideline No. 8. The analysis reviews mapping from the common method outlined in Implementation Guideline No. 8 and alternative more accurate analysis using more recent GIS data and aerial photography. The resulting mapping of scenic amenity values contributes to the determination of landscape units encompassing regional landscape values which can inform regional and local planning and define regional landscape areas as envisaged in Policy 3.1.3 of the SEQRP. Landscape units are identified in the following Section.

5 Landscape Units

Based on the results of analyses contained within Section 3.3 Landscape Character and Section 4 Scenic Amenity, four broad Landscape Units have been mapped in order to provide a reference for management strategies over parts of the site:

• Prominent vegetated Peaks; • Prominent Ridges with semi intact vegetation; • Creek Flats; and • Creek‐lines, dams and associated buffers.

In addition to these landscape units, several major and minor gateways are formed by the combination of existing site features. These gateways are obvious from existing road access points and shown on the attached Landscape Units plan. Refer to Figure 55: Landscape Units.

Figure 55: Landscape Units (Source: Cardno SPLAT 2012) Refer Appendix H for full size Figure.


The landscape character of the study area was once dominated by natural processes. However, today the study area reveals a complex interplay of both natural and cultural processes. Human occupation and activity has resulted in a pattern of development with large park living lots and associated housing, kerb‐less local roads, managed remnant vegetation, ornamental landscapes, manipulated waterways, dams and utility lines.

In contrast, the natural site character is defined by topography and vegetation. The features that contribute to site character include Windaroo Creek and its tributaries, meandering through the river valley flats, remnant natural stands of vegetation and elevated, forested ridgelines such as Wuraga Road Ridge, the Western Ridgeline and hilly landmarks of Clarks Hill and Bahrs Hill. Natural gateways are formed as existing roads enter and pass through scenic parts of the site and are exposed to these natural features. The major gateway is formed on the eastern entry to the site with a backdrop of Bahrs and Clarks Hill. Similarly, minor gateways are formed at road entries and junctions along the northern ridgelines, from Beaudesert‐Beenleigh Road south east of the site and at internal road crossings of Windaroo Creek. Protection of vegetation cover and possible reinforcement of these gateways in the future site development will ensure the unique qualities of the place are preserved.

The elevated terrain with remnant vegetation has a combination of both regionally significant and locally important scenic amenity values as identified in the previous section of the report. These areas of high scenic amenity are captured within landscape units 1 and 2 Prominent Vegetated Peaks and Prominent Ridges with Semi Intact vegetation. The protection of vegetation cover and minimizing construction impacts in landscape units 1 and 2 will ensure a green‐break is formed around the perimeter of the LDA. This green‐break will establish an inter‐urban break to existing and future developments in the vicinity of the site.

Similarly the watercourses and dams associated with Windaroo Creek reflect locally significant scenic values and a range of other values captured by other consultants including recreational, cultural, amenity and ecological values, which are reflected in landscape units 4a and 4b and their associated buffers. Rehabilitation of watercourses and buffers will assist in protecting the range of values associated with the creek systems and providing internal green‐breaks to break up future built form within the LDA. As scenic amenity values have been verified via independent mapping, strategies to protect the values of the seen landscape areas and associated buffers may also protect values established by other consultants (QGOUM 2007, QGDIP 2009). This additional cross referencing between consultants data will form a vital part of future planning of the LDA.

This reinforces the need to protect and manage particular landscape units that represent the features of the site and maintain these landscape and scenic amenity values. By maintaining natural processes such as creek flows, remnant indigenous vegetation, and preserving of the amenity of the elevated, vegetated ridges, the values of the site can be managed. The landscape units contribute to the identification of regional landscape areas of highest priority for protection, management, rehabilitation and restoration as provided for in Policy 3.2.1 of the SEQRP 2009.

The protection of these values may involve some constraints on development, which will be discussed further in the following Section 7: Landscape and Visual Amenity Management.


6 Constraints

This step in the landscape and visual amenity study is to identify and map various levels of constraint categories based on scenic amenity and landscape values identified in Section 3 Site Analysis, Section 4 Scenic Amenity Analysis and Section 5 Landscape Units above. These constraints are part of the suite of data that can inform future land use options and also can assist in the provision of measures for protection and management of landscape character, scenic amenity values, and reinforcement of sense of place as required by the SEQRP 2009, Policy 3.2 Regional landscape areas.

6.1 Development Constraints Mapping

The scenic amenity and landscape assessment results in the creation of the three levels of development constraints that reflect the analysis outcomes and the need to protect scenic amenity and landscape values. This will assist in subsequent identification of land use options to be completed in Stage 2 of the Bahrs Scrub LDA study. The three constraints categories recognise the importance of the landscape and scenic amenity values identified and discussed in this report as being significant for protection and management over time.

Category 1 ‐ No or low constraint to development – may require design response but no reduction in development yield

Category 2 ‐ Moderate constraint to development – reduces development yield and/or removes land from urban development

Category 3 ‐ Significant constraint to development – severely reduces development yield or removes most, and possibly all, land from urban development.

As previously identified an alternative Scenic Amenity Methodology was developed to verify scenic amenity ratings for the site. What was evident in Section 3.4 Scenic Amenity Analysis was that the more detailed revised Scenic Amenity Methodology utilised in this assessment provided greater detail so that there was variance with the interim Regional Scenic Amenity Maps indentified in Guideline 8 (QGOUM 2007).

Accordingly, levels of constraint informed by the different values in the two scenic amenity methodologies varied. To facilitate comparison constraints categories are mapped below using the interim Scenic Amenity values and then the values determined by the alternative Scenic Amenity Methodology. Refer to Figure 56 and Figure 57.


What is apparent from the comparison is that the majority of the site is covered by constraints category 2 and 3 using the Interim Scenic Amenity Data which correspond to Locally Important and Regionally Significant Scenic Amenity Values respectively. Only very small and isolated portions of the site are mapped as constraints category 1. Refer to Figure 56. In comparison, the alternative Scenic Amenity Methodology maintains a significant amount of constraints category 2 and 3 on the elevated, vegetated ridges, but introduces a significant portion of flat land, in the enclosed river valley flat portion of the site. We consider that the alternative methodology that was implemented in accordance with assessment strategies outlined in Guideline 8, identified constraints more accurately at a site level than the outcomes from the regional scale assessment as defined by the 2004 Interim Scenic Amenity Data of the locality. Hence the constraint values identified by alternative methodology were adopted. Refer to Figure 57.

Category 1 Constraints

No or low constraint to development – may require design response but no reduction in development yield

Parameters

• Slope <16% • not so visually prominent, river valley flats can visually absorb smaller lot sizes and higher

densities • Scenic Amenity Mapping medium to low value (1‐5) • Tributaries to creek systems may be category 1 or 2 and may require a 15m buffer

(dependant on ecological values)

Design response

• Generally coincides with Landscape Units 3 Creek Flats except for areas with higher visual exposure outside the south east corner of the LDA

• Refer recommendations in Table 1 and 2


Moderate constraint to development – reduces development yield and/or removes land from urban development.

Parameters

• Slopes between 16% and 20% may require changes in density and built form • As land becomes more elevated into mid slopes, visual exposure and vegetation cover

increases • Scenic Amenity Mapping locally important value (6‐8) • Creek lines and associated buffers may be category 2 or 3 and impact on development

footprint (dependant on ecological values) • Creek buffer width may be 15 to 30m each side (dependant on ecological values)


Design response

• Generally coincides with Landscape Units 4a and 4b which are creek lines and tributaries and associated buffers.

• Buffer widths are dependent on ecological values identified by other consultants • Some areas coincide with the lower slopes of Landscape Unit 2 Prominent Ridges with semi

intact vegetation and the upper slopes of Landscape Units 3 Creek Flats where slope and visual exposure increases and may reduce development densities

• Requires a high level of screening and visual integration of development components to achieve the maximum levels of evident development from locally significant view locations.



Significant constraint to development – severely reduces development yield or removes most, and possibly all, land from urban development.

Parameters

• Slopes >20% • Visually prominent elevated land with existing intact vegetation, and not desirable for high

density development. • Scenic Amenity Mapping regionally high value (9‐10) • Creek lines and existing dams may impact on development footprint • Creek lines and associated buffers may be category 2 or 3 and impact on development

footprint (dependant on ecological values) • Creek buffer width 30m each side (dependant on ecological values)

Design response

• Generally coincides with Landscape Unit 1 Prominent Vegetated peaks and Landscape Unit 2 Prominent Ridges with semi intact vegetation

• Requires a high level of screening and visual integration of development components to achieve the maximum levels of evident development from locally significant view locations.



Figure 57: Constraints based on Revised Scenic Amenity Methodology (Source: Cardno SPLAT 2010). Refer Appendix I for full size Figure.

Figure 56: Constraints based on Interim Scenic Amenity 2004 (Source: Cardno SPLAT 2010). Refer Appendix I for full size Figure.


7 Landscape and Visual Amenity Management

7.1 Management Recommendation Tables 1 and 2

The following two tables summarise landscape and visual amenity considerations, and urban development considerations relating to key site features, recognised values and landscape units and associated management recommendations. This is consistent with the SEQRP, Section 3 Regional Landscape, which includes Policy 3.2.1 which requires the identification and mapping of regional landscape values to inform regional and local planning so that priority scenic amenity areas can be managed, monitored, rehabilitated and restored, and Policy 3.5.1 which requires regionally significant and locally important scenic amenity areas to be identified and protected from intrusive development. These tables are to be read in conjunction with the landscape units and constraints category mapping.

Table 1: LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL AMENITY CONSIDERATIONS, VISUAL AMENITY AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT UNIT

DESCRIPTION Including Scenic Amenity and Constraints ratings

ISSUES MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Prominent Vegetated Peaks

• Peaks in Coastal foot hills and coastal flats

• Visually prominent from internal and external viewpoints

• Clarks Hill • Bahrs Scrub Hill Regionally Significant Scenic Amenity rating (9‐10) (SPLAT 2010)

Predominantly Constraint Category 3

1. Protect Regionally Significant scenic amenity values

2. Minimise potential loss of vegetation cover and associated natural character to preserve landscape value.

3. Retain views and protect view corridors of prominent peaks

4. Limited development opportunities due to high level of sensitivity

5. Preserve major gateway between Clarks and Bahrs Hill

• Protect local landmarks by restricting future development around the base of Bahrs Hill and Clarks Hill.

• Maintain Park Residential and/or restrict form of development above the ridgeline as the existing vegetation provides significant habitat and forms part of the City Edge.

• Retain stands of vegetation where possible, particularly along ridgelines to provide connections between larger patches of retained vegetation on peaks.

• Retain existing significant trees and groups of trees in any potential future public open space areas.

• Undertake restoration where possible of degraded vegetation on Bahrs and Clarks Hill.





2. Prominent Ridges and Mid‐slopes with semi‐intact vegetation

• "Wuraga Road" Ridge forms a dominant visual edge, running east west along the northern boundary of the study area.

• "Bahrs Hill" and the South western ridge form a dominant visual edge around the western and southern edges of the site.

• The ridge landform limits views to areas outside of the site and also forms a vegetated backdrop to internal views.

• Windaroo Creek and its tributaries traverse the study area and forms a tree lined visual edge.

• Urban/rural, rural/natural and urban/natural interfaces

Predominantly Locally Important Scenic Amenity rating (6‐8) with areas of Medium to Low value (1‐5) and minor areas of Regionally Significant (9‐10) (SPLAT 2010) Constraint Category 1, 2 and 3

1. Reduce impacts on locally important scenic amenity values on ridges

2. Minimise potential loss of vegetation cover and associated natural character to preserve landscape value on ridges.

3. Retain views and protect view corridors from ridgeline such as Wuraga Road alignment.

4. Development opportunities need considered integration in the landscape due to moderate level of sensitivity

5. Careful consideration of infrastructure and earthworks to minimise impacts on scenic amenity and existing vegetation

6. Preserve major gateway between Clarks and Bahrs Hill and minor gateways where roads enter the site from Wuraga Ridge

• Retain stands of vegetation where possible along ridgelines to assist in preserving the amenity of the site

• No additional development should occur along ridge lines, with the potential exception of well designed and integrated roadways

• The suggested method for protecting visual backdrops such as ridgelines is limiting development around the base of Bahrs Hill and Clarks Hill, and edge to the ridgelines, being Wuraga Road ridgeline, Bahrs Hill associated ridgeline and the western ridgeline.

• Prescription of minimum buffer widths and development heights below the ridgeline will ensure the character of the ridgeline is maintained.

• Careful design of any roads and building lots with dedicated BLEs to ensure that existing vegetation and or additional tree planting achieves the ‘Evident’ development standard of 30% through use of landscape as screening and integration elements.

• Development and implementation of landscape plans that clearly illustrate the screening and integration outcomes required for this constraint category.

• Define maximum height of structures to a maximum of two storeys adjacent to natural areas and ridges.

• New infrastructure may open up parts of the site due to extent of clearing and construction so care should be taken to minimise construction footprint where possible.





3. Creek Flats and Flat lands

• River valley character surrounded by forested foot hills

• Contained viewshed with some external views

Predominantly Medium to Low (1‐5) with areas of Locally Important Scenic Amenity ratings (6‐8) (SPLAT 2010) Predominantly Constraint Category 1 with areas of Constraint Category 2

1. Reduce impacts on locally important scenic amenity and landscape values by preserving stands of intact vegetation where possible and protect buffers along watercourses

2. Retained vegetation can result in inter‐urban breaks and form gateways through the site and frame view corridors

3. Retain views and protect view corridors from the creek flats to elevated ridges and peaks

4. Appropriate higher density development footprint is possible but should be buffered by vegetation and height restrictions adjacent to sensitive areas.

5. Potential loss of vegetation cover and associated natural character.

7. Higher development opportunities due to lower level of sensitivity

6. Recent urban development within this landscape unit includes Windaroo Lookout, south east of the site.

7. Celebrate gateways and crossings of Windaroo Creek

• Retain stands of vegetation where possible along creeklines, to provide connections between larger patches of retained vegetation and break up built form.


• Additional restoration work within future open space and on larger lots will assist in breaking up the development footprint.

• Additional tree planting and landscape treatments associated with infrastructure and roads may assist in framing gateways, screening and softening built form and providing shade and shelter.

• Design of buildings and other elements would benefit from bold and very simple building design guidelines.

• Maintain a suitable setback, separation with road or open space or limit height to two storeys where new development adjoins existing and proposed park residential areas.

• Structures, furniture, signage and embellishments need to be sensitive to their setting e.g. treatment of boundaries to properties and the edges of roads with appropriately themed fencing e.g. post and wire, or post and rail fences are simple and functional enabling views across the rural area to be seen by passing motorists and facilitate wildlife movement.

• Road designs may consider wide grass verges with no kerb and channel.





4. Creek Lines, Dams and Associated buffers

• River valley character surrounded by forested foot hills.

• Waterways and gully lines related to Windaroo Creek traverse the site and the existing lots establish "private ownership" of the watercourse

Combination of Locally Important (6‐8) and Medium to Low Value Scenic Amenity ratings (1‐5) (SPLAT 2010) Constraint Category 1, 2 and 3

1. Reduce impacts on locally important scenic amenity and landscape values by preserving stands of intact vegetation where possible and protect buffers along watercourses Potential loss of vegetation cover and associated natural character.

2. Retained vegetation can result in inter‐urban breaks and form gateways through the site and frame view corridors

3. Potential development impact on creeks and gully systems due to stormwater quantity and quality impacts.

4. Current private ownership across Creek Systems makes ongoing management and restoration difficult.

8. Retain views and protect view corridors from the creek lines to elevated ridges and peaks

9. Revegetating degraded creek buffers can enhance ecological values along Windaroo creek and create habitat connections to preserved vegetation on ridges

• Retain stands of vegetation where possible, particularly along creek lines, to provide connections between larger patches of retained vegetation.


• Additional restoration work within future open space and on larger lots will assist in breaking up the development footprint.

• ID and rate watercourse values to ensure primary ecological corridors are preserved and enhanced, potentially protected in public open space areas.

• Establish suitable buffers 15 ‐ 30m along key waterway corridors with wider buffers as required to improve amenity values.

• Consider fauna friendly crossings where waterway corridors intersect with roads.

• Explore opportunities to retain nutrient cycling, groundwater recharge and some habitat value in streetscapes, private lots and open space areas where minor corridors exist, but ecological integrity is low.

• Retention of existing dams as a landscape feature and potential storm‐water management/stormwater harvesting device may assist in retaining site character and harnessing a useful resource.

• Explore opportunities to retain farm dams as part of site stormwater management strategy.

• Explore opportunities for stormwater harvest and reuse for landscape and open space irrigation if acceptable to Logan City Council.


Table 2: POTENTIAL URBAN DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS ELEMENT DESCRIPTION ISSUES MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Development footprint

• Sequence of development indicates previous land holdings, land clearing and subdivision in 1800s, 1920s to current 1960s

• Park residential lots • Existing larger lots 2000‐5000m2 reinforce a park residential hobby farm character

• Development footprint extends over entire landscape in private landholdings

• Natural systems extend across lots such as vegetation cover, creek and drainage lines

1. Future development footprint will achieve higher density of development within constraints.

2. Development Footprint may impact on view corridors

• Cultural markers which identify early subdivision pattern may be considered in the landscape at key locations

• Additional restoration work along Creek lines and buffers in future open space will assist in breaking up development footprint

• Ridgeline vegetation and retention of rural residential perimeter may define a buffer to higher density development footprint

• Consider techniques for vegetation retention on larger lots and proposed open space to retain amenity

• Consider transition of larger lots with retained vegetation as transition to areas of higher amenity

• Protect amenity of gateways and view corridors by preserving existing vegetation cover particularly major gateway east of Bahrs and Clarks Hill

Built form • Current built form is varied in character and not a dominant feature of the site due to low density development and extensive vegetative cover

1. Controls to ensure well designed and considered built form will ensure a high quality response to site issues, climate and character

2. Built form may impact on view corridors and existing gateways

• ESD principles applied to built form could greatly improve community efficiencies: social; economic; ecological.

• Design for climate can ensure site values are captured and enhanced, passive solar design, cross through ventilation, thermal mass, energy and water efficiency.

• Prepare development controls such as building design guidelines, design for climate, excavation and retaining walls, control building materials and appearance, parking garages and access driveways, landscape, fencing and ancillary structures and construction requirements will assist in protecting landscape values

• Building height to be considered in any identified significant view corridors

Infrastructure • Existing infrastructure in the form of roads and services caters for low numbers of users

• Current road alignment may reflect subdivision sequence and old access routes through and around the site

1. Flush kerb facilitates flow of water and polishing

2. Some cul‐de‐sac streets to not facilitate pedestrian connections

3. Increase in traffic volumes may require road widening and increase stormwater management requirements

• Where practical, utilise existing alignments for roads and services to retain character and minimise impact from cut and fill

• Consider options for fauna friendly crossings where roads intersect with fauna corridors and creek systems

• Integrate flush kerb and swales to promote rural character of the site and encourage groundwater recharge and storm water management

• Additional tree planting and landscape treatments associated with infrastructure may assist in framing gateways, screening and softening built form and providing shade and shelter


ELEMENT DESCRIPTION ISSUES MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Infrastructure (continued) 4. Landscape values could be affected by earthworks and infrastructure particularly on ridges and at creek crossings

• Consider appropriate stormwater management techniques to control runoff and quality

• Consider site treatment reuse and disposal of sewerage as a resource

• Visual effects of power lines across forested ridges to be managed through appropriate management

• Visual effects of earthworks need consideration in the development of the LDA and protect high scenic amenity values i.e. vegetation removal, straight‐line road cuttings, driveways up slopes, benching for lots, parallel retaining walls etc require specific management controls in future development applications

Social Infrastructure

• The site has limited social infrastructure.

• A number of offsite facilities including schools, sporting clubs and playing fields, shops, services and clubs are located in the immediate vicinity of the site

1. The proposed development requires extensive new infrastructure, public facilities, parks and conveniences to ensure it is self contained and well serviced.

2. The promotion of interaction between existing and future residents would assist in establishing a sense of community and forming a social network

• Educate residents on sustainable initiatives to embrace culture of responsibility in the development

• Promote retention of ecological and cultural values by establishing bush care groups and seeding community activities, promoting the "custodians of the landscape" approach

• Facilitate community engagement by establishing social core nodes, shops, meeting places etc

• Promote sustainable initiatives such as water harvest, solar, wind and recycling centres at the local water transfer station

• Establish networks for locally grown foods, food forests and community gardens as part of landscape works to promote a self sufficient, healthy and active community

Public open space

• Privately owned sites on elevated and vegetated ridges create the illusion of public open space

1. Lack of connectivity from existing roads to public open space

2. Private ownership restricts opportunities to preserve and manage landscape values such as creek corridors, and associated vegetationIllegal access for recreational vehicles and dumping of rubbish along vegetated ridgelines through site

• Future open space may reinforce habitat connections along waterway corridors as well as pedestrian connections and permeability

• Opportunity to incorporate areas of scenic quality and ecological value in future open space

• Develop open space networks in conjunction with community hubs to provide better recreational opportunities, meeting places and engagement spaces


8 Conclusion

This report has provided a detailed analysis of the landscape and visual amenity values pertaining to the Bahrs Scrub Local Development Area and has provided two outcomes of the analysis which was carried out. This is based in part on data provided by the QGOUM Implementation Guideline No. 8 (2007). However, an alternative methodology to determine scenic amenity values has been used. This is provided for within Guideline No. 8 when data supplied is found to have limitations. The alternate outcome provides a more accurate portrait of the current landscape and scenic amenity qualities of the area. This data has been utilized to prepare suitable constraints mapping and management measures to ensure landscape and visual amenity considerations are addressed and maintained over time. The data will form part of a comprehensive study encompassing various disciplines which can contribute to the development of the Bahrs Scrub Local Area Development Plan.

References

August 2010 Cardno (Qld) Pty Ltd 1

Australian Institute of Landscape Architects [AILA] (2009). ‘AILA Queensland Position Paper on SEQ Scenic Amenity and the Scenic Amenity Guideline 8’

Cardno SPLAT (2010). Alternative Scenic Amenity Methodology, Unpublished Report.

Gold Coast City Council [GCCC] (2000a). ‘Landscape Character Guiding the Image of the City, Part 1’

Gold Coast City Council [GCCC] (2000b). ‘Landscape Character Guiding the Image of the City, Part 3 Visual Diaries Character Area 8.0 Beenleigh and Sugar Cane’

Google Maps (2010). URL http://maps.google.com.au/maps (accessed: 20 April 2010) Logan City Council [LCC] (2009). ‘Bahrs Scrub Local Development Area: The planning process’

Lynch, Kevin (1960) The Image of the City, MIT Press, Cambridge MA

Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd [PB] (2009a) ‘Bahrs Scrub Local Development Area Planning Study Summary of Logan City Council Officers Workshop 23 September 2009’

Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd [PB] (2009b) ‘Bahrs Scrub Local Development Area Planning Study Summary of Community Workshop 8 October 2009’

Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd [PB] (2009c) ‘Bahrs Scrub Local Development Area Planning Study Summary of State Government Workshop 1 October 2009’

Queensland Government, Department of Infrastructure and Planning [QGDIP] (2009). ‘South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009 – 2031’

Queensland Government, Department of Local Government, Planning, Sport and Recreation [QGDLGPSR] (2005). ‘South East Queensland Regional Plan 2005 – 2026’

Queensland Government, Office of Urban Management [QGOUM] (2007) ‘Implementation Guideline No. 8, Identifying and protecting scenic amenity values’

Terranean Mapping Technologies (2008) ‘Gold Coast Initial Scenic Amenity Study’

TTM Consulting (2007) ‘Bahrs Scrub Planning Investigation Beenleigh, QLD’

Documents

4.12 Scenic Amenity Summary - Logan City Council · The major gateway is ... cultural, amenity and ecological values ... • Some areas coincide with the lower slopes of Landscape