Kings Forest Stage 1 (Mod 4)

No change to what was originally permitted. Koalas already endangered here in tweed. Kungs forest right near protection zone.

Developers just care about ! If we must allow their hands on our beautiful part of the world then the council should be trying their best to ensure that the wildlife is protected. They are attempting to make more than consider what us locals want! This submission should be thrown in the bin!!

I strongly oppose modifications to 08-0194 (MOD4) as former agreements have been watered-down

I object the application to modify the Koala Plan of Management (KPOM).
The approved KPOM is the minimum requirement to ensure koala habitat safety & to meet the expectations of the local community

Keep all koala conditions already agreed to.

I am concerned about proposed modification of the Koala Plan of Management which do not meet the requirements of planning authorities. The decline of koala populations is appalling and cannot be halted if such proposals as this receive approval. Other species have a right to exist that should be respected . Especially in this region, rich biodiversity is one reason that people choose to live here. Please do not accept these modifications;
These modifications are unacceptable for the following reasons:
* 27 ha of koala habitat in Cudgen Nature Reserve was a strategic measure to counter the lack of planting space within the site and the problems of overlapping with conflicting vegetation areas
* The KPoM 2017 is yet to be assessed and approved so using it to guide koala tree planting areas and the timing of such cannot be acceptable
* The revised KPoM was supposed to consult council on the detail of compensatory koala habitat planting areas and schedules - this has not been done
* Half of the compensatory habitat is planned to be "Secondary habitat" when it should be "Primary Habitat" which is far more valuable to koala survival
"
The Proponents request is highly contradictory and confusing. They offer no valid explanation for putting koalas in direct contact with vehicle strike on busy roads and with people and their pets on foot on these roads. They offer no valid reason for relying heavily on untested cattle grids that would not be effective in keeping dogs out of koala habitat areas.
This request completely contravenes Project Approval conditions and should be rejected

1. Exclusion fencing needs to be in place before Preliminary works commence to define the boundaries of Environmental protection zones so that these areas are not accidently cleared or encroached on by contractors creating further risk to koalas. Some works classified as Preliminary works could jeopardise both environmental zones and koalas. At the very minimum, boundaries need to be clearly defined.
2. A delay in exclusion fencing coupled with no restrictions to workman bringing dogs onto the site is a huge risk to koalas. Workman at Koala Beach estate (near Pottsville), were prohibited from bringing dogs onto the estate at all times.
3. To delay permanent fencing until release of subdivision certificate: "of the first stage of subdivision precent 5", is in my opinion too late.
4. Revegetating and rehabilitating the buffer areas adjacent to the environmental protection zones is a great idea, however Figures 25 & 30 in the Kings Forest Koala Plan of Management clearly show "permanent fencing" within the buffer zone. The Modification request seeks to include a "maintenance zone" either side of the permanent fencing, which will paradoxically reduce the existing vegetation and/or the amount of rehabilitation that the developer plans to do. Essentially a significant amount of the buffer will become the cleared maintenance zone for the permanent fence-line rather than an off-set for Environmental Protection Zones as suggested in the modification request.
5. Generally the proposed modification request seems to be a watering down of the offset compensatory planting requirements within heath areas which should not be supported. While development of the site is inevitable, one should not forget the original state of the site and how significant it is for koala habitat.

I object to any changes that affect Koalas in the Kings Forest Development. Developer should keep all promises regarding the health and wellbeing of Koalas. Developer needs to plant Koala food trees and have a 100m wildlife corridor and traffic calming devices. Like Koala Beach cats and dogs should NOT be allowed.

Koalas are a endandered species in Northern NSW. We need to provide them with habitates that are safe.

It is a privelage not a right to build in the Tweed Shire. The developer should stick to their promises to preserve Koalas in this region. They are a protected species and need protecting. We chose to live in Koala Beach due to the care and sensitivity in which the estate was developed.

I object to this modification to the King's Forest Project. Our Koalas on the Tweed Coast are dwindling at a rapid rate. This project has already had its environmental protections watered down and the developer is looking to water them down further. The developer should stick to what has been agreed. In light of this, I strongly object to any changes to the plan.

Furthermore, the Koala Management Plan must be in place and operational before the bulldozers start.

I wish to lodge my strong objection to the attempts by Leda, the developer of Kings Forest to the commitments made most by them to safeguard koalas and their habitat in this area. I find their submission to be outrageous and clearly driven by and . Koalas in the Tweed are endangered enough as it is without Leda doing their best to them.

Leda want to remove traffic calming devices, change koala offsets and fencing in ways which will be detrimental to koala survival.

They want to plant trees which are not primary, but secondary, koala food sources in areas which are presently cleared, thus reducing the availability of the kinds of trees essential to koala survival.

The modifications of plans do not include planting offset trees in either cleared or disturbed areas.

The east-west corridor plan has already been weakened and now Leda are trying to weaken it further. The current corridor offers 100 m. for koalas and Leda want to halve this. 50 m. of corridor will hardly provide koalas with the necessary ability to move through the area. If they are unable to move freely, they will be unable to disperse, their vulnerability to dog attack will increase because they will come to ground and they will not be able to access different food trees.

Leda also want to remove the requirement to plant koala food trees on a 27 Ha plot of land within the Cudgen Nature Reserve. This was a condition of approval on which the original development approval was based; now they want to get rid of it.

They also want to reduce the number and change locations of the underpasses and fencing which are essential to minimize human/koala contact.

To say that this is a by this developer is an understatement.

This development was forced upon us amid widespread and vehement opposition. The only reason they were allowed to proceed was by committing to certain measures which would ensure the koalas' survival. To say that they were to that commitment is also an understatement.

As far as I am concerned, permission for this group to develop such an ecologically sensitive area should never have been given and predictably, as soon as it was, Leda is in there trying to . Which is to say, to and to with the environment.

I am very concerned about the dramatic change of environment caused by the Kings Forest development on the Koala population of the Tweed. Born and raised in the Tweed, I have watched the habitat of the Koala slowly but surely be undermined to the Koalas detriment. To change the existing Koala plan of management, already in place for the Kings Forest development, undermines the Koalas survival once again. Is this the best approach for the future of our little furry mates. We need to develop land such as this with great care and with great empathy for the wildlife.

I object to any changes to plan. Developer should keep all promises.

I object to any changes to plan. Developer should keep all promises.

Developer needs to plant trees and have a 100m wildlife corridor and traffic calming devices to protect native fauna populations. Thankyou

The developer should keep all previous promises,with regard to number and type of trees to be planted.
I object most strongly to any changes to the plans regardiing protection of the wildlife population in the proposed development

I object to any changes to the plan. Approval was given on the basis of providing protection to the koalas. The developer should not be allowed to water down these measures at the expense of koalas and their habitat.

Given the long history surrounding the Kings Forest development, all I can say is if a developer is able to change the conditions of approval to this extent, after the fact, that is in my view government . I do not support the proposed changes to the requirements outlined in the original approval. I am hopeful that common-sense and government transparency will prevail.

For the survival of the Koala Habitat at Kings Forest Development, I object to any further changes to the development plan. The developer should plant trees, have a 100 metre wildlife corridor and have traffic calming devices as previously promised.The developer should demonstrate it's concern and respect for our native wildlife by keeping it's promises.

*Developer should keep ALL promises
*I object to any changes of the plan
*Developer needs to plant trees & have a 100metre wildlife corridor
* The Koala Management Plan must be in place BEFORE bulldozers arrive