Time-stamping native
vegetation data
Public Consultation 2010–12
Final Report
Published by the Victorian Government
Department of Environment and Primary Industries Melbourne,
May 2013
© The State of Victoria Department of Environment and Primary Industries 2013
This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the
Copyright Act 1968.
Authorised by the Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne.
ISBN 978-1-74287-767-9 (online)
For more information contact the DEPI Customer Service Centre 136 186
Disclaimer
This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the
publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all
liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.
Accessibility
If you would like to receive this publication in an accessible format, such as large print or audio, please telephone 136
186, or email customer.service@dse.vic.gov.au
Deaf, hearing impaired or speech impaired? Call us via the National Relay Service on 133 677 or visit
www.relayservice.com.au
This document is also available in PDF format on the internet at www.depi.vic.gov.au
Contents
1. Introduction
2
Purpose of report
2
Project context
2
Growth corridor native vegetation surveys 2008–2012
2
Quality Assurance for data
3
Probity review
4
2. Public consultation process 2010–11
5
Overview of public consultation process
5
Stage 1 – Initial time-stamping mail out
7
Stage 2 – Second round resend of returned mail and ‘gaps’
7
Summary of submissions and surveys from Stages 1 and 2
8
Stage 3 – Landowner review of Biosis assessments
8
3. Finalisation of time-stamped data set 2011–2012
9
Initial public release – November 2011
9
Public consultation November – December 2011
10
Final time-stamped data set
10
4. Data coverage
11
5. Implementation in the planning system
12
6. References
12
Appendix 1 – Time-stamping consultation maps
13
Appendix 2 – Time-stamping fact sheet
14
1. Introduction
Purpose of report
This is the final report on the process undertaken by the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) (now the
Department of Environment and Primary Industries, DEPI) in 2010-12 to complete the “time-stamped” native vegetation
data set for Melbourne’s new urban growth corridors.
The report outlines the consultation process, including an explanation of how submissions were considered, where native
vegetation data was refined by further survey work, and the process used to complete the time-stamped
data set.
This is an updated version of an initial report released in November 2011. It includes discussion of the additional
consultation phase conducted in November–December 2011 as part of the public consultation process on the draft
Growth Corridor Plans, and draft Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS) and sub-regional species strategies. The final
“time-stamped” native vegetation data set was completed following this further consultation.
Project context
The time-stamping project (TSP) captured and “time stamped” native vegetation information to establish a native
vegetation dataset and maps showing the type, extent and condition of all native vegetation in Melbourne’s growth
corridors.
This information was used together with information on threatened species habitat mapped for the BCS and sub-regional
species strategies to calculate habitat compensation requirements for the removal of native vegetation and threatened
species habitat associated with urban development in the growth corridors.
Under the time-stamping approach, if land in the growth corridors is to be subdivided and developed, habitat
compensation will be calculated on the basis of the 2012 “time-stamped” maps regardless of the extent and condition of
the vegetation on the land at the time it is developed. This approach will simplify the current system and increase
certainty for landowners, planners and developers regarding habitat compensation requirements.
The areas that trigger habitat compensation requirements have been mapped for all land within the area covered by the
BCS and sub-regional species strategies and include the native vegetation information from the time-stamping data. The
results of the mapping is provided in DEPI’s Habitat Compensation Layer.
The TSP was part of a coordinated approach between DEPI, the Growth Areas Authority (GAA), the Department of
Transport (DoT) and the Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) to streamline development in
Melbourne’s growth corridors and implements a Victorian Government commitment as part of the Melbourne Strategic
Assessment.
The Melbourne Strategic Assessment provides 41,000 ha of developable land which does not require further referral
under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), and for approvals
of the Regional Rail Link and Outer Metropolitan Ring/E6 Transport Corridor. The assessment includes mitigation and
habitat compensation measures, in particular the creation of the Western Grassland Reserve and Grassy Eucalypt
Woodland Reserve.
The Melbourne Strategic Assessment is designed to meet the requirements of the EPBC Act, and is a one-off strategic
approach to Commonwealth approvals that will reduce red tape, increase planning certainty and benefit the environment.
The commitment to complete the “time-stamped” native vegetation data set for Melbourne’s growth corridors is
documented in the Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities: Program Report (Victorian Government,
2009) (Program Report p. 16):
Victoria will finalise a complete dataset of native vegetation type, extent and habitat score in 2010 for the Program
Area, following further survey and consultation with stakeholders. The habitat scores determined and published as a
result of this process will be used to calculate losses and offset liabilities for all future clearing in accordance with the
Program. That is, the offset required for the removal of native vegetation will be calculated using these 2010 condition
scores regardless of the condition of the vegetation at the time it is removed.
There are several benefits to this approach including:
• Greatly streamlining the process of determining offset requirements
• Providing certainty for developers regarding their offset obligations (and costs) in the future
• Providing greater certainty about offset revenue to fund the establishment of the Western Grassland Reserves; and
• Assisting with compliance by removing incentives to degrade vegetation over time as a way of reducing future offset
liabilities.
Growth corridor native vegetation surveys 2008–2012
The TSP completes the assessments of Melbourne’s growth corridors commenced in 2008 by the GAA in collaboration
with DSE, DPCD and DoT.
The GAA mapping project included three rounds of native vegetation surveys on properties within Melbourne’s growth
corridors during the summer periods in 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11. DoT also conducted native vegetation surveys in
2009/10 on properties affected by the proposed Regional Rail Link project. The TSP completes the mapping across the
growth corridors by consulting directly with landowners of properties that had not been surveyed by the GAA or DoT over
these years. Additional surveys were conducted in 2011 by consultants engaged by DSE. Additional data was also
accepted from landowners who had commissioned their own surveys, conducted by DSE-accredited consultants and
subject to the same quality assurance process as all other surveys for the TSP.
DSE merged all the data from the GAA and DoT mapping with the native vegetation data compiled through the
consultation process described in this report to complete the final “time-stamped” native vegetation data
set for Melbourne’s growth corridors.
Quality Assurance for data
Native vegetation assessments for the TSP were conducted by experienced consultants accredited by DSE to undertake
native vegetation assessments according to published DSE standards and procedures. The specific standards for the
TSP are set out in the document Time Stamping Project 2010/11: vegetation mapping and condition assessment
procedures (DSE, 2010).
The collection and mapping of native vegetation data for the TSP included a Quality Assurance (QA) process undertaken
by DSE to ensure that all assessments were conducted to a sufficient standard. This process applied to data collected by
consultants working on behalf of government agencies (eg. the GAA), landowners and developers, as well as to DSE
staff.
The quality assurance process consisted of three steps:
Step 1 – The first stage of the quality assurance process involved a self-QA conducted by each consultant for the data
they have collected. This was conducted in accordance with the specified standards.
Step 2 Verification – This stage of the QA process was conducted by DSE’s Data Management Team. It involves the
team checking each dataset for completeness and compliance with the specified standards.
Step 3 – Audit and validation of the mapping and assessment data by DSE. This stage involved field audits, a
Vegetation Quality Assessment Competency Check, and an analysis of the assessment data to ensure that it meets
the specified standards.
All data submissions had to pass all three steps before being signed-off by DSE.
The habitat hectares methodology used is specifically designed to capture information at a point in time, and does not
rely on repeat visits at different times of year which could potentially produce varying results.
Probity review
DSE engaged independent probity specialist O’Connor Marsden and Associates to review the TSP consultation process
and provide probity advice to assess whether the project has complied with the Victorian Government Probity Principles.
The probity review focused on project management systems and processes in regard to:
• Accountability of the participants and transparency of the process
• Fairness and impartiality in carrying out the process
• Identification and management of actual, potential and perceived conflicts of interest
• Maintenance of confidentiality and security of documentation and information.
In the course of the review, nothing came to the attention of the probity advisor to indicate that the processes and
procedures related to the TSP did not comply with the Victorian Government Probity Principles in all material respects.
2. Public consultation process 2010–11
Overview of public consultation process
The TSP consultation process was designed to complete the mapping of native vegetation extent and condition across
Melbourne’s growth corridors, to produce a definitive “time-stamped” native vegetation data set for these areas.
The aims of the consultation process were:
• To inform affected landowners within the TSP project area of the proposed requirement to base future offset liabilities
on the “time-stamped” native vegetation data set
• To finalise the “time-stamped” native vegetation data for all properties within the TSP project area through a
consultative process with land owners.
The consultation process occurred in three stages:
Stage 1 – Initial mail-out to affected landowners, inviting submissions and offering free native vegetation assessments
if landowners disagreed with the estimated mapping for their land
Stage 2 – Second round mail-out to affected landowners who did not receive initial mail-out (where mail was returned
to DSE undelivered or checks revealed omissions/errors in the original address data), inviting submissions and offering
free native vegetation assessments if landowners disagreed with the estimated mapping for their land
Stage 3 – Landowner review of data from TSP native vegetation assessments
The complete consultation timeline is presented in Table 1. Full details of each stage are described below.
In summary, throughout the consultation process:
• DSE wrote to over 1900 affected landowners and their agents or representatives
• DSE responded to over 200 phone inquiries made through the Customer Service Centre and by direct contact with
project staff
• DSE responded individually in writing to over 150 written submissions by landowners or their agents / representatives.
• During all stages of consultation DSE briefed peak industry groups on the status of the project including notification of
closing dates for submissions
• DSE consulted with landowners of properties covering 98.7% of the native vegetation mapped within the project area.
A small number of landowners with small amounts of native vegetation were unable to be contacted
• A total of 129 TSP submissions were received by DSE during Stage 1 and Stage 2. An additional 23 submissions were
received for the Stage 3 data review
• A total of 86 TSP native vegetation assessments were conducted (covering ~2000 hectares) during January to May by
Biosis Research
• DSE also accepted data from four native vegetation assessments independently commissioned by landowners,
following a review and audit to confirm they were conducted by qualified assessors and conformed to the required
standards
• Data from TSP native vegetation assessments have been merged with data from the GAA and DoT mapping projects
to complete the “time-stamped” native vegetation data set for Melbourne’s growth corridors.
Throughout the consultation DSE ensured that all landowners, developers and other affected parties have been treated
equitably and fairly by the consultation process. Equity and fairness requirements have been addressed in the project
through the following means:
• The standards for data collection which must apply to all native vegetation assessments for the TSP have been applied
consistently throughout the project and are clearly defined in the document Time Stamping Project 2010/11: vegetation
mapping and condition assessment procedures (DSE, 2010)
• DSE went to sufficient lengths to ensure all affected landowners successfully received the mail-out package and had
an opportunity to make a submission
• DSE accepted late submissions from landowners in all cases where reasonable justification was provided, up until May
2011 when the contract period with Biosis Research to conduct native vegetation assessments ended
• DSE ensured that all landowners had a fair and equal opportunity to review the native vegetation data for their
property, by providing free independent site assessments where requested
• DSE provided clear and consistent advice to landowners wishing to conduct their own native vegetation assessment,
ensuring they are aware of the required standards and procedures.
Table 1: Consultation timeline for completion of time-stamping data set
Stage
Date
Details
1
5 Oct 2010
Initial time-stamping mail-out
12 Nov 2010
• Initial deadline for submissions
20 Dec 2010
• Extended deadline for submissions from initial mail-out
22 Dec 2010–21 Jan
2011
• DSE responds to first round submissions
• Biosis Research commences TSP surveys on properties with signed access
consent forms.
• DSE agrees to accept independent site assessment data from landowners,
provided surveys meet DSE standards and satisfy DSE quality assurance
(QA) and audit requirements.
2
28 Jan–28 Feb 2011
Second round mail-out
• Returned mail checked and resent where possible
• Initial mail-out list rechecked against updated property data and mail-outs
sent where omissions/errors in original address data.
• Submissions initially due up to 14 March 2011.
Feb–March 2011
• DSE responds to second round submissions
• Biosis Research continues TSP surveys on properties from first and second
round submissions.
March–May 2011
• Late submissions accepted up to 30 May 2011
• Biosis Research completes TSP surveys on all 86 properties where surveys
requested and access granted.
• Biosis Research submits data to DSE for QA check 2 June 2011.
3
29 June 2011
Review of Biosis native vegetation assessments
• Results of Biosis TSP surveys sent to landowners for review. Landowners
given 30 days to respond to DSE if they believe there are errors in data.
August 2011
• DSE responds to landowner submissions on Biosis TSP survey results.
• Biosis TSP data re-checked and additional audits conducted, with data
revised where required.
September 2011
• Biosis TSP data finalised by DSE through QA and audit process
• DSE QA and audit process completed for independent site assessments
• GAA, DoT, DSE, Biosis TSP and independent data sets merged to produce
draft time-stamping data set.
9 September 2011
Draft time-stamping data set completed
Stage 1 – Initial time-stamping mail out
In October 2010 DSE sent all affected landowners within the project area a mail-out package informing them of the timestamping project and DSE’s current understanding of the extent and condition of native vegetation on their land. Address
details for landowners were sourced from information provided by the GAA, DPCD and local councils.
Landowners who had already received native vegetation surveys as part of mapping projects by the GAA and DoT in
2008–10 were sent a letter informing them that the data from these assessments would be used in DSE’s time-stamping
project and that they were not required to take any further action.
Landowners whose properties had not received native vegetation surveys by the GAA or DoT in 2008–10 were provided
with native vegetation maps, which represented DSE’s current understanding of the native vegetation on their properties.
These maps relied on estimated information on native vegetation type, extent and condition in areas where no surveys
had been previously undertaken. Estimation of native vegetation was based on remote sensed data and on-ground
observations and augmented by rapid vegetation assessments undertaken from property boundaries between 2009 and
2011 by DSE. The data provides a highly reliable estimate of the extent and condition of native vegetation on sites that
have not received formal on-ground surveys.
Where landowners identified inaccuracies in the maps, they were invited to make a submission to DSE and receive a site
assessment by an independent consulting firm to review the data. DSE engaged independent ecological consultants
Biosis Research to undertake site surveys to review the maps. This involved the collection of information on vegetation
type, extent and condition within areas of native vegetation, following the same standards and procedures applied to
native vegetation surveys by the GAA and DoT in 2008–10. These standards are defined in the DSE document Time
Stamping Project 2010/11: vegetation mapping and condition assessment procedures (DSE, 2010).
DSE also agreed to accept data provided by landowners, to be incorporated into the “time stamped” native vegetation
dataset provided assessments were undertaken by DSE certified consultants to the same standards applied to all other
surveys for the TSP. Data from four properties was accepted through this process.
During stage 1:
• 523 letters were sent to landowners who had received previous native vegetation surveys by the GAA or DoT in 2008–
10 informing that the data will be used in the time-stamping process.
• 1,392 mail-out packages, including maps showing
DSE’s current understanding of native vegetation
extent and condition, were sent to affected landowners
of properties which had not received previous surveys. These landowners were invited to make submissions.
• Landowner submissions were originally due on
12 November (38 days from mail-out date), with the submission period then extended to 20 December 2010 (total of
11 weeks) following discussions with planning and development industry groups.
• 84 landowners (representing 86 properties) made submissions requesting a site assessment and providing consent for
property access. Biosis Research Pty Ltd was engaged by DSE to conduct site assessments, which commenced on 6
January 2011.
• DSE received 22 submissions objecting to the DSE estimated data but not giving consent for property access to
conduct a site assessment. DSE responded to each submission in writing, clearly outlining the options available to the
landowner to review the data.
• DSE agreed to accept independent site assessment data from landowners, provided surveys met DSE standards and
could satisfy DSE quality assurance (QA) and audit requirements.
• A number of submissions included data or reports that DSE could not accept as the native vegetation assessments
had not been conducted by assessors with the required DSE certification or did not conform to the required standards.
Stage 2 – Second round resend of returned mail and ‘gaps’
Stage 2 of consultation aimed to ensure that all landowners with native vegetation mapped on their properties were
successfully sent the mail-out pack and given a fair opportunity to make a submission. In particular, this stage ensured
that information was received in cases where: (i) the initial mail-out had been returned to DSE undelivered; and (ii)
address details were missing or incomplete in the initial mail-out.
All mail-out packages that were returned to DSE undelivered were assessed. Correct address details were sourced from
local councils and mail-outs were sent to affected landowners where possible.
• 243 of the 1,392 Stage 1 mail-out packages including maps were returned to DSE undelivered in January 2011 (17%
of mail-outs).
• All returned mail was assessed to determine whether any native vegetation appeared on the map for the relevant
property.
• 198 of the 243 returned mail-outs were for properties with no native vegetation. These mail-outs were not re-sent as
these properties are not affected by the TSP.
• 45 returned mail-outs were for properties with some native vegetation mapped. Five of these properties had been
mapped by the GAA as part of their 2010/11 surveys. Updated landowner contact details were sourced from local
councils, resulting in mail-outs re-sent to five landowners with an extended submissions date. These five landowners
accounted for over 70% of the mapped native vegetation on all the returned-mail properties.
During this stage DSE also cross-checked the original mail-out list with updated complete data on all properties in the
target area, which had only become available after the initial mail-out had gone out. This data included updated
landowner contact details for properties within the project area. Some gaps in the original mail out were identified due to
omissions or errors in the original mailing list and an additional 34 mail-out packs with maps were sent in February 2011.
These landowners were also contacted by phone where possible. Submissions were accepted for up to 12 weeks
following the February mail-out date.
This extended deadline period included late submissions from a number of landowners who provided good reasons for
why they were unable to make submissions by the initial deadline, e.g. where the landowner had been overseas when
the letter was originally sent out or where tenants had not passed the letter onto the landowner. DSE accepted all late
submissions with the final submission received at the end of May 2011. This was the latest date possible to meet project
time lines, with Biosis Research contracted to deliver final data from the native vegetation assessments to DSE in June
2011.
During Stage 2:
• DSE received an additional 25 landowner submissions.
• 21 landowners made submissions requesting a site assessment and providing consent for property access. DSE
passed on landowner contact details to Biosis Research to survey these properties in addition to the stage 1
properties.
• DSE received four submissions objecting to the DSE estimated data but not giving consent for property access to
conduct a site assessment. DSE responded to each submission in writing, clearly outlining the options available to the
landowner to review the data.
Summary of submissions and surveys from Stages 1 and 2
• A total of 86 properties were surveyed for the TSP as a result of submissions during Stages 1 and 2. Surveys were
completed by the end of May 2011.
• DSE also accepted data from four native vegetation assessments independently commissioned by landowners,
following a review and audit to confirm they were conducted by qualified assessors and conformed to the required
standards.
• 19 properties that originally made submissions requesting a site assessment were not surveyed. For these properties
the landowner either explicitly accepted the DSE estimated data mapping, or denied site access to Biosis Research
assessors with full knowledge that the DSE estimated data would apply if the site was not surveyed.
• One landowner consistently objected to the DSE estimated data for their property but refused to allow on-ground
surveys and did not provide DSE with alternative data. DSE has engaged closely with this landowner and provided all
relevant information when requested. DSE has clearly stated that the estimated data will apply in this case as
alternative data has not been provided by the project end date.
During Stages 1 and 2 DSE also received over 200 phone inquiries and responded to over 130 written submissions by
landowners or their agents / representatives.
Over the consultation period DSE actively engaged with the planning and development industry. These groups were
briefed by DSE on eight occasions on the status and results of the project. This ensured TSP received a wide level of
awareness throughout the industry, which recognises the significant benefits and cost savings achieved by this
approach.
Stage 3 – Landowner review of Biosis assessments
Stage 3 of consultation gave landowners who had made a TSP submission and received a site assessment a chance to
review the native vegetation data for their property. Landowners were sent maps showing the results of the Biosis
Research native vegetation assessments and allowed 30 days to make a submission if they believed there were
significant errors.
In this stage DSE received 23 responses from landowners. DSE responded to all landowners in writing. The survey data
was re-checked and additional audits conducted, resulting in data revisions to mapping on six properties.
3. Finalisation of time-stamped data set 2011–2012
Initial public release – November 2011
The draft “time-stamped” native vegetation data set was made available to the public on 9 November 2011 as maps
included in the draft BCS. It was also made accessible in interactive form in DSE’s Biodiversity Interactive Map (BIM)
accessed via the DSE web site.
This data set merged the TSP native vegetation assessments with data from the GAA and DoT mapping projects to
complete the “time-stamped” native vegetation data set for Melbourne’s growth corridors. This included data from
surveys conducted by the GAA in 2010/11 in a further round of native vegetation assessments in the growth corridors.
Where no data from on-ground surveys was available this draft “time-stamped” data set used DSE’s estimated
information on native vegetation as sent to all landowners during Stage 1 and 2 of the TSP consultation.
Public consultation November – December 2011
A final round of public consultation on the time-stamping data set was conducted as part of the broader consultation
process on the draft BCS and the three draft Sub-regional Species Strategies (SRSS) for Growling Grass Frog (GGF),
Southern Brown Bandicoot (SBB) and Golden Sun Moth (GSM).
This consultation was coordinated by the GAA as part of the public consultation process on the Growth Corridor Plans
which occurred at the same time. Public feedback on the draft strategies was formally sought during a six week period
from 9 November to 20 December 2011. The draft BCS and the SRSSs were released for public consultation on 9
November 2011 along with supporting documentation including the full release of the “time-stamped” native vegetation
data set for the growth corridors.
DSE received 44 submissions related to the time stamping of native vegetation data. Following recommendations
outlined in the TSP probity review, DSE considered each of these submissions individually.
DSE agreed to accept new data in cases where landowners had previously been unable to participate in the consultation
process and had not received a native vegetation survey. As a result DSE accepted new data from eight landowners for
properties that had not been covered by the previous consultation. This data was subject to the same quality assurance
process as other data submissions for the TSP.
As a result of the submission process DSE also reviewed data for sites where landowners had identified issues with the
time-stamping data set. This resulted in amendments to the data for two properties by agreement between DSE and the
landowners. Some minor errors in the draft November 2011 time stamping data set were also identified and corrected.
Final time-stamped data set
The final “time-stamped” native vegetation data set was completed in June 2012. This data set includes all the changes
arising from the November–December 2011 consultation process.
The final data set covers the full extent of the BCS, including 16 of the 28 precincts within the 2005 Urban Growth
Boundary also covered by the Melbourne Strategic Assessment (as specified in the Program Report). The 16 precincts
are those included in the BCS and categorised as “incomplete”.
4. Data coverage
The consultation process for the TSP has ensured that the final time stamping data set represents the best available
data on native vegetation type, extent and condition for Melbourne’s growth corridors.
The complete data shows there are around 12,000 properties within Melbourne’s urban growth zones. However most of
these properties have no native vegetation and are thus not affected by the time-stamping project and will not have to
provide native vegetation offsets for development.
A total of 828 properties within Melbourne’s growth corridors have patches of native vegetation mapped within areas
zoned as Urban Growth Zone (UGZ) in 2011. The total extent of native vegetation mapped within UGZ 1 areas is almost
4000 hectares. (Note: These figures do not include data for the 16 precincts within the 2005 Urban Growth Boundary,
which are included in the BCS and the time-stamping area. The total area of native vegetation mapped within these 16
precincts is approximately 640 ha.)
The 2010–11 consultation process for the TSP covered 779 of these properties (94%), and covered 3940 hectares of
mapped native vegetation (98.7% of total mapped native vegetation in UGZ). 66% of this native vegetation mapping is
either the result of formal on-ground assessments according to DSE standards or explicit landowner acceptance of the
DSE estimated data. As described in section 3, additional consultation late in 2011 resulted in additional on-ground
survey data from eight properties.
Approximately 1,300 hectares of mapped native vegetation (32% of the total) in the “time-stamped” native vegetation
data set is based on DSE estimated data where landowners have had an opportunity to review the data and did not
request to revise the data. It is well-accepted that DSE can make use of estimated data where detailed property surveys
are unavailable. The estimated data provides a highly reliable estimate of the extent and condition of native vegetation
on sites that have not received formal on-ground surveys. As such it is included in the time-stamping dataset in these
cases where landowners have not received on-ground assessments.
DSE was unable to consult with landowners of 49 properties that have some mapped native vegetation in UGZ areas.
This was due to the absence of landowner address data either in the original mailing list or in cases where the original
mail out information pack was returned to DSE undelivered. Most of these properties only have small fragments of native
vegetation, and the total native vegetation on these 49 properties represents only 1.3% of the native vegetation mapped
within Melbourne’s growth corridors.
Consultation Status (properties with native
vegetation mapped in UGZ)
Number of
properties
Area of native vegetation mapped
within UGZ1 zone (ha)
Property formally surveyed
327
2161 ha
DSE data accepted by landowner
18
482 ha
Landowner consulted – no survey
434
1297 ha
No consultation possible
49
52 ha
Grand Total
828
3992 ha
5. Implementation in the planning system
The finalisation of the “time-stamped” native vegetation data set is the first stage in implementing the time-stamping
requirement in the planning system. It is proposed that changes to the Victoria Planning Provisions and affected planning
schemes will be made to give effect to this requirement. These details are yet to be finalised. This process may involve
further consultation beyond the scope of this report.
6. References
DSE (2010) Time-stamping project, 2010/11: Vegetation mapping and condition assessment procedures. Department of
Planning and Community Development, East Melbourne.
Victorian Government (2009) Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities, Program Report. Department of
Planning and Community Development, East Melbourne.
Appendix 1 – Time-stamping consultation maps
Examples of Native vegetation maps sent to landowners during Stages 1 and 2
Appendix 2 – Time-stamping fact sheet
Time Stamping Fact sheet sent to landowners during Stages 1 and