Page 4749 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 31 October 2017

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


Currently, all works undertaken in reserves require an EIS unless the conservator has provided an environmental significance opinion stating that the proposal is not likely to have significant adverse environmental impact. The proponent of the works must apply to the conservator for an ESO on a case-by-case basis and an ESO will only be issued where the conservator believes that the proposal will not have a significant adverse environmental impact.

The effect of an ESO granted by the conservator is that the proposal is removed from the impact track and is assessable in the merit track unless an exemption in the planning and development regulation applies that removes the requirement to obtain approval before undertaking works.

The bill amends these planning approvals requirements for minor public works that are undertaken in accordance with a minor public works code. Such works will not require an EIS and therefore will not be assessable in the impact track. The works will also be exempt development and not require development approval.

Clause 1.2 of schedule 1 of the bill amends schedule 4 of the Planning and Development Act to allow for minor public works undertaken in accordance with the minor public works code to not require an EIS. Also, clause 1.4 of schedule 1 of the bill amends schedule 1 of the planning and development regulation so that minor public works undertaken in accordance with the minor public works code are included as exempt development.

The amendments in the bill achieve efficiencies in the planning assessment process by allowing works that comply with the minor public works code to be deemed to satisfy the requirements of the planning approvals process. In effect, the code will function as a standing ESO issued by the conservator for all works that are undertaken in accordance with its requirements.

The requirements of the code will set up a pre-defined set of conditions and circumstances that, if complied with, will mean that the works proposals are unlikely to have a significant adverse environmental impact. Having the requirements of the code set out at the start of the assessment process will enable a more efficient process in determining whether proposed works will have an environmental impact. This will reduce the need to produce an ESO for each works proposal and will allow for a better understanding of the types of works that can be undertaken in reserves.

To give members an idea of the expected administrative time savings that these amendments will achieve, it is estimated that there will be a saving of 11 person days per project. I am advised that a simple ESO can take at least 19 person days to finalise, involving staff from the parks and conservation service, the planning and land authority and the environmental division within the Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate.

Under the new code assessment process, there will be at least eight person days of time involved in investigating the site, preparing a works plan and assessing the


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video