HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-11-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Exceptional Tree Register) Amendment Bill

Introduction and First Reading

Mr DULUK (Waite) (10:36): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Planning Development and Infrastructure Act 2016. Read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr DULUK (Waite) (10:38): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

My seat of Waite is privileged to have some of the highest levels of tree canopy in metropolitan Adelaide, and my local community have made it clear to me that they significantly value the tree canopy in their local area as something that is unique and irreplaceable.

In fact, when you compare the City of Mitcham, which covers a large portion of my community, with other councils across Australia that have a similar population density, rainfall and levels of urbanisation, our local area has double the rate of tree canopy when compared with other similar jurisdictions across Australia. Trees bring immense and often underrated benefits to our neighbourhoods and to the lives and communities we represent. They cool our streets and suburbs by up to 5° to 6° on days of extreme heat and do a remarkable job in reducing energy bills.

Trees reduce stormwater run-off, clean our air, improve our mental and physical health and provide valuable habitat for urban biodiversity. They also provide a major role in providing improved amenity and even increase the value of one's home. Sadly, it is well recognised that Adelaide has some of the lowest levels of tree canopy cover of any major city in Australia, with studies showing a loss of tree canopy across metropolitan Adelaide.

Changes to the regulated and significant tree regulations and planning policy in 2011 are broadly acknowledged to have weakened protections for mature trees and resulted in significant increase in tree clearance. With many residents choosing to live in the local area for the trees and natural environment, the destruction of it can take an emotional toll. Across metropolitan Adelaide increasing urban infill and smaller allotment sizes with the larger houses are making it difficult for councils and the state government to achieve the tree canopy goals outlined in the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide had two key goals: one was for council areas with a less than 30 per cent tree canopy cover currently to have that coverage to increase by some 20 per cent by 2045, and for council areas with more than 30 per cent tree canopy cover currently to maintain and ensure there is no net loss of tree canopy cover by 2045.

Despite best efforts of state government and local government to increase tree canopy on public land, there is not enough space available on public land to keep up with the loss of trees on private land. With a significant proportion of canopy located on private land across metropolitan Adelaide, it seems increasingly unlikely that we will reach these two critical goals when the current regulations in my local area allow for trees that were around pre-European settlement to be removed for solar panels or because they make a mess.

The Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 contains little in the way of protection for regulated and significant trees, and I think that is of much disappointment to the then authors of that legislation. Much of this detail is left to the regulations. However, part 5, subdivision 3, section 68 of the act outlines how the Planning and Design Code may declare a tree or stand of trees to be significant. A tree can be added to these lists if:

it makes a significant contribution to the character or visual amenity of the local area;

it is indigenous to the local area, it is a rare or endangered species or it forms part of a remnant area of native registration;

it is an important habitat for native fauna; and, finally,

if it satisfies any criteria prescribed by the regulations.

These trees are then included in part 10 of the Planning and Design Code in what forms a significant tree register. Currently, only four South Australian councils have a significant tree register: the City of Adelaide, City of Burnside, City of Prospect and City of Unley. These significant tree registers were created before the changes to the regulated and significant tree regulations back in 2011.

As a result of these changes, these registers are now largely superfluous and outdated, as many of the trees listed on them can be cut down without requiring council approval, due to the substantial number of exemptions outlined in the Planning Development and Infrastructure General Regulations 2017. These exemptions include the ability to remove any regulated or significant tree:

within 10 metres of a residential dwelling or swimming pool (excluding eucalyptus and agonis flexuosa);

within 20 metres of a dwelling in a medium and high bushfire danger area (which is, of course, a significant matter of concern in my community, as consideration must always be given in terms of high bushfire danger areas); and

if the tree is one of 24 species that are exempt from being classified as a regulated or significant tree.

The use of the tree register to protect special trees is a common occurrence in councils throughout Australia. In other jurisdictions, however, trees listed on a register are actually protected, with requirements to seek permission from council to remove them. In fact, every capital city in Australia has a significant tree register which provides protections to all trees listed on it, regardless of other exemptions. South Australia is indeed the only exception.

There are also a significant number of other jurisdictions that have similar rainfall, population density and urbanisation to South Australian councils that utilise a register to protect trees, such as the City of Freemantle, the Yarra City Council, the Moonee Valley City Council, Maribyrnong City Council, Hunter's Hill Council, City of Parramatta Council and the Inner West Council of New South Wales.

Currently, the significant tree register of our wonderful capital city, the City of Adelaide, has 282 trees listed on it. Of those 282 trees, 42 are exempt from being classified as significant due to their species, 210 are located within the most residential part of the City of Adelaide, being North Adelaide, and are non-eucalyptus trees, which means they can be felled if they are within 10 metres of a dwelling. To put things more simply, of the 282 trees on the City of Adelaide register, only 12 trees would certainly require council approval to remove them

The near redundancy of the significant tree register has resulted in many of them no longer being maintained or updated by councils—that is, the protection of the tree. The sheer volume of work required to maintain them due to the number of exemptions has made it not worthwhile for council resources. The intent of this bill is to bring South Australia in line with every other jurisdiction in Australia that uses a tree register to protect exceptional trees from unnecessary removal.

The bill takes inspiration from the City of Melbourne, which established their Exceptional Tree Register back in 2012 and whose urban greening strategy, as part of Living Melbourne, is seen as a global leader. Part 5, subdivision 3, section 68 of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 should be changed to allow the Planning and Design Code to identify trees or stand of trees to be exceptional instead of significant to avoid the confusion of having two types of significant trees.

Councils, in conjunction with the public, should be able to work together to identify trees that can be recommended for inclusion into the Planning and Design Code at the discretion of the State Planning Commission. Critically, though, this bill would allow for trees to be recommended for exceptional status, based not only on existing values of visual amenity, species or habitat, but also historical value, Aboriginal association and other means of cultural importance.

The consultation for the Planning and Design Code in March earlier this year showed substantial community angst over the loss of trees across our suburbs. Key findings from the phase three engagement report found that submissions from the community, local government and advocacy groups overwhelmingly sought to strengthen policy to protect large trees.

Given that we live in the driest state in the driest inhabited continent on earth, many of the trees that would be worthy of exceptional status provide environmental benefits that are becoming irreplaceable. With a push from the government for Adelaide to become the second National Park City in the world, protecting exceptional trees in our local environment is a critical step that will allow future generations of South Australians to enjoy the benefits that they bring. I commend the bill to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Dr Harvey.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT