Tasmania’s planning tribunal has given the go-ahead to the proposed $53.5 million EAT group King Island abattoir.
The Resources Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal ruled against appellant Raff Angus, which objected to the King Island Council and Environmental Protection Authority granting a planning permit for the plant.
If it accepted Raff Angus’ argument about the restrictive nature of what could be approved in the rural resource zone, then very few if any proposals for development could satisfy the requirements of the Planning Scheme and thus be permitted to be developed in that zone.
- Tasmanian Resources Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal
The permit for the development of an export abattoir and associated infrastructure at Grassy Road, Lymwood was approved by the council on January 17 this year.
King Island Meat Processing director Phil McFarlane said the company was very pleased with the decision.
“We have always maintained full confidence in the high quality development application that we prepared and submitted in 2017,” Mr McFarlane said.
“We had already received EPA and town planning permit approval and the announcement simply reconfirms that the right approval decisions were made then, and now. “
He thanked the legal team, council and Tasmanian EPA for their efforts during the tribunal process.
“We are now looking forward to getting on with the job of delivering a premium meat processing facility to King Island as originally planned.”
Read more: KI beef abattoir approved
Permit appeal
Raff Angus appealed against the granting of a planning permit, on the basis it did not comply with significant parts of the King Island interim planning scheme.
In addition, they argued the development would pose a threat to their ability to obtain organic certification.
Read more: Tribunal hears works fears
Raff Angus principals, Andrew and Anna Raff, argued the proposal was not consistent with the ‘local area objectives” of the scheme, there was no specifically naturally occurring resource on the site or adjacent land and there was no infrastructure on the site.
The family shifted it’s stud operation from Drillham, Queensland, in 2015.
Read more: Mild climate of King Island a sure winner
Tribunal decision
But Tribunal members Marica Duvnjak, planning expert Michael Ball and environmental sciences expert Fran Healy found it was not the intention of the planning scheme to impose significant restriction on resource processing in the rural resource zone.
“If it accepted Raff Angus’ argument about the restrictive nature of what could be approved in the rural resource zone, then very few - if any proposals - for development could satisfy the requirements of the planning scheme and thus be permitted to be developed in that zone,” the members said.
The Tribunal also found that the abattoir would have significant benefits to King Island.
Modelling work
Economic impact modelling provided by SGS Economics and Planning senior associate and partner Ellen Witt, for KIMP, said significant economic benefits would flow from the construction of the abattoir.
“The abattoir is approved to produce 10,000 tonnes of meat product,” Ms Witte said.
“I am instructed that the regulatory limit 10,000 tonnes equates to 300kg carcass weight for 30,000 animals.”
That would be achieved in 2023, the third year of operation.
She said she had been instructed the development and operation of the abattoir would return processing and packaging of premium beef back to King Island
It would have a minimal environmental impact on the island and community and reduce the reliance on live shipping, of animals.
The proposal would also provide up to 85 jobs, during peak production, with half of that being seasonal.
“It is anticipated that many of the employees will be from Tasmania,” Ms Witte said.
She said the abattoir could mean the direct addition of 50 jobs in the food product manufacturing sector, which would lead to a corresponding addition of $19.1million for the Cradle Coast Region’s economy.
The flow on into other related industries would create a further increase of $7.35million in output.
Mr Raff said the family was consulting with its legal representatives, about the decision.
He said he would reserve comment, until those discussions had concluded.
The family has 28 days to appeal the decision, in the Supreme Court of Tasmania.