❓ Question regarding the City of Mandurah's handling of a retaining wall requirement for a property development in San Remo, specifically why it wasn't enforced despite unstable soil and level disparities. The answer reveals the wall was required but not built, a notice was served, and an appeal against the notice was upheld.
AnsweredQoN 855Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
In response to the answer received to Question on Notice No. 555, I ask -
(1) In reference to the development of Lot 97 Hestia Way, San Remo, which was built on in November 1989, can the Minister please advise -
(a) did the City of Mandurah require a retaining wall to be built as a condition of the approval of a building licence; and
(b) given the disparity in site levels with the neighbouring block, Lot 96 Hestia Way, San Remo, and the unstable nature of the soil in the area, if the retaining wall was not a requirement of building approval, why not?
(1) In reference to the development of Lot 97 Hestia Way, San Remo, which was built on in November 1989, can the Minister please advise -
(a) did the City of Mandurah require a retaining wall to be built as a condition of the approval of a building licence; and
(b) given the disparity in site levels with the neighbouring block, Lot 96 Hestia Way, San Remo, and the unstable nature of the soil in the area, if the retaining wall was not a requirement of building approval, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
11 May 2006
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Local Government and Regional Development
Response time
30 days
(b) given the disparity in site levels with the neighbouring block, Lot 96 Hestia Way, San Remo, and the unstable nature of the soil in the area, if the retaining wall was not a requirement of building approval, why not?
(b) It was a requirement. However, it was not built. In July 2002, the City served a notice for a departure from theapproved plans for not constructing the wall. An appeal was lodged against the requirements of the City's notice and the appeal was upheld on 14 January 2003.
(b) It was a requirement. However, it was not built. In July 2002, the City served a notice for a departure from theapproved plans for not constructing the wall. An appeal was lodged against the requirements of the City's notice and the appeal was upheld on 14 January 2003.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.