❓ A parliamentary question regarding the Port Catherine urban marina proposal, focusing on the costs of site clean-up, decontamination, excavation depths, and compliance with EPA recommendations regarding the height of development on the limestone ridge.
AnsweredQoN 463Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
In relation to the Port Catherine urban marina proposal -
(1) What is the cost of the proposed clean-up and site decontamination?
(2) How much of this cost will be paid by the -
(a) proponent; and
(b) State Government?
(3) To what depth will soil in the clean-up and site decontamination by excavated and where will the contaminated soil be taken?
(4) Is the Minister aware that a 1993 EPA report stated that the proposed development should not exceed the 25 metre contour of the limestone ridge to the west?
(5) Is the Minister aware that the current proposal in the MRS Amendment No. 1010/33 exceeds the 35 metre contour of the limestone ridge?
(1) What is the cost of the proposed clean-up and site decontamination?
(2) How much of this cost will be paid by the -
(a) proponent; and
(b) State Government?
(3) To what depth will soil in the clean-up and site decontamination by excavated and where will the contaminated soil be taken?
(4) Is the Minister aware that a 1993 EPA report stated that the proposed development should not exceed the 25 metre contour of the limestone ridge to the west?
(5) Is the Minister aware that the current proposal in the MRS Amendment No. 1010/33 exceeds the 35 metre contour of the limestone ridge?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
27 March 2002
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
27 days
(b) State Government?
2). a) Approximately $1 million b) Approximately $6 million 3). Soil will be excavated down to a depth of 1.5m below ground level for the private lots and between 1 - 2.5 m for the government land. Soils will be deposited to Class I/II landfills in Kwinana, Class III in Rockingham and Class IV in Redhill. 4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
3). Soil will be excavated down to a depth of 1.5m below ground level for the private lots and between 1 - 2.5 m for the government land. Soils will be deposited to Class I/II landfills in Kwinana, Class III in Rockingham and Class IV in Redhill. 4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
Soils will be deposited to Class I/II landfills in Kwinana, Class III in Rockingham and Class IV in Redhill. 4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
2). a) Approximately $1 million b) Approximately $6 million 3). Soil will be excavated down to a depth of 1.5m below ground level for the private lots and between 1 - 2.5 m for the government land. Soils will be deposited to Class I/II landfills in Kwinana, Class III in Rockingham and Class IV in Redhill. 4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
3). Soil will be excavated down to a depth of 1.5m below ground level for the private lots and between 1 - 2.5 m for the government land. Soils will be deposited to Class I/II landfills in Kwinana, Class III in Rockingham and Class IV in Redhill. 4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
Soils will be deposited to Class I/II landfills in Kwinana, Class III in Rockingham and Class IV in Redhill. 4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
4). I am aware that the 1993 EPA provided advice relating to an earlier development concept that considered developing most of the Coogee Regional Open Space area, including the eastern side of the ridge. On that occasion, the EPA proposed the 25 m contour on each side of the ridge line as the preferred maximum height of development to maintain the integrity of the limestone ridge. 5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
5). I assume from the Hon. Member's previous question that he is referring to the 25 metre contour and not the 35 metre contour. I am aware the Port Catherine concept plan within the Environmental Review which was advertised with the MRS amendment No. 1010/33 proposes that development encroaches above the 25 metre contour. However, the development has been designed to maintain views to the ridge from the east, in an apparent undeveloped state. There will be two short sections where the skyline of the ridge from the east, will be modified by the Primary Regional Road. The EPA can consider this issue during its current assessment of the amendment.
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.