❓ Question regarding the protection of shipwrecks and maritime artefacts at Koombana Drive, Bunbury under local planning regulations versus the Maritime Archaeology Act. The answer clarifies the differences in protection and the possibility of development with consideration of heritage issues.
AnsweredQoN 2805Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the answer to question without notice No. 67 asked on 19 February 2015, and I ask: (a) does declaration as a protected zone under local planning regulations provide the same protection as declaration under section 9(1) of the Maritime Archaeology Act 1973 ; (b) what protection is provided under local planning regulations to the shipwrecks and maritime artefacts located at lots 882 and 883 Koombana Drive, Bunbury; (c) do the local planning regulations prohibit any development over the protection zone; (d) is developing gardens or a car parking area over a protected zone permitted; and (e) is it permitted to build a building over a protected zone?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
21 April 2015
Responded by
Minister for Mental Health representing the Minister for Planning
Response time
42 days
I am advised:
(a) Protected zones as provided in the
Maritime Archaeology Act 1973
are not directly comparable to zoning provisions provided under the City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No 7.
(b) The shipwrecks are currently identified in the City's Heritage Inventory. The City is in the process of updating the Inventory to include the entirety of Lots 881, 882, and 883.
A proposed development may be progressed in accordance with the provisions of the
Public Works Act
1902
or the Town Planning Scheme. In either case, consultation with the relevant state and local authorities is required to be undertaken.
(c) No, however any development proposal progressed through the Town Planning Scheme or the
Public Works Act 1902
would need to consider heritage issues.
(d) - (e) Yes. Under the
Maritime Archaeology Act 1973
development could be considered, if consistent with the preservation of the identified shipwrecks or other artefacts.
(a) Protected zones as provided in the
Maritime Archaeology Act 1973
are not directly comparable to zoning provisions provided under the City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No 7.
(b) The shipwrecks are currently identified in the City's Heritage Inventory. The City is in the process of updating the Inventory to include the entirety of Lots 881, 882, and 883.
A proposed development may be progressed in accordance with the provisions of the
Public Works Act
1902
or the Town Planning Scheme. In either case, consultation with the relevant state and local authorities is required to be undertaken.
(c) No, however any development proposal progressed through the Town Planning Scheme or the
Public Works Act 1902
would need to consider heritage issues.
(d) - (e) Yes. Under the
Maritime Archaeology Act 1973
development could be considered, if consistent with the preservation of the identified shipwrecks or other artefacts.
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.