❓ A parliamentary question probes the Minister about the cost and acquisition strategy for land needed for the city rail project, specifically regarding valuations and landowner enthusiasm. The Minister responds by providing details on the valuation, funding, and consultations.
AnsweredQoN 171Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to her comment in the House on 10 September that two valuations estimated the cost at $40 million for acquiring buildings and compensating leaseholders in the commercial precinct at William and Wellington Streets to facilitate the proposed underground rail platforms for the city rail development project. (1) What is the date of the Valuer General’s valuation report, and has the minister received a copy of or read the valuation? (2) If not, why not? (3) Will the minister now table a copy of the Valuer General’s report? (4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(1) What is the date of the Valuer General’s valuation report, and has the minister received a copy of or read the valuation? (2) If not, why not? (3) Will the minister now table a copy of the Valuer General’s report? (4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(2) If not, why not? (3) Will the minister now table a copy of the Valuer General’s report? (4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(3) Will the minister now table a copy of the Valuer General’s report? (4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(1) What is the date of the Valuer General’s valuation report, and has the minister received a copy of or read the valuation? (2) If not, why not? (3) Will the minister now table a copy of the Valuer General’s report? (4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(2) If not, why not? (3) Will the minister now table a copy of the Valuer General’s report? (4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(3) Will the minister now table a copy of the Valuer General’s report? (4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(4) If not, why not? (5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(5) Given that, even at $40 million, this is shaping up to be the biggest single government property acquisition in Perth’s history, can the minister explain how it will be funded? (6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(6) Finally, is the minister still confident she has the enthusiasm of owners to work with the Government on this project, as she stated in the House on 10 September? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(1)-(2) The valuation report is dated 27 November 2001. The report was received and evaluated by the Department for Planning and Infrastructure and the Perth urban rail development group prior to formally reporting to me on the land acquisition strategy. I have viewed the report. (3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(3) No. (4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(4) The report contains specific, confidential information that has the potential to prejudice future negotiations with landowners, and may be in conflict with updated valuation details which have been requested from the Valuer General. (5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(5) As previously advised, the value capture analysis shows that revenue from the sale of the development rights above the station platforms will exceed the initial acquisition costs - if indeed acquisition is required. There is no certainty that we will be required to acquire that site. For budgetary purposes, a conservative cost-neutral position has been adopted, so no overall impact is expected. (6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
(6) Yes. There has been ongoing, productive discussions with the principal property owner, Pacific Shopping Centres Australia Pty Ltd, the owner of the vast majority of the site. City rail development team members last met with Pacific Shopping Centres on 17 September. It is understood that when contacted by staff from the office of the Leader of the National Party, Pacific Shopping Centres advised that it was more than satisfied with the level and nature of consultation with government. There are two other smaller owners and we have had discussions with one of these owners via their agent; more formal discussions will continue over the next few weeks. Each of those leaseholders has been visited and advised of the expected timetable for development, and all leaseholders will now receive a regular update.
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.