❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure regarding Town Planning Scheme Number 1 Amendment No. 29, focusing on advertising adequacy, council justifications, environmental impact, public objections, and survey peg placement. The Minister defends the decision, citing compliance with regulations and resource allocation.
AnsweredQoN 130Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to Town Planning Scheme Number 1 Amendment No. 29 - proposed realignment of a portion of the Eastern Bypass Road -
(1) Will the Minister reject the above town planning scheme amendment given that the City of Kalgoorlie Boulder Council has stated in part in Council Minutes dated 23 April 2001 in relation to the proponent complying with councils resolution dated 14 August 2000 to erect notices along the proposed alignment of the road that ‘They were not erected along the proposed realignment of the road’ and furthermore ‘apart from being impracticable would not have served any useful purpose as the area was effectively in bush and not really accessible’ when clearly it was practicable to place notices advertising the amendment along the proposed alignment in the areas near the following streets -
(a) Johnston;
(b) Hamilton;
(c) York;
(d) Clancy;
(e) Clements Way;
(f) Pauley Court;
(g) Milton;
(h) Launceston;
(i) Hainault Road; and
(j) Fimiston,
and other areas?
(2) If not, why not?
(3) Will the Minister reject the above town planning scheme when clearly councils justification in stating ‘the area was effectively in bush and not really accessible’ is illogical given that council has advised Mrs Laverty who owns properties in Johnston Street East that in terms of evacuation routes ‘The industries in Johnston Street East would not have paved alternative evacuation routes although, as the QEST report observed, there are unpaved tracks leading to the north and to the south (which according to council is through the so called bush which is not really accessible) that could carry vehicles if required for this purpose. These tracks are currently utilised by vehicles despite not being formed roads and will serve the purpose for emergency evacuation adequately’?
(4) If not, why not?
(5) Can the Minister provide a detailed scaled map showing the location of the proposed realignment which both states and shows on the map what percentage of the realignment of the proposed 2.4km realigned section would be through bush which is not really accessible?
(6) If not, why not?
(7) Has the Minister received letters from bulk dangerous goods drivers, members of the transport industry and others objecting to the proposed town planning scheme amendment?
(8) If so, can the Minister state how many letters she has received and will she take all of their concerns into consideration?
(9) Will the Minister investigate and confirm that within several days or within a week after Council approving the motion on the 23 April 2001 wooden survey pegs approximately 1 metre high with pink ribbon were placed along the alignment of the proposed road of which most were clearly visible to the public from different areas all along the proposed road?
(10) If not, why not?
(11) Can the Minister advise how many public submissions were received by council and how many were objections to the Scheme Amendment?
(12) Can the Minister advise how many people signed petitions received by the Council who were opposed to the Scheme Amendment?
(1) Will the Minister reject the above town planning scheme amendment given that the City of Kalgoorlie Boulder Council has stated in part in Council Minutes dated 23 April 2001 in relation to the proponent complying with councils resolution dated 14 August 2000 to erect notices along the proposed alignment of the road that ‘They were not erected along the proposed realignment of the road’ and furthermore ‘apart from being impracticable would not have served any useful purpose as the area was effectively in bush and not really accessible’ when clearly it was practicable to place notices advertising the amendment along the proposed alignment in the areas near the following streets -
(a) Johnston;
(b) Hamilton;
(c) York;
(d) Clancy;
(e) Clements Way;
(f) Pauley Court;
(g) Milton;
(h) Launceston;
(i) Hainault Road; and
(j) Fimiston,
and other areas?
(2) If not, why not?
(3) Will the Minister reject the above town planning scheme when clearly councils justification in stating ‘the area was effectively in bush and not really accessible’ is illogical given that council has advised Mrs Laverty who owns properties in Johnston Street East that in terms of evacuation routes ‘The industries in Johnston Street East would not have paved alternative evacuation routes although, as the QEST report observed, there are unpaved tracks leading to the north and to the south (which according to council is through the so called bush which is not really accessible) that could carry vehicles if required for this purpose. These tracks are currently utilised by vehicles despite not being formed roads and will serve the purpose for emergency evacuation adequately’?
(4) If not, why not?
(5) Can the Minister provide a detailed scaled map showing the location of the proposed realignment which both states and shows on the map what percentage of the realignment of the proposed 2.4km realigned section would be through bush which is not really accessible?
(6) If not, why not?
(7) Has the Minister received letters from bulk dangerous goods drivers, members of the transport industry and others objecting to the proposed town planning scheme amendment?
(8) If so, can the Minister state how many letters she has received and will she take all of their concerns into consideration?
(9) Will the Minister investigate and confirm that within several days or within a week after Council approving the motion on the 23 April 2001 wooden survey pegs approximately 1 metre high with pink ribbon were placed along the alignment of the proposed road of which most were clearly visible to the public from different areas all along the proposed road?
(10) If not, why not?
(11) Can the Minister advise how many public submissions were received by council and how many were objections to the Scheme Amendment?
(12) Can the Minister advise how many people signed petitions received by the Council who were opposed to the Scheme Amendment?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
13 September 2001
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
44 days
(b) Hamilton; (c) York; (d) Clancy; (e) Clements Way; (f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(c) York; (d) Clancy; (e) Clements Way; (f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(d) Clancy; (e) Clements Way; (f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(e) Clements Way; (f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(j) Fimiston, and other areas?
and other areas?
(2) In making her decision on this amendment the Minister was satisfied that the advertising process met the requirements of the Town Planning Regulations 1967. (3) No. (4) See Response to Question 2. (5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(3) No. (4) See Response to Question 2. (5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(4) See Response to Question 2. (5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(c) York; (d) Clancy; (e) Clements Way; (f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(d) Clancy; (e) Clements Way; (f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(e) Clements Way; (f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(f) Pauley Court; (g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(g) Milton; (h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(h) Launceston; (i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(i) Hainault Road; and (j) Fimiston, and other areas?
(j) Fimiston, and other areas?
and other areas?
(2) In making her decision on this amendment the Minister was satisfied that the advertising process met the requirements of the Town Planning Regulations 1967. (3) No. (4) See Response to Question 2. (5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(3) No. (4) See Response to Question 2. (5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(4) See Response to Question 2. (5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(5) No. (6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(6) Undertaking a detailed assessment to determine the percentage of the realignment which would go through bush would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(7) Yes. (8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(8) Five. Yes. (9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(9) No. (10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(10) An investigation into the placing of survey pegs would serve no purpose and would be an unnecessary waste of Government resources. (11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(11) 69 Submissions were received of which 65 were opposed to the amendment. (12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
(12) 218. A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
A decision has been made on this matter taking into account the best interest of the community as a whole. To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
To ensure specific interests are protected we have established an implemention committee to be chaired by John Bowler MLA to provide an avenue for public input during the implementation process.
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.