❓ A parliamentary question raises concerns about the use of dredge spoil as fill for building sites, potential erosion of house foundations, and the government's responsibility. The Minister deflects, citing acid sulphate soils and shared responsibility between agencies.
AnsweredQoN 458Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Will the Minister advise if the Minister’s Department has a policy for the use of dredge spoil as fill for building sites; and
(a) if not, why not?
(2) Will the Minister advise how long the Minister’s Department has known that the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away?
(3) Will the Government be offering compensation to the owners of such homes as described in (2)?
(4) Will the Minister advise where dredge spoil is being used as land fill for housing developments in Western Australia?
(5) Will the Minister guarantee that dredge spoil being used for housing developments will not cause rotting of building foundations?
(6) Will the Minister advise if she has considered requiring the Environmental Protection Authority to specifically investigate all of the environmental facets of using dredge spoil as land fill for development; and
(a) if so, what was the outcome; and
(b) if not, why not?
(a) if not, why not?
(2) Will the Minister advise how long the Minister’s Department has known that the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away?
(3) Will the Government be offering compensation to the owners of such homes as described in (2)?
(4) Will the Minister advise where dredge spoil is being used as land fill for housing developments in Western Australia?
(5) Will the Minister guarantee that dredge spoil being used for housing developments will not cause rotting of building foundations?
(6) Will the Minister advise if she has considered requiring the Environmental Protection Authority to specifically investigate all of the environmental facets of using dredge spoil as land fill for development; and
(a) if so, what was the outcome; and
(b) if not, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
20 October 2005
Responded by
Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
28 days
(b) if not, why not?
(a- b) Dredging activities and the management of dredge spoil are regulated by the Department of Environment and the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). Port Authorities also have relevant responsibilities. Local government is generally responsible for implementation of building standards. The Member's questions appear to touch on the more general issue of acid sulphate soils. The WAPC released "Planning Bulletin No. 64: Acid Sulfate Soils" in November 2003. The bulletin contains a set of acid sulfate soil planning guidelines which have been adopted by the WAPC to assist it in the assessment of new town planning schemes, town planning scheme amendments, subdivision and strata applications and applications for planning approval where there is evidence of a significant risk of disturbing acid sulfate soils. The WAPC has recommended that all other approval authorities in Western Australia similarly adopt the guidelines. The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
The Member's questions appear to touch on the more general issue of acid sulphate soils. The WAPC released "Planning Bulletin No. 64: Acid Sulfate Soils" in November 2003. The bulletin contains a set of acid sulfate soil planning guidelines which have been adopted by the WAPC to assist it in the assessment of new town planning schemes, town planning scheme amendments, subdivision and strata applications and applications for planning approval where there is evidence of a significant risk of disturbing acid sulfate soils. The WAPC has recommended that all other approval authorities in Western Australia similarly adopt the guidelines. The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
The WAPC released "Planning Bulletin No. 64: Acid Sulfate Soils" in November 2003. The bulletin contains a set of acid sulfate soil planning guidelines which have been adopted by the WAPC to assist it in the assessment of new town planning schemes, town planning scheme amendments, subdivision and strata applications and applications for planning approval where there is evidence of a significant risk of disturbing acid sulfate soils. The WAPC has recommended that all other approval authorities in Western Australia similarly adopt the guidelines. The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(a- b) Dredging activities and the management of dredge spoil are regulated by the Department of Environment and the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). Port Authorities also have relevant responsibilities. Local government is generally responsible for implementation of building standards. The Member's questions appear to touch on the more general issue of acid sulphate soils. The WAPC released "Planning Bulletin No. 64: Acid Sulfate Soils" in November 2003. The bulletin contains a set of acid sulfate soil planning guidelines which have been adopted by the WAPC to assist it in the assessment of new town planning schemes, town planning scheme amendments, subdivision and strata applications and applications for planning approval where there is evidence of a significant risk of disturbing acid sulfate soils. The WAPC has recommended that all other approval authorities in Western Australia similarly adopt the guidelines. The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
The Member's questions appear to touch on the more general issue of acid sulphate soils. The WAPC released "Planning Bulletin No. 64: Acid Sulfate Soils" in November 2003. The bulletin contains a set of acid sulfate soil planning guidelines which have been adopted by the WAPC to assist it in the assessment of new town planning schemes, town planning scheme amendments, subdivision and strata applications and applications for planning approval where there is evidence of a significant risk of disturbing acid sulfate soils. The WAPC has recommended that all other approval authorities in Western Australia similarly adopt the guidelines. The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
The WAPC released "Planning Bulletin No. 64: Acid Sulfate Soils" in November 2003. The bulletin contains a set of acid sulfate soil planning guidelines which have been adopted by the WAPC to assist it in the assessment of new town planning schemes, town planning scheme amendments, subdivision and strata applications and applications for planning approval where there is evidence of a significant risk of disturbing acid sulfate soils. The WAPC has recommended that all other approval authorities in Western Australia similarly adopt the guidelines. The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
The guidelines have been applied by the WAPC since November 2003. Prior to that time, the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils. (2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(2) The DPI has no documented evidence detailing any specific instances where 'the foundations of some houses built on dredge spoil are slowly eroding away'. In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
In relation to the more general issue of acid sulfate soils, and given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no specific knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is possible that some houses in this State have been built on acid sulfate soil affected land without the use of the special building techniques and materials that can prevent structural damage taking place as a result of contact with these soils. In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
In recognition of this, I note that the Department of Environment has recently published as part of its acid sulfate soils guidelines series, a document entitled "Is My House Built On Acid Sulfate Soils?". I understand the document provides an inventory of visual indicators of acid sulfate soil effects that homeowners can look for inside the house, on exterior walls and paved areas, and in the garden to help determine whether structural damage as a result of acid sulfate soils might be occurring. (3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(3) No. The issue of potential compensation in relation to such a situation would only arise where a breach of the general duty of care on the part of an approval authority is proven. Given the fact that the various approval authorities in Western Australia had no knowledge of the existence of acid sulfate soils prior to November 2003, it is highly unlikely that such a breach could be proven. (4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(4) Because of the division of responsibilities between local and State government, this question cannot be answered categorically. However, the Western Australian Planning Commission has applied the acid sulfate soil planning guidelines since November 2003. The negative impacts associated with the development of land containing acid sulfate soils for residential purposes should no longer arise as a result. (5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(5) See answer to (4) above. (6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
(6) See answer to (1) and (4) above.
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.