❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses concerns regarding the WAPC's decision to approve a mobile phone tower in Gooseberry Hill, overriding local government objections and potentially conflicting with planning policies related to telecommunications, development control, and water source protection.
AnsweredQoN 6055Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Why did the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) overturn a recent decision by the local government not to allow a mobile phone tower in Gooseberry Hill?
(2) How many times has the WAPC overturned decisions not to allow mobile phone towers to be erected?
(3) Does the WAPC take into account community concerns and investigate the site of the towers prior to making such decisions?
(4) Can the Minister explain why, when making the decision regarding the site of the tower in Gooseberry Hill, the WAPC decision was inconsistent with two of the following policies:
(a) Statement of Planning Policy No 5.2 – Telecommunications Infrastructure (SPP5.2);
(b) Development Control Policy 1.2 – Development Control – General Principles; and
(c) Development Control Policy 5.3 – Use of Land Reserved for Parks and Recreation?
(5) Can the Minister explain why the WAPC failed to address all the relevant policies regarding the site of the tower in a public drinking water catchment area?
(2) How many times has the WAPC overturned decisions not to allow mobile phone towers to be erected?
(3) Does the WAPC take into account community concerns and investigate the site of the towers prior to making such decisions?
(4) Can the Minister explain why, when making the decision regarding the site of the tower in Gooseberry Hill, the WAPC decision was inconsistent with two of the following policies:
(a) Statement of Planning Policy No 5.2 – Telecommunications Infrastructure (SPP5.2);
(b) Development Control Policy 1.2 – Development Control – General Principles; and
(c) Development Control Policy 5.3 – Use of Land Reserved for Parks and Recreation?
(5) Can the Minister explain why the WAPC failed to address all the relevant policies regarding the site of the tower in a public drinking water catchment area?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
18 October 2011
Responded by
Minister for Planning
Response time
48 days
(1) The Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) is the sole determining authority for development on land that is reserved under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). In this instance, the Shire of Kalamunda provides only a recommendation to the WAPC for its consideration and decision-making of the application.
In determining the application, the WAPC gave careful consideration to the Shire'srecommendation. However, the application was approved on the grounds that the proposed development would enhance the quality and continuity of telecommunication services for social, recreational and business use in the locality and was in accordance with State Planning Policies and the MRS.
(2) Since 1997, when legislative changes required telecommunications facilities to comply with State planning approval procedures, the WAPC has approved eleven telecommunications developments of a comparable nature against the recommendation of local government.
(3) Yes. The WAPC takes into account community concerns made to local governments and directly to the WAPC. Furthermore, the WAPC investigates the site of a proposed development prior to making a decision.
(4) The WAPC decided that the development of the telephone tower on the subject land was consistent with the objectives and policy provisions contained in Statement of Planning Policy No. 5.2:
Telecommunications Infrastructure
(SPP 5.2) and will enhance the quality and continuity of telecommunication services for social, recreational and business use in the locality. With respect to WAPC Development Control Policies 1.2 and 5.3, the WAPC decided that the development would not compromise the recreational or conservation purposes of the reserve.
(5) As the development was proposed to be located in a Public Drinking Water Source Area (PDWSA) classified as Priority 1, the proposal was referred to the Department of Water (DoW) for comment prior to determination of the development application by the WAPC. This is consistent with WAPC Statement of Planning Policy 2.7 -
Public Drinking Water Source Policy
(SPP 2.7). The DoW did not object to the application and provided advice about best management practices for development in a PDWSA Priority 1 area. A condition of the WAPC approval requires the proponent to prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) prior to the commencement of any site works, and the applicant was informed of the DoW's advice regarding development in a PDWSA Priority 1 area. The WAPC considered this to be a suitable response to SPP 2.7 to ensure there would be no adverse impacts on the PDWSA from the development.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
In determining the application, the WAPC gave careful consideration to the Shire'srecommendation. However, the application was approved on the grounds that the proposed development would enhance the quality and continuity of telecommunication services for social, recreational and business use in the locality and was in accordance with State Planning Policies and the MRS.
(2) Since 1997, when legislative changes required telecommunications facilities to comply with State planning approval procedures, the WAPC has approved eleven telecommunications developments of a comparable nature against the recommendation of local government.
(3) Yes. The WAPC takes into account community concerns made to local governments and directly to the WAPC. Furthermore, the WAPC investigates the site of a proposed development prior to making a decision.
(4) The WAPC decided that the development of the telephone tower on the subject land was consistent with the objectives and policy provisions contained in Statement of Planning Policy No. 5.2:
Telecommunications Infrastructure
(SPP 5.2) and will enhance the quality and continuity of telecommunication services for social, recreational and business use in the locality. With respect to WAPC Development Control Policies 1.2 and 5.3, the WAPC decided that the development would not compromise the recreational or conservation purposes of the reserve.
(5) As the development was proposed to be located in a Public Drinking Water Source Area (PDWSA) classified as Priority 1, the proposal was referred to the Department of Water (DoW) for comment prior to determination of the development application by the WAPC. This is consistent with WAPC Statement of Planning Policy 2.7 -
Public Drinking Water Source Policy
(SPP 2.7). The DoW did not object to the application and provided advice about best management practices for development in a PDWSA Priority 1 area. A condition of the WAPC approval requires the proponent to prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) prior to the commencement of any site works, and the applicant was informed of the DoW's advice regarding development in a PDWSA Priority 1 area. The WAPC considered this to be a suitable response to SPP 2.7 to ensure there would be no adverse impacts on the PDWSA from the development.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
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.