❓ Hon. Colin Tincknell questions the MRA's approval of the 3 Oceans development in Scarborough, specifically regarding height allowances, unmet criteria, and public opposition. The Minister defends the MRA's discretionary powers and cites public support for the project.
AnsweredQoN 1310Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
METROPOLITAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY —3
OCEANS TWIN TOWERS DEVELOPMENT — SCARBOROUGH
1310. Hon COLIN TINCKNELL to the minister representing the
Minister for Planning:
I refer to question without notice 1085 that I asked the
minister on Tuesday, 6 November this year, regarding the Metropolitan
Redevelopment Authority's decision to approve the 3 Oceans development
in Scarborough.
(1) Is the MRA
restricted or limited in the level of discretion it can apply when approving
applications that exceed a zoned planning area's maximum height
allowances; and, if so, to what extent are they restricted; and, if not, why
not?
(2) The answer
provided by the minister on 6 November stated that the 3 Oceans proposal did
not meet the basic criteria required in the areas of building height, setback,
tower separation and street activation not being met. If these basic criteria,
which are required to be met for a development of any size under the MRA's
own guidelines, were not met, why was the development still approved?
(3) What
justification or rationale has the MRA offered for its decision to overlook the
80 per cent rate of negative public deputations it received for the 3 Oceans
proposal via public submissions to the Scarborough Land Redevelopment
Committee?
OCEANS TWIN TOWERS DEVELOPMENT — SCARBOROUGH
1310. Hon COLIN TINCKNELL to the minister representing the
Minister for Planning:
I refer to question without notice 1085 that I asked the
minister on Tuesday, 6 November this year, regarding the Metropolitan
Redevelopment Authority's decision to approve the 3 Oceans development
in Scarborough.
(1) Is the MRA
restricted or limited in the level of discretion it can apply when approving
applications that exceed a zoned planning area's maximum height
allowances; and, if so, to what extent are they restricted; and, if not, why
not?
(2) The answer
provided by the minister on 6 November stated that the 3 Oceans proposal did
not meet the basic criteria required in the areas of building height, setback,
tower separation and street activation not being met. If these basic criteria,
which are required to be met for a development of any size under the MRA's
own guidelines, were not met, why was the development still approved?
(3) What
justification or rationale has the MRA offered for its decision to overlook the
80 per cent rate of negative public deputations it received for the 3 Oceans
proposal via public submissions to the Scarborough Land Redevelopment
Committee?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of the
question.
(1)–(2)
Discretion is available to the MRA under the provisions of the respective planning
frameworks and has been used to approve various developments in other
redevelopment areas such as Elizabeth Quay and Perth City Link.
(3) The MRA
received a total of 1 445 submissions during the public consultation period for
the 3 Oceans proposal, including 794 submissions, or 54.9 per cent, in support;
636 submissions, or 44 per cent, not in support; and 14 submissions, or one per
cent, neutral. Although some of these submitters also took the opportunity to
make a deputation to the Scarborough Land Redevelopment Committee meeting, the
MRA had regard for all submissions received from the public and key
stakeholders.
question.
(1)–(2)
Discretion is available to the MRA under the provisions of the respective planning
frameworks and has been used to approve various developments in other
redevelopment areas such as Elizabeth Quay and Perth City Link.
(3) The MRA
received a total of 1 445 submissions during the public consultation period for
the 3 Oceans proposal, including 794 submissions, or 54.9 per cent, in support;
636 submissions, or 44 per cent, not in support; and 14 submissions, or one per
cent, neutral. Although some of these submitters also took the opportunity to
make a deputation to the Scarborough Land Redevelopment Committee meeting, the
MRA had regard for all submissions received from the public and key
stakeholders.
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.