❓ Question on Notice regarding the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill 2009 and its potential impact on residential areas and zoning regulations, with the Minister providing a general response about urban consolidation and consultation processes.
AnsweredQoN 160Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PLANNING IMPROVEMENT SCHEMES
My question is about the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill 2009, which allows for the establishment of improvement schemes that will override local and regional planning schemes. (1) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme may apply anywhere in the state, including to traditional residential areas such as Applecross, Mt Pleasant, South Perth, Mosman Park, Claremont, Peppermint Grove, Cottesloe and Nedlands? Several members interjected. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY
My question is about the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill 2009, which allows for the establishment of improvement schemes that will override local and regional planning schemes. (1) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme may apply anywhere in the state, including to traditional residential areas such as Applecross, Mt Pleasant, South Perth, Mosman Park, Claremont, Peppermint Grove, Cottesloe and Nedlands? Several members interjected. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(1) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme may apply anywhere in the state, including to traditional residential areas such as Applecross, Mt Pleasant, South Perth, Mosman Park, Claremont, Peppermint Grove, Cottesloe and Nedlands? Several members interjected. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Several members interjected. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(1) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme may apply anywhere in the state, including to traditional residential areas such as Applecross, Mt Pleasant, South Perth, Mosman Park, Claremont, Peppermint Grove, Cottesloe and Nedlands? Several members interjected. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Several members interjected. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : I will continue. (2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(2) Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, members! Take a seat, member. Everybody in this place is entitled to ask a question. Some people might not necessarily like the question being asked and they might have better suggestions. All I want to hear in this place is the member whom I have called to ask the question asking that question. I do not believe the member needs any assistance from either side of this place. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Will the minister confirm that an improvement scheme could include development control provisions that provide for a change in zoning, such as the Western Australian Planning Commission has proposed for Mt Pleasant and Applecross? Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Mr B.S. Wyatt interjected. The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
The SPEAKER : Take a seat! Member for Victoria Park, you probably heard me before; I imagine you did. I formally call you for the first time. I hope the member will be able to conclude the question shortly. Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD : Performance-based zoning could see developments of 20 to 30 storeys. This sketch shows Canning Bridge. (3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(3) Will the minister confirm that the Western Australia Planning Commission has already recognised Canning Bridge as a regionally significant area because it is in a transport-oriented development zone, and when will the minister tell the people who are living within one kilometre of train stations — The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
The SPEAKER : Order! Member, I have given you some leniency in terms of asking the question. Might I suggest politely to you that perhaps you keep that as a supplementary question after the answer to the question from the minister. I will call upon the minister to answer the questions the member has so far asked. Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
Mr J.H.D. DAY replied: (1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
(1)–(3) As the member for Alfred Cove indicated, we do have a bill before this house at the moment titled the Approvals and Related Reforms (No. 4) (Planning) Bill. We will be debating the general provisions in the bill, I hope, very soon; in fact, I was hoping it would be today, but it will probably be during the next sitting week. We will go through some of the provisions in detail during consideration in detail. It is the case that one of the provisions in the bill is to clarify the ability of the state, through the Minister for Planning, to develop improvement schemes for specific areas—but not in some sort of autocratic way; it will be through all the normal consultations that occur with planning scheme amendments. We will have the debate about the bill when it comes on. That is probably the appropriate time. As a general comment, and as we are all aware, Western Australia, and the Perth metropolitan area in particular, faces major population growth pressures, and we need to ensure that land is available for residential development both in greenfield sites and also through urban consolidation. I am very clear about the need, and we have indicated this through the “Directions 2031” document that has been out for comment and is close to finalisation: we need to provide more residential developments from urban consolidation and urban infill developments than has been the case in the past. That trend has been developing over the past 20 years or so. We cannot rely excessively on further urban sprawl and peripheral developments for which, as most members would be aware, there are higher transport and infrastructure costs and greater social challenges are produced. We need a combination of both, and that is the approach that has been taken. This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
This bill is not specifically about Applecross, Alfred Cove, South Perth or any of those important local areas; it is about general planning provisions in Western Australia. Any particular developments that are proposed will be subject to all the usual consultation processes that occur. We listen to the community and we make decisions that are in the interests of the community as a whole.
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.