PLANNING — BUSHFIRE
MANAGEMENT — MT HELENA
COLIN TINCKNELL to the minister representing the Minister for Planning:
I refer to the subdivision in Mt
(1) In choosing
to move forward with the proposal, can the minister outline what considerations
were so convincing as to outweigh the expert opinion of the Department of Fire
and Emergency Services?
(2) What factors
have persuaded the minister to overlook the expert advice of DFES and move
forward with the proposal?
(3) What factors
did the Minister for Planning take into account when choosing to go ahead with
the proposal and ignore DFES expert advice?
(4) Have any
government departments flagged concern over the proposed subdivision; and, if
so, which ones and what are their concerns?
Hon STEPHEN DAWSON
I thank the honourable member for the question.
There is a preamble in the question that I have that the
member did not read out, so I presume it is the answer to the same question.
The Western Australian Planning Commission metropolitan region scheme amendment
1277/57 ''Report on Submissions'' states, and I quote —
12 submissions were of support, 2
submissions were of objection and 14 submissions contained neutral comments,
non-objections or general comments on the amendment (primarily from government
Overall, there is a need to
balance technical concerns with ensuring the ongoing viability of hills
communities. In making the decision, the minister outlined the requirement for
the preparation of an updated and refined bushfire management plan to address
the concerns raised by DFES, including the extension of water infrastructure
and bushfire attack level ratings on new houses, which impose far stricter
requirements than those that are applicable to the existing and adjacent
property owners. There are also 20 existing houses on the landholdings that
were rezoned, and it is adjacent to an existing subdivision.