DOCSLIB.ORG

Extract from Hansard [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 5 November 2002] P2473b-2478A Hon Graham Giffard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Extract from Hansard [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 5 November 2002] P2473b-2478A Hon Graham Giffard Extract from Hansard [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 5 November 2002] p2473b-2478a Hon Graham Giffard SELECT COMMITTEE INTO THE FREMANTLE EASTERN BYPASS Amendment to Motion Resumed from 24 October on the following motion moved by Hon Simon O’Brien - (1) That a select committee of five members is appointed, any three of whom constitute a quorum, to inquire and report on the history of that part of the metropolitan region scheme known as the Fremantle eastern bypass and related road infrastructure including - (a) initial inclusion of the bypass in the metropolitan region scheme; (b) subsequent modifications to the metropolitan region scheme in respect of the bypass; (c) the decision making process and advice given to Government by relevant government agencies including agencies responsible for main roads, planning, transport and environment; (d) directions given by Government to agencies with responsibility for decision making; and (e) other matters pertaining to the history and possible future of the Fremantle eastern bypass that the committee may consider useful to bring to the attention of the House. (2) The committee have power to send for persons, papers and records and to travel from place to place. (3) Standing Orders Nos 322, 323, 330 and 331 apply to the proceedings of the committee and any contrary or inconsistent provision of chapter XXIII is modified accordingly. (4) The committee may present interim reports without a requirement for leave and is to report finally not later than 30 November 2002. to which the following amendment was moved by Hon Norman Moore (Leader of the House) - That the words “That a select committee of five members is appointed, any three of whom constitute a quorum,” be deleted and the following words be substituted - That the Standing Committee on Public Administration and Finance be required HON GRAHAM GIFFARD (North Metropolitan - Parliamentary Secretary) [4.25 pm]: When I last spoke on this matter, I referred to a quote from a Fremantle News article, which typified the basis upon which the Fremantle eastern bypass came into being. The article was based on an interview with engineer, Peter Woodward, who stated that - “You know, I’ll tell you a funny thing. It turned out that the road went right through Sir Charles Court’s house, and he got to thinking that the road was not such a good idea . Hon Simon O’Brien: Is that the case? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: There is contention from the other side of the Chamber about whether the road went through his house or his front or back garden. I am not exactly sure, because I never went to his house for tea. Given that I lived in his street, one would have thought that he would have invited me over. Sir Charles Court did not want the road to go through his suburb - he might have regarded his suburb as his backyard - so it was moved, and the proposed Fremantle eastern bypass came into being. Hon Barbara Scott interjected. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: Some people may hold that view, but it does not appear to have motivated Mr Woodward at the time. In the article Mr Woodward also stated that - We didn’t think of the environment much in those days. I shouldn’t tell you this, but if you look at all the freeway systems, most of them were planned through wetlands, because that was the way to go. You never worried about open space. That was the basis upon which the Fremantle eastern bypass came into being. It was first included in the metropolitan region scheme in 1973 as a controlled access highway. At that time it received the highest classification - it still does - for a regional road, although it is now designated as a primary regional road. Such roads have controlled access, they do not allow direct access from properties abutting the road and intersections are often grade separated with ramps and the like. As I understand the situation, the formal objections to the Fremantle eastern bypass date back to at least 1980 when the Fremantle City Council made its first objections, which were put forward because of social and environmental factors and planning consequences. In those days, [1] Extract from Hansard [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 5 November 2002] p2473b-2478a Hon Graham Giffard the council objected to an MRS amendment that resulted in the Fremantle eastern bypass heading south. During the 1990s I lived in Hampton Road, Fremantle, and I can assure members that the objections raised in the 1980s continued throughout most of the 1990s. Hon Barbara Scott interjected. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: I did not say that. I lived on Hampton Road and I was aware of the continuing unrest about the Fremantle eastern bypass. It is true that some people in Hampton Road took the opposite view - Hon Barbara Scott interjected. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: I am not sure how the member concludes that it was the majority of the people. However, when I was living there - Hon Simon O’Brien: Are you going to share the views that you held at that time? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: I did not think that the Fremantle eastern bypass was a good idea. Hon Barbara Scott: You obviously didn’t own a home on Hampton Road. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: Yes, I did. However, I thought the bypass was a poor solution that would carve the community in half. I did not think it was a good idea. Hon Simon O’Brien: The things we do for pre-selection! Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: No, that was notwithstanding the fact that had I listened to the supporters of Hampton Road, my property would appreciate. However, I did not think the bypass was a good idea, because it was poorly planned. I listened carefully to the debate at the time because the issue directly affected me. Hon Barbara Scott: Where would you have liked the traffic to have been directed? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: I do not want to keep rehashing this matter every time I make a contribution to the debate. Hon Barbara Scott interjected. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: Yes, I did. The last time I spoke I dealt with the Government’s approach to the deletion of the Fremantle eastern bypass. I do not propose to go over that debate. Hon Derrick Tomlinson: Did you deal with that last time? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: Yes, I did. Hon Derrick Tomlinson: What did you say last time? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: That is a trick question. Hon Simon O’Brien: He is trying to get his story straight. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: Now the member is just being unkind. In October 1992 the Government delivered on its promise to delete the Fremantle eastern bypass. The new Government took a different view from that of its predecessor and it reinstated the Fremantle eastern bypass by virtue of legislation that passed through this place. As I recall, there was minimal or no community consultation at that time. Hon Barbara Scott interjected. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: We have taken a different view from that of our predecessors, as did the previous Government. It is not a new policy. It is a policy that was held by the Labor Party when it was last in government. It is a policy to which we have been faithful throughout that time. As I indicated when I last spoke, it is a policy to which the local member, Hon Jim McGinty, has been faithful throughout that time. Hon Barbara Scott interjected. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: Our decision to proceed with the deletion of the Fremantle eastern bypass is sound. Its construction would cause significant disruption within the Fremantle community. It would be a four-lane, controlled-access highway through the middle of the established residential areas of White Gum Valley and Beaconsfield. It would result in substantial community severance and traffic noise and vibrations. Obviously, local air quality issues would then arise. The Fremantle eastern bypass route encroaches on the edge of the White Gum Valley Primary School site, compounding the issues of community severance and traffic noise. To that we can add the serious concerns about the safety of schoolchildren. Deleting the Fremantle eastern bypass will create an opportunity to reinvest the land in that area to build a greater urban place and a stronger community. It will not be a green village, but it will be a good, strong community. As I said, I lived in that area [2] Extract from Hansard [COUNCIL - Tuesday, 5 November 2002] p2473b-2478a Hon Graham Giffard for some time. I lived in Hope Street in White Gum Valley and there is a great sense of community throughout that area. The bypass would carve that area in half. This presents an opportunity for the people who live in that area to continue to build a strong community. Along the bypass route is Clontarf Road and Clontarf Hill. The Fremantle eastern bypass would involve an open excavation, or a cut and cover tunnel, through the hill. Clontarf Hill is a significant landmark in the Fremantle area and has environmental, recreational and educational importance. The damage to this site would be seen in a number of ways, including damage to vegetation in the human movement corridor, the limestone ridge, habitat values, and the social amenity of and views from the hill. These would be diminished by the construction of the Fremantle eastern bypass through that area. Hon Barbara Scott interjected. Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD: A tunnel over a four-lane highway. The Fremantle eastern bypass was planned as part of the proposed north-south coastal route for regional traffic within the metropolitan region. It has links to Fremantle Road and Rockingham Road in the south and Stirling Highway and West Coast Highway to the north.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Perth Freight Link: Facts and Fiction Prepared by Peter Newman and Philip Jennings for the Beeliar Group – Professors for Environmental Responsibility
    For Release 8 Feb 2017 The Perth Freight Link: Facts and Fiction Prepared by Peter Newman and Philip Jennings for The Beeliar Group – Professors for Environmental Responsibility The supporters of Roe 8 and the Perth Freight Link (PFL) have been spreading misinformation and half truths about the developments. Their aim is to discredit alternatives by the selective use of the facts. This analysis of the Roe 8 and PFL myths provides a more complete picture. Myth 1: The PFL has been on the books for 60 years and no one objected until recently. The PFL was a Prime Minister Abbott “Captain’s Call” presented to the former Transport Minister, Dean Nalder, at a meeting in Canberra in early 2015, along with similar highly controversial roads in Melbourne and Sydney. The Melbourne East-West Link was rejected by the Victorian people at their last election. It is extremely unusual to have a road project proposed by a Commonwealth politician and it has disrupted all planning processes since it was dropped on Perth without any history or warning. The PFL is still a vague proposal and the detailed design has never been released publicly or assessed by the EPA. Roe 8 was included in the Metropolitan Region Scheme in 1963 without any public consultation or environmental impact assessment as part of a ring road bringing traffic to the coast between North Coogee and South Beach and then north to Fremantle. The Cockburn Wetlands Study of 1975 first suggested that the road should not proceed. The first environmental assessment was carried out by the EPA in 1978 and it recommended in its System Six report in 1980 that a new route be found because the proposed route was environmentally unacceptable.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council Held
    MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF THE COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY 16 JUNE 2015 AT 6.30PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS MELVILLE CIVIC CENTRE DISCLAIMER PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER BEFORE PROCEEDING: Any plans or documents in agendas and minutes may be subject to copyright. The express permission of the copyright owner must be obtained before copying any copyright material. Any statement, comment or decision made at a Council or Committee meeting regarding any application for an approval, consent or licence, including a resolution of approval, is not effective as an approval of any application and must not be relied upon as such. Any person or entity who has an application before the City must obtain, and should only rely on, written notice of the City’s decision and any conditions attaching to the decision, and cannot treat as an approval anything said or done at a Council or Committee meeting. Any advice provided by an employee of the City on the operation of written law, or the performance of a function by the City, is provided in the capacity of an employee, and to the best of that person’s knowledge and ability. It does not constitute, and should not be relied upon, as a legal advice or representation by the City. Any advice on a matter of law, or anything sought to be relied upon as representation by the City should be sought in writing and should make clear the purpose of the request. DISTRIBUTED: 19 June 2015 ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 16 JUNE 2015 CONTENTS PAGE Page Item Description Number ITEMS FROM FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT,
    [Show full text]
  • Perth-Freight-Link-Paper 8-June-2015
    Perth Freight Link: Making the right Investment A position paper for In Perth’s the City of Fremantle Freight Task by : Peter Newman and Cole Hendrigan Curtin University Sustainability Policy (CUSP) Institute June 8, 2015 This Position Paper was prepared for the City of Fremantle by Peter Newman and Cole Hendrigan of Curtin University Sustainability Policy (CUSP) Institute between April and June of 2015. Professor Newman (AO) is a globally respected expert in transport and land use planning, while Dr Hendrigan is a recent PhD graduate in the same subject matter with a decade of private and public experience. ©City of Fremantle, 2015 ii Perth Freight Link Newman & Hendrigan Contents I. ABSTRACT VII I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IX 1. Context ix 2. Understanding the Future Trends ix 3. Impacts of the Perth Freight Link ix 4. Options for the Port of Fremantle’s Freight Task xi 5. Conclusion xii II. INTRODUCTION 1 1. Fremantle: A Small Port with a Big Future 1 2. Fremantle’s Future: Change 2 3. Perth Freight Link: Consequences 3 4. Privatising the Fremantle Port Authority 4 III. THE ECONOMIC AND TRANSPORT CONTEXT 5 1. Introduction 5 2. Current Freight Task 5 3. Perth Freight Planning 5 IV. ABOUT PERTH FREIGHT LINK - ROUTES AND POLICY 16 1. Introduction 16 2. Why the PFL? 16 3. The Economics 16 4. Stated Benefi ts 16 5. Benefi t Cost Ratio 17 6. Time savings reconsidered 17 V. THE IMPACTS OF THE PERTH FREIGHT LINK 18 1. The Tollway Toll 18 2. Inner and Outer Harbour: Transport and Capacity Impacts 21 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Tony Weeks Submission Date: 2 Oct 2011 Re: Session 5: Environmental and Social Taxes
    Tax Forum Oct 2011 Submission Submitted by: Tony Weeks Submission date: 2 Oct 2011 Re: Session 5: Environmental and social taxes Summary This submission relates to transport infrastructure which forms part of the Session 5: Environmental and Social Taxes discussion. It indirectly addresses the discussion question of “are there ways in which governments could use specific taxes to ensure that people take appropriate account of environmental impacts in their decision making?” After reading seven submissions from a diverse range of stakeholders I was struck by the similarities between the concerns and proposed solutions to improve infrastructure. However, none of the submissions address the fundamental issue of who controls the money. The purse strings for infrastructure projects are controlled by the State and Federal governments. Whilst it is an exaggeration to say that the tax summit is doomed because this issue is not addressed, it is probably fair to say that implementation of solutions proposed will be suboptimal as execution will be piecemeal and taken for political reasons such as election promises. Infrastructure projects cut across Federal and State lines and should be prioritised according to need and viability by an independent body which has representatives from all stakeholders and assesses projects on triple bottom line, social, environmental and economic criteria. A case study, the Roe Highway extension in Perth is attached. Whilst the final decision to proceed hasn’t been made as the project is currently being assessed by the EPA it nevertheless illustrates the folly of allowing politicians to determine which infrastructure projects should be implemented. The project is controversial and has been on the books for over 10 years as debate rages between Local Government Authorities, environmentalists and State Government over the need for the highway.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Special Meeting of Electors Held in the Main Hall, Melville Civic Centre, 10 Almondbury Road, Booragoon, Commencing 6.30Pm on Monday, 17 August 2015
    MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF ELECTORS HELD IN THE MAIN HALL, MELVILLE CIVIC CENTRE AT 6.30PM ON MONDAY 17 AUGUST 2015 DISTRIBUTED: 4 SEPTEMBER 2015 10 Almondbury Road Booragoon WA 6154 Postal Address: Locked Bag 1, Booragoon WA 6154 Tel: 08 9364 0666 Fax: 08 9364 0285 Email: [email protected] Web: www.melvillecity.com.au MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF ELECTORS HELD IN THE MAIN HALL, MELVILLE CIVIC CENTRE, 10 ALMONDBURY ROAD, BOORAGOON, COMMENCING 6.30PM ON MONDAY, 17 AUGUST 2015. 1. OFFICIAL OPENING His Worship the Mayor, R Aubrey, welcomed Ratepayers and Electors of the City of Melville and opened the meeting at 6.30pm. His Worship the Mayor advised the meeting had been called to discuss Roe 8 and the Perth Freight Link and the impacts to City of Melville Residents and that no other matter could be addressed at this meeting. 2. PRESENT His Worship the Mayor R Aubrey COUNCILLORS WARD Deputy Mayor Cr N Foxton University Cr M Reynolds University Cr R Aubrey, Cr D Macphail City Cr C Robartson, Cr R Willis Bull Creek/Leeming Cr J Barton, Cr S Taylor-Rees Bicton/Attadale Cr P Phelan Palmyra/Melville/Willagee Cr N Pazolli Applecross/Mount Pleasant IN ATTENDANCE Dr S Silcox Chief Executive Officer Mr M Tieleman Director Corporate Services Ms L Hartill A/Director Community Development Mr J Christie Director Technical Services Mr S Cope Director Urban Planning Mr L Hitchcock Executive Manager Legal Services Mr J Clark Governance & Compliance Program Manager Mr N Fimmano Governance & Property Officer Representatives from Main Roads Mr M Hazebroek Senior Project Director Ms N Walton Executive Director, Strategy and Communications Mr C Rickard Community Relations Manager There were 179 Electors of the City of Melville in attendance.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into the Decision to Commit Funding to the Perth Freight Link Project
    North Lake Residents Submission Inquiry into the decision to commit funding to the Perth Freight Link project Proposed Roe Highway Extension Road Reserve through North & Bibra Lakes August 2015 Committee Secretary Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee PO Box 6100 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Australia 20th August 2015 RE: Inquiry into the decision to commit funding to the Perth Freight Link project: Roe Highway Stage 8 extension / Kwinana Freeway to Stock Road, WA. Dear Mr. Watling, The North Lake Residents are opposed to any form of Roe Highway extension through North Lake and Bibra Lake, and the following key points of this submission should be considered in relation to this inquiry. We also ask that the committee investigate why Commonwealth funding has already been allocated to the Perth Freight Link stage 1 (Roe Highway Stage 8), prior to Federal environmental approval under the EPBC act. This stage of the freight link, clearly desecrates and violates the environmental and indigenous cultural significance of North and Bibra Lakes. Our website www.savenorthlake.com.au also forms part of this submission as it contains relevant government and community reports, videos, photos and information that support the case for the protection of this environmentally significant and cultural heritage area. The website acts as a ‘library’ to which reports referenced in this submission can be viewed or downloaded. We request that committee visit our website before reading this submission and view the short videos in the video tab www.savenorthlake.com.au/videos.shtml The videos highlight the activities and events that have occurred there, including the community and Indigenous opposition to the Proposed Roe Highway extension through North Lake and Bibra Lake.
    [Show full text]
  • To the Office of the Appeals Convener Environmental Protection Act 1986
    To the Office of the Appeals Convener Environmental Protection Act 1986 Appeal form 1. Name: Senator Scott Ludlam 2. Proposal to which appeal relates Proposal description: Roe Highway Extension Location: Jandakot to Coolbellup Name of Proponent: Main Roads Western Australia 3. Type of appeal Environmental Protection Authority Report Number Report 1489 Date published September 2013 Appeal to the EPA Report 1489: Approval of the Roe Highway Extension OVERVIEW This appeal covers 19 reasons for appeal. The first 17 are described in detail. The final two are self-explanatory: 1. The EPA made its decision before the Strategic Environmental Assessment of Perth and Peel has been completed 2. The EPA made its decision before the critical Population Viability Assessment of Carnaby’s Cockatoos report was released, due in late September 3. Misleading information about Aboriginal consultation and heritage and cultural values 4. Cumulative environmental impacts have not been measured 5. Key environmental factors were inadequately and incorrectly addressed 6. Human health impacts were not considered 7. The offsets program is unacceptable: it is not based on scientific evidence that it will work or even be possible to implement 8. The precautionary principle has not been considered or applied 9. The principle of intergenerational equity has not been considered or applied 10. The principle of the conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity has not been considered 11. Principles relating to improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms were not considered adequately 12. The project assessed by the EPA was falsely and misleadingly described by the proponent as the Preferred Option 13. The rationale for the project and a substantial number of justifications are inaccurate or misleading and remain unquestioned by the EPA report 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1180/41
    Western Australian -1111 Planning Commission January 2011 Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1180/41 Cockburn Coast District Structure Plan Submissions Transcript of Hearings Shire of Cockburn GOVERNMENT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1180/41 Cockburn Coast District Structure Plan Submissions Transcript of Hearings City of Cockburn Western Australian Planning GOVERNMENT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Commission February 2011 © State of Western Australia Internet: http://www.wa.gov.au Published by the Western Australian Planning Commission, Albert Facey House, 469 Wellington Street, Perth Western Australia 6000 MRS Amendment 1180/41 Submissions Transcript of Hearings File 809-2-23-13 Pt. 2 & 3 Published February 2011 ISBN 0 7309 9688 3 Internet: http://www.planning.wa.gov.au e-mail: corporate @planning.wa.gov.au Phone: (08) 9264 7777 Fax: (08)92647566 TTY: (08)92647535 Copies of this document are available in alternative formats on application to the disability services co-ordinator. Contents Submissions Transcript of Hearings Submissions Submission 1 Government of Western Australia Department of Planning Our ref: 805/2/1/40P247 Queries: Brianna Sharp (9264 7759) 24th February 2010 Secretary Western Australian Planning Commission 469 Wellington St PERTH WA 6000 Dear Mr Evans, METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME AMENDMENT 1180/41: COCKBURN COAST DISTRICT STRUCTURE PLAN AREA Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on the Metropolitan Scheme Amendmentfor the Cockburn Coast District Structure Plan. The Proposed MRS Amendment is to rezone the Industrial area of North Coogee to Deferred Urban, and to realign the Primary Regional Road Reservation. State Strategic Policy previously commented on the Environmental analysis that was undertakenfor the proposed Cockburn Coast Structure Plan, and made a number of recommendations inSeptember 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Leach Highway (High Street) Fremantle Upgrade (Carrington Street to Stirling Highway)
    Leach Highway (High Street) Fremantle upgrade (Carrington Street to Stirling Highway) urail suomisston inTrascrumure /Australia or reaerat Tunaing August 2012 — • -.1111•111K1 mainroads vir WESTERN AUSTRALIA SUBMISSION COVERSHEET This coversheet should be included with all submissions to Infrastructure Australia. Please complete all fields. Organisation: Main Roads Western Australia Date: 10 August 2012 Submission title: Leach Highway (High Street) Fremantle Upgrade (Carrington Street to Stirling Highway) Author(s): Main Roads WA Contact person: Maurice Cammack Position: A/Manager Project Programming Postal address: PO Box 6202, EAST PERTH State: Western Australia Postcode: 6892 Email address: [email protected] Telephone: - --- Please email your submission to: submissionsinfrastructureaustralia.dov.au Two (2) hard copies (one marked as the original) to: SUBMISSIONS Infrastructure Australia GPO Box 594 Canberra ACT 2600 Ph: 02 8114 1900 CONFIDENTIALITY If this submission contains material which you believe is confidential, this material should marked as confidential on this coversheet and the reason for claiming confidentiality must be provided. The material must also be marked as confidential in the body of the submission. Infrastructure Australia may review claims of confidentiality with the proponent. Document: Reason: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Please acknowledge the following submission guidelines: • This submission conforms with Infrastructure Australia's requirements as set out in Better Infrastructure Decision- Making: Guidelines for making submissions to Infrastructure Australia's infrastructure planning process, through Infrastructure Australia's Reform and Investment Framework (available at www.infrastructureaustralia.qov.au ), • Where any third party material has been incorporated into the submission, the appropriate rights to use this material have been obtained. • Infrastructure Australia may review claims of confidentiality with the proponent.
    [Show full text]
  • Ordinary Meeting of the Council
    MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF THE COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY 21 JULY 2015 AT 6.30PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS MELVILLE CIVIC CENTRE DISCLAIMER PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER BEFORE PROCEEDING: Any plans or documents in agendas and minutes may be subject to copyright. The express permission of the copyright owner must be obtained before copying any copyright material. Any statement, comment or decision made at a Council or Committee meeting regarding any application for an approval, consent or licence, including a resolution of approval, is not effective as an approval of any application and must not be relied upon as such. Any person or entity who has an application before the City must obtain, and should only rely on, written notice of the City’s decision and any conditions attaching to the decision, and cannot treat as an approval anything said or done at a Council or Committee meeting. Any advice provided by an employee of the City on the operation of written law, or the performance of a function by the City, is provided in the capacity of an employee, and to the best of that person’s knowledge and ability. It does not constitute, and should not be relied upon, as a legal advice or representation by the City. Any advice on a matter of law, or anything sought to be relied upon as representation by the City should be sought in writing and should make clear the purpose of the request. DISTRIBUTED: 24 JULY 2015 ORDINARY MEETING OF THE COUNCIL 21 JULY 2015 CONTENTS PAGE Page Item Description Number URBAN PLANNING P15/3644
    [Show full text]
  • Decision to Commit Funding to the Perth Freight Link Project
    The Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee Decision to commit funding to the Perth Freight Link project May 2016 © Commonwealth of Australia 2016 ISBN 978-1-76010-414-6 This document was prepared by the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport and printed by the Senate Printing Unit, Department of the Senate, Parliament House, Canberra. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License. The details of this licence are available on the Creative Commons website: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/au/. Membership of the committee Members Senator Glenn Sterle, Chair Western Australia, ALP Senator the Hon Bill Heffernan, Deputy Chair New South Wales, LP Senator Joe Bullock (to 13 April 2016) Western Australia, ALP Senator Alex Gallacher (from 18 April 2016) South Australia, ALP Senator Sue Lines Western Australia, ALP Senator Peter Whish-Wilson Tasmania, AG Senator John Williams New South Wales, NATS Other Senators participating in this inquiry Senator Chris Back Western Australia, LP Senator Scott Ludlam Western Australia, AG Senator Linda Reynolds Western Australia, LP Senator Dio Wang Western Australia, PUP iii Secretariat Mr Tim Watling, Secretary Ms Bonnie Allan, Principal Research Officer Ms Erin East, Principal Research Officer (to 24 November 2015) Mr Nicholas Craft, Principal Research Officer (from 12 October 2015) Ms Trish Carling, Senior Research Officer Ms Erin Pynor, Senior Research Officer (from 26
    [Show full text]
  • The City of Cockburn - Local Planning Strategy
    THE CITY OF COCKBURN - LOCAL PLANNING STRATEGY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 REQUIREMENT This Local Planning Strategy is in support of the Council's proposed Town Planning Scheme No. 3 and is to be read in conjunction with the Scheme. 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE STRATEGY 1.2.1 Approach At the Core of the Local Planning Policy Framework of Model Scheme Text is the Local Planning Strategy which sets out the long-term planning directions for the municipality and provides the rationale for the zones and other provisions of the scheme. In addition to the Local Planning Strategy, the Scheme provides for Local Planning Policies which set out the general policies of the Council on matters relevant to the scheme. 1.2.2 Local Planning Strategy The Local Planning Strategy is intended to become a central feature of the scheme setting out the Council's general aims and intentions for future long-term growth and change. Whereas the scheme has a 5 year timescale, the strategy will look ahead 10 to 15 years into the future. The Local Planning Strategy includes the basic structure in terms of future population and employment; the broad strategies for housing, employment, shopping and business activities; and proposals for transport, parks, regional open space and other public uses, reflected in the Scheme Map. Refer to Figure 30. The Council has adopted a Local Planning Strategy which most suits the needs of its district and local issues and includes, but is not limited to the following matters:- • a description of the key characteristics of the municipality, its regional
    [Show full text]