MRS 1236-57 Amendment Report on submissions

Submissions

Submission

Sent; Wednesday, 24 October 2012 1:12 PMTo; corporateSubject; Ref: 833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)- Metropolitan Region Scheme ProposedAmendment 1236/57

Western Power wishes to advise the following in respect to the above mentioned proposal.

1. There are no objections to the above proposal, however, the following should beconsidered, prior to any of works commencing.

Please note:Western Power must be contacted on 13 10 87, if your proposed works involve:

A)Any changes to existing ground levels around poles and structures.

B)Working under overhead powerlines and/or over underground cables.

Western Power is obliged to point out that any change to the existing (power) system;if required, isthe responsibility of the individual developer.

Regards,Customer Service OfficerConnections AdministrationWestern Power - Locked Bag 2520 Perth WA 6001 [map]

T: 13 10 87 I F: (08) 9225 2073E: works.admin.qeneral(a).westernpower.com.auW: westernpower.com.auTwitter: twitter.com/westernpowerwa

Submission 2

Subject: ref: 833-2-1-56 Ptl (RLS/0319) MRS Amendment 1236/57

Thank you for the opportunity for the Department of Transport to comment on theproposed Scheme Amendment noted above.

The Department has no comment.

regards

Tony RadfordSenior Transport Planner | Integrated Transport Planning | Department ofTransportLevel 8, 140 William Street, Perth WA 6000Tel: (08) 6551 6104 Fax: (08) 6551 6947 Mob:Email: [email protected] | Web: www.transport.wa.qov.au

Sybmissiori 3Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Water

Enquiries: Celine Stacker

Tel: 6250 8045

Western Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING

Attention: Tracey Scroop 2 9 OCT 2012

FILE mi 03^1

Dear Sir/Madam

RE: WIETROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57 -BUSH FOREVER AREA DEFINITION CLAUSE INSERTION AND REMOVALCLAUSE 16 (1 A)(A) FOR NEW SIMILAR CLAUSE INSERTION 16(1A)(A) AND(BA) IN THE METROPOLITAN SCHEME TEXT

Thank you for the above referral dated 19 October 2012. The Department of Water(DoW) has assessed the proposal and has no comment to offer at this stage of theplanning process.

If you wish to discuss the matter further, please contact Celine Stocker on 6250 8045.

Yours sincerely,

PROGRAM MANAGERLAND USE PLANNINGSWAN AVON REGION

26 October 2012

Swan Avon Region7 Ellam Street Victoria Park Western Australia 6100Telephone (08) 6250 8000 Facsimile (08) 6250 8050

www. water, wa.gov.au

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING

1 9 OCT 2012

052.FILE.

Planning and Development Act 2005

Section 57 Amendment (Minor)Form 57

SubmissionMetropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba| in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

I

To: SecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

OFFICE USE ONLY

| SUBMissToN NUMBER |

)y[ fiori 4

Name

Address Postcode

Contact phone number ..(&fo..cD.(Q , Email address .SMi

* „ ¦-okSubmission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose/rather than bound)

^(ImMMtZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

turn over to complete your submission

(Submission continued. Please attach additional pages if required)

You should be aware that:

o The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may be

subject to applications for access under the act.

g in the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies of yoursubmission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.

To be sicanedl by

Signature

the submission

Shelley Brinda!Corridor & HeritageDate

Coordinator"

z

Note: Submissions IViUS l be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

Submission 5Government of Western AustraltaDepartment of itidigenous Affairs

ENQUIRIES : Joseph Aldis- Ph 6551 8029

[email protected]

OUR REF: 2012/D21262 departm£!i!7' Of py

- I MOV 201ÿYOUR REF: 833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)

Mr Neil ThomsonSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Dear Mr Thomson

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMEMDMEWT 1236/S7 BUSHFOREVER AREA DEFINITION CLAUSE IMSERTION AMD REMOVAL OF CLAUSE16 (1a){a) FOR NEW SIMILAR CLAUSE INSERTION 16 (laMa) AND (ba) IN THEMETROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME TEXT

Thank you for your letter dated 19 October 2012 regarding amendment 1236/57 to theMetropolitan Region Scheme.

I wish to advise that the Department of Indigenous Affairs has no objections with theproposed amendments.

Kind Regards

JOSEPH ALDISFOR A/DIRECTOR LAND

31 October 2012

Ground Floor, 151 Royal Street, East Perth, Western Australia, 6004PO box 3153, East Perth, Western Australia, 6892

Telephone 1300 651 077 Facsimile (08) 6551 8088www.dia.wa.gov.au

Submission 6M Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Indigenous Affatrs

ENQUIRIES : - Ph 6551 8075


- 5 MOV 2012OUR REF: 12/0011-02

FILE ^ O 3-2 ^YOUR REF: 833-2-1-56 PT 1 (RLS/0319)


Dear Mr Thomson

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57 BUSHFOREVER AREA DEFINITION CLAUSE INSERTION AND REMOVAL OF CLAUSE16 (1A) (A| FOR NEW SIMILAR CLAUSE INSERTION 16 (1A) (A) AND (BA) IN THEMETROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME TEXT

I write with reference to your letter dated 19 October 2012 to the Director General of theDepartment of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) regarding the proposed Amendment 1236/57 toa Bush Forever area definition clause in the Metropolitan Region Scheme text (theAmendment). I will respond on behalf of the Director General to your query.

Thank you for the information regarding the removal of clause 16 (la) (a) and theinsertion of a similar clause, 16 (la) (a) and (ba), in the Metropolitan Region Schemetext. While the Amendment will not have a direct impact on the Aboriginal heritage ofthe Metropolitan area, there are spiritual and archaeological values preserved withinareas defined as Bush Forever sites that may benefit from early identification and

DIA will provide advice regarding strategies to minimize the impact of any activities onthe heritage values of individual Bush Forever areas as required and it is hoped thatthese values are incorporated in any agreements and/or management plans.

Please do not hesitate to contact this office should you require any further informationregarding the Aboriginal Heritage Act, 1972.

Kind Regards

planning.

Manager Heritage Advice South

29 October 2012

Ground Floor, 151 Royal Street, East Perth, Western Australia, 6004PO box 3153, East Perth, Western Australia, 6892

Telephone 1300 651 077 Facsimile (08) 6551 8088www.dia.wa.gov.au

Submission 7Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of Water

looking after all our water needs

Your ref; 833-2-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)

Our ref: RF1333-02

Enquiries; Brett Dunn

31 October 2012

Western Australian Planning Commission140 William StreetPerth, WA 6000

Attn: Tracey Scoop

Dear Tracey

RE: METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57 -BUSH FOREVER AREA DEFINITION CLAUSE INSERTION

Thank you for the above referral received with correspondence dated 19 October 2012.The Department of Water wishes to advise it has no objection to the proposal.

If you wish to discuss the above further please contact the undersigned at theDepartment's Mandurah office on 9550 4222.

Yours sincerely

Brett DunnA/Program iianager - Urban Water iManagementPeel Region

Kwinana Peel Region107 Breakwater Parade Mandurah Ocean Marina Mandurah Western Australia 6210

PO Box 332 Mandurah Western Australia 6210Telephone (08) 9550 4222 Facsimile (08) 9581 4560

www.water.wa.gov.auwa.gov.au

H I Submission 8STATE ¦HERITAGEOFFICE

Working on behalf of the Heritage Counoii to recognise, conserve, adapt and celebrate our State's unique cuiturai heritage

30 October 2012voun rffOur rb:

ENQUIRIES

833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)CI 04/29665Ryan Chu(08) 6552 4152

Chief Executive OfficerWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Attention: Ms Tracey Scroop


- 5 NOV 2012

FILE ^Sl^LlDear Tracey

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME AMENDMENT 1236/57 BUSH FOREVER

Thank you for your correspondence received on 22 October 2012 regarding proposedScheme Amendment No. 1236/57, The proposed Scheme Amendment has beenconsidered for its potential impact on heritage places within the Scheme area. There is noobjection to the proposal.

The State Heritage Office understands the benefits of limiting referrals in instances wherethe landowner and WAPC have a written agreement or where a management plan is inplace. There is the potential, however, for such an approach to lead landowners intooverlooking the requirement for other statutory referrals or approvals. If it is not already astandard practice, it is recommended that the written agreement or management planmakes note of any referrals or approvals that may be required for works at the site.

Should you have any queries regarding this advice please contact Ryan Chu [email protected] or on 6552 4049.

Yours sincerely

Callum CroftonMANAGER LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES

www.stateheritage.wa.gov.au

[email protected]

Bairds Building 491 Wellington Street Perth P0 Box 7479 Cloisters Square P0 WA 6850 P: (08) 6552 4000 F: (08) 6552 4001 FREECALL (regional): 1800 524 000

Planning and Development Act 2005i"j ^Qy 2012


SubmissioniVletropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 {1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

To: SecretaryWestern Australian Planning Commission

OFFICE USE ONLY

| SUBMISSION NUMBER |

p°e?tobwa2otoiSubmission §

Name .. .C.ity. of .Qosnell.s(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...P?..B.0X.86.2: S0.^8.1!5:,^Postcode6990

Contact phone numberEmail address!',eX?.'?®R?.sP.®H?v'au

Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional Information be loose rather than bound)

Amended text 1:

Clause 3 amendedIn clause 3(1) insert in alphabetical order:'Bush Forever area' means an area referred to in clause 28 A(2);

Comment:

The City considers this amended text administrative, and provides no specific comment.

Amended text 2:

Clause 16 amendedDelete clause 16(1 a)(a) and insert:

a) permitted development other than development in a Bush Forever area;orba) permitted development in a Bush Forever area carried out in accordancewith -(i)a written agreement between the Commission and the public authority;or(ii)a management plan approved by the Commission; or

Comment:

The City supports the proposed amendment.



The proposed deletion of clause 16 (1a)(a) and the insertion of a new similar clause 16 (1a)(a)and (ba) will streamline the development approval processes for development proposals onreserved land owned or vested in public authorities within Bush Forever areas, whilstmaintaining all other procedures for development proposals with Bush Forever areas in bothzoned and reserved land.

In this instance, ba) is considered a significant positive initiative, as Clause 16 will not nowpreclude appropriate development in a Bush Forever area, which may include recreational,interpretive or management infrastructure. The provision of a mechanism for such potentialdevelopment is considered appropriate; an agreement or management plan that would besubject to the endorsement of the WAPC provides for a considered and, potentially, morestrategic and contextual approach to such development.

Amended text 2:

At the end of Part III insert:Part IVA - Bosh Forever areas28A. Bush Foii-ever areas(1)The purpose of this clause is to identify regionally significant bushland as Bush Foreverareas.(2)Land is identified as a Bush Forever area in the manner described in the Table column 1.

(3) The identification of an area as a Bush Forever area -(a)operates in addition to the provisions of this Scheme applying toany underlying zone or reserve and any general provisions of theScheme; and(b)does not operate to zone or reserve that area.

Comment;

The City considers this amended text administrative, and provides no specific comment

• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may besubject to applications for access under the act.

o In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies of yoursubmission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.

Column 1Legend on Scheme Map

Coiumn 2Area

All land hatched Bush Forever area

To be signed bv person(s) making the submission

Signature

NolUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - hltp://www.planning.wa.gov.au

Submission 10

I Government of Western AustraliaI Department of Mines and Petroleum

Your ref:833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)

Our ref:A1763/200801

Enquiries:Colin Strickland - Ph 9222 3139 Fax 9222 3633

Email:[email protected],gov.au

department of planning

- 8 MOV 2012

FILEMr Neil ThomsonSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Dear Mr Thomson

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57 -BUSH FOREVER AREA DEFIMITIOM CLAUSE INSERTION AND REMOVALOF CLAUSE 16 (1A)(A) FOR NEW SIMILAR CLAUSE INSERTION 16 (1A)(A)AND (BA) IN THE MRS TEXT

Thank you for your letter dated 19 October 2012 regarding the aboveMetropolitan Region Scheme minor amendment.

The Geological Survey of Western Australia (GSWA) has assessed thisproposal on behalf of the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) withrespect to access to mineral and petroleum resources, geothermal energy andbasic raw materials, and has no comment to make in this regard.

Yours sincerely

Rick RogersonExecutive DirectorGEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

7 November 2012

004058.colin.Strickland.docx - PerthRelease Classification: - Addressee and Within Government Only

Mineral House 100 Plain Street East Perth Western Australia 6004Telephone +61 8 9222 3333 Facsimile +61 8 9222 3862

www.dmp.wa.gov.au

wviAW.wa.gov.auABN 69 410 335 356

inquiries: Matthew Cain - 9411 3573Your Ref: 833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)

13 November 2012

The SecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001Attention: Neil Thomson

DEPARTMEK'T OF PLANNING

1 4 NOV 2012

file RLS/O^4_~1~-

Submission 11

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57 BUSHFOREVER AREA DEFINITION CLAUSE INSERTION AND REMOVAL OF CLAUSE16 (1A)(A) FOR NEW SIMILAR CLAUSE INSERTION 16 (1A)(A) AND (BA) IN THEMETROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME TEXT

I refer to your correspondence dated 19 October 2012 concerning the MetropolitanRegion Scheme ("MRS") Amendment mentioned above. The City of Cockburn ("City")has assessed the proposed amendment and provides the following feedback:

The proposed changes to the MRS Text are welcomed by the City, and are seen asnecessary to keeping cohesion between the MRS Text and relevant MRS Maps andstate planning policy relevant to Bush Forever.

The protection of Bush Forever land has been of great significance over recent years,due to the high ecological value and biodiversity these area represent on the SwanCoastal Plane. The continued protection and management of Bush Forever sites isconsistent with the State Planning Strategy (1997), ensuring a balance is foundbetween economic growth and the continued protection of the environment.

Further to this, Bush Forever sites are consistent with both State Planning Policy 2 -Environment and Natural Resources Policy and the recent Strategic Planningframework for Perth's future growth, Directions 2031 and Beyond (2011). Thesepolicies promote the continued protection of 'Green Networks', particularly areas ofhigh biodiversity and/or conservation value.

The City's key suggestion is that there could be additional clarification made in relationto what constitutes a 'written agreement1 and what constitutes a 'management plan' inthe new clauses introduced into the MRS Text. Standardisation of the extent andexpectation of these instruments is important to consistent treatment of Bush Foreverissues into the future.

Yours Faithfully,

Dear Sir,

ANDREW TROSICMANAGER STRATEGIC PLANNING

9 Coleville Crescent, Spearwood WA 6163, PO Box 1215, Bibra Lake DC WA 6965, P (08) 9411 3444 F (08) 9411 3333. ABN 27 471 341 209.



Submission)Wletropolitan Region Scheme Amendmenit 1238/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 18 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text


Name ./JWj/f 11 ^....&(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)v/ '' J '

Address . .'.P...ft I'll.V.0.4. kH.Qj...$9.9.ML Postcode .(

Contact phone number^H.Zr.Email address S/.!I!J.?/)].:S?;T?rf (1?u/i{-(jC>v1' "cia '

Submission (Please attach additional pages if required, it is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

.I... .thz.... £/. ^.. w* (y?. !?.u$.. :t!yk....fa&r.v.

...... fesQr,,S. htfkt.l ...of.. .7^v?r. • 5 fx.. B>. Ok ^r3.... m&p,.. .0, k^.c Qcj

h.Lj..... ..Qjj&.c.l&y...... Pi.. ft. S...

...17^.....?/..fjy....iwr.s,.,.49...9. "kj.'$tx. .£>.

cs... fer . CC&fi.<58r.. Ib... fev..,

v::cl&..0&c....dj^rZ..(?..cm....pru. fxtx.\&u$..U).Oo^.O.^d. .j.tfz .. Msk M.C&. y&c.. I.&tid.-.. cJ.

..[.s.... W^rvjfc.u//. .. a.. frfrv^v.

a.cj.^QjK-. chrSfrif:^:.... ^.^..mkCxh..,.....(. ,a..cf. n. {iCjJM. fW.C. .rr, at^.p. r^SCZsl-...

OFFICE USE ONLY

I SUBMISSION NUMBER j

Submission 12

turn over to complete your submission!

(Submission continued. Piease attach additional pages if required)


o The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of/nfofmaf/on/4cf'/992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC maybesubject to applications for access under the act.


To be signed fov persotifs) making the submission

SignatureDate .l.C(.:ll.-.S7.0.L2rr......

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm| on 18 Januan/ 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected],au; Website-htlp:/7www.planning.wa.gov.au

Submission

Your Ref: 833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)Our Ref: FTA2162: 2013/03948

South West AboriginalLand & Sea Council

13

27 February 2013



2 8 FEB 2013

FILE L & / 0 5o<L

Dear Neil

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57 BUSHFOREVER AREA DEFINITION CLAUSE INSERTION AND REMOVAL OF CLAUSE16(1a)(a) FOR NEW SIMILAR CLAUSE INSERTION 16(1a)(a) and (ba) IN THEMETROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME TEXT

The South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC) is the registered nativetitle representative body for the Whadjuk People (WAD242/2011).

On behalf of its clients, SWALSC tabled this matter at the Working Party Meeting(WPM) held on 20 February 2013 and obtained their instructions and submission.

We understand that the purpose of the Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment(MRS) 1236/57 is to amend the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) by inserting a newclause in the text to define the Bush Forever area overlay that already exists on theMRS Map, as a result of MRS amendment 1082/33.

Of concern to our clients, is the insertion of Clause 16 (ba) and permitted development-- in a Bush Forever area carried out in accordance with (I) a written agreement between

the Commission and public authority: or (ii) a management plan approved by theCommission.

Bush Forever areas are of immense significance to the Whadjuk People and they seek,as a matter of vital importance, prior consultation with the Commission on any writtenagreement between the Commission and the public authority. Consultation includesdirect involvement in any management plans established by public authority.Attendance at Whadjuk Working Party meetings is requested by our clients.

SWALSC requests that the amendment incorporates the concerns of our clients andthat any written agreement or management plan is subject to consultation andengagement with the Traditional Owners.

Yours sincerely

Carolyn FennelleLegal OfficerSouth West Aboriginal Land & Sea Council

Telephone: 9358 7400 » 1800 517 617 • Facsimilie: 9358 7499

1490 Albany Highway, Cannington • PO Box 585 Cannington, WA 6987

ICN 3832www.noongar.org.auABN 42 485 265 673

48 Old Perth Road, Bassendean WA 6054PO Box 87, Bassendean WA 6934Tel: (08) 9377 8000 Fax: (08) 9279 4257Email: [email protected]

Sulbmissioii 14

Our ref; OLET-3472312LUAP/ZNNG/1: BR

Your ref; 833-2-156 Ptl (RLS /0319)

Western Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Deal- Sir/Madam

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236 / 57

I refer to your letter of 19 October 2012 relating to the above and enclose a copy of theTown's Submission.

Should you wish to discuss any aspect of this matter further, I may be contacted on93778005.

Yours faithfully

Ba&u/i 'fosJ

BRIAN REEDMANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES30 November 2012


3 DEC 2012

FILE (U-S I O 3\0l


Section i7 Amendment (Minoir)Form 57


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for Wew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Riletropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

SUBMISSION NUMBER j

Sybmission 14

Namei2£eD : MflN/'ee£, .MueLcmebiJ..TOWhi of 6^66e^0WKriNTCLEARLY)1 1 -

Address •P0 6^-87 ... Postcode ..(o.ri.OT^

Contact phone number.. .'.'I t?. AEmail address'

Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

. iMt.. .Co. uwol.. boppafis.

.... Am. awdMOA. t.dedUM.. wttki

...faiaXJT.tel'kfc..-





o The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may besubject to applications for access under the act.


To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Dato ife.lill) r

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Signature

Contacts: Telephone-(08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 [email protected]; Website - http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

vM Submission 15ENQUIRIES TO: Rachel Marie (9273 6528)

Strategic Planning, Sustainability & Heritage ServicesYOURREF: 833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)

OUR REF:PLA0066

10 December 2012CITY OF VINCENT

Neil ThomsonSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Administration & Civic Centre244 Vincent Street (Cnr Loftus)

Leederville, Western Australia 6007PO Box 82, Leederville WA 6902

Telephone (08) 9273 6000Facsimile (08) 9273 6099

Email: [email protected]: www.vincent.wa.gov.au

Dear Mr Thomson,

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Metropolitan Regional SchemeProposed Amendment 1236/57.

The information provided has been reviewed by the City's officers and given that theCity has no Bush Forever sites, the City has no comment in relation to this proposedamendment.

The City strongly encourages the retention and re-establishment of native vegetationwherever possible.

Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact Planning Officer(Strategic), Rachel Marie on 9273 6528.

Yours sincerely

CARLIE ELDRIDGEDIRECTORDEVELOPMENT SERVICES

H:\Devl&Env\Plng&Bld\Strategic Planning\Letter\2012\Letter- WAPC_MRS 1236.57.docx

"Enhancing and celebrating our diverse community"

Submission 16

ABN 92 614 728 214

Enquiries;Jason Moore on 9273 3500Our Reference; TPN/067-04 M12/30101

19 December 2012

Western Australian Planning Commission140 William StreetPERTH WA 6000

DEPART WENTf T PLANIWJU

2 I 2012

I FILE/ 0^)4

Dear Sir / Madam,

Metropolitan Region Scheme Proposed Amendment 1236/57 BushForever Area Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16((1a)(a) for New Similar Clause 16(1a)(a| an (ba) in the MetropolitanScheme Text.

The above matter was considered at the Council Meeting of the 11December 2012 and Council adopted the following resolution:

Council Resolution I Committee Recommendation IRecommendation to Committee

Council

Advises the Western Australian Planning Commission that itsupports the proposed Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment1226/57 entitled "Bush Forever Area Definition Clause Insertion andRemoval of Clause 16 (1a)(a) for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)and (ba) in the Metropolitan Scheme Text."

Should you have any queries regarding the above, you can contact me [email protected] or on 9273 3500.

; Yours faithfully

Ui'-Gabriela PoezynManager Strategic Planning

71 Stirling Highway NedlandsWA 6009 ° PO Box 9 Nedlands WA 6909T 08 9273 3500 F 08 9273 3670 E [email protected] Printed on 100 per cent recycled paper. nedlands.wa.gov.au

Submission 17

Jikmainroads7 t? O'"P 17 T> X1 \ TTt'T^TI AT T AWE8TERN AUSTRALIA

ABN: 50 860 676 021

Enquiries: Lynne Wrigglesworth on (08) 9323 4544Our Ref: 05/4050 (D12#443765)Your Ref: 833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)

27 December 2012

The SecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

DEFAP'TMFA'T OF PLANNING

2 JAN 2013

fii p <S.|-S Uzsit:ATTENTION: TRACEY SCROOP

Dear Tracey

MRS PROPOSED AfyiENDIWENT 1236/57 - BUSH FOREVER AREA DEFINITION

Thank you for your letter of 19 October 2012 inviting Main Roads comments on theabove proposed Metropolitan Region Scheme amendment.

Main Roads environmental officers have reviewed this proposed amendment and haveno additional comments to make.

If you require any further information please contact Planning Information Officer LynneWrigglesworth on (08) 9323 4544.

Yours faithfully

A/MANAGER ROAD PLANNING

Don Aitken Centre, Waterloo Crescent, East Perth or PO Box 6202 EAST PERTH Western Australia 6892Telephone: 138 138 Facsimile: (08) 9323 4547 TTY: (08) 9428 2230

Email: [email protected] Website: www.mainroads.wa.gov.au

t A I SXb

241 Rokeby Road SUB1ACO WA 6008

PO Box 270 SUBIACO WA 6904

Telephone: 08 9237 9222 Facsimile: 08 9237 9200Email: [email protected] Website: www.subiaco.wa.gov.au

All communications should be directed to theChief Executive Officer

Submission 18

CITY OF

BIACOEnquiries: Elyse SaraceniFile: KB; cj; A/601-02 DEPARTMENT Of PLAHNiHG.19 December 2012

2 ^ DEC 2012

RLEWest Australian Planning Commission140 William StreetPERTH WA 6000

Dear Sir/Madam,

METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEilE AMENDMENT 1236/57 - BUSH FOREVERAREAS

The above matter was considered by Council at its meeting of 18 December 2012.

At the meeting Council resolved as follows:That Council advise the Western Australian Planning Commission of its in principlesupport for Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57 relating to BushForever subject to the following comment:1. That any agreement or management plan between the Commission and a public

authority as referenced in Clause 16 (1a)(ba) is required to be updated regularly.

if you have any queries regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact ElyseSaraceni, Coordinator Strategic Planning on 9237 9296.

Yours faithfully,

K/DlIENT SERVICES

Printed on Australian made 100 per cent recycled paper.



Submission(,

Wletropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

0 0 JAN 20i3

lo^Zl

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

I SUBMISSION NUMBER ITo: Secretary

Western Australian Planning Commission

per™ wSiSubmission 19

Maine(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address . .4r.Q. .Ttnr^..tPostcode pO. O

Contact phone number ^.4-8:2^.7.^^6Email address.

Submission (Please attach additional pages If required. It Is preferred that any additional Information be loose rather than bound)

. ... s.sjpp.arrfcs.. .a4Po^'.oov^'P<i... .^P...

. .. .ojrm.... c>.. sxi.. .Or>.R§>.. â.cA,. . -Hne..^ o4

.o.S.ê^rfpo...A.fe...C^c.O(.&}]..c?9r...rv—^r'.-

. .Wvi-S^. .b«-Vtr^#r... A^r.. Sr<W.\U.,.prs^c^sS...c^soU:..

. .C^rx.. grie^JrcXT:.... .«vs».. .^.e4\.. .¦saûc'Y?^.... rt^Cr

.. a£... î^srfZn:9.cs....S^ôo^...Cvs. .u^J.

C^psxssr*. .isjjs^vwcs^cs... <2os-... ors^V:






I© be sicmed by [persoo(s| nnakincji the submissioim

Signature^ Date .\^

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 Janyarv 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 [email protected]; Website - htlp://www,planning.wa.gov.au

Sybmissiori 2®Government of Western Australia

Your Ref:833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)Our Ref:EHB-01445EHB12/29Q4Contact:Vic AndrichPhone:9388 4978

DEf-'AHTiViFÎ Of HAMWiN

0 8 JAN 20i3

Mr Neil Thomson FILE / ail 4SecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionAlbert Facey House469 Wellington StreetPERTH WA 6000

Attention: Ms Tracey Scroop

Dear Mr Thomson

METROPOLITAM REGION SCHEME (MRS) PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1236/57BUSH FOREVER AREA DEFINITION CLAUSE INSERTION AND REMOVAL OFCLAUSE 16(1a)(a) FOR NEW SIMILAR CLAUSE INSERTION 16(1a)(a) AND (ba)IN THE METROPOLITAN REGION SCHEME TEXT

Thank you for your letter dated 19 October 2012 requesting comment from theDepartment of Health (DOH) on the above MRS Amendment.

The DOH has no specific comment on this amendment however you may wish toconsider requesting the public authority to incorporate Health Impact Assessment(HIA) and/or Public Health Assessment (PHA) principles in their decision makingprocess when considering such developments.

For your information and guidance, you may refer to the relevant information at thefollowing sites:

HIA - http://www.public.health.wa.qov.aU/2/1400/2/health risk assessment.pmPHA - http://www.public.health.wa.qov.aU/2/1399/2/public health assessment.pm

Should you have queries or require further information please contact Vic Andrich on9388 4978 [email protected].

Yours sincerely

Jim DoddsDIRECTORENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIRECTORATE

4 January 2013Environmental Health

All Correspondence: PO Box 8172 Perth Business Centre Western Australia 6849Grace Vaughan House 227 Stubbs Terrace Shenton Park WA 6008

Telephone (08) 9388 4999 Fax (08) 9388 4955wa.gov.au

ABN 28 684 750 332

Planning and Development Act 20.015

Section 57 Araen$iTi^^Mtnio|)Form 57

r

~ ûbmissleo ¦ .

'K MitropoMtaiTRegioffSclieme Amendment4-2^®^7

Bush Forever P^ffiiltion piaus&lnserti.oir^'d*^^âtî^laî^^^j'(a)for New Similar Clause Insertiofi IB.(1

5^-0 1-CjCS &¦ } ¦Iwallfif// OFFICE USE ONLY.

.€«^4 ¦" fW'-Ejf|.lo: Secretary .T^

Western Australian plann'nn ';Snrr,m'So'nn — « —

Locked Bag 2506, PERTH WA 6001

Western Australian Plannmg^C.Qmmtesion -r f *2, irnrrtl^ff

Locked Bag 2506''' ' ¦ SllbmiSSfOrQ 21

' Name .IrV'....Lj?ys..P?r^?vi£..-#td.,,^((PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)^

Address , .^r?.. .^5. ft P?... QirrP^^r. . Postcode

Contact phone number ;„.... Email address .-.ar.UAydA^-Q^^¦'¦ -^d/A f..c:^,


. fe di-k-J. ./bs^siCk^r .. .CS^Wv,JW&J&t-sMhr.... /^hWrS,..f.0"

.. .'WrfS- .U. £?dj!... .erri.... L&hd ?. M y*JtJCS. ^.....d.....*s\....

.c(rO.J|v2> S?.^f.,. Ife?;r;

..1.^..... .ctsJ-Mjjr^s... HyJr.-'.lr«

.. .1&2/?yr«W./CS4<^(........ ^.êr^br.. ...."TCWsu.

.tf.vJ .I%MS.d twKik&....w^ct, fl^vr... ;

.T.i-x^.--PrST'^Yl^^rviT... .r\yX'SIT...,. fhA-.d^^S^....'....

...;.. .WsTT ^.... ... .J-^s We

-.. E 2-....^¦. ...v,

.•".fp/z «ay. v.\'kA v/âAr......^..-.'.

•; irrifjT. . ; . .1 h& f?... ... . .-

;......../..Dn.ffvfM^Wi.f,.1?Uh*sJ.'.33.1.<=..

.... .Vf. .<?. II.'?. ¦.ft.'c?............ 1 .•..

....;..;..,...

...1 IjwC,.-.....GTi ...)bi4h....rr§!^Wnn<^SiSr^rrM<&>..-.¦;

IfwrvSW^VVr^rt/VS'l'jC.ifVtlxC (i.vX/...-..

c?^v(n„2 Ji,.......:.Cr).. '.....'...


BUSH FOREVER SUBMISSION

g2^ a'^v^, < UjA- ,

yI am the landowner of land located in the City of Gosnells. The land is the subject of a Bush Forever

overlay in the Metropolitan Region Scheme and also the City of Gosnells planning Scheme.

The Western Australian Planning Commission has advertised for comment a Metropolitan Region

Scheme Minor Amendment 1236/67 and has called for submissions pertaining to the "Bush Forever

Definition Clause Insertion and removal of Clause 16(la) for New Similar Clause insertion 16(a-)a and

(ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text.

The Metropolitan Region Scheme should be amended to allow the landowners to develop their land

¦ that is the subject of Bush Forever overlay in the Metropolitan Region Scheme in the following

circumstances. That the clause be amended as follows;

"To allow permitted development within a Bush Forever area owned or vested in a public authority

on reserved land to commence development without the written approval of the WAPC if there is a

written agreement between the public authority and the WAPC or a management Plan approved by

the WAPC". Add the following new clause.

Additionally, to allow permitted development within a Bush Forever area owned or vested in the

landowner to commence development without the written approval of the WAPC and subdivision if

relevant with the approval of the WAPC if there is a written agreement between the landowner and

the WAPC or a management Plan approved by the WAPC, which allows the landowner after

negotiating with the WAPC to develop and subdivide the landowners land for the purposes of

developing up to a maximum of 50 % of the land for high density residential development andeducational institutional / Bush Forever uses, that is the subject of a Bush Forever overlay in the

MRS. The balance of the 50% of the landowners land is be ceded free of cost to the WAPC for the

purposes of pursuing and maintaining Bush Forever objectives.

The purpose of this submission is;

>To allow land owners to develop and subdivide up to 50%,ofthe land they own without• *

detracting from the overall Bush Forever Overlay;

>To allow landowners to ceded up to 50% tpfeir land to WAPC for the purposes of pursuing

Bush Forever objectives.^ .I WU V? ¦ tV>UIVd MW wanvMi«• . —


o in the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies bf .yoursubmission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.

iter Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 118 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone-(08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 [email protected]; Website - http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

Prepared on behalf of the landowners by:

DR EDWARD ANDRE8 Sion CloseWATERFORD WA 6152email; [email protected]

Date: 8 January 2013

Secretary,Western Australian Planning Commission140 WILLIAM STREET,PERTH, WA6000

Dear Sir

PLANNSNG REPORT AND BUSH FOREVER SUBlViiSSiON PERTAIWIMGTO 82 BARRETT STREET SOUTHERN RIVER.' SUBMITTED ONBEHALF @F SANi SANTOSO^ BY EDWARD AN0RE.

I act for Sani Santoso (The Land owner) in relation to the Western AustralianPlanning Commission advertisement seeking comments about the MetropolitanRegion Scheme Amendment 1236/57 (Minor Amendment). This submissionproposes to change the current Outline Development Status of the subject landpartly from open space / Bush Forever zone to part residential / educationalpurposes (50%) in the City of Gosnells Planning Scheme and also the MetropolitanRegion scheme in accord with a proposed Outline development Plan as shown onpage 5 (Figure 4) of the planning report attached.

My client is seriously concerned about the current Bush Forever classification of theirland, and. is prepared to cede 50% of the land for open space/ Bush forever to theCrown. In support of my clients claims l outline the following reasons:

o The subject land is currently used for farming / agricultural purposes and doesnot in any way promote the Bush Forever intentions of Government and

o The facts clearly demonstrate that the current land use activities are notcomplimentary to the Bush Forever intentions of Government, and theopportunity is provided for the WAPC to approve a.Rezoning in both the MRSand the City of Gosnells planning scheme for the purpose of permittingdevelopment in accord with the proposed Outline development Plan as shownon page 5 (Figure 4) of the planning report attached.

Please call me on 6304 5803 with any queries, about the ODP.

Yours sincerely

Dr Edward Andre


1 0 JAN 2013

file fixslssai

PLANNING REPORT. BUSH FOREVER SUBMISSION. PERTAINING TO 82 BARRETT STREET,SOUTHERN RIVER. SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF SANI SANTOSO, BY EDWARD ANDRE.

I am the landowner of land located in the City of Gosnells. The land is the subject of a Bush Forever

overlay in the Metropolitan Region Scheme and also the City of Gosnells planning Scheme.

The Western Australian Planning Commission has advertised for comment a Metropolitan Region

Scheme Minor Amendment 1236/67 and has called for submissions pertaining to the "Bush Forever

Definition Clause Insertion and removal of Clause 16(la) for New Similar Clause insertion 16(a)a and

(ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text.

The Metropolitan Region Scheme should be amended to allow the landowners to develop their land

that is the subject of Bush Forever overlay in the Metropolitan Region Scheme in the following

circumstances. That the clause be amended as follows:

"To allow permitted development within a Bush Forever area owned or vested in a public authority

on reserved land to commence development without the written approval of the WAPC if there is a

written agreement between the public authority and the WAPC or a management Plan approved by

the WAPC". Add the following new clause.

Additionally, to allow permitted development within a Bush Forever area owned or vested in the

landownerto commence development without the written approval ofthe-WAPC and subdivision if

relevant with the approval of the WAPC if there is a written agreement between the landowner and

the WAPC or a management Plan approved by the WAPC, which allows the landowner after

negotiating with the WAPC to develop and subdivide the landowners land forthe purposes of

developing up to a maximum of 50 % of the land for high density residential development and

educational institutional / Bush Forever uses, that is the subject of a Bush Forever overlay in the

MRS. The balance of the 50% of the landowners land is be ceded free of cost to the WAPC for the

purposes of pursuing and maintaining Bush Forever objectives.

The purpose of this submission is: .

>> To allow land owners to develop and subdivide up to 50% of the land they.own without

detracting from the overall Bush Forever Overlay;

> To allow landowners to ceded up to 50% of their land to WAPC for the purposes of pursuing

Bush Forever objectives.

The subject land (82 Barrett Street is zoned Parks St Recreation in. the Metropolitan Region Scheme

(Figure 1) and has been cleared of Bush as shown on Figure 2. In effect, there is no bush on the

subject land and has no value as a Bush Forever overlay. Figure 3 shows that the subject land is the

subject of an ODP. Given this scenario and the fact that the subject land is located within 800 km of

the mixed use centre, and that extensive subdivision has occurred in close proximity to the subject

lot, that the WAPC having regard to the context recommends the approval of an ODP which allows

land owners to develop and subdivide up to 50% of the land they own without detracting from the

overall Bush Forever Overlay AND to allow landowners to cede up to 50% of their land to WAPC for

the purposes of pursuing Bush Forever objectives. A proposed ODP is shown as Figure 4.

1


ZonesRfeslttenlial

LegendTown Planning Scheme 6

Composita Rsskle-ntial/Light IndustryExtiaotiva Industiy

¦ ^ | Light IndustryGeneral IndustryOffice

CZ3 Regional Centre'-3=31 '3'sl"c' Centt-ij '[ Local Centraf~ ' ! Mixed Businessf- ' 1 Highway Commercial

''V Business DevelopmentGeneral RuralSpecial Rural

| Kennels, u, v. Residential Development' i Special UseEC Environmental Conditions Apply

" • Scheme Amendment Boundaiy

CodesR17.3 Residential Density Code:

Special Control Aiea

[_R• Restricted Uses

j A | Additional UsesReserves

MRS Res-fvesState Forests j -

1 Parks C.1^.,i Recreation

RailwaysWaterway;I "T Primary Regional Roadsr 1 Other Regional Roads

WaterCatchmentsPublic Purposes

Localen Civic & Cultural

Water CoursesJ PurposesLocal Housing Strategy

Figure 1. City of Gosnells. Town Planning Scheme No 6. Source: City of Gosnells Intra Maps (2013)

Figure 2. Air Photo of 82 Barrett Street, Southern River. Source: City of Gosnells Intra Maps. (2013)

2

PLANNING REPORT. BUSH FOREVER SUBMISSION. PERTAINING TO 82 BARRETT STREET,SOUTHERN RIVER. SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF SAN I SANTOSO, BY EDWARD ANDRE.

HWIUHOVULB

fK

l.'V//-

A ''Si--- ^ ¦

w .v _ x? \ll|/C'ty

^ i-fC •wzt eGpIhSp)

Figure 3, Development Areas City of Gosnells. Map & Legend. Source: City of Gosnells Intra Maps

(2013)

©DP ILegerod!

m"

I ODP Boundary>

Public Open Space

Residential

Subject to Future Detailed Planning

Regional Open Space

Church Pr ecinct

Mixed Use Centre

Primary School

Mixed Business

Residential Mixed Use •

Retail/Commercial

Private Club

Community Purpose

Private School

Proposed High Residential Density

Cadastral Boundary

City Boundary

Special Control Area

Proposed ODP

IC Approved

Not Yet Approved

Roads Si Paths¦District Distributor "A"^ ¦Local Distributor— . ¦ — District Distributor "B"

- • — Path

Wetlands

n.c <./> ¦ Wetland

iI Wetland Buffer

Catch m e rutsr"""ngg 400m VValkable Catchment

Ij 800m Walkable Town Unit

I1) 800m Radius /1 0 minute walk

TopoBogical Features

!Compensating Basin

High Voltage Power Line

Lined Lake

Stormwater pipe or swale! IN otSfl cati o ns

Church / School CSubject to DAP)

Community Purpose Site

Poultry Farm 500m Buffer

Proposed Road Widening

Subject to Detailed Area Plan to Facilitate "Mixed Us

OTraffic Signals

mmo

3


iV. . t( i'iV.'I* "itjf p-.v.-.Mnnr'tKu ^ ;. *" UdOfl-r- ¦ i-w-. ^ /'/

v 'B]y *// .

s\' JS.

Figure 4. PROPOSED OUTLINE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 82 BARRETT STREET, SOUTHERN RIVER.

City of Gosnells. Map & Legend. Source: City of Gosnells Intra Maps (2013).

PROPOSED ODP LEGEND.

y///J{ PROPOSED HIGH DENSITYRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT R60 AND EDUCATIONAL USES.

I"""' jf PROPOSED BUSHFOEREVER USES TO BE CEDED TO"THE WAPC (50%) OF S2 BARRETT STREET.

4

PLANMING REPORT. BUSH FOREVER SUBMISSION. PERTAINIWG TO 82 BARRETT STREET,SOUTHERN RIVER. SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF SANI SANTOSO, BY EDWARD ANDRE. .

mmmmmmmmm

ODP Legendf=>

=3- <=5 -C-1)I) ODP Boundary

1

Public Open Space

Residential

Subject to Future Detailed Planning

Regional Open Space

Church Precinct

Mixed Use Centre

Primary School

iMixed Business

| Residential Mixed Use

Approved

Not Yet Approved

Roads & Paths—:' District Distributor "A"

«— <= Local Distributor' ^^ District Distributor "B"

PathWetlands

• Wetland

"I Wetland Buffer

Catchmentsrjj 400m Walkable Catchmentf--J- — — =3

J

Retail/Commercial

Private Club

Community Purpose

Private School

'1 -

| Proposed High Residential Density

Cadastral Boundary

City Boundary

(j 800m Walkable Town Unit

i| 800m Radius 110 minute walk

Topological Features

Compensating Basin

High Voltage Power Line

Lined Lake

—y— Storm water pipe or swale

Notifications

g Special Control Area

Proposed ODP

Church I School (Subject to DAP)

o Community Purpose Site

i Poultry Farm 500m Buffer

y/////;- Proposed Road Widening

Subject to Detailed Area Plan to Facilitate "Mixed Use"

O Traffic Signals

5

PlanningWA Metropolitan Region Scheme Minor AinendnignLr123W57 "'"Page { ©f 1

jl'Jite A DegartmentqfWannJgg

Metropolitan Region Scheme Minor Amendment 123,6ii®JYou Are Here: Home (ht'cp://planning.wa.gov.au/ciefault.asp) > Plans and policies {http;//planiiing;wa.gov.au/618.asp) > Publications(h'ctp://planning,wa.gov.au/723.a'sp) ^ WetFppoitta'rfRgglgniSpheme.JVIinor-Amgndoient-l236/57

¦. i^'t Metropolitan Region ^c'ft^mS'l>/lififdf'Am8nanfettfil"23g/5lri,Reiiort (iittD://planninq.wa.qBv<'au/dQp' pub' pdf/.1236- .' .

57AmendmentR6Port/D'dft:;,'Y688^:'6^1<Bl.• . .' , , ' ' : ¦ . ; ¦> '¦

W Submission Form'(http://dlanninq.'wa.a'6vTau/aab>pub o'df/SubitilsstS^^dl-hiSXiifffl-veao^Kfll• !• . ' ¦

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion

The Western Australian Planning Comrinission (WAPC) intends to amend the Metropolitan Region Scheriie (MRS) by amending the" MRS.-text

¦and is seeking, public comment, '•¦.. ' . ¦ ¦

The amendment proposes to insert a new clause in the MRS text to define the BushForever area overlay that'aiready skist^'onê'MRSiM.fp,

as a result of MRS Amondment 1082/33..' . '

The WAPC also proposes to remove section -16 (1a)(a).of;the-MRS text and insert a new similar clause'as 15 '(,1 a).(.a)' ar;d':(ba) to dllow.

permitted development within a Bush Forever area owned or vested in a public authority on reserved land to commence'devejppment without

the written approval of the WAPC if there is a written agreement between.the.public authority and the WAPC or a managSnient plan-approved

by the WAPC. Full details are included'ln the amendment report.,

The WAPC certifies that, in its opinion, the proposed amendment does not constitute a substantial alteration to the MRS.

The WAPC amendment report which explains the proposal, will be available for public inspection from Tuesday 23 October 2012 to Friday 18

January 2013 at:--. ¦¦

Western Australian Planning Commission, 140 William Street, Perth

J S Battye Library, Level 3 Alexander Library Building, Perth Cultural Centre

Offices of all metropolitan local governments

Any person who desires to make a submission to support, object or provide comment on any part of the proposed amendment should do so on

a form 57. This submission form is available from the display locations, the amendment report and the internet.

.Submissions must be lodged with the: Secretary, VVestern Australian Planning Commission,

140 William Street, Perth WA 6000; on or before 5 pm Friday 18 January 2013.

Late submissions will not be consi'dered.. ¦ ¦ '....

. . . , This is a printer friendly version of the web page available at http://planning.wa.gov.au/publicatibhs/6487.asp

Horpe | Privacy | Terms of use ¦¦jpift ^ |Ar-fsriAll contents copyright © Government of Western Australia, All riglfts reserved.•iFiorSg"

• 'Last Modified: Tuesday; 23 October 2QT2l :§g}PJM. . .., -sssSST' ¦' ^ ComnnSion

http ://www.plamiing. wa. go v. au/publications/6487. asp 19/12/2012

Submission 22

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendment (R/iinor)

Form 57Submission

Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Foo*evel)• Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (laKa)for Mew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To: mrs(a)planning.wa.ciov.auSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Name ....DaveBright(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...39 Guron Rd DUNCRAIGPostcode ..6023

Contact phone numberEmail addressSubmission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

I am very disturbed about the wording of the proposed Bush Forever IVIRS Text Amendment1236/57. For the following reasons:

o The Amendment does not state the purpose of Bush Forever Areas.Clause 3(1) should include the definition and purpose of a Bush Forever Area.This could be: Bush Forever Areas are areas of regionally significant bushland andwetlands that collectively provide for a conservation reserve system for the PerthMetropolitan Region.

o Clause 16(1a)(ba) allows government authorities to clear and develop in their BF sites ifapproved by the WAPC. This is totally unacceptable and it is recommended that this clausebe deleted and replaced with a clause which prohibits clearing of bushland and remnantnative vegetation in all Bush Forever Areas.Government authorities should be required to modify their operational plans by opting out oftheir Bush Forever Areas and handing over their sites to an appropriate land manager suchas the local government authority.

o Clause 16(1a)(a) will effectively allow public authorities to clear regionally significantbushland outside Bush Forever Areas (BFA) for 'permitted developments'. While suchproposals may be subject to environmental assessment under the EnvironmentalProtection Act, in most cases the EPA decides to 'not assess' such proposals, and thenoften such proposals are approved under the clearing regulations.

o Clearing in Bush Forever Areas should be prohibited. A clause is needed in theAmendment that states that developments in Bush Forever Areas that include clearing ofbushland or remnant native trees are not permitted.

o Statutory Protection: Bush Forever is supposed to be a 'representative system ofprotected areas'. But the Amendment does not provide any additional protection. A clauseis needed that states that all bushland in Bush Forever Areas is protected and thatdisturbance and clearing of this bushland is prohibited. Further all landholders (includingpublic authorities) of sites should be required to manage their bushland to retain its natureconservation values.

• Bush Forever is a whole of government policy plan, but some government utilities are notrespecting Bush Forever by their failure to prevent degradation. Specific legal protection inthe Amendment is needed to apply equally to all sites held by government agencies as wellas private and company owned sites.

o Clause 16(1a)(b), This clause should be deleted. This clause is unchanged from thecurrent clause. However it allows development on reserved land vested in or owned by apublic authority if it is expressly authorized under an Act to be carried out without WAPCapproval. Under this clause in theory there could be a new Act brought in which allows afreeway or major road or water treatment plant to be built through or in the middle of a BushForever site.Unfortunately a new Act for a specific development could over-ride the MRS text anyway.

o Part IVA-Bush Foreveo* Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (1) states 'The purpose of thisclause is to identify regionally significant bushland as Bush Forever Areas.'This implies that all regionally significant bushland is identified as Bush Forever Areas.This is not correct and is indeed misleading as there are thousands of hectares ofregionally significant bushland outside BFA. However if all regionally significant bushlandwere declared Bush Forever Areas we would be very pleased and support such aninitiative!This clause should be rewritten as: 'The purpose of this clause is to identify BushForever Areas as regionally significant bushland.'Better still with the added words: '....to be protected and managed for the benefit of thecommunity and for the purpose of nature conservation.'

o Special Control Areas should be declared under the MRS and text Amendment for allBush Forever sites not yet secured for the purpose of conservation. This mechanism toprovide interim protection was an Action specified in the Bush Forever plan (Dec 2000) butwas later dropped. This mechanism exists and should be used to provide immediateprotection in the planning process.

o Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (3). Supported except for thelast phrase. The last phrase ' and does not operate to zone or reserve that area' shouldbe deleted.

o All Bush Forever Areas should be made Parks and Recreation reservation. Whilemost BFA are already rezoned to P&R, the remainder should also be rezoned (entirelywithout any further incursions). Clearing and development in all bushland in BFA should beexpressly 'not permitted'.Clearing of parts of BFA for development of recreation buildings and facilities remains aproblem under current zoning and an amendment needs to prevent this furthermore.

9 A new reserve purpose for 'protection of Bush Forever Areas' could be introduced underthe MRS for all Bush Forever Areas. This would remove the land use conflicts which ariseunder the current P&R reservation where sports fields and recreational facilities can be builtin Bush Forever sites which are supposed to be protected when zoned P&R.

In summary MRS Amendment 1236/57 is not acceptable in its current form and needs to bechanged so that all Bush Forever Areas are legally protected and managed and clearing isprohibited.

You should be aware that:•The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.•In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making Its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.


Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - mrs@planning,wa.gov.au; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au

Signature Date ...13 Jan 2013..

Email your completed form to [email protected]




Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 13 (1a)(a)for Mew Similar Clause Insertion 16 {1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

SUBMISSION NUMBERTo: Secretary

Western Australian Planning Commission

Locked Bag 2506SlOfeBTOflSSiODTl 23PERTH WA 6001

Namet-Wfc-^ 1 n,^ (PLEASE PRI^LM^r

Address ...5?............... Postcode o'"/

Contact phone number..;Email address ..^Tf

Submission (Piease atiach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)




0 The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may besubject to applications for access under the act.



Wote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Gontacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

The proposed deletion and replacement of clauses, particularly clause 16(la)(a) and (ba) are verybiased towards future development within Bush Forever Sites which is contrary to their intendedand reserved purpose . The proposed text changes have the potential to set a precedent for theerosion of controls implemented to protect bushland in Bush Forever Areas.

The current Clause 16 (la) differs significantly from the proposed clause in its intention and detail.The current clause provides specific protection to significant vegetation in bush forever sites fromclearing including for permitted developments. The proposed text removes the protection of anyvegetation from permitted developments. This clause should continue to contain text that requiresremoval of significant vegetation by clearing in a bush forever site for permitted developments torequire approval from the commission in writing.

Many of the permitted developments listed actually have a greater impact, on ground, whenimplemented than is initially realised during the planning stages such as earthwork batter footprints,excavations for services, drainage and run-off. By decreasing the vigour that is involved duringplanning a proposal to get written permission from the commission, which is currently in place, toundertake permitted development in bush forever sites, there is a real potential that the impacts onbush forever areas will be greater and less controlled resulting in significant impacts on anirreplaceable asset that belongs to the West Australian Community.

Many of the permitted developments also include, such as primary or other regional roads, activitiesthat cover large areas. These activities need to have appropriate and detailed scrutiny supportedwithin the MRS to ensure that the local impact and regional impacts on bush forever sites areaddressed in detailed investigations as opposed to reducing the level and integrity of investigationfor the sake of 'streamlining'.

Proposed Clause 16 (ba) should replace the word 'or' between 16 (ba) (i) and 16 (ba) (ii) with 'and' toensure that any permitted developments that are undertaken have controls in place that areconsidered to be best current practice and detailed in a management plan, and have a writtenagreement in place, as opposed to the option of having only a written agreement between thecommission and a public authority (unless the written agreement is stated to include a managementplan).

Submission 24

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendmeint (Minor)

Form 57Submission

iVietropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the iVietropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To: [email protected] r"— TTTTZT™ ammim^Secretary^DEPARTMb^ OF PLANNINGWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506i c )A|\J 2013PERTH WA 60011 ^ '

Name ..Ms Rahima Bannermanau-.....&!V."?..1.(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)LL —"

Address ..19 Arlington Avenue, SOUTH PERTH WAPostcode ...6151.

Contact phone number0468 494764Email [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

Introduction

Clause 16(1 a) deals with two distinct and separate land classifications; - reserved lands vested in apublic authority and Bush Forever lands. The scope and purpose of these categories are vastlydifferent and came into being through different legislative channels and for different purposes.

© Reserved lands are lands reserved for community purposes such as public facilities(hospitals, schools, universities, prisons etc). Reserved lands held in private ownership aresubject to compulsory acquisition and compensation;

® Bush Forever lands refer to a classification of land established under SPP2.8, a policy andimplementation framework intended to ensure bushland protection and management issueswithin the Perth Metropolitan area. SPP2.8 required the approval of the WAPC, the Ministerand government, being placed before Parliament on 22 June 2010 pursuant to s 56 of thePlanning and Development Act 2005.

That land in two disparate schemes of land classification be dealt with in the same paragraph anddealt with as having equal consideration is a matter of statutory interpretation. This factor alonecould well attract a challenge at law

The argument that the amendment apply to 'permitted development' on reserved land vested in apublic authority is not objected to, as these lands had been earmarked for future development fromtheir inception.

That the amendment be extended to Bush Forever sites is strongly opposed, as there is no suchpresumption that development will take place in these areas in the future. Clause 16(1a)(a)(ba)(i)and (ii) should therefore be removed. Further considerations in support of this submission are:

Clause 16(1a)(a)(baKi) and (ii)

1. As it stands the amendment means that the current statutory protections will be by-passed;

e The WAPC will not be required to specifically consider the proposed development;• A copy of the proposed amendment will not be sent to the Minister;

o Extensive community consultation and public comment will not take place andsubmissions will not be called for;

© Ministerial scrutiny and approval will not be required for the proposed development;© EPA approval and review may or may not be required.

The current status of Bush Forever sites was founded on a rigorous process culminating inapproval by both Houses of Parliament. This clause disregards that protection. It therefore cannotbe sustained, either legally or morally.

2.The definition of 'permitted development' in the parent Act is open to amendment which caninclude additional developments, at any time in the future. This would automatically include BushForever sites to be included for any approved development.

3.The contents of a written agreement or an approved management plan between theCommission and the public authority will not be available to the public and therefore not open topublic scrutiny. As this will again by-pass existing mechanisms currently in place, approvals canlead to unforeseen consequences. For example a road could mean a simple access road or itcould mean a major road with lanes wide enough to restrict the movement of fauna on the site. Inprinciple, private agreements by definition subvert the checks and balances put in place by ademocratic society.

Clause 16(1a)(b)

The term 'expressly authorized under an Act' is wide, and as it can include future Acts not yet inexistence, is open to challenge as being void for uncertainty. In the event of such a clause beingincluded in an Act, clause 16(1a) will automatically be activated, and open the door fordevelopment to take place. These developments may well be contrary to the policy intentions ofSPP2.8.

The term 'to be commenced or carried out without the approval of the Commission' is objected toas it refers to developments which are not identified, and again is open to challenge as being voidfor uncertainty.

In short, this clause covers those instances which have not been caught in the preceding sub¬clauses. That is, those cases where a public authority does not have a written agreement ormanagement plan lodged with the Commission. It is perhaps the most far reaching and dangeroussub-clause of the amendment, as it includes current and future developments referred to in anyAct, including an amendment to an existing Act or a future Act.

Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above I submit that clause 16(1a)(a)(ba)(i) and (ii) and (b) be removedfrom this proposed amendment, as it makes for bad law. While the argument that permitteddevelopment will be streamlined on reserved lands owned or vested in a public authority can besustained, a similar argument cannot be extended to Bush Forever sites which came into beingunder a different framework and one which expressly stated that its purpose was to ensurebushland protection and management.

You should be aware that:•The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.•in the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature ...Ms Rahima BannermanDate .14 January 2013Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.aov.au

Email your completed form to mrs(a).planning.wa.gov.au

Submission 25

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendment (Minor)

Form 57

SubmissioniVleti opo!itan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the IVletropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To: [email protected] Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Name ....Hon Alison Xamon MLC(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ....62 Eighth Avenue, MaylandsPostcode6051....,

Contact phone number .9272 1718Email address [email protected]

Submission {Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

Dear Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC),

I would like to raise a number of concerns about the proposed amendment to the MetropolitanRegion Scheme (MRS) text regarding Bush Forever.

PurposeThere was a widespread expectation in the community that the MRS Text Amendment for BushForever would explicitly state a purpose for Bush Forever sites. While State Planning Policy 2.8Bushland Policy for the Perth Metropolitan Region is very clear that Bush Forever sites should beprotected and managed for conservation purposes, the community is well aware that this does notqualify as statutory protection. The hope and expectation was that this statutory protection wouldbe provided by the MRS Text. This has not been done - and indeed, there is no mention of thepurpose of Bush Forever, nor Is there any mention of protection and management for conservationpurposes in the proposed MRS text.

Recommendation - That the MRS Text Amendment be redrafted to incorporate a purposestatement for Bush Forever, and

Recommendation: That the purpose of Bush Forever explicitly be stated and include mention ofprotection and management for conservation

Public Consultation on development that may impact Bush Forever sitesThe proposed amendment seems to reduce the level of Commissioner oversight of developmentby a Government Agency in or impacting upon Bush Forever Areas.

The Amendment Report states that the proposed c16.1(ba) is "intended to streamline thedevelopment approval processes for development proposals on reserved land owned or vested inpublic authorities within Bush Forever areas". While it may be argued that a management plan thathas been agreed to by the WAPC that includes the details of any proposed developmentaddresses the need for the Commissioner to approve any development in or impacting upon aBush Forever area, concerns around the process remain.

ne initial concern is that the purpose of agreeing to development as part of a management planseems to be that the proponent will not need to make multiple applications to the Commissionshould their development plans change. This is not sufficient oversight of development in theseprecious bushland areas.

The second major concern with this change is the uncertainty around the level of publicinvolvement in development plans in a Bush Forever site. There are two avenues where the publicmay potentially be excluded from commenting upon development in or impacting upon a BushForever site.

The agreed management plan for the site is between the Government Agency and the WAPC, It isnot clear what level of public involvement and comment will be part of this process. The public isfurther excluded if the proposed development changes with no oversight by the Commissioner.Given the public importance of Bush Forever sites, this is of great concern.

Recommendation: Any changes to development agreed to as part of the management plan bebrought before the Commission for approval

Recommendation: Public consultation in the development of management plans be mandatory

Recommendation: Any changes to development agreed to as part of the management plan be putout for public consultation

Special Control AreasGiven that a substantial proportion of Bush Forever is not yet zoned parks and recreation, it isappropriate that a special control area be declared over those sites to ensure that bushland valuesare maintained.

The declaration of sites as environmentally sensitive areas is insufficient, especially whencombined with the negotiated planning solutions, which allow for far too great an area of bushlandto be lost.

Special Control Areas were considered as part of the interim actions for Bush Forever, but werenot implemented, on the understanding that the clearing controls under the EnvironmentalProtection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004.

The historical need for negotiated planning solutions is acknowledged, but It is appropriate for anyplans to develop the area to be reviewed by the WAPC prior to any development taking place. Thepreferred mechanism for this is through a Special Control Area.

Recommendation: Special Control Areas be declared over Bush Forever areas not currentlyzoned Parks and Recreation.

Other mattersThe community remains concerned about the further implementation of Bush.Forever. As matterscurrently stand, there remain legal avenues for clearing and development in Bush Forever sites,even those that are zoned Parks and Recreation. While acknowledging that the effect of thepolicies surrounding Bush Forever is to protect these areas, in the context of ongoing andaccelerating clearing throughout the metropolitan area, leaving these loopholes for developmentonly contributes to the unease the community feels about the future of Bush Forever.

Recommendation: That statutory protection for Bush Forever sites be implemented.

You should be aware that:• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.° In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signe ""' ' "" " s submission

Note: Submis„ the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Conlacts: Telephone-(08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website - htlp://www.Dlannina.wa.Qov.au

Signature Date


Submission 26


Form 57Submission


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the iVietropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


NameLeonie Stubbs(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...A Bentley Street, SingletonPostcode6175

Contact phone number .9536 8195Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

I oppose Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57 as is currently proposed because:

1.it does not provide any statutory protection for Bush Forever sites.

2.In fact it is worse than that as it actually provides government authorities the right to clearBush Forever sites with no public oversight.

3.This is in direct contradiction to the purpose of Bush Forever which is to protect regionallysignificant bushland sites, to establish a representative system of protected areas and topromote the conservation of ecological systems and the biodiversity they support (as notedin the Discussion section of the Amendment, but not).

4.Also, there is no obligation in the Amendment to manage Bush Forever sites for the purposeas stated above.

5.This amendment sends an appalling message to private owners/corporations who have BushForever sites. The government should be setting the example, instead it is basically saying"do as I say but not as I do".

Cont'd/2

You should be aware that:- The WAPC Is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making Its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureDate ....15 January 2013Note: Submissions WiUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website -http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au

bmail your completed form to [email protected]

-2-

6.This amendment does not provide a sustainable balance between economic growth and theconservation and enhancement of our natural environment (as noted in the Discussionsection of the Amendment). It gives all the power to the developers at the expense of theenvironment and is an extremely short-sighted approach to long term development of thePerth metropolitan region.

7.If one of the purposes is to establish a representative system of protected areas and yetgovernment departments can clear land with no recourse by the public, who is ensuring thata representative system is being maintained?

8.Finally, I believe the amendment should include legal protection from any form of clearningfor Bush Forever sites to ensure that they are safe from such actions by the government,privately owned as well as company-owned sites. Our future depends on it.

Sulbmossta TH


Form 57

SybmissionMetropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57


OFFICE USE ONLY


Name ..Linda Metz(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...26 Minigwal LoopWaikikiPostcode6169

Contact phone number0438 904 0505.... Email [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

The Amendment does not state the purpose of Bush Forever Areas.Clause 3(1) should include the definition and purpose of a Bush Forever Area.A definition may be: Bush Forever Areas are areas of regionally significant bushland and wetlandsthat collectively provide for a conservation reserve system for the Perth Metropolitan Region.

Statutory Protection: Bush Forever is supposed to be a 'representative system of protectedareas'. But the Amendment does not provide any additional protection. A clause is needed thatstates that all bushland in Bush Forever Areas is protected and that disturbance and clearing ofthis bushland is prohibited. Further all landholders (including public authorities) of sites should berequired to manage their bushland to retain its nature conservation values.

Clause 16(1a)(ba)-not supported allows government authorities to clear and develop in their BFsites if approved by the WAPC.Government authorities should be required to modify their operational plans by opting out of theirBush Forever Areas and handing over their sites to an appropriate land manager such as the localgovernment authority.

Clause 16(1a)(a)-not supported will effectively allow public authorities to clear regionallysignificant bushland outside Bush Forever Areas (BFA) for 'permitted developments'. While suchproposals may be subject to environmental assessment under the Environmental Protection Act, inmost cases the EPA decides to 'not assess' such proposals and then often such proposals areapproved under the clearing regulations. Stricter controls and assessments should be made forthe continued protection of Bush Forever Areas and areas of significance that surround them.

Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (1) states 'The purpose of this ciause isto identify regionally significant bushland as Bush Forever Areas.'This implies that all regionally significant bushland is identified as Bush Forever Areas. This ismisleading as there are thousands of hectares of regionally significant bushland outside BFA.However if all regionally significant bushland were declared Bush Forever Areas I would supportsuch an initiative.

This clause should be rewritten as: 'The purpose of this ciause is to identify Bush Forever Areas

as regionally significant bushland.'Better still with the added words: '....to be protected and managed for the benefit of the communityand forthe purpose of nature conservation.'

Special Control Areas should be declared under the MRS and text Amendment for all BushForever sites not yet secured for the purpose of conservation. This mechanism to provide interimprotection was an Action specified in the Bush Forever plan (Dec 2000) but was later dropped.This mechanism exists and should be used to provide immediate protection in the planningprocess.

Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (2) - Supported.

Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 2SA. Bush Forever Areas (3). Supported except for the lastphrase. The last phrase ' and does not operate to zone or reserve that area' should be deleted.

All Bush Forever Areas should be made Parks and Recreation reservation. While most BFAare already rezoned to P&R, the remainder should also be rezoned (entirely without any furtherincursions).

You should be aware that:• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.»In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Note: Submissions iVIUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.qov.au

Date .15.01.2013


Submission 2B


Form 57



To: [email protected]<Western Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

NameD.J Blackburn(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ....15 Celina Cr KingsleyPostcode ..6026

Contact phone number ...93092557Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose ratherfhan bound)

The Bush Forever areas already defined should be protected from development of any kind.Regionally significant bushland should be considered for Bush Forever classification.The aim should be to protect and expand Bush Forever sites rather than facilitate development.

The proposed amendment 16(1a)(a) would seem to foreclose Regionally significant bushlandbeing considered for Bush Forever classification by allowing sites of such bushland owned orvested in a public authority to be developed without approval from the WAPC. This could result inmany areas not yet classified as Bush Forever being cleared for development.

I do not support the amendment.

You should be aware that:•The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.•In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.

Note: Submissions IVIUST be received by the advertised closing date, oemg close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.aov.au

OFFICE USE ONLY

Date


Submissiori 29

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendment (Wlinos*)

Form 57


Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Ciause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (,ia)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To; [email protected] Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Name."S..a.-.(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address^TT../... Postcode ..^^2^2-.

Contact phone numberEmail address ...rTT!??!-.!. 1. @n paf (<^K^ •'Submission (Please attach additional pages If required, it is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

You should be aware that:• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions madeWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.° In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions,your submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed bv persons) making the submission

Signature^^?^^..<^$rT7T^^DateMote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being ciose ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Lats submissions will WOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - httD://vww.planninq.wa.ciov.au


to the

copies of

Submissions to the WAPC

Bush Forever MRS Text Amendment 1236/57

What does it do, and not do?1.It does not provide for statutorv protection of Bush Forever Areas

2.It defines Bush Forever areas as delineated on the MRS map (clause 28A) but does not state their purpose

3.It does not provide a management obligation to retain the conservation values

4.Change: Alarmingly it allows government authorities to clear and develop their Bush Forever sites withthe approval of the WAPC, but without public consultation. Permitted development under MRS includespublic works (roads, drainage, sewerage, etc) The explanatory notes for the amendment on p4 under'Substantiality' state:

'This MRS text amendment is to tie in with (the MRS amendment showing BFA on the MRS map) toensure Bush Forever areas are protected through statutory planning controls.Clearing and development in a Bush Forever site by a government authority is not protection of thebushland, so this amendment clearly contravenes the purpose of Bush Forever.

Notably the intention to streamline development is contradictory to the spirit and intent given in the'Strategic Planning Context' (on p3 of the explanatory notes) which includes Bush Forever policy (2000),Urban Bushland Strategy 1995, 1996 National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biodiversity,State Planning Strategy 1997, Directions 2031 and beyond (2011), and State Planning Policy 2. Remarkablyat the top of p4, it states

o Clause 3(1) should include the definition and purpose of a Bush Forever Area.This could be: Bush Forever Areas are areas of regionally significant bushland and wetlands thatcollectively provide for a conservation reserve system for the Perth Metropolitan Region.

o Clause 16(la)(ba) allows government authorities to clear and develop in their BF sites if approvedby the WAPC. This is totally unacceptable and it is recommended that this clause be deleted andreplaced with a clause which prohibits clearing of bushland and remnant native vegetation in allBush Forever Areas.Government authorities should be required to modify their operational plans by opting out of theirBush Forever Areas and handing over their sites to an appropriate land manager such as the localgovernment authority.

o Clause 16(la)(a) will effectively allow public authorities to clear regionally significant bushlandoutside Bush Forever Areas (BFA) for 'permitted developments'. While such proposals may besubject to environmental assessment under the Environmental Protection Act, in most cases the EPAdecides to 'not assess' such proposals, and then often such proposals are approved under the clearingregulations. The EPA has advised that no formal assessment is required of the Amendment, but havefailed to give any policy advice for protection and management.

o Clearing in Bush Forever Areas should be prohibited. A clause is needed in the Amendment thatstates that developments in Bush Forever Areas that include clearing of bushland or remnant nativetrees are not permitted.

® Statutory Protection: Bush Forever is supposed to be a 'representative system of protected areas'.But the Amendment does not provide any additional protection. A clause is needed that states that

all bushland in Bush Forever Areas is protected and that disturbance and clearing of this bushland isprohibited. Further all landholders (including public authorities) of sites should be required tomanage their bushland to retain its nature conservation values.Local natural areas have become so degraded due to neglect by land managers that there significanceis being eroded which will make it even easier to be cleared for development.

o Bush Forever is a whole of government policy plan, but some government utilities are notrespecting Bush Forever by their failure to prevent degradation. Specific legal protection in theAmendment is needed to apply equally to all sites held by government agencies as well as privateand company owned sites.

o Clause 16(la)(b). This clause should be deleted. This clause is unchanged from the current clause.However it allows development on reserved land vested in or owned by a public authority if it isexpressly authorized under an Act to be carried out without WAPC approval. Under this clause intheory there could be a new Act brought in which allows a freeway or major road or water treatmentplant to be built through or in the middle of a Bush Forever site.Unfortunately a new Act for a specific development could over-ride the MRS text anyway.

a Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (1) states 'The purpose of this clause isto identify regionally significant bushland as Bush Forever Areas.'This implies that all regionally significant bushland is identified as Bush Forever Areas. This is notcorrect and is indeed misleading as there are thousands of hectares of regionally significant bushlandoutside BFA. However if all regionally significant bushland were declared Bush Forever Areas wewould be very pleased and support such an initiative!This clause should be rewritten as: 'The purpose of this clause is to identify Bush Forever Areasas regionally significant bushland.'

'....to be protected and managedfor the benefit of the community andfor the purpose of natureconservation.'

a Special Control Areas should be declared under the MRS and text Amendment for all Bush Foreversites not yet secured for the purpose of conservation. This mechanism to provide interim protectionwas an Action specified in the Bush Forever plan (Dec 2000) but was later dropped. Thismechanism exists and should be used to provide immediate protection in the planning process.

o Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (2) - Supported.

o Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (3). Supported except for the lastphrase. The last phrase ' and does not operate to zone or reserve that area' should be deleted.

® All Bush Forever Areas should be made Parks and Recreation reservation. While most BFAare already rezoned to P&R, the remainder should also be rezoned (entirely without any furtherincursions). Clearing and development in all bushland in BFA should be expressly 'not permitted'.Clearing of parts of BFA for development of recreation buildings and facilities remains a problemunder current zoning and an amendment needs to prevent this furthermore.

o A new reserve purpose for 'protection of Bush Forever Areas' could be introduced under the MRSfor all Bush Forever Areas. This would remove the land use conflicts which arise under the currentP&R reservation where sports fields and recreational facilities can be built in Bush Forever siteswhich are supposed to be protected when zoned P&R.

In summary MRS Amendment 1236/57 is not acceptable in its current form and needs to be changedso that all Bush Forever Areas are legally protected and managed and clearing is prohibited.

Submission 3©

Planning and Development Act 2005Sectioini 57 Amendment (Minor)

Form 57Submission

iietropolitan Regioo Scheme Amendnnient 1236/57

Bush Forever Definiiiomi Clause Insention and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name. Doris M Macdonald(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...5 Mair Place .Mulialoo WAPostcode 6027

Contact phone number: 9401 1707

Email address: [email protected]....

Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additionalinformation be loose rather than bound)

1 object to the amendment for the following reasons

•The Amendment does not provide for statutory protection of Bush Forever Areas

•The Amendment does not provide a management obligation lo retain the conservationvalues valued by the community.

o There are no guaranties for the community in the Amendment because thisclause intended to streamline the approval processes for development proposals onreserved lands owned or vested in public authorities within Bush Forever areas allowsgovernment authorities to clear and develop their Bush Forever sites with the approval ofthe WAPC but without public scrutiny.

» This Amendment would allow the unfettered development of the Ocean Reef Marina. I havebeen concerned about the development of a marina at Ocean Reef for some time and havefollowed the environmental process conducted by the City of Joondalup. There have beenno proper environmental studies conducted to date on the project, all have been preliminaryand have no value. In particular the impact of the marina on the coastal strip has did nottake into consideration the effects of climate change on the marina and its impact on thevery fragile dune system at Mulialoo and cliffs at lluka. The State government now hascontrol of this project and this amendment would bar proper scrutiny of the process if itshould be developed further. This area has many valuable natural assets in its bush andthe magnificent sweep of bay which includes Mulialoo Beach is unique in the Metropolitanarea.

o The amendment would allow developments to occur without proper consideration ofClimate Change. Climate change has been very evident and our bush forever sites shouldbe protected as a buffer against its impact. This amendment will enable developmentwithout proper consideration of Climate Change on any project because public scrutiny is

not mandatory and we cannot assume that without public scrutiny and proper managementrequirements, governments will consider climate change. The City of Joondalup has spentover 2 million on the Ocean Reef Marina development and it has not considered climatechange as being paramount.

o i his amendment will increase the chances of corruption within government process.

You should be aware that:° The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made tothe WAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions,copies of your submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by personfs) making the submission

Note; Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts; Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - hiip://ww/.pl3nnina.v/a.qov.au

Signature. Date




SubmissionMetropolitan) Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Ciause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

To; SecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

OFFICE USE ONLYDEPARTMENT 0; PUW^Nt'j

i ii jaw 2013 i n=n

. ls I ^ sti | Submissiooi 31FILE

Nameft A ^ 0 SL.fH.... .CQ.O.(\J 0\\ W C -«(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...f.ty..D'Q.f:...)...W.(VPostcode .6.^ 1

Contact phone number.3.3.2-.P.T! Email address0)1^. (kC





o The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may besubject to applications for access under the act,


To be signed by person(s) nnakinej] the submission

F

Date lL:J-J3

Mote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 Email - mrs@planning,wa.gov,au; Website - http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

Signature

Submission

^villrban£ Bushland

Vl^'CouHdl WA Inc

16 January 2013

mrs @plamiing. wa. go v. au

SecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57Busli Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16(la)(a) for New SimilarClause Insertion 16 (la)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

Submission by Urban Bushland Council WA Inc.PO Box 326, West Perth WA 6872Contact phone: (08) 9420 7207 (leave a message)Email: ubcfSjbushlandperth.org.au

Representatives of The Urban Bushland Council request the opportunity of making a presentationin person to the Review Committee on this amendment.

The Urban Bushland Council is the peak community organisation for urban bushland conservationin WA. The Council is an association of some 70 community groups, mostly Friends groups, whoare working to protect and conserve our precious and unique urban bushland. This includes allnatural areas within the Perth and Peel regions.

Introduction and Background

The Urban Bushland Council is concerned that the text amendment is inconsistent with the statedobjectives of Bush Forever policy (December 2000) as published by the WAPC in December 2000.Specifically the first Policy Objective on p. xiii of Bush Forever Volume I: Policies, Principles andprocesses is:

'To meet the needs and aspirations of the community of Western Australia for the appropriateprotection and management of bushland of regional significance in the Swan Coastal Plain portionof the Perth Metropolitan Region.'

The amendment fails to provide the stated 'protection and management' for Bush Forever Areas.On the contrary, the amendment actually grants permission to clear Bush Forever Areas held bypublic authorities. This is contrary to the concept of providing 'protection'.

The amendment is also inconsistent with the spirit and intent of the preceding Urban BushlandStrategy 1995, the 1996 National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biodiversity, the StatePlanning Strategy 1997, Directions 2031 and beyond (2011), and State Planning Policy 2, all ofwhich are described in the Amendment Report.

1

The final comment of the Discussion on page 3 of the Amendment Report states:' This MRS text amendment is to tie in with that MRS amendment to ensure Bush Forever Areas areprotected through statutory planning controls.' However there are no corresponding provisions inthe text amendment to ensure such statutory protection, and furthermore it allows for clearing tooccur in Bush Forever sites. Thus the Amendment Report is diametrically opposed to the wordingof the amendment.

We believe these are major flaws in the amendment and require revision.

Specific comment on clamses

1,Clause 3(1) Definition of Bush Forever Area

The Amendment Report and indeed the very title of the Amendment, states as its primary purposethe definition of Bush Forever Areas. Clause 3(1) neither defines Bush Forever Areas nor does itdescribe the purpose of having Bush Forever Areas. Given that these areas have been selected underthe CAR system and based upon extensive scientific research, this amendment disregards the statusof Bush Forever. It ignores the fact that the Perth region is an internationally recognisedbiodiversity hot-spot for conservation priority.

Therefore we submit that Clause 3(1) should be amended to include the definition andpurpose of a Bush Forever Area. This could be;

'Bush Forever Areas are areas of regionally significant bushland and wetlands thatcollectively provide for a representative system ofprotected areas for the PerthMetropolitan Region,'

We are concerned that a definition has been omitted. Not only will this invite confusion, it suggestsuses other than conservation purposes will be permitted without the proper controls and publicscrutiny.

2,Clause 16(la)(a)

This clause will effectively allow public authorities to clear regionally significant bushland outsideBush Forever Areas (BFA) for 'permitted developments'.

While such proposals may be subject to referral to the EPA and environmental assessment underthe Environmental Protection Act, in most cases the EPA decides to 'not assess' such proposals.Under the clearing regulations such proposals are most often exempt from requiring a clearingpermit under Schedule VI. Therefore bushland which is inherently biodiverse and regionallysignificant is afforded no protection and is not even assessed.

In effect this clause sets out a legal mechanism to bypass proper environmental consideration. Thedanger is it will provide carte blanche approvals, and facilitates clearing and developments inregionally significant and locally significant bushland. In other words it encourages the 'dealingdown' of Perth's unique and species rich bushland to leave only Bush Forever Areas.

This is contrary to and indeed flies in the face of the whole Bush Forever policy package which setsout a network of Bush Forever Areas tied in with local bushland areas which interconnect withecological linkages. These all need to be retained and protected as a network.

2

Given that this clause applies to areas outside Bush Forever Areas, it seeks to bypass properenvironmental assessment and clearing controls under the Environmental Protection Act. Asit allows regionally and locally significant bushland to be cleared under state planning law forpublic purposes without any public or agency scrutiny this clause should be deleted.

A new clause 16(la)(a) should be inserted stating; ' clearing of bushland or remnant nativetrees in Bush Forever areas is not permitted.'

3. Clause 16(la)(ba)

This clause allows government authorities to clear and develop in their Bush Forever sites ifapproved by the WAPC. This is totally unacceptable. Government authorities should be requiredto modify their operational plans by opting out of their Bush Forever Areas and handing over theirsites to an appropriate land manager such as the local government authority.It is recommended that this clause be deleted and replaced with a clause which prohibitsclearing of bushland and remnant native vegetation in all Bush Forever Areas .

4= Clause 16(la)(b).

This clause should be deleted. The wording of this clause is unchanged from the formeramendment.However it allows development on reserved land vested in or owned by a public authority if it isexpressly authorized under an Act to be carried out without WAPC approval. Under this clause intheory there could be a new Act brought in which allows a freeway or major road or watertreatment plant to be built through or in the middle of a Bush Forever site. Any new Act targeting aspecific development would over-ride the MRS text.

5, Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A„ Bush Forever Areas

Sub clause (1) states 'The purpose of this clause is to identify regionally significant bushland asBush Forever Areas.' This implies that all regionally significant bushland is identified as BushForever Areas ('BFA'). This is not correct and is indeed misleading as there are thousands ofhectares of regionally significant bushland outside BFA. However if all regionally significantbushland were declared Bush Forever Areas we would be very pleased and support such aninitiative.

This clause should be reworded to read;'The purpose of this clause is to identify Bush Forever Areas as regionally significant bushland.'

Or even better with the addition \..to be protected and managed for the benefit of the communityand for the purpose of nature conservation.'

Fart IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (2) - Supported.

Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (3). Supported except for the lastphrase. The last phrase ' and does not operate to zone or reserve that area' should be deleted.

Further recommendations

a) Special Control Areas should be declared under the MRS and text Amendment for all BushForever sites not yet secured for the purpose of conservation. This mechanism to provide interim

3

protection was an Action specified in the Bush Forever plan (Dec 2000) but was later dropped. Thismechanism exists in planning law and should be used to provide immediate protection in theplanning process.

b)P&R reservation: All Bush Forever Areas should be made Parks and Recreation reservation.While most BFA are already rezoned to P&R, the remainder should also be rezoned (entirely andwithout any further incursions). Clearing and development in all bushland in BFA should beexpressly 'not permitted'.

Clearing of parts of BFA for development of recreation buildings and facilities remains a problemunder current zoning and this amendment needs to prevent this.

c)A new reserve purpose for 'protection of Bush Forever Areas' could be introduced under theMRS for all Bush Forever Areas. This would remove the land use conflicts which arise under thecurrent P&R reservation where sports fields and recreational facilities can be built in Bush Foreversites which are supposed to be protected when zoned P&R.

d)Statutory protectionMost importantly, the Amendment needs to include a new clause which provides overall statutoryprotection and management of all Bush Forever Areas for the conservation of nature in Perth'sunique natural landscape, and for the enjoyment, health and benefit of the people of Perth.

SUMMARY

In summary, MRS Amendment 1236/57 is not acceptable in its current form and needs to bechanged so that all Bush Forever Areas are legally protected and managed and clearing inBush Forever Areas is prohibited.

C Mary GrayPresident16 January 2013

4

Submission 32

From: Hendrik Stappenbelt: rmailtoihencoSlOskvmesh.com.aulSent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013 10:07 PMTo; mrsSubject: Submission

Planning and Development Act 2005Section S7 Amendment (Minor)

Form 57Submission

Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/S7

Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the iietropolitan RegionScheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


NameAnnaPembroke(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ..72 Brennan Rise,GidgegannupPostcode

6083

Contact phone number ..08 95746937 Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be looserather than bound)

I support the insertion of the New similar Clause, thankyouAnna Pembroke

You should be aware that:•> The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissionsmade to the WAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.»In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on thesesubmissions, copies of your submission or the substance of that submission, may bedisclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureAnna PembrokeDate15.01.2013

Note: Submissions illUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website -http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au


ubmission


Form 57Submission

Metropolitain Regiosi Scheme Amendment 1236/57


OFFICE USE ONLY

To; [email protected] Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

NameMR MichaelGorman(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address18 Shaw Mews Leda, PERTH W.APostcode6170

Contact phone number0420847072Email [email protected]


i- pul -ftirilv -f o W/vPC -fU

SusU fo'W PoHcaas in i-ys cwitni-fofn f-j pfootcks ^ p/ofcciiVa_pOf BiaSY.).(,,/,\CIM ÔKianr^ct^d^ldjux}^ QpS\\'0-'if- ApPfg\j{jj

lyfhL UAPt. -iM ftM,' thoS CIOMAc 6^ dsLldea 'tpfattd Â% clai.^ tokic^p(oh}hK cjîoa of,RuShkoAfioJ.fca/joo.r..(J.ttjd.cdiCc-...vM. £iiSk.F'o-CfZ ^ fec-'S".

You should beâwere that:^•The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.•In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by persons) making the submission

SignatureDateI5:..J:.ZQL^...Note; Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being closs ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website - htto://wvvw olannino.w3.aov.au


Sutaissi©ii 34


Form 57

SybmissionMetropolitan Region Scheme Ameradment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1 a)(a) and {ba) in the IVletropolitan Region Scheme Text


NameMargaret Owen.(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

|0EPARTM!7: 'T OF PLANNING

1 8 JAN 2013

RLE (I l£, /o32_7

OFFICE USE ONLY

Address86 Daglish Street WembleyPostcode 6014.

Contact phone number ....9381 12987Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

® Clause 3: Why direct the reader to another clause? if it is necessary to direct the reader toClause 28 A (2), at least make the reading clearer. For example: 'Bush Forever area'means an area of regionally significant bushland and/or wetland identified by government toprotect and manage. (Bush Forever Vol 1 v). A bushland and/or wetland is identified as aBush Forever area by hatching on the map.

o Clause 16: The suggested clause insertion is a way of permitting development in a BushForever area. The permitted development would be through '(i) a written agreementbetween the Commission and the public authority: or (ii) a management plan approved bythe Commission.' The object of Bush Forever areas is to protect that regionally significantbushland or wetland because it is important and has been identified as such and ratified bythe whole of government. The object is not to make it easier to put development in thosearea. Therefore 1 strongly object to part ba) of clause 16 being inserted.What expertise do the Commission and public authorities have in respect of bushland andwetland? Their interest is in matters other than protecting Bush Forever areas.The process of the inclusion of Bush Forever areas in the state's biodiversity conservationplanning was rigorous and was undertaken over years. The Department of Planning or theCommission cannot then turn around and say let's facilitate development. Bush Forever Vol1 states that 'Areas of highest conservation value will be reserved for conservationpurposes under the CALM Act 1985 and the Land Administration Act 1997' (p XV)In addition and relating to (i), there would be no public input in the discussions leading to awritten agreement between the parties.

o Part IV A Bush Forever areas28A. Bush Forever areas(1) Is the clause going to identify all regionally significant bushland as Bush Forever areas?

That would be wonderful.

You should be aware that:a The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.

o In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, c'ojsies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureDate ..i.t...J.Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spra) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.ciov.aLi


Sybmission 35


Form 57Submission


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for Mew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a){a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name:

Address:

Contact phone number:

Email address:

Submission

Background

I would like to lodge my objection to the current wording of the MRS text amendment referring to the Bush ForeverDefinition.

The Bush Forever scheme is a worthy mechanism to protect regionally significant bushland in the Perth area. Thesouth-west of Western Australia, including the Perth metropolitan region is an internationally renowned biodiversity"hotspot" and has suffered from extensive degradation since European settlement, primarily due to land clearing. Landclearing for urban development is still a current threat to these important areas, together with numerous other threats totheir biodiversity values, including: weed invasion, feral animals, bushfire management, groundwater draw-down, off-roadvehicles and climate change.

It is our duty as West Australian citizens to protect and conserve these scientifically identified sites into the future,ensuring we maintain a healthy and sustainable environment and community.

Bush Forever Definition

The MRS text needs to be amended to tie the current MRS map, which shows Bush Forever areas, with an officialdefinition of what these areas represent. The Bush Forever areas represent areas of significant natural resources ofconservation value. These areas should be defined in the MRS text amendment Clause 3 (1) as conservation areas tobe protected and managed for the benefit of the community and for the purpose of nature conservation where landclearing is prohibited.

Without a simple definition of Bush Forever areas as conservation zones there is still no statutory protection of ourregionally significant bushland areas. As previously stated these areas have been identified by a thorough scientificprocess and this ongoing lack of protection of these areas may be seen nationally and internationally as an embarrassingfailure of the Western Australian state government to protect our known treasures.

Bush Forever Areas Owned by Government Authorities

Bush Forever areas that are currently owned by government authorities have been identified via the Bush Foreverprocess as regionally significant conservation areas. The Department of Planning is in charge of the acquisition of BushForever sites and transfer of these lands to a management agency. Any Bush Forever areas currently owned byGovernment Agencies should, as a priority, be transferred to management agencies such as the DEC or localgovernments together with adequate funding for ongoing management and protection of environmental values.

These Bush Forever areas should not be developed.

MRS CATHERINE COOPERPRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTLOMANDRA ENVIRONMENTAL PTY LTD

23 FIRST AVE MT LAWLEY WA 6050

0416 127 420

[email protected]

The current text amendment fails to provide adequate protection of these government authority owned Bush Foreverlands and in fact works against the whole notion of "Bush Forever". Clause 16(1a)(a)(ba) should therefore be removed.

Management of Bush Forever AreasThe MRS text amendment should include a clause that requires "owners and management agencies of Bush ForeverAreas to manage Bush Forever Areas to maintain and enhance their biodiversity values".

Parks and Recreation Zoning

The current zoning for conservation areas falls under "Parks and Recreation" which is not adequate for the protection ofenvironmental values. Buildings and other recreational infrastructure can be developed in these areas, which is totallyinappropriate development and represents a failure in protecting these areas from land clearing.

A more appropriate zoning, rather than Parks and Reserves, should be applied to Bush Forever Areas to ensure theirprotection from land clearing.

You should be aware that:° The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.- In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature: MRS CATHERINE COOPER Date: 16 JANUARY 2013

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - 050


Submission 36


Form 57Submission



OFFICE USE ONLY


Name ....Dr Marjorie Apthorpe(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ..69 Bacchante Circle, Ocean ReefPostcode ....6027

Contact phone number ...9300 8573... Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

This is not a minor amendment. It is a major "about face" on the whole purpose of Bush Forever.Bush Forever was intended to preserve bushland and its associated species for conservation forposterity. The proposed amendment does not do that and is therefore entirely unsatisfactory. Itenables destruction of Bush Forever bushland by any government authority with ownership orvesting of the land; without any public right of appeal or review, and without any statutoryprotection for fauna or flora on the site. This is entirely unsatisfactory. It is against the spirit andintention of Bush Forever, for the present government to be facilitating the easier destruction ofBush Forever sites. There needs to be a statement in this MRS Amendment that says that "BushForever is bushland protected from clearing, for the benefit of future generations of WestAustralians." In the proposed amendment wording, there seems to be a clear intent to bypass thelegal safeguards erected in environmental legislation that protect rare or vulnerable species fromextinction. This amendment clearly goes against the purpose of Bush Forever and other state andfederal conservation policies. Clearing of Bush Forever sites should not be permitted, and thisshould be stated in the Amendment under consideration.The Amendment should also require authorities that are responsible for management of BushForever areas to actually carry out bushland maintenance (eg. weed control, preventing 4-WDdrive access, preventing ad hoc clearing). There is evidence that local governments that haveBush Forever sites vested with them are deliberately allowing those sites to be trashed by trail bikeriders, BMX track creation, rubbish dumping and weed invasion, in order to degrade the site,downgrade its conservation condition, and cause it to be more easily approved for clearing. This iswhat is occurring with the magnificently vegetated Ocean Reef marina site. The City of Joondalupowns part of this site, and has refused to maintain the Bush Forever bushland or the adjacentCrown land foreshore bushland, on the grounds that "it is going to be cleared so we're notspending money on it" (Comment from an employee). This is despite the "protection" of otherlegislation that should protect vulnerable and threatened species, and threatened ecologicalcommunities at that site. Kingsley Dixon has stated that this site is the best coastal vegetation inthe Perth region. The City of Joondalup is currently exploring ways of getting around what littlelegislative protection exists, so that it can run a major road through the middle of a threatenedGraceful Sun Moth colony, and through a stand of significant vegetation (Melaleuca cardiophyllaclosed heathland). It is proposed to also erect a sports ground on this cleared heathland. This isentirely unacceptable (there are several large sports fields, underutilized, nearby). For reasonssuch as the example given above, Bush Forever sites should be zoned for Parks and Recreationbut should also be designated as not to be cleared.

You should be aware that:•The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.•In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature ....Marjorie Apthorpe. Date ..16th January 2013Wote: Submissions WJUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spun) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.aov.au

Email your completed form to mrs(a)plannlng.wa.gov.au



SubmissionWletropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the IVIetropolitan Region Scheme Text


Name^1....^...^^.^^./ 1 /I. /(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)-^

AddressPostcode

Contact phone mmhetEmail address


fafer to tiffadi eJ UrfcC

OFFICE USE ONLY

SUBMISSION NUMBER

Submissita 37


(Submission continued. Please attach additional pages If required)


® The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may besubject to applications for access under the act.


To be siomed by person(s) making the submission

Signature ...^^..^^77:^:?—::Date

Note; Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 [email protected]; Website - http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

CITY OFwww. ar madale. wa. go v. au

OurRef: MRS/1236/57Enquiries to: James Robinson

14 January 2013


Dear Sir/Madam

RE: Submission - Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

The City generally supports amendment to the MRS text to allow permitted developmentwithin a Bush Forever area owned by, or on reserved land vested in a public authority tocommence development without the written approval of the WAPC. However, it is notclear if existing dedicated road reserves under the care and management of a publicauthority would fall within the meaning of "reserved land" or the "permitted development"expressed in the amendment.

This City's view is that road reserves should be specifically addressed by the MRSamendment. The text wording of the MRS amendment would therefore need minormodifications to clarify that road reserves which are affected by the Bush Forever overlayon the MRS Maps do not require farther written approval of the Commission for thepurpose of road infrastructure. This exclusion can be suitably qualified by applying it onlywhere existing dedicated roads are identified in a District Structure Plan approved by theCommission, or identified in a gazetted Town Planning Scheme.

The Bush Forever overlay is a policy overlay on land to highlight areas of regionalecological significance. The City notes that the mapping of Bush Forever areas is at acourse scale at MRS level rather than a finely grained overlay that differentiates betweenbushland that can be protected and land this has been already earmarked for publicpuiposes, including for district and local road infrastructure. In Bush Forever locations therequirement for the WAPC to grant a written approval for development or use should notapply where a public authority has been given responsibility for management of the land aspart of its broader government responsibilities to provide the public with infrastructure andservices in accordance with the WAPC approved District Structure Plans or Town PlanningSchemes.

Long term planning required for roads and infirastructiireThe State of Western Australia is the owner of all land in dedicated roads, however, thecare, control and management of roads is placed with the relevant local government inwhich the road is situated unless the road is a main road or highway under the care, controland management by the Commissioner of Main Roads. For local roads it is the relevantlocal government which is required to construct planned roads unless a private land

7 Orchard Avenue Armadale Western Australia 6112Locked Bag 2 Armadale Western Australia 6992

Telephone (08) 9399 0111 Facsimile (08) 9399 0184 [email protected] 798 6326 9538

OEPARTMEMT OF PLANNING

1 6 JAN 2013

Page 2

developer has to construct a local road to provide private lots with a road frontageconnected to the regional road network. In circumstances where the land adjacent to adedicated road reserve is not to be developed for lots, such as found in Bush Foreveroverlay areas, it is only local governments which can construct the unbuilt section theplanned road, however the current lack of clarity of the approvals required is notsatisfactory.

Roads are defined in section 3 of the Land Administration Act as being land reserved,declared or otherwise dedicated under an Act or dedicated at common law as an alley,bridge, court, lane, road, street, thoroughfare or yard for the passage of pedestrians orvehicles or both. A road consists of a "road corridor" which is the cadastral boundaries of aland parcel created for road purposes. Roads are parcels of land to be used for the passageof pedestrians or vehicles or both and are dedicated to use by the public.

Dedicated road reserves have net environmental benefitsRoads are also used by most utility service providers and by concentrating impacts of anumber of service providers in a single discrete geographic location, road corridors serve tominimise the environmental impacts that may otherwise occur. For example in a BushForever area if service agencies chose different conidors for the extension and connectionof their respective services the environmental impacts would be multiplied. Existingdedicated roads therefore serve an environmental function that is not sufficiently catered forin planning and environmental processes, notwithstanding that vegetation has to be clearedto allow their proper construction.

Road corridors are important parts of servicing and access networks, particularly inurbanising areas such as the City of Armadale where they connect adjacent land uses andfacilities such as schools, shopping centres and recreation sites to their catchmentpopulation. Road conidors are intended to provide an efficient network design based onthe continuity and connection of the conidor to a wider district network.

Roads by definition require a continuous corridor and require connections to other existingand dedicated roads and/or utility infrastructure service installations at each end of thecorridor. Where an unmade section of an existing dedicated road has been included in aBush Forever overlay, that section of road often cannot be transported or relocated toanother location entirely outside of the Bush Forever overlay due to the physical limitationsof connecting to existing infrastructure and the land use commitments inherent in anapproved District Structure Plan or Town Planning Scheme.

Roads are also often created in the form of a dedicated road reserve that is constmcted instages over a period of time to an appropriate service standard, as required by fundingavailability and service requirements. With provision in advance of actual requirements,the vegetation on dedicated roads often remains. This is then identified by the BushForever overlay which has in some locations been imposed on the final remaining unmadesection of an existing dedicated road not yet fully constructed to the intended servicestandard, notwithstanding that the unmade or partially made section already exist as adedicated road reserve forming part of a committed infrastructure and movement corridorand part of a larger network and notwithstanding that they have been long identified aslocal roads in Town Planning Schemes and in WAPC District Structure Plans.

The Bush Forever overlay has been imposed on a dedicated road reserve in some locationsbecause adjacent land has been identified as regionally significant and included in a Bush

Page 3

Forever site such that the dedicated road reserve has been swallowed up in a larger BushForever site. The level of resulting uncertainty over approval requirements is anunnecessary cost on local governments in meeting the infrastructure provision and trafficmanagement service obligations of the Local Government Act.

Previous Commission endorsements of uses for public pmirposesWhere formal public processes have already been followed, such as the State government'sadoption of District Structure Plans, for example the Southern River / Forrestdale /Brookdale / Wungong District Structure Plan (2001) or Town Planning Schemes and thesealready identify existing dedicated local road reserves, there should be no requirement for afurther written WAPC approval in a Bush Forever overlay area. As the WAPC has alreadyendorsed the local road reserve identified in these plans, to require a written WAPCapproval for their implementation or development would be an unnecessary duplication andinefficiency in government, particularly given the growth of separate approval requirementsand processes under environmental legislation.

Land reserves vested in public anthorities require certainty of purposeThe current wording of the MRS amendment does not provide the level of certainty overdedicated roads affected by Bush Forever which should be expected of the rational andefficient system of metropolitan planning intended by the MRS. Nor is the currentuncertainty consistent with the assurances given to local governments in the Bush ForeverSite Implementation Guidelines, which states that for: Existing Road/Railway Reserveswithin land reserved in the local TPS for roads purposes, there shall he a presumption thatthe construction authority has a right to undertake the required works for transport andassociated infrastructure (Bush Forever Site Implementation Guideline/Practice Notes,2000, Vol. 1 Policies, Principles and Processes Appendix 3).

Dedicating land as a road reserve is intended to provide planning and infrastructure serviceproviders with a high level of certainty in planning future infrastructure and land use.However, the level of certainty has now been eroded by the inclusion of dedicated roadreserves in the Bush Forever overlay area. It is currently ambiguous whether a dedicatedroad is permitted to be used for a road even where costly environmental approvals aresecured. As currently worded the MRS does not give any certainty that the Commissionwould grant planning approval to an existing dedicated road which requires construction ina Bush Forever overlay area.

The currently proposed MRS text amendment fails to provide sufficient clarity whether anapproval by the WAPC is required to permit the use of a dedicated road as a road. Localgovernments are therefore currently faced with not knowing if the WAPC may decide that adedicated road can not be constructed and used for road and infrastructure purposes.

The resulting duplication of process, inefficiencies and uncertainties over final planningoutcomes where local road infrastructure has been long planned but subsequentlyswallowed up within a wider Bush Forever overlay area, is further compounded becauseunder environmental legislation in Bush Forever overlay areas local governments arerequired to undertake often costly and time-consuming environmental assessments prior toconstructing a road, even though the dedicated road reserve put in place by long termplanning is intended for that purpose. Significant public funds and years in delays can beexperienced when local governments seek formal environmental approvals for theconstruction of what may be a final linking section of an existing dedicated road reservewhich has been subsequently included in the Bush Forever overlay, notwithstanding that it

Page 4

has long been identified in a local Town Planning Scheme and has been identified in aWAPC District Structure Plan for major land use change and urbanisation.

As it stands, the MRS amendment implies that not only is a local government required toundertake costly environmental assessments to construct a local road under environmentallegislation, but may also be required to seek a planning approval from the WAPC due to theBush Forever planning overlay. This red tape is further compounded by a local governmentalso having to potentially obtain separate environmental approvals from both the WA andCommonwealth environmental protection agencies where a Bush Forever overlay alsorelates to any matter the Commonwealth may decide is of National EnvironmentalSignificance as well as State level significance.

The uncertainty associated with multiple approval requirements for public infrastructuresuch as roads and services may also flow on into the private land development sector. As aresult of uncertainty investors in housing supply and land development cannot presume thatplanned road and infrastructure connections will be implemented as planned, even thoughthey may have been put in place many decades in advance in the form of existing dedicatedroad reserves identified in Town Planning Schemes and in WAPC approved DistrictStructure Plans. This tends to undermine the very intention of the forward planning systemof District Plans and Town Planning Schemes.

The essence of planning and the intent of planning legislation are to identify landrequirements and future uses in advance of the need for implementation and construction.However, in areas affected by Bush Forever, local governments are penalised by oftenduplicated and costly planning approval and environmental approval requirements, even atthe final stages of implementing a local road by constructing a final unmade section.

Dedicated road reserves identified as roads in Town Planning Schemes and in DistrictStructure Plans approved by the WAPC form part of the cadastral framework whichunderpins the legal rights to use land for a road. Planning Schemes should provide a levelof planning certainty that a dedicated road reserve is pennitted to be developed and used asa road within its cadastral boundaries, given that these have already been provided by Stategovernment for the puipose of a road.

The State government's Bush Forever Policy states for existing Road/Railway Reserves"implementation is largely a design and management issue, to retain and protect thebushland values, where practical" (Bush Forever Site Implementation Guideline/PracticeNotes Vol. 1 Policies, Principles and Processes Appendix 3).

Bush Forever Practice Note 18 states that the Bush Forever Objective for Road andRailway Reserves is - To encourage the protection, where practical, of bushland andcorridor values along existing road/railway reserves and to give due consideration tobushland protection in the design and location offuture roads/railways.

Bush Forever Practice Note 18 also states that for: Existing Road/Railway Reserves withinland reserved in the local TPS for roads purposes, there shall be a presumption that theconstruction authority has a right to undertake the required works for transport andassociated infrastructure.

The Bush Forever Implementation Guideline 23 (IG 23) includes that: where regional orlocal road reserves are at an advanced stage of planning and/or reserved in the MRS or

Page 5

local TPS for road purposes and no feasible alternative exists for a review of the alignment,the implementation of Bush Forever will be largely a design and management issue, toretain and protect the bushland values, where practical.

When Bush Forever was finalised in 2000, local governments took the above assurances ofpractical considerations contained in the Bush Forever Site ImplementationGuideline/Practice Notes in good faith. Local governments have accordingly extendedconsiderable support to protecting regionally significant bushland and implementing BushForever policy.

Bush Forever is intended as a "whole-of-government" response to regional bushland. Localgovernment and infrastructure service providers should therefore be able to expect the Stategovernment's environmental and planning agencies to honour this stated intention.However this will not occur unless the WAPC provides leadership through providingclarity for the intention and purpose of existing endorsed dedicated road reserves affectedby the Bush Forever MRS overlay.

In practice local governments already carry out high level formal environmentalassessments where these are in Bush Forever areas with the aim of establishing the "designand management issues, to retain and protect the bushland values, where practical'referred to in the WAPC's Bush Forever Site Implementation Guideline/Practice Notes.

Such assessments enable the State and/or Commonwealth Minister's for the Environment toset the appropriate matters as Conditions in formal Statements of Environmental Approvalunder environmental legislation and to which local governments would be required toconform. There is therefore no need for additional planning approval by the WAPC for theconstruction of dedicated roads in Bush Forever overlay areas as a dedicated road hasalready been put in place and endorsed by previous planning approvals and the constructionworks to develop the road infrastructure will be assessed under environmental legislation.

Modifications requested to Amendment 1236/57Planning agencies and public and private infrastructure service providers rely on thecertainty provided by dedicated road reserves for the future implementation of movementsystems (pedestrians and vehicles) and utility service extensions including energy, gas,water, sewerage, telecommunications and drainage. Local roads are not identified on theMRS maps, however. Bush Forever sites are. The MRS text should accordingly clarify thatthe use and construction of a dedicated road reserve is permitted development without theneed for additional WAPC planning approvals.

Accordingly the City recommends the following modifications to the final wording ofAmendment 1236/57:

ba) permitted development in a Bush Forever area carried out in accordance with:

(i)a written agreement between the Commission and the public authority; or

(ii)a management plan or District Structure Plan approved by the Commission; or

(Hi) a road reserve identified in a gazetted Town Plannins Scheme for the purpose ofroad infrastructure.

Page 6

CondmisionAs the State planning agency the WAPC should be providing guidance for the whole-of-govemment Bush Forever policy and how the overlay relates to existing dedicated roadreserves identified in Town Planning Schemes or WAPC approved District Structure Plans.The current form of the amendment does not specifically deal with existing dedicated roadreserves which have been swallowed up by a Bush Forever overlay, nor does it reflect thepreviously stated whole-ofgovernment intention for roads in Bush Forever site that thereshall he a presumption that the construction authority has a right to undertake the requiredworks for transport and associated infrastructure.

Given thati separate approvals are required under environmental legislation in Bush Foreverareas, the WAPC should accordingly reconfirm its statements in the Bush Forever SiteImplementation Guideline/Practice Notes by suitably modifying the current MRS textamendment as recommended by the City of Armadale.

It is requested that the WAPC support the highlighted modifications proposed above tomake it clear that WAPC approval is not required to permit development of roadinfrastructure on a dedicated road reserve, irrespective of whether it is contained wholly orpartly within an area of Bush Forever overlay.

Thank you for your consideration. Should you require any further information pleasecontact Council's Strategic Planner Mr James Robinson or Executive Director ofDevelopment Services on 9399 0111.

Yours sincerely

, , .<>/ ,

'p- Lx)

UJW ROBINSONMANAGER STRATEGIC PLANNING

Submission 38

Your Ref:Our Ref:Enquiries:Telephone:

833-2-1-56 (RLS/0319)JT1 2012 10999 V01Brett Coombes9420-3165

17 January 2013

SecretaryWestern Australian Planning Commission140 William StreetPERTH WA 6000

Attention: Tracey Scroop

629 Newcastle StreetLeederville 6007Western Australia

PO Box 100Leederville 6902Perth Western Australia

Tel (+61 8) 9420 2420

www.watercorporation.com.

ABN28 003 434 9I7

Wletropolitami Region Scheme Proposed Amendment 1236/57 - Bush Forever AreaDefmiffloim Clause insertion) and Removal of Clause 16(1a)(a) for [\!ew Similafi-Clause Insertion 1S((1a)(a| and (ha) in the Metropolitan [Region Scheme Text

Thank you for your letter of 19 October 2012 requesting the Water Corporation'scomments on this MRS amendment.

The Corporation supports the 'Bush Forever Notice of Delegation' overlay on the MRSmaps and the proposal to insert Clause 28A to clarify the purpose of the hatched BushForever areas on the scheme map.

However, the proposed modification of Clause 16(1a)(a) of the MRS texi is notsupported as it would remove the current permitted development rights in BushForever areas in cases where development proposals by a Public Authority do notinvolve the clearing of any regionally significant vegetation.

In view of the broad scale of Bush Forever mapping in some areas, the proposed newprovisions will in effect give rise to the requirement for Public Authorities to obtainplanning permission from the WAPC to undertake any works in Bush Forever areas,even when the clearing of vegetation is not required.

The alternative option (clause 16(1a)(ba)) is also not supported because the informalprocess of obtaining a written agreement from the WAPC, or the approval of amanagement plan, would be akin to a requirement to obtain planning approval, butwithout the certainties provided within a statutory framework or the ability for theapplicant/public authority to seek a review of the WAPC's decision through the StateAdministrative Tribunal.

The Water Corporation would support the amendment being further modified prior tofinal approval to retain of the current exemptions from the need for Public Authorities toobtain planning approval for works where the clearing of regionally significant bushlandis not required.

Should you have any further queries in this regard, please contact me or the offlcerindicated above.

eterJ HowardManager Land PlanningPlanning and Capability Group

r— Sybmission 39DEI

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendment (Minoir)

Form 57

SubmissioniMetropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57


1 7 JAN 2013

file f-Ls/osan

OFFICE USE ONLY


,Name(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

...3.12. 1....3..Y..^...f£.

Address (f?....Postcode

Contact phone number77./.ZI.Q.... Email addressSubmission (Please attach additional pages If required. It Is preferred that ^ny/addltional Informationph loose rather than bound) £-0

You should be aware that:- The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureDatel.:±.. UST be received by|ne,adVertised closing date, being/close ofNote: Submission's _ _^~

business (5pm) on/8 January 2013. (/ate Submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone -J^8) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website -http://www.plarihHiq.wa.qov.au

Email your completed form to mrs@,planninq.wa.qov.au

Submission on Metropolitan Region Scheme Annendment 1236/57

I am most concerned with the content of the proposed Amendment.

Clause 3 (1) fails to define what is a Bush Forever site and also the purpose for which the site is tobe managed. This is a deficiency and the most likely outcome of this omission is that there will beconfusion by government decision makers and the community as to what is a Bush Forever site andits purpose. In some cases the site may have multiple uses, although all of them must be entirelycompatible with the essential purpose of Bush Forever - eg conservation of Perth's remarkablebiodiversity.

This should be corrected.

Clause 16 (la) (ba). This gives authority to the Western Australian Planning Commission to clearbushland and develop a Bush Forever site for purposes incompatible with its status. I am puzzledthat the Commission is putting at risk Bush Forever sites, when the Commission throughout the past12 years or so has been the principal advocate for protection of these sites.

This Clause should be deleted.

Clause 16 (la) (a). Again I am dismayed and puzzled that clearing of regionally significantbushland for development is to be facilitated by this clause. The Commission took responsibilityfor acquisition of sites identified as Bush Forever many years ago and it is not the time for theCommission to walk away from its commitment to Bush Forever.

Most agencies and the community know there is little likelihood of the EPA assessing proposalsimpacting on Bush Forever areas as it is plain the Authority's focus is on major developments inother parts of the State. If referred it is almost certain the EPA will opt out.

It is up to the Commission to complete the task they began, which was to maximum opportunities toacquire the most significant remnant bushland in the metropolitan area and to ensure that thebushland's conservation values are protected and well managed.


Clause 16 1(a) (b). This is an insidious clause which would have serious ramifications forprotecting regionally significant bushland in the metropolitan area. Potentially any infrastructuredevelopment could slip through without scrutiny by the Commission, the EPA, and mostimportantly by the community.


What should be included in the text: -

In the past Special Control Areas have been used to protect bushland and wetlands prior tofinalization of their acquisition (eg Greater Brixton Street Wetlands). The text should state that thismechanism would be used to provide interim protection for Bush Forever sites where it is required.

The text should state clearly that Bush Forever sites will be protected from all clearing anddevelopment.

Affirmation that all sites will be rezoned to Parks and Recreation or in some instances NatureReserves in a timely manner.

Statutory protection should be given for all Bush Forever sites. Many people have voiced theirstrong support for Bushplan and then the renamed Bush Forever over a 15 year period. Theirexpectation is that when Bush Forever was announced by the Court Government - as a 'whole ofgovernment' initiative that at last a government valued the special bushland and wetlands of thePerth area. The text needs to reflect the commitment that the Court government (with support fromthe Labor opposition, who began the process) had to conservation of Perth's natural heritage.

If the Commission fails to uphold the essence of Bush Forever, of which it has been a majorsupporter and advocate, then it would be a disgrace. The name selected - 'Bush Forever1 - was ineffect a declaration by the Court Government that the areas identified would remain 'bush forever'.

I urge you to use this opportunity to ensure that Bush Forever areas are protected and well managedin perpetuity by deleting the clauses outlined above and including statements which reflect fullsupport for Bush Forever sites.

Joan Payne10 Walcott StreetMount Lawley WA 6050

15th January, 2013

Submission 40)

ToWA PLANNING [email protected]

SUBMISSION RE MRS AMENDMENT 1236/57From James Mumme36 Gloucester AveShoalwater WA 6169

I have faxed this submission with the covering sheet signed.I do not have an electronic signature but trust that this email address will suffice.

This submission makes the following points :

1. In general

The proposed amendment appears to be little more than an attempt to make it easier for governmentagencies to destroy Bush Forever sites and thus represents a step backwards to a discredited model ofenvironmental protection that prevailed 40 years ago. A brief case study is supplied to illustrate theargument.

1.

2.Overview

The proposed amendment specifically

a.fails to clarify the purpose and nature of Bush Forever sites,b.fails to ensure any effective legal protection for existing Bush Forever sites in terms of

conservation and biodiversity,c.fails to propose any steps to ensure retention of conservation values and to prevent their

degradation, andd.fails to ensure any level of community consultation in development proposals.

1. 3. Detailed objections

a.The amendment should clarify the purpose of Bush Forever sites as setting up a system ofprotected conservation areas with the functions of at an absolute minimum ensuring thepreservation of adequate representation of all plant communities within the Perth Metro area. Itshould also ensure an adequate buffer to minimise the impacts of foreseeable climate changeimpacts on plant communities: in other words the sites should not just contain minimalexamples of communities but contain sufficient buffers against human impacts to ensuresustainability of each site. A further purpose should be to ensure community health and well-being through provision of green belts: there is ample evidence to show that mental andphysical health are improved through provision of green belts, something that is increasinglyimportanfgiverTthe pace of urban development occurring north and south oftfieTJity and thetype of housing developments which have small block sizes, minimal setbacks and lack of talltrees and bush areas.

b.The amendment needs to propose legal measures to ensure conservation and biodiversityprevent. At present it appears that Bush Forever sites can be commandeered by Landcorpwith little onus on that agency to justify destruction of such sites beyond claiming to producehousing developments, a marina and a few jobs, something that may well happen with site355. The proposed amendment makes it even easier for Government agencies to take overBush Forever sites for any purpose. Lack of requirement for referral to the EPA for a publicprocess with community consultation. There should also be requirements for adequate bushcorridors to ensure the passage of birds and animals to promote natural spreading of seeds.Adequately large areas of quality bushland to represent plant communities sustainably shouldbe legislated.

c.At present practical measures to prevent degradation of Bush Forever sites are left mainly tochance or at best to overworked DEC staff. This is patently inadequate and, if the BushForever program is to have any real meaning, needs to be dealt with properly.

d.Community consultation is clearly not a priority in the minds of the drafters of this amendment.This runs counter to the focus of governments at all levels over the past 20 years in whichattempts have been made, however inadequately, to involve the community In providingfeedback about Government programs and decisions and in acting as sources of insight andinvention. As the community are the end users of Bush Forever sites, it makes sense toconsult them both in planning and in implementation. The current amendment places thecredibility of DEC's community groups at risk: the volunteers who consult with DEC and whoprovide thousands of hours of work to clean up, revegetate and look after Regional Parks willjustifiably feel slighted if community consultation is further reduced. On the contrary instead ofreducing community consultation, it makes sense to adequately fund community groups so thatthe quality of the discourse over the benefits, costs and risks of development proposals isimproved.

4. Case StudyBush Forever sites 355 and 354?? are situated within Rockingham Lakes Regional Parks. Togetherthey comprise approximately half of the total area of the Cape Peron part of the Regional Park. Theycontain the limestone headland of Point Peron, the tombolo that links the headland to the mainland,active dunes and coastal vegetation communities. Lake Richmond and three Threatened EcologicalCommunities - thrombolites, holocene dune sedge communities and a rare stand of callitris pressii.They also comprise habitat for 125 bird species, many migratory, and a large number of reptiles andinvertebrates including the Graceful Sun Moth.

The original transfer of the land from the Commonwealth to the State in the 1960s was made subject tothe conditions that the land was to be used only for "recreation and parkland" and explicitly not for"residential commercial or industrial" purposes. Subsequently much of the land became the BF 355.

Following the declaration of the BF sites in 2000, as a result of certain sectional political motivations,proposals were developed to construct a marina and canal estate inland at Cape Peron which woulddestroy over 40 hectares of BF 355 and potentially threaten BF 354??.

Subsequently due to the extreme environmental difficulties and the controversial nature of the concept,the proposals were put out by the EPA for both initial Strategic Environmental Review and later forPublic Environmental Review with the highest level of accountability.

At this point the EPA are on the verge of issuing the proponent's response to the PER concerns forpublic appeal.

At no point has there been put forward any rationale for the defiance of the Commonwealth's conditionson land use or for the destruction of BF 355.

Further concerns are the gross inequality in resourcing for the cases for and against the project. Whilecase for the project has had the financial and administrative support variously of Landcorp, the City ofRockingham, two State Governments and over $3 million from a developer, the ability of communitygroups to mount independent research into the controversial issues has been limited - in fact apart frompro bono contributions, the value of scientific research into areas ignored or miniminised by theproponent has been below $10,000.

Furthermore the proponent has conducted a cynical propaganda campaign to persuade the public thatthe project is harmless and will benefit the community. No evidence was produced for either of theseproposals. One example is that the proponent claimed the project would provide "low cost familyaccommodation". In fact because the structure plan has not yet been published, the only evidence forthis claim is a conceptual map on Page 27 of the PER showing approximately 0.6 hectare for suchaccommodation while at the same time the PER shows that over 3 hectare of existing low costaccommodation will be demolished and over 14 hectare of luxury residences will be provided.

There is a strong argument that community consultation regarding such projects is vital to ensure thatmonumental environmental, financial and social errors are not made as has happened with othermarinas in WA.

In relation to Lake Richmond and the proposed duplication of the sewer pipeline through both BFs, theWater Corporation's consultation with the community has been an attempt at a responsible model. Atleast the community had some understanding of the issues, the reasons for the duplication and for the

decisions made regarding routes and methods to be used. At least members in the community will beless likely to protest once work begins.

Finally the population of the City of Rockingham is forecast to grow to 160,000 by 2030. Little thoughthas been given to the mental health needs of this future population for areas of relatively unspoilt or atleast relatively well preserved bush.

Submissiori 41


Form 57


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a]) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text


Name: Britta Mathews

Address: 6A Dadley Street Hamilton Hill Postcode: 6163

Contact phone number: 0423 658 771 Email address: [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

This text amendment is inadequate and provides no statutory protection for Bush Forever Areas.The amendment needs to be changed to ensure legal protection and management.Many in the community value their local Bush Forever site and this amendment will allow WAPC toclear without consultation with the community or individuals that value it, now and for the future.This was not the intent of "Bush Forever" which identified sites of ecological importance andregionally significant bushland and wetlands on the Swan Coastal plain, therefore these shouldhave a level of protection where no clearing is permitted and where management is maintained inorder to keep their conservation values. In addition. Bush Forever's intent was to have a 'whole ofgovernment' approach to this protection. This amendment (clause 16 (1a)(ba) continues to allowthe utilities to fast track a development within a site which is zoned for their use. I wholeheartedlydisagree with this lack of transparency and lack of protection. I recommend this clause be deletedand replaced with a clause that prohibits clearing in Bush Forever Areas.

A new reserve purpose for the 'protection of Bush Forever Areas' should be introduced into theMRS for all Bush Forever Areas as currently parks and recreation zoning conflicts with theconservation intention of Bush Forever Areas where all clearing should be prohibited.Please consider my submission on this important conservation issue on the Swan Coastal Plain.

You should be aware that:» The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies oj'your submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by personfs) nnakincg the submission

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submisaions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au

OFFICE USE ONLY

Signature Date 17/01/2013

bmail your completed form to [email protected]

Sybmission 42


Form 57Submission

Metropolitan Region ScHiiem© Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16for Wew Similar Clause Insertion 16 flajifa) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name\ ,WC(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)U

Address .... LQ..&&Y,........ Postcode

Contact phone number MitEmail addressA/I ^ 1Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

You should be aware that:» The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act° In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureDateMot©: Submissions MUST lie received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will MOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected],gov,au; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au



1 8 JAN 2013

FILE fU^-s I. O'h 1-1

Ph: [email protected]

V. President/ ActingPresident:Tony Fowler

P.O. Box

656Kalamunda,W.A., 6926

Nature Reserves Preservation Gronp, Inc.

Address;SecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506Perth WA 6001

Date: January 17 2013

TO: [email protected]

CC: [email protected]

Snibject: Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57 Submission

The Nature Reserves Preservation Group (NRPG Inc.) is an environmental umbrellagroup of residents of the Shire of Kalamunda. As acting President of NRPG, I makethe following submission on their behalf and request it be listed under the NRPGname.

Our members recently attended a forum on the progress of Bush Forever, organisedby the Urban Bushland Council. At that forum, the above amendment came up fordiscussion. Having previously heard an historic account of the genesis of BushForever, its various manifestations and its current status, the above text amendmentgave cause for concern.

Despite legislation designed to protect Bush Forever areas, we still find them underconstant threat. Areas once containing pristine natural bushland have been allowed todegrade to a degree where they are deemed no longer worthy of protection. Clearingpermits are granted for such Bush Forever sites with the odd 'offset' in compensationfor the cleared vegetation.

The failure of 'owners' (who should, realistically be considered 'custodians') of BushForever sites to preserve and maintain the natural vegetation on their sites has led tothe degradation of many sites through illegal dumping, other inappropriate activitiesand weed invasion. Such owners may be private individuals, businesses, localgovernments or state or federal agencies. Some government utilities are failing torespect a site's Bush Forever status leading, invariably, to degradation of the valuablenatural assets forming the original basis for its designation.

and weed invasion. Such owners may be private individuals, businesses, localgovernments or state or federal agencies. Some government utilities are failing torespect a site's Bush Forever status leading, invariably, to degradation of the valuablenatural assets forming the original basis for its designation.

A clearing permit (CPS 41001/1) granted for a section of Bush Forever site IlartfieldPark involved the use of another Bush Forever site (BF 45 Poison Gully West) as anoffset. This offset, like Hartfield Park, has been permitted to degrade to a degreewhere it is now deemed a suitable candidate for rehabilitation. The Minister, over¬riding a recommendation by the Office of Appeals Convenor that the clearing not becarried out, confirmed this particular permit.

In the above example, the local government authority should have been required,under effective legislation, to manage the bushland efficiently. All Bush Forever sites,regardless of owner status, should be protected effectively through legislationrequiring the owner to manage the site to retain its natural conservation andbiodiversity values.

The clearing of remnant native vegetation within Bush Forever sites should beprohibited. Where proposed developments within such sites would require clearing ofremnant native vegetation, such development proposals should be rejected.

Clause 16(la)(ba), permitting government authorities to clear and develop within theirBush Forever sites following WAPC approval, should be deleted. It contradicts boththe spirit and intent expressed in the 'Strategic Planning Context', appears to conflictwith numerous policies and strategies and is totally alien to the original concept ofBush Forever.

NRPG objects to the above amendment in its present form. It fails to provide therequired statutory protection of Bush Forever areas containing some of the richest andbest biodiversity in the world, fails to impose a management duty on owners to retainconservation and biodiversity values and, whilst defining Bush Forever areas (clause28A) fails to state their puipose.

A hard copy of this email will be following.

Regards

Tony FowlerActing president NRPG

ubmission 43

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendment (Wlinor)

Form 57


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for Mew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To: [email protected] Australian Planning CommiasionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Name; Suzanne Marsh (Mrs)(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address: 149 Crawford St, EAST CANNINGTON Postcode: 6107

Contact phone number: 9451 3017 Email address: [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

Statutory ProtectionBush Forever Sites requires statutory protection to ensure they remain, as their name implies,bush forever. Amendment 1236/57 does not provide this essential protection. Bush Forever Site283 in Queens Park Regional Open Space is currently the subject of a clearing permit to enablethe development of playing fields. This, I believe, is a conservation and recreation conflict Whilethere is sufficient degraded open space available for the development of playing fields, clearing is'required' for parking and additional baseball diamonds. It is acknowledged that playing fields areneeded but recent correspondence with the permit applicant states: "In meeting that obligation theCity is very conscious of the need to protect and enhance the inherent qualities of the place, mostspecifically the communities of the Bush Forever sites which are valuable in their own right as wellas being a potential educational and recreation facility for the locale". Bushland should not beconsidered as expedient. Any clearing and development within the BFA further damages theintegrity of the bushland and therefore should not be permitted.

Management ObligationAgain, with reference to Site 283, this area has been allowed to be degraded by four wheel drivevehicles and trail bikes usage over an extended period of time. The local authority that managesthe area claimed there were no funds to provide protection. Areas that 10 years ago were in goodcondition are now sufficiently degraded they have little or no conservation value. Landholders ofsites, including public authorities, should be required to manage their bushland to retain its natureconservation values.

Clause 16 (la) (b)Bush Forever Site 283 is currently further at risk of being fragmented by the proposed extension ofGerard Street. Already, within the Queens Park Regional Open Space, Bush Forever Site 424 hasbeen dissected and fragmented by Orrong Road and McDowell Street. Clause 16 (1a) (b) permitsthis type of development, and, under the proposed amendments may even be streamlined. Thisclause needs to be deleted if Bush Forever Sites are not to become tarmac and concrete foreversites.

Purpose of Bush Forever SitesWhat is the puipose of BF Sites? I believe they are intended to be interconnected conservationsites within the urban environment with the express purpose of protection Perth's unique flora andfauna. There is no clear statement to this effect within MRS Amendment 1236/57. Bushland in thePerth metropolitan area is becoming increasingly rare and fragmented. If Perth is to retain its

reputation as "one of the world's cleanest and greenest cities" then bushland needs to be valued,retained and protected.

ConclusionIn its current form I believe that MRS Amendment 1236/57 is not acceptable. Bush Forever Sitesneed legal protection: they need effective management and should not be treated as expedientopen space. Clearing of all bushland should be prohibited.

You should be aware that;¦> The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions madeWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions,your submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

r...-D7 ^ y/?^'/

Signature.......v.ÔrT.'k-..;-Date January 2013

Mote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website - httD://www.plannina.wa.aov.au

to the

copies of


Submission 44


Form 57Submission


Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan RegionScheme Text

; &nb sp;OFFICE USE ONLY

To: mrsCajplanninq.wa.qov.auSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Name .IreneTallentire(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ..30 Thompson RoadPostcode ..WA 6159

Contact phone number .0439 097 386Email address¦[email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be looserather than bound)

It is disappointing that the MRS Amendment 1236/57 does not provide a solidstatutory protection for our Bush Forever Sites. Sadly, there has not been anyimprovement in the management of these sensitive areas. Despite being recognisedas significant, their future is unclear, they still remain under threat. Theirpreciousness is not debatable and they must be protected from degradation, whichoften leads to opportunistic clearing. Iconic and fragmented ecosystems, such asBush Forever Sites, are less and less represented in our suburbs which, in turn,becoming sterile, simplificated landscapes beyond recognition where uniformityreigns and authenticity has been alienated. It is the developers' dream. Theconsequences are a loss for the fauna and flaura they were supporting, but also forus, as they gave us a sense of place. Furthermore, it is a blatant demonstration ofthe lack of appreciation showed by the very people that should be caring for themand, instead, are making non abiding laws to protect them. We have to avoid beingoblivious or untouched by the preciousness of these remnants. We should selectappropriate locations for developments. It is a tragedy that our future is being shapedby a lack of awareness, that is giving way to unscrupulous actions. It should not bethat way. The Bush Forever Sites are to be protected, maintained and enhanced.They have to grow and are not available for clearing.

You should be aware that:0 The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may be subject toapplications for access under the act.

o In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making itsreport on these submissions, copies of your submission or thesubstance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

.Signature. Irene TallentireDate. 17 January 2013

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertisedclosing date, being close ofbusiness {5pm] on 18 January 2013. Late submissions willMOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website -http://www.planninq.wa.aov.au/


"ZS 7 JQ t Submission 45


Form 57

DEPARTMP: 1 r ¦ >•'! ANNHMPJ

SubmissionIWetropolotan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

1 $ JAN 2013

file dtsloSaiBush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text


NameNorman Hodgkinson

(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address .6 Lake Street, RockinghamPostcode6168

Contact phone number ....9527 2383Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

I do not agree that the proposed amendment CI16(1a)(a) should be made.The proposed clause amendment will allow government authorities to clear'Bush Forever" sites."Bush Forever" sites are remnants of the country which existed before development of the city ofPerth and surroundings. They are the extension of the concept of Kings Park.They should remain intact to keep what flora and fauna that remains.The government should protect and manage the valuable resource in the "Bush Forever" sites.I believe that Landcorp and other Government agencies do not recognize the importance of thesesites and have little reservation in developing them for other purposes.As an example, Landcorp proposes to develop Point Peron for a marina regardless of the value ithas as adjacent parkland to Lake Richmond and many other attributes which will be magnified asRockingham becomes the centre of a big city population


2013Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected],au; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.Qov.au


OFFICE USE ONLY

SignatureN Hodgkinson Date 17 January

^ < t fS ~? ///2- of?V'/

c-

Submissiori 46


Form 57Submission


Bush Forever Definition CSause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for Mew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name: Swan Estuary Reserves Action Group Inc.(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address; PO Box 73 Worth Fremantle WA Postcode; 6159

Contact phone number: 08 93392439 Email address: [email protected]


The Swan Estuary Reserves Action Group Inc. (SERAG Inc.) is an active voluntary community organisationwith a membership drawn from across the metropolitan area. We provide volunteer labour and mobilize othercommunity resources to

•Enhance the long-term ecological health of the Swan River Estuary A-Class Reserves and adjacentriver parks for the benefit of native fauna and for the enjoyment of current and future generations ofthe Perth Community.

•Support the managing authorities and those organisations involved in the restoration of the naturalenvironment of the Swan River Estuary.

Two of the principal areas in which operate are Bush Forever Sites: BFS 331 in Melville and BFS 402 inCrawley. We work to maintain and restore the ecological integrity of the remnant native vegetation thatprovides habitat for a great diversity of native fauna and significant amenity to the wider community.

As the population of the Perth region grows and as areas of remnant vegetation in both public and privatehands are converted to industry, housing, recreation and transport systems, and the density of populationincreases (with diminishing block sizes) the value of remaining areas of natural bushland increasesimmeasurably to the community.

Research into mental health has concluded that humankind benefits greatly from access to natural areas,enhancing well-being and quality of life experiences; and this is born out in our informal research of thenatural areas we look after, which shows a rapidly increasing usage for passive recreation.

Increasing demand for natural experiences requires both more natural areas to be set aside for thecommunity, as well as greater resources to be allocated to the care and protection of existing natural areas,in order to maintain the natural values being pursued.

We believe it is highly likely that our experience of community appreciation of the two local BFS we engagewith is replicated in other BFS contexts.

In short, the visionary of establishment of Bush Forever Sites has been of great value to and greatlyappreciated by the Perth community. We are extremely fortunate in the unique beauty and rich diversity ofour natural ecosystems identified through this policy; our Bush Forever Sites are precious and well-loved.

Unfortunately we believe that these areas remain under threat not only from mounting urban pressures butalso through inadequate legislation and strategies to "streamline" the development approvals process.

SERAG Inc. is concerned to ensure that the future of Bush Forever Sites is both secure and appropriatelyresourced - that the well-being of these significant areas of ecologically rich and diverse bushland andwetland is protected for the benefit of not only this generation, but also for future generations.

DEPARTW-1 OP PLANNING

% $ JAN 2013jIrle (^lS I oSm

Hence we submit that MRS Amendment 1236/57 is not acceptable in its current form and request that it bechanged so that all Bush Forever Areas are legally protected and managed, and clearing is prohibited:

» Clause 3.1 should include the definition and purpose of a BFS, recognizing Bush Forever Areas areareas of regionally significant bushland and wetlands that collectively provide for a conservationreserve system for the Perth Metropolitan Region.

» Clause 16{1a)(ba) should be deleted and replaced with a clause which prohibits clearing of bushlandand remnant native vegetation in all Bush Forever Areas.

® A clause is needed in the Amendment stating that developments that require clearing of bushland orremnant native trees are not permitted in Bush Forever Areas - that ail bushland in Bush ForeverAreas is protected and that disturbance and clearing of this bushland is prohibited.

•Bush Forever Sites should be given Statutory Protection. All landholders (including publicauthorities) of Bush Forever Sites should be required to actively manage the bushland in their careto retain and strengthen its nature conservation values and to prevent degradation.

•As a matter of urgency, additional areas of regionally significant bushland and wetlands should beidentified and reserved as Bush Forever Sites to collectively provide for a healthy and sustainableconservation reserve system in the Perth Metropolitan Region,

® Clause 16(1a)(b) should be deleted as it provides the possibility to undermine the protection of aBFS.

a Part IVA-Bush Forever Areas, 28A. Bush Forever Areas (1) should be edited to read: The purpose ofthis clause is to identify Bush Forever Areas as regionally significant bushland/wetland to beprotected and managed for the benefit of the community and for the purpose of nature conservation.

® Special Control Areas should be declared under the MRS and text Amendment for all Bush Foreversites not yet secured for the purpose of conservation.

9 A new reserve purpose for protection of Bush Forever Areas should be introduced under the MRSfor all Bush Forever Areas to remove the land use conflicts which arise under the current Parks &Recreation reservation. Currently sports fields and recreational facilities can be built in Bush Foreversites which are supposed to be protected when zoned P&R. The clearing of bushland for recreationfacilities should not be allowed.

Thank you for your consideration of our Submission

Catherine O'NeillChairpersonSERAG Inc.

You should be aware that:o The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.

In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature- Catherine O'Neill Date 17^ January 2013Note: Submissions R/IUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au


Planning and Developrnent Act 2003

Section 67 Amertdment (Minor)Form 37

SubmissionMetropolitan Region Sclieme Ainendtnent 123S/57

Biisft Forever Definitton Clauso (nsertioni and Removal of Ctouse 16 {IdMfor Mew iimllar clause Insertion 16 (iaf(a) ancf (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OPFCS USE. OHW

I MMlSeigt! .'!UMyi33 |Te; Sscfelafy

Western Australian Planning CornmtssionweNdBag,2508SyfeOfBOSSiOil] 4^PERTH WA BDDI

Namei/FL-E^SE FRlfiT CLEARLT)

AddressS|LCCk....Mftf,L,,...t.O.Ji£flL.,. Postcode ti?.C?.iD„

CoFitacf phone nu mbir.,, ,1pr .1.1...Emaii add res® ,,pfj Lit! a . ild t.rf /. il IM 0 ¦ C CPh

Subrftiaaloini ipleaEB aits-di additional pgpss if f&niired. It bprefemad IhatarâiiriitiiDnal mfarmalitjfi- be toose rgtherlhaa bcuml)

$iljaiA-flxW

turn over to coraiplotQ your submission

[SuwnteS'Oi coriLffUfetj. plfeftsg Hiiaoh ajaiPsnel imfSi n fftQulteci)

You should be aware Ehsrt:

* The WAPC rs sMjbJecHo the Fmedom of MormoffonAct&s such, su&miasions madetolheWAPOrnsybesubject to spplicatiens for access under the act.

m In She sours® of the WAPC assessing subrnissrDns, or ftlaRing its report on these subfrtisstona, copies of ytnifsubmission or the substence of thai submission, may ho disclosed to third partias.

ro he stoned jiv pjarsapjaVniakjaci .tlio..submfsslQn

SignaturecLktb Date ...(5,,.

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closiiitj' datej helng closo ofbusiness (5pin) on 18 January 2013. Late submlaisions Will NOT bo considered.

GOfflacto; TeteOlWiW ÿ CDS} 9551 8000 Fex- (.90) 0551 SCO i Emsi - rorsgplaiv'H'ng.-iva.guv.iau; V/obslte • Isllp:/ftvwiv.(!<aiining.w3.{icni.au

Submission on MRS Amendment 1236/57

By Heidi Hardisty

I would like to object to the proposed MRS amendments 1236/57 for the following reasons, it will

provide less protection to in Bush Forever Areas (BFAs) by allowing Authorities to carry out

"permitted development" at their discretion without environmental assessment or public

consultation. It does not state that BFAs are to be protected as a priority, not developed. Bush

Forever Areas are not defined properly. There are no management obligations for BFAs. The EPA has

failed in its duty to assess the proposal and supplied no reason for doing so.

Currently there is no statutory protection for Bush Forever Areas (BFAs). The proposed MRS

Amendment 1236/57 will facilitate "permitted development" in BFAs and has the force of law.

Hence these changes will provide less protection to and may even result in unnecessary loss of

vegetation/biodiversity in existing Bush Forever Areas by allowing Government Authorities to clear

and develop BFAs without environmental assessment or public consultation. The Government

should be creating and strengthening the laws to protect Bush Forever Sites from development and

enhancing the consultation process, not weakening them.

Much of what is "permitted development" by an Authority is defined and guided by a myriad of

legislation. Many of these Acts are antiquated and are already failing to protect WA's unique

biodiversity. Many of these Acts are decades old; immense change has since taken place in those

years and should be considered, not overlooked. For example, the proposed amendments would

most certainly allow land on a Bush Forever Area to be cleared for a road without any environmental

assessment or public consultation if a road reserve set aside 50 years ago passes through that BFA.

The proposed MRS amendment will ensure that outdated Acts will prevail when it comes to a

clearing decision on a BFA.

In addition, most Ministers or officers in various Authorities will not have the expertise relating to

the issues and management of BFAs (including those in the WAPC). If there is no environmental

assessment or advice from the DEC, EPA or the public, ill equipped personnel in public authorities

may clear rare fauna or remove habitat for (or worse kill) endangered fauna species, completely

unaware that they are doing so. There is no legislation to prevent this from happening.

Therefore I object to removing the current clause 16 (la)(a) and replacing it with the proposed new

one. This removes a check to ensure that an objective scientific assessment on the impacts of

development has been done and that expert advice has been given. The public would be eliminated

from the process and hence transparency suffers. I would also suggest that paragraph 16 (la) (b) be

deleted. This paragraph allows for any development on reserved land vested in a public authority if

the development is expressly authorized under an Act. Instead, amendments should be made to

include proper management of BFAs and to protect them from development.

I find it worrying that one of the main reasons for the proposed amendment to the MRS is "to

streamline the development approval processes for development proposals on reserved land owned

or vested in public authorities within the Bush Forever areas". Instead the Government should be

slowing down the process and looking for new ways to protect BFAs by properly reviewing and

updating legislation for the conservation of our biodiversity. This should include a coherent plan to

conserve BFAs.

I agree that the map of the BFAs should be included. However, it should be made clear that the BFAs

are regionally significant bushlands and not all BFAs have been identified. BFAs should be clearlydefined.

Contrary to the proposal, I do not see this as a "minor" amendment. This is a major amendment that

could have considerable impacts on our remaining bushlands. Hence I feel that the EPA should have

assessed this proposal and have failed in their duty not to do so. Remarkably, they gave no

explanation for this in their letter addressed to the WAPC.

in conclusion, to go ahead with the proposed MRS Amendment 1236/57 is dangerous and

irresponsible. The continued whittling away of our natural environment is extremely concerning.

Cumulative impacts of development are not being fully considered. The Government must try much

harder to protect our remaining BFAs as well as locally significant bushlands and the corridors that

connect them. Please go back to the drawing board and strengthen the MRS and laws to do so.

If anything in this submission is unclear, I would be happy to discuss further.

Thank you for your consideration

Heidi Hardisty

12A Myera Street Swanbourne WA 6010

Submission 48


Form 57

SubmissionMetropolitain Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 {1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name ..CHRISTINE RICHARDSON(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ..90 SIXTH AVENUE, MAYLANDS .. Postcode ..6051.

Contact phone number ..0427777135. Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

I believe that the MRS Amendment 1236/57 is not acceptable in its current form because it does notprovide the protection we expect for Bush Forever. I also believe that it needs to be changed so that itactively provides legal protection for all Bush Forever Areas.

In my reading of the Amendment it appears that0Clause 16(la)(ba) would allow government authorities to clear and develop within their BF sites ifapproved by the WAPC. This is totally unacceptable and I hope that this clause will be deleted and replacedwith a clause which prohibits clearing of bushland and remnant native vegetation in all Bush Forever Areas.

1also understand that Bush Forever is a whole of government policy plan. However, it appears to me thatsome government utilities are not respecting Bush Forever, shown through their failure to prevent

degradation. Therefore, I believe that any specific legal protection in the Amendment should apply equallyto all sites held by government agencies as well as private and company owned sites.

Government authorities should be required to modify their operational plans by opting out of their BushForever Areas and handing over their sites to an appropriate land manager such as the local governmentauthority.

You should be aware that:• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.° in the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureChristine RichardsonDate ...17/1/2013Note: Submissions WIUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected],au; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.qov.au

Email your completed form to mrs(a)planning.wa.gov.au

SMtaissBom 49


Form 57Submissaoo

Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/S7


OFFICE USE ONLY


Name ...Sharon Mcarthur(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address76 Brazier Road YanchepPostcode6035

Contact phone number ..0422224849Email address ..¦smcarthur63(a)gmail.com


I am concerned that MRS Amendment 1236/57 does not adequately protect the conservation values of Bush Forever Areas. I amopposed to the streamlining of the approvals process for development.

I believe these areas of regionally significant Bushland should be protected by legislation that ensures these areas are fully protectedagainst threatening processes, including but not limited to; land clearing and other human activity (e.g. rubbish dumping, sand boarding,off road vehicles etc) that damages conservation values, weed invasion, degradation by rabbits, loss of habitat to feral birds and bees,predation by feral cats and foxes.

Bushforever areas need to be set aside and protected so that future generations are able to enjoy at least a small representation of theunique biodiversity of the Swan Coastal Plain. I believe that these areas urgently require legislation that ensures that they are no longerthreatened by development and other threatening processes are managed with appropriate funding. I also believe landowners/managers who have allowed conservation areas to become degraded should be required to restore those areas.

As the generations who have been responsible for the loss of the majority of the biodiversity of the Swan Coastal Plain I believe wehave a moral obligation to future generations to fully protect what remains to ensure they are able to enjoy our unique natural andcultural heritage.


•The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the

WAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.

•In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies of

your submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

XSharon Mcarthur

SignatureDate

Note: Submissions MUSI be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.aov.au


Submission 50


Form 57Submission

[metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment '1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the [Vletropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name .MargaretMatthews(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address .5 Penryn Avenue City BeachPostcode 6015

Contact phone number .0402105649Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

I believe the proposed Amendment is not acceptable in its current form as it does not provideprotection from clearing for Bush Forever sites.

The proposed Amendment does not provide Statutory protection for Bush Forever areas, howeverit does allow government authorities to clear and develop their Bush Forever sites with theapproval of the WAPC, but without public consultation (Clause 16a). Permitted development underthe MRS includes public works (roads, drainage, sewerage, etc).

The explanatory notes for the amendment on p4 under 'Substantiality' state:

the new clause 16a is intended to streamline the development approval processes for development proposals onreserved lands owned or vested in public authorities within Bush Forever areas;

This is exactly what the community does not want: Bush Forever areas subsumed for roads asplanned for the Roe Highway extension, or for hospitals as occurred at the Fiona Stanley site.Land vested in public authorities is owned by the public and we should have a right to object to itsloss or its transfer to the private sector though sale for housing etc. Bush Forever land vested inpublic authorities should be protected in perpetuity on our behalf.

The idea of allowing "streamlined development" is contrary to the entire Bush Forever project andthe stated intentions of the Bush Forever policy. This clause should be deleted and replaced with aclause which prohibits clearing of bushland and remnant native vegetation in all Bush ForeverAreas.

Bush Forever is supposed to be a 'representative system of protected areas', but there is still noreal statutory protection for Bush Forever areas. The Amendment should include a clause statingthat all bushland in Bush Forever areas is protected and that disturbance and clearing of thisbushland is prohibited. Landholders (including public authorities) of Bush Forever sites should berequired to manage their bushland to retain its nature conservation values.


Signature..Date .18/1/13Note: Submissions WiUST be received by the advertised dosing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 13 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]\/,au; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.aov.au

Email your completed form to mrs(a)plaiining.wa.qov.au

Submission Si


Form 57




Name; Katrina Zeehandelaar(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address: 4B Newbury St, BalgaPostcode: 6061

Contact phone number: 0403558863Email address: [email protected],auSubmission (Please attach additional pages if required. It Is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

I am concerned about the text amendment to the MRS is the increased ease at which remnantvegetation within the metropolitan area will be able to be cleared and that land developed upon.Bush Forever sites were originally created with the intention of conserving urban bushlandFOREVER, not until developers decide they want to clear it. I believe all Bush Forever sites shouldhave statutory protection under our WA legislation and should be managed in a way that willconserve and preserve our urban bushland remnants.

You should be aware that:" The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.»In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to. third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

ie received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submlssioins will MOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au

OFFICE USE ONLY


Submission 52


Form 57



depariw^ !'c h

1 7 JAN 2013

FILE (U-S 10 iXl

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address

Contact phone numberIEmail address (\\ f s-x) Q

Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)/)

BjvL faeJef is a7^ /^//s o^c/erJfresd c^f fiyjvra cie^raôtic. ^s. u/e^f, / f . r//

f?3cfz:f UsvlU aKooo ¦M-.ror^.do dm j prnto wiUnHeS. & QNe.. uf KelffrtJ^^ e* c\ror^(,

n/l shoM (j'?e/4v^ ca**'f*-_f Jtrof-eePfe*. eft- fa Ogfy. fhf&Oef 's-fae/lt/ laCvs/^tnt'(b?x£ Pfcv/y/

'\,cS

J>n>tee£f0*- faosA.S^'es 'sfaalof ^ fe*.-#sl, ct;sik>-w<i'?\<:t/ejtUfyt ^^ fire, r('

' The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature ...../X..:...Date

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date' being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.aov.au




SubmissSonMetropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text


NameVictoria Laurie and Andrew Farrant(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address60 Joh.n Farrant.Drive'. .Go.oseber^ .Hilhostcode6076

[email protected] phone numberEmail address

Submission (Please attach additional pages If required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

WE have been strong supporters of Bush Forever. It was a

credit'' 'to'' John"Day' MLA" 'and''the ' state' 'goverhmeht'' that" they

i-nt-rodueed' • a ¦ -p-lan• -to- • con-serve ¦ bushl-and- -around • -Perth-: - Any

cja.use. ,o.r.. ame.n.droent.. .that.. al l.o.wg., gomrrm^.n t

instrumentalities and others to clear protected bush

without public consultation completely undermines the

purpose' arid''use'fulriess' of 'Biish ForeverV' Western'"Australia

and• Perth-• in• particular¦ have1 'lost¦ -e-O-80%-• of• 'mo-st-"types of

bushland,.. an. .extraordinary.. indictment. .when, .one .considers

WA;s southwest (including Perth) is designated a Global

hotspot of biodiversity by Conservation International.

We are strongly against this iegisiative change that willrehdei"' 'Bush' 'Forever ' a' 'useless ' 't'dol'' 'in' pro tec ting' 'and'

conserving- • f-or- • al-1- ¦ Western- -Aus-t-ral-i-ans - -ou-r- • nat-u-ral- • • • •

he.r.i.tage.,

OFFICE USE ONLY

SUBMISSION NUMBER

SubimBssioDi] 53



You should be aware that;



To be signed by peirson(s) making the submission

zfy • ¦ ' , ...

Signature ./..I:'... J..L...\Date .. J..X.

Mote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2Q13. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected],au; Website - http://vAvw,planning.wa.gov.au

Submissioii 54


Form 57Submission

[Wetropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57


OFFICE USE ONLY


Name Marilyn Zakrevsky(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address .49 Koreila St., Mullaloo, W.A. 6027Postcode

Contact phone number .9401 7132Email [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

The proposed amendment does not provide for Statutory protection of Bush Forever areas. So thisclause should be deleted and replaced with a clause prohibiting clearing of bushland.This proposed clause permits government authorities to clear and develop Bush Forever siteswithout public consultation and this is unacceptable.The amendment should state that the clearing of Bush Forever sites is not permitted. Statutoryprotection of Bush Forever sites is long overdue. To retain conservation values, funding should beprovided for their management.

You should be aware that:The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the

WAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.0 In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature ..M.G,ZakrevskyDatelS January 2013

Note; Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected],au; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au

Email your completed form to mrs(a)planninq.wa.qov.au

Submission 55

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendnnent (Minor)

Form 57Submission

Wietropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Foreveir Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

To: [email protected] Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001l

Name . Peel Preservation Group Inc(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ..PO Box 1784 Mandurah WAPostcode6210

Contact phone number95861310Email address- [email protected]


"Bush Forever" should mean just that - not bush until some government authority wants to clear and develop(without public consultation) their Bush Forever sites with the approval of the WAPC. These small areas ofbush are more important than development under MRS eg public works (roads, drainage, sewerage, etc).

Clause 16(1a)(ba) is totally unacceptable and it is recommended that this clause be deleted and replacedwith a clause which prohibits clearing of bushland and remnant native vegetation in all Bush Forever Areas.A clause is needed that states that all bushland in Bush Forever Areas is protected and that disturbance andclearing of this bushland is prohibited. Further all landholders (including public authorities) of sites should berequired to manage their bushland to retain its nature conservation values.

You should be aware that:» The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.° In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be consideired.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au

OFFICE USE ONLY

Signature Date


Submission 5§


Form 57

SubmissionR/letropolitan Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a){a)for Mew Similar Clause insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the IVIetropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To: [email protected],auSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

Name;J.(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

fiv

CoUiAS

Address .... 1.2:M1.Q^f)..... 1,!.^!. Postcode

Contact phone numberEmail address'j ' C0(y}Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It Is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

-W.cU ^ sf^k ôf $jsU

- mpilu iUk)C^h ckcpJ a <.il^r. .

-CUuSe (bfl*) WI?mi ( ^tUonn^

You should be aware that:U- fS-faif^D ni bj.» The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.»in the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureDate ! ^' I ^ 5Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on IS January 2013. Late submissions will MOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax-(08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website - http://www.plannina.wa.aov,au


iitaissita


Form 57Submission


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for Mew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text


NameMargaret Larke(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...54 Glyde St...East FremantlePostcode 6158

Contact phone number 0435206414Email address [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

As a person very involved in Perth's bushland (I have been involved as a volunteer in flora surveyssince 1988), I am appalled that there is still no proposal to give statutory protection to the BushForever sites.

These sites are regionally significant bush land and wetlands and together represent a biodiversityconservation estate for future generations which should not be lost.

Not only has statutory protection not been enacted but the way has been opened to make it easierfor government authorities such as Landcorp to clear and develop their Bush Forever sites ifapproved by WAPC. The original intention behind the Bush Forever plan was that clearing theselands should be prohibited. This protection should be reinstated.

It is important that these areas be actively managed to preserve their diversity: many have beenallowed to deteriorate. The amendment should insist on this.

In total many aspects of the amendment are not compatible with the intention of the originalobjectives of the Bush Forever Plan. This will not be a legacy we can be proud of for futuregenerations.

You should be aware that:0 The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by pers©n(s) making the submission

Wote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au

OFFICE USE ONLY

Date ..18.01.2012

Submission


Form 57Submissioo

Wletropolitara Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for Mew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name ...Keith Brown(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

6018 Postcode

Contact phone number 9448 [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

Our brilliant forefathers put aside kings park for posterity. Since then we have learnt to appreciatethat foresight as we all enjoy the bush so close to the town. Since then of course populationpressures have increased. It is unthinkable that kings park would ever succumb to such pressureeven though it would make ver attractive development. With WA having 8 out of 15 Ausbiodiversity hotspots and being one of thirty in the world, the vision of bushland forever needs thesame protection as Kings Park so that we can enjoy our natural and national heritage.

I have been responsible for school children planting over 60 000 trees and amaware of how important affiliation with the bush;land is for our children

You should be aware that:° The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.• In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties,To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature .Keith BrownDate18/1/13Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will WOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - mrs@planning,wa.gov.au; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.qov.au


Submission 59

Form 57

Submission

Hudh tOfsviaf DfefisliuOrt CidUsd liiSeftioi'i Sitd R^rl'iOval Of CiauS# 16 {1a]{a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1s)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region -Scheme Text" OFF'CE USE ON'.v

To: [email protected]

Locked Bag 25G5PERTH WA 6001,w, . /l^-, / ^r\f/Â/AiFTK ^fiA) ASl-ffc)^

Address ^ lM / rJ 1 iH CLOS^l. .6^( Z-

T^l ; ( 0) 4 / ÔKÎ i /<ei/ia^^^(S c'0^

Xto -66t^ f/tyo&cl H£s 'Te^f\Z^hj.f cio^s w ffo^cU^ $6^6^prrhtd^ ^jA V^L9'"^ ^ c^c^Mcw % /eû--

\r^€. "T^? ^ ^ 6 r :4;^s s Sc. ^Q>Q?c-kJl€a.{;(x/€£^,^1, CÔLsjgvz

_ -J-U^ \f.f^SK :.-¦ .-...k:..',.*!. !v «•.«. C^Mrfwô rt# sJte*M*KiVi A:'t trsni*¦> MMSt-fl**.* A-.---;4-h ' ,-=. tl ivl ,,'" i s jv- V Tr\! w i-jlv/ ii iv.. » r Vr<_• ¦_!?s j v/j jj fn_rr rtrcfji%s^c~ wuv-fowvui. oujvi juooiv/i to iiiotvis^ vv v\ •.-, T lIj&s•, hjQ

WAPC mav be subject to apolicatlons for access under the act£n1a !n the course of the WAPC sssessfno submissions, or rnskino Its reoort on these submissions, cooies p£

Qlrtn sfi irrtL.IFtcifr; ^ ^ ^ <2- C^ ^ _3

%-3L?S.»SS£S5S»Et.«!S^lljsJl? 8 Cf^S?! VS?%.! SJy -ll!?? 3SU V S8!t-rLs-&?Si^ UetS.'C?^ £-'5?££l|^ t„-f4J'r»S? -L';

business (5pm) on 13 January 2013. Lats submissions will MOT bs considered.

Email your com Dieted form to [email protected]

Siibmissioii

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amondment (Minor)

Form 57Submission


Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16 {1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 {1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To: mrs(a)planninq.wa.qov.auSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERT! I WA 600 !

NameLesley Shaw(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address9 Greenville St, SwanbournePostcode,,,6010.....

Contact phone number93847983Email [email protected] (Please attach additional pages If required. It la preferred that any addllioaal Information bo loose rather than bound)

On behalf of the Friends of Allen Park Bushland Group, I urge you to provide the necessaryprotection of the Bush Forever sites to ensure that they are held in perpetuity for generations tocome. If land is protected and unmanaged in the metropolitan area, it is subject to vandalism,including dumping and fires. In effect, the MRS Amendment 1236/57 is not acceptable in its currentform and needs to be changed so that all Bush Forever Areas are legally protected and managedand clearing is prohibited.

Bush Forever is a whole of government policy plan, but some government utilities aro notrespecting Bush Forever by their failure to prevent degradation. Specific legal protection in theAmendment is needed to apply equally to all sites held by government agencies as well as privateand company owned sites.

Special Control Areas shoitkl be declared under the MRS and text Amendment tor ail Bush Forever sitesnot yet secured for the purpose of conservation. This mechanism to provide interim protection was an Actionspecified in the Bush Forever plan (Dec 2000) but was later dropped. I his mechanism exists ami should heused to provide immediate protection in the planning process.

You should be aware that:•The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act,•In tlie course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may he disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureDate18 January 2012Note: Submissions MUST bo rocoivod by tho advortlsod closing dato, boing close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Lato submissions will NOT bo considorod.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax ¦ (08) 6551 9001 Email - rtirn®planning.wa.gov au; Website - hap;//www.pl8nnlnqjfi^,flQy,9M


Submission 61


Form 57

SybmissionMetropolitan Regioo Scheme Amendmemit 1236/57

DEPAPfiVff ¦ '"

1 I JAN 2013

FILE PvUS I QUI

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for Wew Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan RegionScheme Text


Name Brian Moyle; Wildflower Society of Western Australia (inc.).(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ..PO Box 519 FloreatPostcode 6014

Contact phone number 93301754 Email [email protected]

Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather thanbound)

The Wildflower Society of Western Australia was formed in 1958, has more than 800members and among its concerns is the preservation and protection of bushland acrossWestern Australia.

We note from the Amendment Report for MRS Amendment 1236/57 that:The deletion of clause 16 (la)(a) and the insertion of a new similarclause 16 (la)(a) and (ba) is intended to streamline the developmentapproval processes for development proposals on reserved landowned or vested in public authorities within Bush Forever areas; andAll other procedures for development proposals with Bush Foreverareas in both zoned and reserved land remain unchanged.

This is contrary to purpose of Bush Forever. It was developed to ensure Bush Forever areasare protected through statutory planning controls. Bush Forever is an outcome of the UrbanBushland Strategy 1995, 1996 National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia'sBiodiversity, state planning Strategy 1997, Directions 2031 and beyond (2011) and Stateplanning Policy2. The protection is for the protection of biodiversity.

A clause that disallows clearing should be included.

In part one of the report it is also stated:The WAPC also proposes to remove section 16 (la)(a) of the MRS text andinsert a new similar clause as 16 (la)(a) and (ba) to allow permitteddevelopment within a Bush Forever area owned or vested in a public authorityon reserved land to commence development without the written approval ofthe WAPC if there is a written agreement between the public authority and theWAPC or a management plan approved by the WAPC.

OFFICE USE ONLY

Submission 62


Form 57Submission


Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Wletropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

PERARTMENl 0FPLANN3To: [email protected] Australian Planning CommissionLocked. Bag 2506I 1 R (AM ?fl11PERTH WA 6001'Al'

NameJ.FJLE(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ..3E0a.i.o.tiy.tlK. PostcodeI

.Q317

rContact phone numberEmail address ...^.^V/WKkX. to^vuSubmission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional [information be loose rather than bound)

Clause 10('la)(ba) allows government authorities to clear and develop in their BF sites if approved by theWAPC. This is totally unacceptable and it is recommended that this clause be deleted and replaced with aclause which prohibits clearing of bushland and remnant native vegetation in all Bush Forever Areas.Government authorities should be required to modify their operational plans by opting out of their BushForever Areas and handing over their sites to an appropriate land manager such as the local governmentauthority.Clearing in Bush Forever Areas should be prohibited. A clause is needed in the Amendment that statesthat developments in Bush Forever Areas that include clearing of bushland or remnant native trees are notpermitted.Statutory Protection: Bush Forever is supposed to be a 'representative system of protected areas'. But theAmendment does not provide any additional protection. A clause is needed that states that all bushland inBush Forever Areas is protected and that disturbance and clearing of this bushland is prohibited. Further alllandholders (including public authorities) of sites should be required to manage their bushland to retain itsnature conservation values.

Bush Forever is a whole of government policy plan, but some government utilities are not respecting BushForever by their failure to prevent degradation. Specific legal protection in the Amendment is needed to applyequally to all sites held by government agencies as well as private and company owned sites.


You should be aware that:• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.° In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

SignatureDate ....Note: SubmissrSosHnjOST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninQ.wa.aov.au


Submission 6


Form 57Sybmissiosi


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 18 flalfalfor Mew Similar Clause Insertion IS f1a|fa| and fba| in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


NameW,.!. R,9. (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

AddressfPostcode6AO.

Contact phone numberEmail address .Cow>Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

department of planning

1 6 JAN 2013

03X1 I

Clause 16(1a)(ba) allows government authorities to clear and develop in their BF sites if approved by theWAPC. This is totally unacceptable and it is recommended that this clause be deleted and replaced with aclause which prohibits clearing of bushland and remnant native vegetation in all Bush Forever Areas.Government authorities should be required to modify their operational plans by opting out of their BushForever Areas and handing over their sites to an appropriate land manager such as the local governmentauthority.Clearing in Bush Forever Areas should be prohibited. A clause is needed in the Amendment that statesthat developments in Bush Forever Areas that include clearing of bushland or remnant native trees are notpermitted.Statutory Protection: Bush Forever is supposed to be a 'representative system of protected areas'. But theAmendment does not provide any additional protection, A clause is needed that states that all bushland inBush Forever Areas is protected and that disturbance and clearing of this bushland is prohibited. Further alllandholders (including public authorities) of sites should be required to manage their bushland to retain itsnature conservation values.

Bush Forever is a whole of government policy plan, but some government utilities are not respecting BushForever by their failure to prevent degradation. Specific legal protection in the Amendment is needed to applyequally to all sites held by government agencies as well as private and company owned sites.


You should be aware that:° The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.»In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by personfs| making the submission

SignatureDateNote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - htlp://www.planninq,wa,qov,au


Submission 64

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amend in ent fMinor)

Form 57

Sybmission(Wletropolitasi Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insestion and Removal of Clause, 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


Name.1.W...Û..V)..C.r(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) -[I

Address!...'..1.X..Kf.\.CPostcode .r^.Ci.^ ^

Contact phone numberI...i&../^/?Email address . 1..^ W" - ^Submission (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional i|iformation be loose rather than bound)

SV/ CTcUfol

You should be aware that:• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.»in the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature . ....^CUaaAIDateNote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being^lose ofbusiness (Spm) on 1g January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.qov.au

Email your compieted form to [email protected]


1 6 JAN 2013

FILE l^S j Cj-Y)~l

Rainer Repke

1 Pittwater Close, Kallaroo, WA, 6025

lSJan.2013

Attachment to SUBMISSION Metropolitan Scheme^ Amendment

1236/57, Public Consultation.

In general there are two ways to combat climate change. One is to

reduce emissions the other way is to preserve and plant plans.

Clause 161a)(b) allows that Bush Forever sights are cleared in a

simplified manner. That is not acceptable.

The Clause should include ""The purpose of the Clause is to identify

Bush Forever Areas as regional significant bushland to be protected

and managed for the benefit of the community anc( for the purpose

of nature conservation.

In line with this 1 have mentioned before and I do it again: the

number of people moving to Perth requires more hpusing. But, we

should not provide the land needed by clearing lanc( or subdividing

existing blocks but by going vertical. The ideal place^ for this are the

train stations and the shopping centres. If we go this way we reduce

the need for cars and keep our bushland and our gardens.

We need to and we can do better.

lpi^riioi



SubmissionWletropoliian Region Scheme Amendmeinit 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Wlstropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

SUBMISSION NUMBER

Sybmission SS

Name.. CÂ..(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address .. i.O..'r.'fJ.frrf. i/flk.rf. Postcode^ .Q.f?.P.

Contact phone numberEmail address .h^


(P c? ^7/1/ 7) ^ L S qr l) S f < J /p /Y P.9,'r':


(C.t MM! Ml'- ¦ i '!¦ PLANNINGji i 8 JAN 2013iL,r/.

1 Qycij




o The WAPC is subject to, the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to the WAPC may besubject to applications for access under the act.



Date ../..6./0.{.7-.

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.

Signature (si

Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 [email protected]; Website - http://www.planning.wa.gov.au

HSPCJI^for all creatures great & small

16 January 2013


APPLICATION TO REMOVE RSPCA WA LOT 1002 FROMBUSH FOREVER AREA 385 DETAIL PLAN NUMBER 1.5412/1

Whilst we recognise that this submission does not strictly relate to theproposed amendments to the Metropolitan Region Scheme, RSPCA WA wantedto take this opportunity to submit an application to remove the RSPCA WA landholding from Bush Forever Area 385

The original Bush Forever Area 385 included the current RSPCA WA land holdingas it was then part of one single title being Lot 303 on Diagram 94078 coveringall the land from Camboon Road to Malaga Drive and Reid Highway to theTruganina Road Reserve.

The portion of the land occupied by RSPCA WA from 2000 to 2007 as a leasefrom the City of Swan was a portion of Lot 303 that was a former dairy farmwhich had been cleared of the majority of its native vegetation before the BushForever area 385, Detail Plan Number 1.5412/1, was created.

In 2007 Lot 303 was sub-divided with a separate title issued to RSPCA as Lot1002 on Deposited Plan 51435 for the purpose of an animal refuge.

The operation of an animal refuge is incompatible with the objectives of BushForever in that significant portions of the Lot are required to be reticulatedgrass for grazing large animals and for exercising smaller pets. The animalrefuge operation on Lot 1002 also comprises a wide variety of built structuresspread across the site, including an administration building, kennels, a catteryand services and storage buildings, together with sealed roads, pathways andassociated in-ground infrastructure services.

The Royal Societyfor the Prevention of

Cruelty to AnimalsWestern Australia Inc.

ABN 77 620 418 137

We would be grateful if you would consider our application and advise if thereis further information required or if an alternative application needs to besubmitted.

Yours faithfully

Hazel DarkinExecutive Manager Business ServicesRSPCA WA

108' Malaga Drive(Cnr Reid Highway)Malaga WA 6090

P 08 9209 9300F 08 9248 3144E [email protected] rspcawa.asn.au

PO Box 3147Malaga WA 6945

4*

Submission 66

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Asnendment (lVlinor|

Form 57


Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 (1a)(a)for New Similar Clause insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY

To: [email protected])Qv.auSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

NameRay Flanagan(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address 3/47 Davies Rd, Claremont. WA 6010Postcode

Contact phone number ..93854942Email [email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

You must ensure that any policy for Bush Forever sites must not allow clearing and developmentother than the management to maintain conservation values. These sites must be protected forthe long term. They are precious biodiversity hotspots for our communities.

You should be aware that:• The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act- In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.T© be signed by personfs) making the submission

Signature ...Ray f\anagan../lC&^\L.^.^^^..r^rr^.Date 14th January~-^r2013

Note: Submissions MUST be receivecl by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]: Website - http://wvvw.planninci.wa.qov.au

Email your completed form to m rs @ p I a n n i n ci. wa. ci o v. a u

DEPARTWFKT OF Pi./1

1 8 JAM 2013

FILE fLL<. jo-vnl

(LA ISSybmissiori 67

Government of Western AustraliaDepartment of State Development

Your ref:833-2-1-56 Pt1

Our ref:S0089/200904

Enquiries:Jamie Brady - Ph 08 92220517

Emaii:[email protected]



Dear Mr Thomson

METROPOLITAN REGIOM SCHEME PROPOSED AMEMDWIENT 1263/57

Thank you for your letter dated 19 October 2012 which invites comment from theDepartment of State Development regarding the Metropolitan Region SchemeProposed Amendment 1263/57.

The Department has reviewed the paper and wish to advise that we have nocomment to make regarding this amendment.

Should you have any queries regarding the above, please do not hesitate tocontact Mr Jamie Brady on 9222 0517.

Yours sincerely

Gerard I reacy \ \A/DirectorSTRATEGIC INDUSTRIAL LANDS

17 January 2013

DEPARTMEKT OF PLANNING

2 2 JAN 2013

FILE ^L^/OlSi^

Level 6, 1 Adelaide Terrace, East Perth, Western Australia 6004Telephone +61 8 9222 0555 Facsimile +61 8 9222 0505

www.dsd.wa.gov.au

wa.gov.au

ABN 90 199 516 864

Submission §8

Planning and Development Act 2005Section 57 Amendment (Wlinor)

Form 57Submission




Name ..Nick! Thompson(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ...3/96 Deanmore Road, ScarboroughPostcode6019...

Contact phone number ..0409200057Email address .,[email protected] (Please attach additional pages if required. It is preferred that any additional information be loose rather than bound)

I am highly concerned about the text amendment to the MRS and that it does not provide anyadditional protection of Bush Forever sites. Bush forever sites were created with the intention ofconserving urban bushland FOREVER, not until developers decide they want to clear it. Andwithout proper management of these sites, how do we expect the conservation and biodiversityvalues to be maintained and/or, where possible, improved? I believe that a clause is required thatstates that all bushland in Bush Forever Areas is protected and that disturbance and clearing ofthis bushland is prohibited, I also strongly believe that landholders (including public authorities) ofBF sites should be required to manage their bushland in order to retain the conservation andbiodiversity values.


OFFICE USE ONLY

Signature DateNote: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (5pm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will MOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.plannina.wa.Qov.au


Submission 69

SWANRIVERTRUST

GOVERNMENT OFWESTERN AUSTItALIA

Your Ref 833-2-1-56 Pt 1 (RLS/0319)Our Ref SRT4790

Enquiries Jacey Mills, 9278 0923

Neil ThomsonSecretaryWestern Australian Planning CommissionLocked Bag 2506PERTH WA 6001

21 January 2013


Dear Mr Thomson

Metropolitan Region Scheme Proposed Amendment 1236/57

Thank you for providing the Swan River Trust with the opportunity to comment on the abovementioned amendment which proposes to insert into the MRS text a new 'Bush Forever area'definition under clause 3(1) and replace clause 16(1a)(a) with new similar clauses 16(1a)(a)and (ba). It is understood that the primary intent of the amendment is to streamline theapprovals process for development on reserved land owned or vested in public authoritieswithin Bush Forever areas by not requiring multiple approvals for the same works. Theamendments will not however, negate clause 30A of the Scheme.

It is acknowledged that development excluded from requiring an approval under new clause16(1a)(ba) will continue to be assessed by the Commission either as part of a writtenagreement or approved management plan prior to any works being undertaken. The Trustconsiders that development within Bush Forever areas can be appropriately managed underany of the proposed approval pathways and therefore has no objection to adoption of this MRSamendment.

Should there be any queries regarding this matter, please contact Jacey Mills, EnvironmentalOfficer, on 9278 0923. In all correspondence please quote the above reference number.

Yours sincerely

Rod Hughes/ General ManGeneral Manager

Level 1 Fortesaje Cenlre | 20 Terrace Road | Easl Perth | Western Australia eOO")PO Box 6829 j Easl Perth | Western Australia 6092

Telephone (08) 9278 0900 | Facsimile (08) 9325 [email protected]/a.gov.au 1 VA'AV.sv/anrivertrust.wa.gov.au

Submission ?0Planning and Development Act 2005


Submissiosilletropolitaim Region Scheme Amendment 1236/57

Bush Forever Definition Clause Insertion and Removal of Clause 16 i(1a)(a)for New Similar Clause Insertion 16 (1a)(a) and (ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme Text

OFFICE USE ONLY


NameEleanor Frida-Kahlo(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY)

Address ......9 Guernsey Court, StrattonPostcode ...6056

Contact phone numberEmail [email protected]....


You should be aware that:» The WAPC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1992 and as such, submissions made to theWAPC may be subject to applications for access under the act.° In the course of the WAPC assessing submissions, or making its report on these submissions, copies ofyour submission or the substance of that submission, may be disclosed to third parties.To be signed by person(s) making the submission

Signature...Eleanor Frida-Kahlo...(signed copy following)Date ....24 January 2013

Note: Submissions MUST be received by the advertised closing date, being close ofbusiness (Spm) on 18 January 2013. Late submissions will NOT be considered.Contacts: Telephone - (08) 6551 9000 Fax - (08) 6551 9001 Email - [email protected]; Website - http://www.planninq.wa.aov.au


Statement of Submission:

The current proposal for the Bush Forever Definition clause insertion and removalof clause 16 (1a)(a), and for the new clause insertion 16 (1a)fa) and (ba) in theMetropolitan Region Scheme, should not proceed.

Rather, the relationship between Bush Forever areas and development should bereconsidered using the principles set out in UNESCO's Biosphere Project.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed changes to the Metropolitan RegionScheme Amendment 1236/57

1.1 have read the proposed amendments and considered these in conjunction with commentsmade by the Urban Bushland Council, and I agree with their observations that the amendments:

o do not provide for statutory protection of Bush Forever Areas.Bush Forever areas must be protected in perpetuity, in law

o defines Bush Forever areas as delineated on the MRS map (clause 28A) but does not statetheir purpose.The purpose of Bush Forever areas need to be identified and criteria for its protectionwritten (see following)

9 do not provide a management obligation to retain the conservation values.Management of Bush Forever area needs to be concerned with the preservation andconservation of plant and animal communities

o allow government authorities to clear and develop Bush Forever sites with the approval ofthe WAPC, but without public consultation. Permitted development under MRS includespublic works (roads, drainage, sewerage, etc.).This implies that government authorities do no support democratic processes which, ofcourse, we know could not be. So it is important to include a paragraph to correct thisoversight. In addition, decisions without local knowledge and expertise are most likely toresult in a poor outcome. It is crucial that decision makers, be accountable to the localcommunity.

2. In addition to the concerns expressed here by the UBC, I am aware that many Bush Foreverareas are too small to be able to absorb the shock of any sort of subsidiary development. Inaddition, public works within a Bush Forever area implies urban or industrial developmentimmediately adjacent to the site. Bushland surrounded by development will not survive in the longterm as a regenerating ecosystem, and it is imperative that that public works not be permitted in, oradjacent to, Bush Forever areas.

In addition to these concerns, I would like to put forward the suggestion that this amendment is anopportunity to address broader concerns relating to the current tensions between conservation anddevelopment. This tension is apparent here:

the new clause 16a is intended to streamline the development approval processes fordevelopment proposals on reserved lands owned or vested in public authorities within BushForever areas;.

And The Urban Bushland Council rightly points out that:

What this means is that where a Bush Forever site is owned by or vested in say Landcorp,the Department of Housing or Flealth Dept (as was the case with the Fiona Stanley site)their ownership rights are paramount and they can fast-track a development proposal ifthey have an agreement with the WAPC. Thus their development agenda over-rides the'whole of government' purpose and policy of Bush Forever. Just how many BFA arethreatened by this is not publicly known.

Notably the intention above to streamline development is contradictory to the spirit andintent given in the 'Strategic Planning Context' (on p3 of the explanatory notes) whichincludes Bush Forever policy (2000), Urban Bushland Strategy 1995, 1996 NationalStrategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biodiversity, State Planning Strategy 1997,

Directions 2031 and beyond (2011), and State Planning Policy 2. Remarkably at the top ofp4, it states

'This MRS text amendment is to tie in with (the MRS amendment showing BFA on the MRSmap) to ensure Bush Forever areas are protected through statutory planning controls.Clearing and development in a Bush Forever site by a government authority is notprotection of the bushland, so this amendment clearly contravenes the purpose of BushForever.

The Urban Bushland Council also points out that:

The EPA has advised that no formal assessment is required of the Amendment, i.e.they have signed off on this and have failed to give any policy advice about includingprotection and management They should have done this.

This is clearly not satisfactory, neither for development nor for conservation of bushland. Theproposed amendment provides for an ad hoc process that does not include assessments relatingto amenity and general wellbeing of the community, nor for the critically endangered plant andanimal communities within the Bush forever areas in the context of rapid climate change.

UNESCO and the IViani and the Biosphere Programme (li¥lAB|:5V*1 refer to MAB as 'The Biosphere Programme' or 'UNESCO's Biosphere Programme"

The UNESCO Biosphere project is:

Concerned with problems at the interface of scientific, environmental, societal anddevelopment issues, MAB combines natural and social sciences, economics and educationto improve human livelihoods and safeguard natural ecosystems, thus promotinginnovative approaches to economic development that is socially and culturally appropriateand environmentally sustainable, http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/man-and-biosphere-programme/

UNESCO's Biosphere Programme has been applied and supported in Australia, by Government,14 times (http://www.environment.qov.aU/parks/biosphere/#reserves)

In Western Australia, the most prominent is the Fitzgerald River National Park. However, it is onlyone model of how a Biosphere Reserve may operate. Another is Noosa Biosphere Reserve, whereecologically sustainable development and economics are more evident.

The most important characteristic of the Biosphere Programme is that it considers theenvironment, economics, and community amenity from a systemic perspective. It takes a broaderview of economics than 'development', but does not exclude it. Similarly, it acknowledges theinteraction between human communities and the natural environment.

It does not promote development within areas identified as environmentally sensitive, such asthose found in South-Western Australia(http://www.conservation.orq/where/prioritv areas/hotspots/asia-pacific/southwest-australia/Paqes/default.aspx)However, the principles of UNESCO's Biosphere Programme do support vibrant economicdevelopment, and provide planning ideas that move the debate between the environment anddevelopment forward.

Therefore, Considering the fact that there are planning strategies (theBiosphere Programme) that provide for better outcomes for development andcommunity and the environment, then:

The current proposal for the Bush Forever Definition clause insertion andremoval of clause 16 (1 a)(a), and for the new clause insertion 16 (1 a)(a) and(ba) in the Metropolitan Region Scheme, should not proceed.

Rather, the relationship between Bush Forever areas, and development, should be reconsideredusing the principles set out in UNESCO's Biosphere Project. Reconsideration of development inproximity to Bush Forever areas is an opportunity to

obuild out crimeoincrease community amenity®provide sustainable development in the built environmentodevelop local economicsoincrease and improve housing stock without impact on bushland or other greenfield areasoImprove facilities for health, wellbeing, and education

Talbot Road Reserve and StrattonAn example of how principles of UNESCO's Biosphere Project can enhance both bushlandand development

Talbot Road Reserve is a Bush Forever site surrounded by suburban development, roads, acemetery, and vacant provisional crown land locally known as Stratton Bushland (Lot 6 TalbotRoad). The cemetery, Talbot Road Reserve, and Stratton Bushland contain critically endangeredplant communities, three species of endangered fauna, and a wide diversity of wildlife. Currently,Stratton Bushland is under the auspices of Homeswest and is zoned for housing. However, there isno development application current.

The animals and plant communities within Talbot Road Reserve have an interdependentrelationship with Stratton Bushland, and any development of Stratton Bushland will deplete theconservation value of Talbot Road Bush Forever. Not to mention that Stratton Bushland is, itself, ofcrucial conservation value.

For these, and other reasons relating to social ammenity, health and wellbeing, the localcommunity do not want Stratton Bushland developed.

In addition, the housing planned for Stratton Bushland is badly thought out, and is most likely tobring about social problems relating to poverty, social exclusion, and ageing.

Under the current system, the protection of Stratton Bushland means that the housing stockplanned for that area is deleted from the planning schedule. The issue of housing then becomes adebate that means either the housing is lost, or the bushland. Clearly, both housing andpreservation of the bushland are crucial.

Examining the issue using UNESCO's Biosphere criteria is a way of addressing the problem sothat Stratton maintains its critically endangered bushland, the sustainability of Talbot RoadReserve is improved, and the local community benefits from the development of more housing

and denser population. It is also an opportunity to improve local economics, enhance communityamenity and facilities, improve health and wellbeing

ybmission 11

From; Sanders, KarenSent: Thursday, 7 February 2013 4:51 PMT©; Scroop, TraceySubject: DEC comments - MRS Amendment 1236/57 and Planning Bulletin 59

Hi Tracey

As discussed below, DEC has reviewed the draft revised Planning Bulletin 69 (PB 69) and theMRS amendment 1236/57.

DEC considers that the amendment formalises the previous amendment (1082/33) thatresulted in Bush Forever areas (BFA) being shown as a hatched overlay on the MRS map. Thecurrent amendment comprises of scheme text to correspond with and formally define the

Bush Forever areas, providing statutory protection of Bush Forever areas in accordance withSPP 2.8. This is a positive step for Bush Forever as the previous Scheme amendment mapalone didn't define the implications or importance of an area being identified as a "Bush

Forever area".

In regards to PB 69, DEC supports the update to reflect progress in implementing BushForever. It is agreed that the content of the document is not contentious and it is therefore

not considered necessary for it to be formally referred to DEC. I trust these officer level

comments are sufficient.

Some specific comments are below, and also shown in the attached document in 'track

changes'.

Negotiated Planning Solutions (NPS) - the revised Planning Bulletin has reduced thesection on IMPS, and it is now not clear who is the lead in any negotiations related tothese sites. The PB should clearly state that DoP is the lead for the NPS. It isunderstood that DEC will be involved in negotiations, but not as the first point

contact.

The notice of delegation section states that DoP will not be providing specific BushForever advice or comments on development proposals. Consistent with the Moll,DEC will provide comments on statutory applications affecting a BFA. if there areany proposals that are non-statutory in nature it would be expected that DoP would

be the lead agency.

Please contact me if you have any further enquiries, and if it would be of assistance wewould be happy to review future versions of the document priorto public release.

Kind regards

Karen SandersSenior Land Use Planning Officer, Swan RegionDepartment of Environment and Conservation9423 2987

Documents

MRS 1236-57 Amendment Report on submissions