Satterley Property Group has claimed its plans for a 1,000-block residential estate in Perth Hills were blocked despite complying with the state's bushfire planning rules.
Satterley Property Group has claimed its plans for a 1,000-block residential estate in Perth Hills were blocked despite complying with the state's bushfire planning rules.
Launching a State Administrative Tribunal appeal, Satterley Property barrister Paul McQueen accused the Western Australian Planning Commission and residents lobby group Save Perth Hills of imposing a “precautionary principle” about bushfires on top of state planning laws.
At the first day of a scheduled three-week hearing in SAT, Mr McQueen said the North Stoneville project had been through three decades of assessment and fitted both plans for metropolitan Perth and specific policies.
He said bushfire and traffic monitoring planning indicated residents would be able to get out of its proposed estate within three hours of a bushfire alarm being raised.
“The work has been done to provide the necessary comfort to the tribunal,” the Satterley Property Group lawyer said.
Nigel Satterley-led Satterley Property Group is asking the SAT to give full or modified approval to a North Stoneville structure plan rejected by the WAPC in 2020 and 2023.
The WAPC, Save Perth Hills and the Shire of Mundaring are fighting Satterley’s appeal and on Monday attacked bushfire and traffic planning for the North Stoneville application.
SAT president Judge Henry Jackson and expert member Ross Povey are holding a three-week hearing of the Satterley Property Group appeal.
Satterley Property needs a structure plan in place before it can push ahead with its initial planned development of 400 residential lots on a 535-hectare site, about 3 kilometres east of John Forrest National Park and surrounded by heavily vegetated semi-rural lots.
Satterley Property intends to develop another 600 residential lots in North Stoneville after federal and state authorities complete the planned EastLink highway between Perth and Northam.
EastLink will overlap with parts of Toodyay Road and will have a major road interchange about 2km north of the planned estate.
The developer plans to set 193 hectares aside as a bushland conservation area.
In its opening submissions, WAPC has claimed the North Stoneville structure plan failed to address key questions - including whether the bushfire dangers faced by residents of surrounding areas would be higher or lower at various stage of the proposed development.
Save Perth Hills lawyer Benjamin Tomasi claimed the Satterley Property’s plans failed to account for a variety of bushfire scenarios.
Mr Tomasi said the developer had a “laser-like focus” on the road network and failed to take into account medical emergencies, people needing to help neighbours and the widespread use of horse floats in the area.
Pointing at estimates of 2800 people eventually living on the planned estate, Mr Tomasi said the proposal was adding “thousands of different variables in an area already beset by uncertainty”.
Shire of Mundaring lawyer Craig Slarke said the structure plan had “sidestepped” Satterley Property Group’s responsibilities for road upgrades in the area.
Mr Slarke said the developer should also identify how the remaining bushland “will be managed in perpetuity”.
Mr McQueen said the debate about the North Stoneville structure plan had unfortunately descended into details normally dealt with at the development application stage.
With the plan having complied with the state planning policy of bushfire risk, Mr McQueen said North Stoneville should be dealt with in accordance with regulations that sit within that policy.
The Satterley Property Group lawyer told the tribunal it would need a “very good reason” to not apply those regulations to North Stoneville.
Justice Jackson said: “The others will say that significant bushfire risk is a good one.”
The hearing continues on Tuesday.
