top of page
  • Save Perth Hills Inc

Stoneville Parkerville Ratepayers raise alarm in letter to DPLH

Updated: Apr 8, 2023

Our friends at SPPA (Stoneville Parkerville Ratepayers), have raised alarm over $atterley's apparent capacity to update and update and alter information in their amended plan.

Check out this brilliant letter to DPLH - Well done SPPA (LEGENDS)

VIA EMAIL to: Ms Sally Grebe - Director Planning Appeals

Department of Planning Lands and Heritage

sally. grebe@dp/

• CC:



• SATPlan


31st March 2023


AMENDMENT 1-ADDENDUM (Application from Hatch-Roberts-Day)

Dear Sally,

It is of grave concern to the community I represent, via Stoneville Parkerville Progress

Association {SPPA}, that Satterley Property Group representatives, Hatch-Roberts-Day, have been granted 51 additional days' to review, identify, and then substantially change significant aspects of their SP34 - North Stoneville development (amended) plan.

It has taken Hatch-Roberts-Day more than 7 weeks since lodgements closed, to realise critical information relating to their population estimates and housing lot sizes were wrong.

They submitted, to DPLH, an Addendum of Amended Errors on March 23rd, meaning

submissions made between February 10 - March 24, and/or information sourced by the

Community on amended SP34 to March 23, could be invalid. This is a serious matter that requires rectifying by granting an equal extension of time for Community submissions (51 days= June 28} to demonstrate procedural transparency, accountability and fairness.

The SAT orders, issued November 4, 2022, allow parties to vary the orders, {'5. The parties have liberty to apply'), meaning an extension to the schedule, including the June 30 WAPC deadline, can be sought.

Our request relates to the DPLH acceptance of an Addendum on March 23, on behalf of

Satterley Property Group. {Letter attached}. The November 4th SAT orders clearly state that:

1. By 31 January 2023 the applicant is to provide to the respondent an amended

structure plan (including Parts One and Two, and all technical appendices) and any

supporting information.

Satterley, and its representatives, have been afforded more than 2 years of mediation,

advanced knowledge of the SAT 2023 schedule for SP34 {pre-agreed ahead of the November

4 SAT Directions hearing}, and almost three more months to prepare, review, and finalise an amended plan. The SAT orders make no provision for further amendments - and no Directions hearing has been sought by any party to seek additional time to review, alter, update or correct documents, or to submit 'additional' documents - such as the Addendum.

Additionally, three other critical reports around Bushfire Disaster and Evacuation Management, relating directly to the amended SP34 plan, were not submitted by the proponent within the specified deadline of January 31. These documents are dated 'February, 'February 9' and

'February 16, 2023'. They are:

a. 2023 Bushfire Simulation Modelling Report

b. 2023 Microsimulation Evacuation Modelling Report

c. 2023 Bushfire Management Plan

The replacement Part 38 (Appendix 38), was submitted to, and accepted by DPLH, on February 20th - 3 weeks after SAT's deadline.

With the greatest respect, can you please explain to us:

1. Why are numerous and such considerable extensions of time being allowed?

2. Why don't the overdue lodgements of (any of) these documents breach SAT orders?

3. Why, on February 1st 2023, did the DPLH website state that the amended plan had been submitted on January 31st 2023, 'as required' under SAT orders -yet documents continue to be accepted throughout February, and now, into the last week of March?

Our Association reasonably seeks clarity on how much longer Hatch-Roberts-Day, or other parties contracted by Satterley Property Group in relation to Amended SP34 North Stoneville, will be allowed to submit Addendums - an action which increases the risk of inaccurate and incorrect information being widely and publicly circulated, especially via social media, and then submissions being prepared and lodged, based on wrong information - rendering them invalid.

So, we further ask:

4. How will DPLH manage submissions already lodged ahead of the Addendum?

5. How will DPLH manage the incorrect information now circulating, substantially,

throughout the Community?

6. If further addendums are sought- how substantial can these corrections be - and how

will points 1 and 2 be further managed? (e.g. - can the BMP and evacuation simulation

models be altered and re-submitted to DPLH?)

7. What cut-off date will DPLH apply to the submission of further addendums?

Your new Code of Conduct, updated 29th March 2023, admirably states that:

• ''This Code of Conduct serves to build trust amongst our peers and with the

community., ensures that our work is undertaken in an ethical manner and embeds

accountability in decision making at all levels., across our business."

We look forward to your timely response.

Kind regards,

Jo Sheil - President SPPA - on behalf of Stoneville & Parkerville Progress Assoc.

89 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page