Timeline
1990
A proposal for the area to be be used for use a golf course and associated accommodation by a Japanese Consortium was rejected. This was not in line with the Rural Strategy for the area.
Rural Strategy Report
1992
The council put forward their guidelines for the Gnarabup Township development called TPS18. (Town Planning Scheme 18). The initial Draft of TPS18 from council agreed on 142 sites and tourist development equivalent to Prevelly a nearby low key town site.
TPS 18 Clause 3.3.1
1993
The TPS18 was to be accepted however the developers introduced their Structure Plan early for the area. The Council tried to accommodate the structure plan in TPS18. 268 lots were asked for to be used for residential, tourism, retirement village and commercial. Council agreed on two lots for tourism. Lot 226 was originally described as a caravan park or other low-density use (West of Walcliffe). Lot 228 was designated Commercial/Tourism (Shops and Backpackers). No development densities were designated for these tourism areas. Another lot was designated retirement village/group housing (Lot 220) and was given a high density rating on the understanding that it was to be used for a retirement village.
Developer using legal tactics and upsetting council
The lots were reduced to 243 and an additional tourist lot on a landscape protection zone was rejected. The structure plan was put out for comment and was accepted despite a large negative reaction (620 against and 215 for). 400 submissions were ruled illegal due to a legal technicality found by the developers lawyer. The Structure Plan was acted upon before the TPS18 was gazetted (1995) resulting in the later dispute that the structure plan was invalid because it had been accepted before the TPS18. TPS 18 was accepted on the basis of two pro development submissions despite 12 submissions being put forward (due to a legal technicality) which was then adopted and development went ahead.
1994
The Developer appealed directly to the Minister for Planning for approval of the rejected tourism site which was to become Lot 227. This was gained despite advice against the development from the council, ministry for planning and a government technical advisory group. The Minister ordered a new land zone be created to accommodate this development. Popular support demonstrated in a youth rally led to the land use being converted from a hotel to a lodge/ chalets for 120 beds.
Minister overides all advice
Shire Guidelines
Council Stands Firm
Council had no Choice - Overidden
1995
Lot 220 (the retirement village/group housing) and Lot 228 were sold to another developer and the two sites were made into three tourist resorts Breakers, Beaches 68 units and Margaret River Resort 30 units giving a maximum occupancy of 380 (Equal to Prevelly Tourism Potential). The planned retirement village was disregarded and the density rating from the retirement village was transferred to the commercial/ tourism site through precedent. The commercial/ tourism site was expanded into public space area to accommodate the tourism portion and the commercial portion was downgraded and the original commercial location moved.
The submission for the development of Lot 228 (tourist/commercial) block was sent out to all landholders in the gnarabup area with 2 opposing it and 4 approving it. This may have been due to community cynicism and apathy due to the result of previous submission requests which had been subjugated. The retirement village/group housing lot was developed as a tourist site without without any reference to the community. The Shire made a visual impact assessment of the proposed buildings from six viewpoints and failed to see that it was in contravention of the planning covenants (low environmental impact with maximum vegetation retained around all buildings). This has resulted in a highly visible development that has attracted large critiscm.
1998
The Finniy group put in proposals to buy and develop Lot 226 (West of Walcliffe) from the Developer and were rejected by community opposition due to the scale of the development. The Finney group did not go ahead with the sale. The Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Planning Policy (LNRSPP) was published. This reinforced the previous Rural planning report that goverened the area that the visual amenities of the coastal strip need to be preserved and that coastal nodes such as Gnarabup and Smiths beach should not be over 500 people.
Newspaper Article Rejection of proposal by the community
1999
The sewage farm for the area was placed in an environmentally sensitive area near the beach front at Gas Bay and highly visible to the public using Boodjinup beach in 1993. It was sited over the main surface drainage line for the area which causes problems during high rainfall. It was also claimed as a significant aboriginal site. The sewage farm needed to be extended and the Dept of Environmental protection approved this without submissions from the public. Lawyers supporting the PWPA were confident of a no loss case against the Dept of Environmental Protection and offered their services free. The case was lost on a technicality that the PWPA were not registered with the court as an interested party. Costs were awarded against the PWPA who are a voluntary community group and were made bankrupt.
Issues with the development
Cape Fear
2000
The incorrect procedure of acceptance of TPS18 and the structure plan was uncovered and all further building and development was suspended in the Gnarabup Area. Amendments to TPS18 were drawn up and an amended structure plan was to be developed with consultation from the community. This was overridden and the developer asked for their structure plan to be publicised. Council rejected this request by the developer. A ruling on what constituted the 243 lots originally agreed upon in TPS 18 was submitted to the Supreme Court by the developer. The council failed to tell the community that the hearing was imminent and the developer gained all his preferences uncontested by the Council as well as overruling the council on publication of the current structure plan amendments. A defense by Council was ruled out due to insufficient council funds. The shadow planning minister for the labor party published an article mentioning that the the liberal party had sold out the Prevelly-Gnarabup community by employing Pro Development Commissioners. The council had been spilled in 2003 due to distrust by the councilors of the Council CEO over many issues including Gnarabup and was replaced by the Commissioners that were selected by liberal party backed selections. The council had previously been stacked with pro-development councilors to force through development proposals.
Letter to the labour party 2004 looking for relief from the unrelenting political influence on the local planning process supporting developers.
2015
An amendment to the structure plan requested Tourist development the size of Prevelly Park for Lot 226 (West of Walcliffe Road) which is in addition to the current Tourist development (Equal to Prevelly Park) and Lot 227 (Lodge) above Gnarabup. This is in clear contravention of TPS 18 clause 331(b). The final peak population could be around 2000-2500 people during holiday periods which is conflict with all development guidelines for the area. The Lodge site Lot 227 and Lot 226 are in highly visible area's and would be very visually damaging to the wilderness environment this area is famous for. The current sewage works which was placed just behind a beach cannot be expanded any further and has already been extended due to exceeding the designated capacity it was designed for. Other infrastructure will also be exceeded if the overrun of development is to occur.
There are no safeguards on the development of Lot 226 if it is sold to another developer and no defined density ratings. This development, which originally was supposed to be a Caravan Park could very easily progress to a repeat of the present highly criticised tourist development east of Walcliffe road on a larger scale.
The original wish’s of the community was an environmentally sensitive development similar in size to Prevelly Park.
Currently the development could potentially be twice the residences and triple the tourist development with an incorrectly placed sewage plant and five highly visible tourist developments on one of the most scenic wilderness coastlines in Australia.
A proposal for the area to be be used for use a golf course and associated accommodation by a Japanese Consortium was rejected. This was not in line with the Rural Strategy for the area.
Rural Strategy Report
1992
The council put forward their guidelines for the Gnarabup Township development called TPS18. (Town Planning Scheme 18). The initial Draft of TPS18 from council agreed on 142 sites and tourist development equivalent to Prevelly a nearby low key town site.
TPS 18 Clause 3.3.1
1993
The TPS18 was to be accepted however the developers introduced their Structure Plan early for the area. The Council tried to accommodate the structure plan in TPS18. 268 lots were asked for to be used for residential, tourism, retirement village and commercial. Council agreed on two lots for tourism. Lot 226 was originally described as a caravan park or other low-density use (West of Walcliffe). Lot 228 was designated Commercial/Tourism (Shops and Backpackers). No development densities were designated for these tourism areas. Another lot was designated retirement village/group housing (Lot 220) and was given a high density rating on the understanding that it was to be used for a retirement village.
Developer using legal tactics and upsetting council
The lots were reduced to 243 and an additional tourist lot on a landscape protection zone was rejected. The structure plan was put out for comment and was accepted despite a large negative reaction (620 against and 215 for). 400 submissions were ruled illegal due to a legal technicality found by the developers lawyer. The Structure Plan was acted upon before the TPS18 was gazetted (1995) resulting in the later dispute that the structure plan was invalid because it had been accepted before the TPS18. TPS 18 was accepted on the basis of two pro development submissions despite 12 submissions being put forward (due to a legal technicality) which was then adopted and development went ahead.
1994
The Developer appealed directly to the Minister for Planning for approval of the rejected tourism site which was to become Lot 227. This was gained despite advice against the development from the council, ministry for planning and a government technical advisory group. The Minister ordered a new land zone be created to accommodate this development. Popular support demonstrated in a youth rally led to the land use being converted from a hotel to a lodge/ chalets for 120 beds.
Minister overides all advice
Shire Guidelines
Council Stands Firm
Council had no Choice - Overidden
1995
Lot 220 (the retirement village/group housing) and Lot 228 were sold to another developer and the two sites were made into three tourist resorts Breakers, Beaches 68 units and Margaret River Resort 30 units giving a maximum occupancy of 380 (Equal to Prevelly Tourism Potential). The planned retirement village was disregarded and the density rating from the retirement village was transferred to the commercial/ tourism site through precedent. The commercial/ tourism site was expanded into public space area to accommodate the tourism portion and the commercial portion was downgraded and the original commercial location moved.
The submission for the development of Lot 228 (tourist/commercial) block was sent out to all landholders in the gnarabup area with 2 opposing it and 4 approving it. This may have been due to community cynicism and apathy due to the result of previous submission requests which had been subjugated. The retirement village/group housing lot was developed as a tourist site without without any reference to the community. The Shire made a visual impact assessment of the proposed buildings from six viewpoints and failed to see that it was in contravention of the planning covenants (low environmental impact with maximum vegetation retained around all buildings). This has resulted in a highly visible development that has attracted large critiscm.
1998
The Finniy group put in proposals to buy and develop Lot 226 (West of Walcliffe) from the Developer and were rejected by community opposition due to the scale of the development. The Finney group did not go ahead with the sale. The Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Planning Policy (LNRSPP) was published. This reinforced the previous Rural planning report that goverened the area that the visual amenities of the coastal strip need to be preserved and that coastal nodes such as Gnarabup and Smiths beach should not be over 500 people.
Newspaper Article Rejection of proposal by the community
1999
The sewage farm for the area was placed in an environmentally sensitive area near the beach front at Gas Bay and highly visible to the public using Boodjinup beach in 1993. It was sited over the main surface drainage line for the area which causes problems during high rainfall. It was also claimed as a significant aboriginal site. The sewage farm needed to be extended and the Dept of Environmental protection approved this without submissions from the public. Lawyers supporting the PWPA were confident of a no loss case against the Dept of Environmental Protection and offered their services free. The case was lost on a technicality that the PWPA were not registered with the court as an interested party. Costs were awarded against the PWPA who are a voluntary community group and were made bankrupt.
Issues with the development
Cape Fear
2000
The incorrect procedure of acceptance of TPS18 and the structure plan was uncovered and all further building and development was suspended in the Gnarabup Area. Amendments to TPS18 were drawn up and an amended structure plan was to be developed with consultation from the community. This was overridden and the developer asked for their structure plan to be publicised. Council rejected this request by the developer. A ruling on what constituted the 243 lots originally agreed upon in TPS 18 was submitted to the Supreme Court by the developer. The council failed to tell the community that the hearing was imminent and the developer gained all his preferences uncontested by the Council as well as overruling the council on publication of the current structure plan amendments. A defense by Council was ruled out due to insufficient council funds. The shadow planning minister for the labor party published an article mentioning that the the liberal party had sold out the Prevelly-Gnarabup community by employing Pro Development Commissioners. The council had been spilled in 2003 due to distrust by the councilors of the Council CEO over many issues including Gnarabup and was replaced by the Commissioners that were selected by liberal party backed selections. The council had previously been stacked with pro-development councilors to force through development proposals.
Letter to the labour party 2004 looking for relief from the unrelenting political influence on the local planning process supporting developers.
2015
An amendment to the structure plan requested Tourist development the size of Prevelly Park for Lot 226 (West of Walcliffe Road) which is in addition to the current Tourist development (Equal to Prevelly Park) and Lot 227 (Lodge) above Gnarabup. This is in clear contravention of TPS 18 clause 331(b). The final peak population could be around 2000-2500 people during holiday periods which is conflict with all development guidelines for the area. The Lodge site Lot 227 and Lot 226 are in highly visible area's and would be very visually damaging to the wilderness environment this area is famous for. The current sewage works which was placed just behind a beach cannot be expanded any further and has already been extended due to exceeding the designated capacity it was designed for. Other infrastructure will also be exceeded if the overrun of development is to occur.
There are no safeguards on the development of Lot 226 if it is sold to another developer and no defined density ratings. This development, which originally was supposed to be a Caravan Park could very easily progress to a repeat of the present highly criticised tourist development east of Walcliffe road on a larger scale.
The original wish’s of the community was an environmentally sensitive development similar in size to Prevelly Park.
Currently the development could potentially be twice the residences and triple the tourist development with an incorrectly placed sewage plant and five highly visible tourist developments on one of the most scenic wilderness coastlines in Australia.
