Goode fight not over yet as controversial resort plans lodged under WAPC’s new development assessment pathway

New planning laws fast-tracked through WA Parliament to slash red tape at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic have seen a long-running battle over a controversial 51-unit resort plan at Goode Beach resurrected. A local structure plan for an “eco-resort” on a 7.7ha site between Goode Beach and Lake Vancouver was recommended for approval to the West Australian Planning Commission by the City of Albany council in July, 2018. City of Albany executive director infrastructure, development and environment Paul Camins said last week the endorsed recommendation included “a number of conditions and matters to be addressed by the applicants”. “The recommendation made by the City was based on the proposal providing a unique, high-quality tourist resort designed to integrate with its natural surrounds and not impact surrounding landholders or beach users,” he said. The plans were referred by the applicant to the State Administrative Tribunal in late 2019. In February 2020, the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage and Statutory Planning Committee resolved not to support the application “to form a position to take forward through the SAT proceedings”, a DPLH spokeswoman said. The application to the SAT was withdrawn on September 21, four months after the WA Parliament passed major planning reforms to streamline development applications for “significant, job-creating projects”. Under the new planning pathway, the WAPC will be the decision maker for “significant developments” of $30 million or more in metropolitan areas and projects of $5m or more in the regions. A DPLH spokeswoman last week confirmed the applicant had put forward a pre-lodgement request with the department — the second step in a seven-step process — under the new significant development assessment pathway. “Should a formal development application be lodged with WAPC at the conclusion of the pre-lodgement process, it would be determined by the WAPC under the new assessment pathway for significant developments upon conclusion of consultation with local government, regulatory agencies along with public consultation,” she said. The Frenchman Bay Association has been fighting against construction on Lot 660 for decades. The group believes the resort would “have disturbed fragile sand dunes and endangered the conservation-grade wetland”. An FBA spokesman said the group was surprised to learn the proponent had made a pre-lodgement inquiry under the new pathway. “If the proponent does lodge an application, it will be different from the rejected structure plan, because the new assessment pathway only works on development applications, which require much more detail,” he said. “The legislation makes it clear that Parliament’s intention was to speed the approval of worthy projects, not to give a second chance to one that has already been roundly rejected.”