Gracetown, Cowaramup Bay the heart of the south west Margaret River Wine Region
Landcorp Development Update
Hello all, Please read the letter below from Steve McKinny with regards to the Gracetown Development.
Good morning everyone,
As you know Landcorp have had a Scheme Amendment 175, to progress their residential development, with the Shire for quite some time now. This was lodged under the old town planning scheme.
Meanwhile the Shire's new Town Planning Scheme No.1, has been out for comment last summer and has since been under review by the Shire and the Dept Planning. According to Landcorp, the Shire and DoPs best guess on gazettal of the new scheme is February 2010.
After various discussions with Shire and Department of Planning staff, Landcorp have decided not to advertise amendment 175 this year as by the time it goes out for comment and then these comments are reviewed, the new TPS might be in place, overriding the old Scheme.
This means they won't be having any information sessions on the TPS amendment or the environmental review, or releasing fact sheets etc this year and it will be put on hold until next year.
It means they'll have to re-initiate the amendment under the new scheme next year. This will include the referral process to the Environmental Protection Authority.
The Shire and DoP have agreed that Landcorp can submit and advertise the draft structure plan with the scheme amendment and any environmental reports, not after as was the previous approach. This condenses two large consultation rounds into one.
Often when we have been negotiating to ensure impacts are managed the answer has been that addressing that particular impact will be done under the structure plan, delaying the commitments we need them to make. Advertising them together will mean the community has more of the detail available when considering the Scheme Amendment, plus perhaps a clearer understanding of where commitments lie in the time frame of the planning process.
They have also said that they will start looking at setting up discussions around traffic management, design guidelines and opportunities for GPA and the community to be involved ahead of lodging the draft structure plan.
In the meantime, the GPA has met with Landcorp and State Land Services about our concerns about the National Park re-zoning and our concerns that that they had not fully met their commitment to the community to put the remaining land into National Park. Some land however, e.g. the main beach carpark and the hall is perhaps best keep in Shire control. Subsequently there is work being done in the community to determine exactly where we feel the boundary should be. For example the current Shire-Nat park boundary goes through the boat ramp carpark, and this has resulting difficulties with rubbish and toilet discussions over the years. Another ongoing area of discussion has been how much of the Hall and Oval area should be kept aside for future emergency sheds or other facilities and how much do we want safely in National Park? Also if you are unaware the area to the east of the road into the bay, opposite the main beach area is mostly land vested in Shire until roughly to top of the ridge, plus the creek area is partly shire land - both areas previously considered for some development. If you'd like to comment, please see and use the attached map. The red is the current boundary, the green is what the State Land Services and Landcorp are processing so far - clearly not all the remaining land. Comments to John, Bruce, David or me on the development committee please so we can collate them. If you are going to use a map please use the attached map.
Steve
As you know Landcorp have had a Scheme Amendment 175, to progress their residential development, with the Shire for quite some time now. This was lodged under the old town planning scheme.
Meanwhile the Shire's new Town Planning Scheme No.1, has been out for comment last summer and has since been under review by the Shire and the Dept Planning. According to Landcorp, the Shire and DoPs best guess on gazettal of the new scheme is February 2010.
After various discussions with Shire and Department of Planning staff, Landcorp have decided not to advertise amendment 175 this year as by the time it goes out for comment and then these comments are reviewed, the new TPS might be in place, overriding the old Scheme.
This means they won't be having any information sessions on the TPS amendment or the environmental review, or releasing fact sheets etc this year and it will be put on hold until next year.
It means they'll have to re-initiate the amendment under the new scheme next year. This will include the referral process to the Environmental Protection Authority.
The Shire and DoP have agreed that Landcorp can submit and advertise the draft structure plan with the scheme amendment and any environmental reports, not after as was the previous approach. This condenses two large consultation rounds into one.
Often when we have been negotiating to ensure impacts are managed the answer has been that addressing that particular impact will be done under the structure plan, delaying the commitments we need them to make. Advertising them together will mean the community has more of the detail available when considering the Scheme Amendment, plus perhaps a clearer understanding of where commitments lie in the time frame of the planning process.
They have also said that they will start looking at setting up discussions around traffic management, design guidelines and opportunities for GPA and the community to be involved ahead of lodging the draft structure plan.
In the meantime, the GPA has met with Landcorp and State Land Services about our concerns about the National Park re-zoning and our concerns that that they had not fully met their commitment to the community to put the remaining land into National Park. Some land however, e.g. the main beach carpark and the hall is perhaps best keep in Shire control. Subsequently there is work being done in the community to determine exactly where we feel the boundary should be. For example the current Shire-Nat park boundary goes through the boat ramp carpark, and this has resulting difficulties with rubbish and toilet discussions over the years. Another ongoing area of discussion has been how much of the Hall and Oval area should be kept aside for future emergency sheds or other facilities and how much do we want safely in National Park? Also if you are unaware the area to the east of the road into the bay, opposite the main beach area is mostly land vested in Shire until roughly to top of the ridge, plus the creek area is partly shire land - both areas previously considered for some development. If you'd like to comment, please see and use the attached map. The red is the current boundary, the green is what the State Land Services and Landcorp are processing so far - clearly not all the remaining land. Comments to John, Bruce, David or me on the development committee please so we can collate them. If you are going to use a map please use the attached map.
Steve
Last updated by Cass Fisher Oct. 21, 2009.
Sign in
Website Design By
Hot LInks
|
Blackwood River Houseboats cruise - fish - relax no skippers ticket required! |
Badge
© 2010 Created by Bay Store.
