City of Wanneroo ratepayers face a $900,000 bill - the equivalent of more than 750 average household rates - after the council lost its latest bid to retain an aluminium boardwalk it built illegally at the Yanchep foreshore.
Wrangling over the botched project dates back to 2009 when the WA Planning Commission agreed with residents' complaints that the $560,000 structure linking Compass Circle and Foreshore Vista was built contrary to approved plans.
The council had flagged a timber boardwalk 300mm to 1200mm high, but the so-called sky bridge is in parts 6m to 7m above the dunes.
After much debate, including a $25,000 community survey which backed the original, lower-scale proposal, the council resolved to demolish it at a cost of about $335,000.
However, last year the council changed its mind and decided instead to apply for retrospective approval to keep the structure, with former mayor Jon Kelly citing two favourable petitions as evidence "community attitudes had changed".
That application was knocked back by the commission last week. WAPC chairman Gary Prattley said yesterday the commission's statutory planning committee found the structure was "visually intrusive" and contrary to the State's coastal planning policy.
"The committee also considered the development was inconsistent with the amenity of the surrounding area and approving the existing structure would have set an undesirable precedent for similar structures within foreshore reserves," Mr Prattley said.
However, Mr Prattley said the committee noted it would be prepared to consider a new application which sought to modify the structure.
Yanchep Two Rocks Residents' Association member Ivan Ward said the council should either lower the boardwalk, which residents supported, or get on with demolishing it. "We've always been upset that they went ahead and built this monstrosity," he said.
Wanneroo acting chief executive Len Kosova said a report would be presented to the council seeking further direction once it received formal notification of the commission's decision.Sponsored links
'The West Australian' is a trademark of West Australian Newspapers Limited 2012.
All rights reserved.
Select your state to see news for your area.
11 Comments
Who would want to live north of the river anyway? Leave it there for a couple of years and the local trash will have it virtually pulled down for you at no cost.
2 RepliesAnother prime example how councils use OUR cash...Leave it where it is..plant a few trees, much cheaper solution. Or better still build a row of those ugly croncrete houses that are replacing older properties on West Coast Hwy. Block out the view completley.
ReplyUnbelievable they should be made to pay for it out of their own pockets, then they might realise that their not gods
ReplyNot as much as the Albany council lost of our money and not even a jar of FIGJAM to show for it. Councils need regulating.
ReplyCon Dom…..North of the river rules mate, better than the southern slums….the council should all be sacked and barred from running for office again, councils are the lowest form of governance and this proves it.
1 Reply