![\"Councillors](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/623903d77ce13ebb3f00e66fec30bef69c660afc.jpg\")
Camera IconCouncillors said planning works including coastal preservation have not been adequately addressed by the WA Government. Credit: Ian Munro\/The West Australian<\/p>\nAn attempt to allow urban development on a prime coastal spot has been knocked back by residents and local councillors due to \u201cinsufficient\u201d planning work from the State Government.<\/p>\n
Fremantle councillors voted unanimously last week to oppose rezoning a 23-hectar area near Port Beach from industrial to urban, claiming the State Government had not done enough coastal planning and failed to develop an integrated public transport plan for North Fremantle.<\/p>\n
The Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage approved mixed-use and residential development to create a North Fremantle Urban Precinct in 2024, with support from the city as long as adequate planning was done beforehand.<\/p>\n
Developers have been pushing to fast-track the building process to mitigate WA\u2019s housing shortage, but Fremantle residents and councillors said the government had not delivered on promises to properly protect the coastline and foreshore, and improve public transport and walkability.<\/p>\n
City officers said in a report it would be \u201cpremature\u201d to amend the local planning scheme and support residential development until this was resolved.<\/p>\n
Councillor Andrew Sullivan said Port Beach Road needed to be relocated before allowing any urban building, because a major road cutting through the foreshore reserve was unacceptable.<\/p>\n
He also suggested a protective sand dune system would be critical to preserve the foreshore for future generations, and transport elements – including public transport, cycling and walking – needed to be properly considered.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe really can\u2019t imagine this development going ahead unless Port beach Road is removed from the foreshore so that we can do our coastal retreat actions, and so … the people who are using that foreshore don\u2019t have to cross a main road,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe matter is really premature and I\u2019m really concerned that the State needs to understand that, and needs to go back to the drawing board on these matters.\u201d<\/p>\n
Another major point of contention was a perceived lack of transparency from the WA Planning Commission to the public.<\/p>\n
Cr Sullivan said the Leighton Action Coalition formed 27 years ago to push for better coastal planning policies from the State Government, and he felt disappointed the same issues were rearing up again.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe issue of the consultation and how important it is for community, particularly in something as important as this where they have such a huge stake and where they have been working on these matters for near on 30 years \u2026 that they be able to see that evidence and comment on it and tell the planning commission whether they think the evidence is reasonable or whether it completely sucks,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf you read your own state planning policy about coastal matters, it very specifically says how important engagement with the community is in making decisions about foreshore reserves and other coastal matters. And it basically says they should do it.\u201d<\/p>\n
Camera IconCouncillors said planning works including coastal preservation have not been adequately addressed by the WA Government. Credit: Ian Munro\/The West Australian<\/p>\n
The DPLH held initial consultations about rezoning the Port Beach industrial area in 2023.<\/p>\n
It recently invited the city to provide further comments on the planning, but no formal public consultation has been proposed.<\/p>\n
Leighton Action Coalition member Michael Wearne said he felt \u201cvery disappointed\u201d in the lack of public engagement.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen we wrote asking about the opportunity to provide comment on foreshore setbacks, the response from the DPLH was as follows: \u2018There are no upcoming opportunities to comment on the extent of the foreshore reserve. A considerable body of technical work informed the progress of this item through WAPC and through both houses of parliament.\u2019,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t know what sort of community consultation that constitutes when the public has no access to this body of technical work.\u201d<\/p>\n
Former Fremantle councillor Gerry McGill questioned the ethicality of allowing rich developers to have so much input into the planning.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe proponent has prepared a North Fremantle Coastal Hazard Risk Management and Adaptation Plan which proposes a full coastal retreat option and concludes with certain numbers which I won\u2019t quote here, except to say they are highly disputed,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cSince when have critical issues been left in the hands of those developing the subject land?<\/p>\n
![\"Port](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/80596a8d9585be39224eb1de758668b585f10ce5.jpg\")
Camera IconPort Beach and the dune rehabilitation project. Credit: Ian Munro\/The West Australian<\/p>\n
\u201cThe WAPC states explicitly there will be no further submissions demanded. It\u2019s further evidence \u2026 of our independent state planning authority abandoning planning to ministerial edicts.\u201d<\/p>\n
Councillors agreed not to support lifting the urban deferred status until the appropriate planning works were completed, and will provide this feedback to the DPLH.<\/p>\n
The city is currently progressing its own integrated study on transport options in North Fremantle to inform future discussions with the State Government, expected to be completed in December.<\/p>\n
The city will also begin developing a Coastal Hazard Risk Management and Adaptation Plan (CHRMAP) to help protect and improve the Fremantle coastline, including a major erosion hotspot at Port Beach. It received a $175,000 State Government grant for this.<\/p>\n
Councillors Sullivan, Jemima Williamson-Wong and Melanie Clarke will form the new working group to develop the plan over the next two years.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"An attempt to allow urban development on a prime coastal spot has been knocked back by residents and…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":86286,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[323,4317,1774,152,335,149,1310,4316,464],"class_list":["post-86285","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-perth","tag-business","tag-fremantle","tag-local-government","tag-news","tag-perth","tag-politics","tag-property","tag-south","tag-wa-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86285","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=86285"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86285\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/86286"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=86285"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=86285"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=86285"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}