Geoff Pearson’s article that clearly outlines problems inherent in DAP

This compelling article points out the problematic nature of DAP decision-making and how it ignores local planning and the local knowledge of communities. The Development Assessment Panel decisions have been made in favour of developers who have submitted non-complying development applications often to the detriment of the communities in which they are situated. The communities he identifies are Alfred Cove, Melville, Mandurah, Cambridge, and Subiaco.

He traces the proven track record of developers in five easy steps: They first first submit an Ambit Claim (development application).

  1. Put in an ambit claim (a development application)
  2. Get it knocked back.
  3. Go to SAT to appeal the decision.
  4. Mediate an outcome in secret.
  5. Call a public meeting and approve the non-compliant development.

This process is sanctioned by the State Government’s Development Assessment Panels and the State Administrative Tribunal. Despite community outrage and postured objections by some DAP panel members, the non-compliant development is approved anyway with no reason or references to the DAP panel’s first objections.

Please read Geoff’s well written piece below.

Geoff Pearson, The West Australian, September 1, 2014

Geoff Pearson, The West Australian, September 1, 2014



This entry was posted in DAPS, Development, Local Government and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s