Cost Benefit Analysis Lacking


Lack of Cost Benefit Analysis

Documents obtained under Freedom of Information (FOI) show that, prior to advertising the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) Amendment 1280/41 Mangles Bay Marina (MBM), neither the proponent nor the Department of Planning have conducted an economic cost / benefit comparative analysis of the proposed MBM development against the Cape Peron Coastal Park option

Documents obtained under FOI also show that the WA Planning Commission (WAPC)  did not obtain or consider any advice or report:

  • comparing the merits of the proposed MRS amendment against the option of adhering to the 1964 Pt Peron Agreement for the retention of the land for public recreation and parkland. The WAPC failed to obtain or provide any analysis to justify such radical change to the zoning of Point Peron.
  • as to whether there is any need or justification for a housing subdivision at Point Peron
  • as to the feasibility of the MBM project and the risk that the marina would never be built

This amounts to a serious absence of due diligence, coupled with a reckless willingness to trumpet the MBM proposal as economically advantageous, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Failure to show need for housing estate

 The development would first and foremost be a housing estate, resulting in destruction of ‘bush forever’, loss of public reserve etc.

  • The MRS report fails to justify (and does not even attempt to justify) reclassification of the land for the purpose of a housing estate.
  • This is a fatal flaw in the proposed MRS amendment and sufficient reason alone for its rejection.


These are just a few of the many points that illustrate that the WAPC has also shown a lack of due diligence in its handling of the proposed MRS amendment.

This entry was posted in News.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *