Western Australian surfers are rallying against a proposed coastal development near Yallingup, the home of renowned former world title contender Taj Burrow, as concerns over its environmental impact and scale intensify. The Smiths Beach Project, which aims to transform a plateau above Smiths Beach, has ignited widespread protests from the local surf community.
The development proposal, put forward by the developers behind Smiths Beach, includes plans for a 65-room hotel, 61 holiday homes, a campground, a welcome center, and a new surf lifesaving club. The project will span 40 hectares (approximately 90 acres), with the developers claiming that most of the area will be designated for conservation or public use.
However, critics argue that the proposed development exceeds what was previously approved by planning laws. The Smiths Beach Action Group, a key opponent of the plan, claims the proposal is 36% larger than earlier plans permitted.
“We are not against development,” the group said in a statement. “However, any future development must be sustainable and adhere to the long-standing planning laws of the site. We will support proposals that reflect current planning laws, existing approvals, and the well-established environmental conditions of this unique and pristine area.”
Among the group’s concerns are the planned disposal of sewage, which would be handled on-site rather than through the main sewer lines in Dunsborough. Additionally, surfers have expressed alarm over a new beach access ramp, which will include a 10-meter-wide rock wall facing the ocean. David Mitchell, a spokesperson for the Smiths Beach Action Group, warned that the wall could function as a seawall, allowing the developers to encroach further on the beach.
Mitchell told ABC News Australia that the seawall could potentially erode the very beach it’s meant to provide access to, disrupting sand flow and altering the wave conditions. Surfers fear that this could irreparably damage the surf break that draws visitors to the area.
Taj Burrow, in a video posted online, expressed his strong opposition to the plan. “The purpose of the seawall is clearly for developers to build closer to the beach, increasing accommodation for more profit,” Burrow said. “There’s no consideration of the impact on our coastline, which would have massive environmental consequences. It’s all about dollars, with no thought given to how the beach and waves could be ruined.”
The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) of Western Australia is currently reviewing the proposal and will accept public submissions until February 10. Following this, the EPA will submit its recommendations to the state’s environment minister. However, political leaders have already expressed their concerns. Both the WA Green and Liberal parties have voiced opposition to the development in its current form.
WA Liberal leader Libby Mettam criticized the proposal as exceeding the boundaries set by the approved development area, which was defined in 2011. On February 3, Mettam referred the project to the Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC), calling for an investigation into the approval process. Mettam said in an interview with ABC Southwest Radio, “A range of concerns have been raised in relation to this development, which is why I have referred the matter to the CCC to ensure that these issues are properly considered.”
Related topics
- Outdoor Apparel Market to Grow by USD 7.30 Billion by 2029
- Escalade, Inc. Appoints Armin Boehm as CEO and President
- Ford Bronco Sport Joins The Dyrt for Outdoor Adventures