The land on which the popular golf course lies is on West Parade and has been rezoned by the City of Swan for residential housing.
At a council meeting earlier this month, an application was made to change the land use from ‘rural’ to ‘urban’ for potential redevelopment.
City staff said the rezoning was consistent with the State and City’s planning objectives for the development of the north-eastern Perth corridor.
The application stated the rezoning ‘supports the intentions of Directions 2031, which identified the subject site as an ‘Urban Expansion Area 2011-2015,’ with the potential for more than 600 residential homes.’
A staff report to councillors stated that compared with other sites on the metropolitan fringe, such as Upper Swan and Bullsbrook, the Guildford land was much closer to the CBD ‘and represents a logical and efficient expression of urban development’.
The land subject to possible redevelopment is on lots 57, 200 and 9000 West Parade.
Gatti Investments, which lists its directors as Kaye, Kevin, Alison, Camille and Sophia Gatti, own lots 57 and 9000, while Alison Gatti alone owns lot 200.
The 47ha of land from all three sites is used for the golf course on the southern portion of lots 9000 and 57.
The wedding venue and early Federation-style buildings Rosehill Lodge, Padbury Stables restaurant and function centre is on lot 200.
The centre’s car park is on the northern portion of lot 9000.
When the Reporter contacted Alison Gatti to find out a possible timeline for the development, she said: ‘I am not at liberty to comment at this stage.’
Several Guildford residents spoke with the Reporter on condition of anonymity.
They said they were outraged they could lose the leafy heart of the heritage town.
One Helena Street resident, whose property backs onto the golf course, said she was opposed to development.
‘We live in Guildford because it has so much green space. This is now under major threat,’ she said.
The council passed a motion to notify the WA Planning Commission of its support to rezone lots 57 and 9000 from ‘rural’ to ‘urban’, but not lot 200 because of the narrow range of possible suitable development uses for the land.