State height policy to affect Bunbury plans

An integral part of Bunbury’s City Vision Strategy is the inclusion of multi-storey developments on the foreshore.

As a consequence of the controversy surrounding coastal height restrictions, however, particularly those at Scarborough and Cottesloe, the State Government announced its ‘better beaches policy’.

The policy caps coastal development at five storeys with an exception of eight storeys allowed where there is widespread community support.

Thus, Bunbury’s vision may be con-strained by this state planning policy.                                  

Most of Bunbury’s waterfront land is currently undeveloped, granting a virtually blank canvas free of the issues usually associated with coastal development, and allowing for strategic planning of development.

City of Bunbury executive manager of city development, Tony Brun, said feedback from the community thus far had been very supportive of the idea of height in certain areas.

“Out of the consultation, height has not been a problem for the outer harbour or CBD – it won’t impede anyone’s views, or impact on anyone who already exists there,” he said.

“There has been a trade-off with height, though, and we don’t want it down the coast, only in the two precincts identified. When you look at it as a broader picture, it makes a lot of sense.

“Essentially, we don’t want to expand the outer suburbs of Bunbury as sprawling suburbia-created social problems that we want to constrain.  That is why we want the CBD and outer harbour to be high density nodes.”

The city was waiting on formal notification from the State Government in relation to its coastal policy.

“We only want height in certain areas and want to keep the rest of the suburban beaches at three storeys, and we think we will have a good case to put to the Government in relation to height,” Mr Brun said.

South West Development Commission CEO Don Punch was more cautious in relation to high-rise development, saying he would be surprised if the community really wanted it, and that the proposition needed to be more thoroughly tested with the community.

“There is always an economic imperative that drives height; all experiences with land development along the coast show that when high rise comes up, the community begins to debate about value and who is getting it at the end of the day,” he said.

“Amenity can be sacrificed for economic gain in terms of maximising economic return, and the city will have to fully articulate its views on height to see if the community is supportive.”

SAS Realty director John Saunders, who has been practising in Bunbury for 21 years, said he believed height was necessary in the city to make the most of the waterfront land.

“There is limited special land in Bunbury, and high rise gives more people the opportunity to live on it. The water and the port have to be taken advantage of,” Mr Saunders said.

“High rise will make the city centre – the more people that live close to facilities, the better those facilities will become.

“The moment you mention high rise, people seem to think of the Gold Coast. The term middle rise is more appropriate for what is being discussed.”

Mr Saunders added that if people wanted the opportunity to live close to the water and the CBD, that there was no choice.

“Height limits sprawl and uses existing infrastructure – there is no choice in this, it has to happen,” he said.

City of Bunbury Mayor David Smith said height was one of the critical issues put forward in City Vision.

“I have no doubt that height in and around the peninsula will add substantially to the return on capital investment, and there is some concern about height levels,” Mr Smith said.

“But most of what has been proposed has been accepted by the community.”