Schedule of Submissions Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (DOC/285003 as at: 31/03/2017) # Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Government Agencies and Utilities Noted. 1 Western Power No Objection Thank you for submitting your due diligence request to Western Power in Customer Service relation to your proposed work. Your proposal is being reviewed, and we will Coordinator contact you directly for more information if required. 363 Wellington Street, This email should not be considered to be an approval or non-objection to your PERTH WA 6001 works. (DOC/282446) If you have any queries on the progress of this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us via email.
2 Department of No Objection Noted. Environment I refer to the correspondence dated 14 September 2016 inviting comment from Regulation the Department of Environment Regulation (DER) on the above Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme. Cassie Chew (Executive Officer, Office of the DER has no comment on the proposed Local Planning Strategy or Local Planning Director General) Scheme. Where required, DER will provide input at subsequent stages of planning in reference to the Department’s regulatory responsibilities under the 168 St George’s Environmental Protection Act 1986 or Contaminated Sites Act 2003. Terrace, PERTH WA 6000 Should you wish to discuss any aspects of this correspondence please contact Adam Harbeck, DER’s Acting Planning and Advice Coordinator, on 6467 5383. (DOC/282477)
3 State Heritage Office No Objection Modification to Local Planning Strategy [Letter dated 21 September 2016] Noted. As advised in relation to the State Planning Policy 3.5 Historic Callum Crofton Heritage Conservation, the term 'European heritage' will be replaced (Manager Local Thank you for your correspondence of 14 September 2016 regarding “Local with the term 'historic heritage' throughout the Local Planning
City of Bunbury Page 1 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Government Services) Planning Strategy and Planning Scheme No 8 – City of Bunbury” (reference Strategy document. number: A03929). Bairds Building, 491 This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Wellington Street, A Heritage Officer will be in contact with you regarding this referral. Modifications to the Local Planning Strategy. PERTH WA 6850 If you wish to contact the State Heritage Office regarding this matter, please call (DOC/282588 and us on (08) 65524000 and quote our Correspondence Number: C/152/42103. DOC/291556) [Letter dated 7 December 2016]
Thank you for your correspondence received on 16 September 2016 regarding the City's draft Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme No. 8. The following comments are made on behalf of the State Heritage Office:
Draft Local Planning Strategy
1. It is encouraging to see a strong consideration of heritage within the draft Local Planning Strategy, such as inclusion of Part 3 Cultural Heritage, with associated themes, intentions and strategies, and the reference to State Planning Policy 3.5, Historic Heritage Conservation. It is also pleasing to note that these themes are carried through in other areas such as tourism. This will assist in ensuring that future development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places and areas.
2. Part 2 of the Strategy (page 83) makes reference to 'European heritage'. The term 'historic heritage' has been used in State Planning Policy 3.5 in relation to cultural heritage other than Aboriginal heritage. It is recommended that the more inclusive and representative term 'historic heritage' is used.
Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
3. The draft scheme has been prepared in accordance with the deemed provisions as set out in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 Schedule 2, which we support.
4. It should be noted that Part 3 Clause 8(2)(a) of the deemed provisions states that the heritage list 'must set out a description of each place and the reason for
City of Bunbury Page 2 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission its entry in the heritage list'. The heritage list should also provide detail on whether the building is identified as having a significant interior, as the new provisions require planning approval for interior works only where a place has been designated as having a significant interior.
We recommend the Shire begins planning to create a heritage list which meets these requirements as part of its review of its planning framework. Please note that the State Heritage Office is currently revising its Heritage List guidelines and an updated version will be released shortly, which will reflect the new Planning Regulations.
The comments made in this letter are not statutory advice and are provided only to assist the determining authority in its decision. Should you have any queries regarding this matter please contact Lauren Taylor on 6552 4152 or at lauren.tavlorstateheritage.wa.qov.au.
4 Telstra Operations No Objection Noted. Thank you for the above advice. At present, Telstra Corporation Limited has no Norm Walkerden objection. I have recorded this in our Development Database and look forward (Strategic Forecaster, to further correspondence in the future. Should you require any more New Developments and information regarding Telstra’s new infrastructure policy, please read below or Forecasting Networks) contact me. Locked Bag 2525, Latest Telecommunications Policy PERTH WA 6001 The Federal Government has deemed developers are now responsible for (DOC/283204) telecommunications infrastructure on all developments, i.e. conduits, pits and the cost of the cable installation by Telstra or other carrier. Telstra can provide a quote for the pit and pipe and/or cable. This is explained on the Telstra Smart Community website below. The owner/developer will have to submit an application before construction is due to start to Telstra (less than 100 lots or living units) or NBN Co. (for greater than 100 lots or living units in a 3 year period).
Applications to Telstra can be made on the Telstra Smart Community website: http://www.telstra.com.au/smart-community
City of Bunbury Page 3 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
More information regarding NBN Co. can be found on their website http://www.nbnco.com.au/develop-or-plan-with-the-nbn.html
Please dial 1100 (Dial before You Dig) for location of existing services.
Federal Government Telecommunications Infrastructure in New Developments Policy May 2015
https://www.communications.gov.au/policy/policy-listing/telecommunications- new-developments
State Planning Policy 5.2 Telecommunications Infrastructure August 2015
http://www.planning.wa.gov.au/dop_pub_pdf/Telecommunications_Infrastruct ure.pdf
Communications Alliance - G645:2011 Fibre Ready Pit and Pipe Specification for Real Estate Development Projects
http://www.commsalliance.com.au/Documents/all/guidelines/g645
5 ATCO Gas Australia No Objection Noted. [Email dated 29 September 2016] Fiona Snellin (Land Management and ATCO Gas has Medium Pressure Gas mains and Abandoned Gas Mains along Project Coordinator) with associated infrastructure, predominantly within the road reserves of the area to which the proposed Amendments will apply however we do not have 81 Prinsep Road, any objection to the proposal in principle, best described within the Report JANDAKOT WA 6164 provided on the City’s webpage. (DOC/283342) ATCO Gas requests consultation with any proponent’s prior to any proposed designs, construction or ground disturbance occurring as there are currently domestic/commercial gas supply lines within this AREA that are not depicted on the attached figure.
Please see attached Letter and Figure for your record.
City of Bunbury Page 4 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Should you have any queries regarding the information above, please contact us on 6163 5000 or [email protected].
[Attached letter dated 29 September 2016]
We wish to advise that ATCO Gas Australia have gas mains and gas infrastructure within the adjacent road reserves to that area to which the Draft Strategy and Scheme will apply. We have no objection to the draft strategy and scheme proceeding however we do request contact by any proponent during the design stage prior to any development commencing to ensure that any gas infrastructure is addressed or gas requirements can be accommodated.
Advice Notes to Applicant
• ATCO Gas Australia has Medium Pressure and Abandoned gas mains in the vicinity of the area described, predominantly within the road reserves, within the City of Bunbury. There are also commercial and domestic gas supplies from the gas mains that are not shown on the attached figure.
• The applicant is advised to contact ATCO Gas on 9499 5272 in this regard. Anyone proposing to carry out construction or excavation works must contact ‘Dial Before You Dig’ (Ph 1100) to determine the location of buried gas infrastructure.
Should you have any queries regarding the information above, please contact us on 6163 5000 or [email protected]
6 Main Roads WA No Objection Noted. I refer to your correspondence of 14 September 2016 and advise that Main Paul Davies (Road Roads has no objection to the proposed Local Planning Strategy and Proposed Corridor Planning Town Planning Scheme No 8. Manager) If you have any queries please phone 9724 5662. PO BOX 5010, Bunbury WA 6231
City of Bunbury Page 5 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
(DOC/283688)
7 Water Corporation No Objection Modification to Local Planning Strategy Thank you for providing the Water Corporation with the opportunity to Noted. As advised in the State Planning Strategy, the approach that Ian Kininmonth (Senior comment on the City of Bunbury draft local planning strategy and local planning ‘Strategic resource precincts are secured around wastewater Town Planner, scheme No. 8. treatment plants to facilitate efficient and beneficial use of land, Development Services) water and other resources’ will also be reflected in the Local Planning As you know Water Corporation currently provides wastewater services Strategy document. 629 Newcastle Street, (conveyance and treatment) to the City of Bunbury with water servicing being Leederville, PERTH WA provided by Aqwest. In relation to the requested reproduction of the Dalyellup waste 6007 water treatment plant Special Control Area depicted on the Greater On behalf of the WA Government we are also progressively delivering infill Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS), it is advised that this Special Control (DOC/284590) sewage to various areas of the City, enabling higher development densities. This Area is entirely encompassed by the ‘Regional Open Space’ reserve, is being reflected in the split density codes and associated development and that all land reserved under the GBRS is outside the jurisdiction of provisions in the draft planning scheme. the Local Planning Scheme. Hence, a local Special Control Area created under a Local Planning Scheme cannot apply to land reserved In 2009 Water Corporation undertook a review of wastewater conveyance under a Region Planning Scheme. planning which identified a number of system upgrades to service density and projected population increases. These will be undertaken over time in Nevertheless, the Wastewater Treatment Plant Odour Buffer Areas - accordance with our Capital Investment Planning. Special Control Areas (SCA No. 4) created under the GBRS prevails over the Local Planning Scheme; and hence, still applies to all land use It should also be noted that the Dalyellup (Bunbury No. 2) Wastewater planning processes and decisions made by the local government. Treatment Plant (WWTP) is located adjacent to the southern boundary of the City of Bunbury and that the odour buffer extends into the City of Bunbury. This This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of buffer is currently recognised as a Special Control Area in the Greater Bunbury Modifications to the Local Planning Strategy. Region scheme.
It is noted that the draft local planning strategy (p46) recognises treated wastewater as a potential alternative water source for irrigating POS*. Across WA, stormwater is also increasingly being considered as a valuable resource for helping to ensure the climate resilience, liveability and sustainability of urban areas. This may also apply in the case of Bunbury.
The importance of treated wastewater has been recognised in the State Planning Strategy 2050 which states (p73); “Wastewater treatment plants are increasingly becoming recognised as secure sources of alternative water.
City of Bunbury Page 6 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Facilitating beneficial and synergistic land use in and around the buffers of treatment plants will improve the efficient use of land and reduce the risk of land use conflicts.”
A related aspirational goal is that “strategic resource precincts are secured around wastewater treatment plants to facilitate efficient and beneficial use of land, water and other resources.” This may be applicable to the City of Bunbury and if so it may be relevant to highlight this possibility in the planning strategy.
Please contact me if you would like to discuss this response further.
*NB. With storage and based on 2016 inflows, it is estimated that the Dalyellup WWTP could irrigate over 350 ha of turf.
8 Civil Aviation Safety No Objection Noted. Authority Thank you for your letter of 14 September 2016 addressed to Mr Terry Farquharson at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) about Draft City of Carolyn Hutton Bunbury Local Planning Strategy and Draft City of Bunbury Local Planning (Manager, Government Scheme No 8. and International Relations) CASA has reviewed the draft local planning strategy and scheme and notes that there is no change in the plan that will affect the aerodrome, and therefore GPO Box 2005, CASA has no objection or comment. CANBERRA ACT 2601 I trust this information is of assistance. (DOC/287416)
9 Shire of Manjimup No Objection Noted. I refer to your correspondence dated 14 September 2016 regarding the above Brian Robinson and apologise for the delay in reply. (Director Development & Regulation) The Shire of Manjimup thanks you for the advice and confirms that the Shire will not be making a submission on the advertised documents. PO Box 1, MANJIMUP WA 6258 I thank you for your time on this matter and ask that you contact the undersigned on 97 717725 should you have any queries.
City of Bunbury Page 7 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
(DOC/288261)
10 Department of Water No Objection Modification to Local Planning Strategy The Department of Water (DoW) has reviewed the Draft City of Bunbury Local Noted. As advised, additional stormwater drainage and management Cathie Derrington planning Strategy and Draft City of Bunbury Local Planning Scheme No. 8 and references (including making reference to best management (Environmental provides the following tables of comments for your consideration: practices) will be reflected in the Local Planning Strategy document. Officer/Integrated Land & Water, South West Draft City of Bunbury Local Planning Strategy This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Region) Modifications to the Local Planning Strategy. Suggested comments for the Strategy are: Email: The ‘possible park and ride location’ shown in vicinity of Apex Park is cathie.derrington@wat Page / Document Suggested Change/Addition Comment marked as being ‘indicative’ only on the Transport Sub-Regional er.wa.gov.au Section reference / Strategy Map 1, and would be subject to further detailed investigation text of the land area requirements, feasibility of the subject location and (DOC/289797) Page 36, Most strongly Add additional reference: Lack of stormwater the suitability of other available options for its location; which would Theme 5 related: management references Better Urban Water also necessitate agreement to be reached by the Shire of Harvey and and considerations with Management Framework various State government agencies (e.g. Department of Transport, document. (WAPC, 2008). etc.). Page 36 Transport Query the Pelican Point The only area available It is noted that any proposed clearing of native vegetation for bushfire possible park and ride for a park and ride Sub Regional location. location is the Collie risk management purposes would only occur in accordance with Strategy Map River Floodway, which is clearing permits issued by the Department of Environment 1 a functional Estuary Regulation, as required under the Environmental Protection (Clearing Peripheral wetland that of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004. It should be noted though is part of the Leschenault that the Local Planning Framework must seek to balance and trade-off Regional Park. risks in a responsible and lawful manner, and hence, the local Page 40, Addresses the Add additional reports: City of Bunbury has government will likely be required to undertake some bushfire hazard 5A-3.1 threats to some Water Corporation reduction works in accordance with its statutory obligations under the • Drainage Liveability water quality drains within its Bush Fires Act 1954. Program (2016), Water and quantity boundaries but has an Corporation. for surface open water drainage Modification to Local Planning Strategy and Scheme (Text) and • Water Urban Sensitive network that is managed groundwater. Design (WAPC 2008) by the City. The Noted. As advised, the full title of the document referenced in principles of the clause 2 of the Bunbury Water Reserve Special Control Area will be • Construction and documents can assist in changed to read: Establishment Guidelines: guiding best swales, bio retention management practices
City of Bunbury Page 8 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission systems and wetlands for drainage (Water By Design, 2010) management within the ‘…Department of Water’s Water Quality Protection Note No. 25: Land LG. In addition, Use Compatibility Tables for Public Drinking Water Source Areas • Perth and Peel Green encourage the concepts (2016) requires the prior development approval of the local Growth Plan (WAPC 2016) of multiple use green government.’ •Operational policy 4.3: corridors for the Identifying and establishing community along water This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of waterways foreshore areas ways will ensure better Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme - Scheme Text. (DoW 2012). water quality outcomes. Page 44, Identifying Add additional references Limited drainage and It is appreciated that Table 1 of the Better Urban Water Management Theme the key to the following guiding stormwater guidelines indicates that a Local Water Management Strategy (LWMS) 6 documents documents: management is appropriate for a local planning scheme amendment or local that the considerations within structure plan where proposals are less than 300 hectares. However, • BUWM Framework (2008 section Most document. WAPC) properties encompassed by Restricted Use No. 4 (RU4) have already strongly Recommended that been subdivided in accordance with an approved structure plan, with relates to: • Drainage Liveability BMP’s are incorporated one of the created lots having been granted development approval. at a strategic level to Program (2016), Water Therefore, in accordance with the guidelines, no change is required to Corporation ensure that good principles are utilised in the draft Scheme, as Table 1 of the guidelines identifies that this is • Decision Process for open spaces. addressed through ‘building plans’ under the fifth level of ‘planning stormwater management stage/scale’. (2009) • Stormwater Management The Centre Point shopping centre site has already been granted Manual for Western development approval, the urban design for which has then been Australia (2004-2009) reflected in the draft Activity Centre Plan for the same site. • Public Parkland Planning Therefore, any change to the draft Regional Centre Zone maps & Design Guide (WA) regarding the subject area would be nugatory. (2014, Department of Sport and Recreation). Page Special The bushfire hazard Reducing bush fire 152 elements at reduction / separation hazards to a minimum risk, private distances should not be in BAL 29 level in areas properties line with SPP3.7 for areas adjacent to bushed areas developed prior to 2015. It will impact on the quality is important to note that of the remnant SPP3.7 is not retrospective. vegetation. This is not the aim of the SPP3.7 nor legal under the Bushfires Act 1954. It is
City of Bunbury Page 9 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission native vegetation clearing and will require a clearing permit from DER under the EP Act 1987 native vegetation regulations.
Draft City of Bunbury Local Planning Scheme No. 8
Suggested comments for the Local Planning Scheme No 8 are:
Page / Section Document Suggested Change Comment reference / text Restricted Use Koombana North ‘drainage and Noted that at (RU4) Page 60, Precinct (Lot 505 stormwater subdivision that a 10a Holman Street) management’ in LMWP is referenced. accordance to a A LWMS, will LWMS. capsulate any water resource issues that may arise from the development. Page 99 Map B Regional Car park area and Any future Centre Zone part of Centre redevelopment of Setback and Point have been Centre Point should Pedestrian Core left blank. Suggest consider connecting map to include it as the street scape and City Centre Leschenault Inlet Frame. foreshore area to the shopping/cafe area. Page 115, Section Additional Clearly add the 2 provisions. full title of the document that is referenced. Suggest: Department of water’s Water Quality Protection Note No. 25: Land
City of Bunbury Page 10 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission use compatibility tables for public drinking water source areas (2016).
11 Department of No Objection Noted. Agriculture and Food Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Planning Scheme No. 8 for the City of Bunbury. Mr Neil Guise (Regional Director, Southern The Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia (DAFWA) recognises Region) that there is no significant agriculture within the City of Bunbury; however there are two important abattoirs within the City boundaries. DAFWA found that PO Box 1231, BUNBURY both these abattoirs are identified and protected in the Draft Local Planning WA 6231 Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8. It is important to keep these protections in place as to ensure the operation of these important abattoirs well (DOC/289877) into the future.
I trust these comments inform your decision on this matter. If you have any queries regarding the comments, please contact Leon van Wyk at (08) 9780 6171.
12 Department of No Objection Noted. The endorsed and draft structure plans for the development Education of the remaining areas of Glen Iris and Moorlands do not incorporate Thank you for your letter dated 14 September 2016 regarding the Draft City of any new/additional primary school sites. The ‘Public/Community Bunbury Local Planning Strategy and Draft City of Bunbury Local Planning Stephen Muldoon Purpose’ areas shown on the city-wide strategy map (page 16 of the Scheme No. 8. Local Planning Strategy) relate to a range of hard and soft (Senior Consultant, infrastructure items, which includes land previously identified for the The Department of Education has reviewed the document and wishes to make Strategic Asset purposes of the Glen Iris Relief Floodway. the following comments regarding the future urban areas identified on the City- Planning) Wide Strategy Plan; A primary school site of approximately 4.0 hectares is identified in the (DOC/290127) approved Tuart Brook Structure Plan, which will be separated by • The future development in the Glen Iris – Moorlands locality appears to have future road frontages to environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore, a potential primary school site. The Department has previously advised the City there are no known environmental constraints limiting the that dependent upon the dwelling yield the need for a school would occur development of the future primary school site. should 1,500 residential lots be developed.
• Previous correspondence indicated that a yield of 1,122 lots was anticipated.
City of Bunbury Page 11 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission If that yield remained then it is anticipated that the student yield could be accommodated within the Picton Primary School.
• A primary school site is identified south of Washington Avenue within the proposed structure plan for Tuart Brook/Parade Road. It is understood that environmental constraints may have limited this proposed development. Advice is sought as to the status of this proposed structure plan.
• The other existing school sites are currently not under any student accommodation pressure.
13 Public Transport No Objection Modification to Local Planning Strategy Authority Thank you for your referral of the City of Bunbury’s draft Local Planning Strategy Noted. As advised, the ‘Future BRT Network’ line indicated as passing and Local Planning Scheme No 8. The Regional Town Bus Services division of through a portion of Glen Iris urban area will be deleted from the Matthew Saliacus the Public Transport Authority (TPA) is responsible for the provision of Transport Sub-Regional Strategy Map 1 of the Local Planning Strategy (Manager Regional TransBunbury intra-town school and town bus services it the Bunbury region. document. Instead, as advised, the ‘Future BRT Network’ route will Town Bus Services) The following comments provided are in relation to TransBunbury bus services be shown on the map to follow along the Forrest Highway without only. deviation. Public Transport Centre, West Parade, The PTA supports in principle the future provision of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of PERTH WA 6000 corridors to connect key locations in Bunbury in order to maintain consistent Modifications to the Local Planning Strategy. travel times for buses and in order to minimise delays as a result of congestion. (DOC/291367) The PTA also supports the intensification of land uses at the key activity centres and along the BRT corridors in order to increase patronage potential catchment for TransBunbury services.
The PTA provides general support for the BRT routes identified in the Draft Local Planning Strategy. While the BRT in Eaton is outside the jurisdiction of the City of Bunbury, the PTA would support the extension of the BRT in Eaton towards Treendale and Kingston. In regard to the rout alignment of the BRT in near Glen Iris, The PTA supports the identification of the BRT along Forrest Highway and would not support the BRT going through the suburban areas of Glen Iris, as it is the PTA’s opinion that this would diminish the utility of a rapid corridor for buses. The PTA requests that it meets with the City of Bunbury in the future, so exact alignments can be determined.
City of Bunbury Page 12 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The PTA provides general support for a circle route service operating in Bunbury in the longer term. Please note that that further research will be required to determine the final route alignment of such a service and must be supported by population densities.
The PTA requests that any Local Traffic Management plans in the City of Bunbury are referred to the PTA, so that the impact of traffic calming measures and other works on the PTA’s current and future proposed bus network can be identified.
If there are any queries regarding this submission or should you see value in meeting with the PTA, please do not hesitate to contact myself on (08) 9326 3964. Thank you for consulting on this matter with the Public Transport Authority.
14 Department of No Objection Modification to Local Planning Strategy Transport [Letter dated 13 December 2016] Noted. An ‘Outer Harbour Precinct’ will remain shown on the principle Strategy Map; however, reference made to the creation of a James Holder Introduction ‘harbour zone’ at this point in time is considered to be premature, and hence will be modified, as it has been advised by the Department of (Manager Maritime The purpose of the Department of Transport (DoT) is to 'provide and enable Planning that the structure planning process outlined in the draft Projects, Coastal safe, accessible and efficient movement for the economic and social prosperity Strategy will adequately inform the nature and type of the ultimate Infrastructure Business of Western Australia'. zoning. As such, the interim application of the ‘Urban Development Unit) Zone’ is considered by the department to be the most suitable land To facilitate this, DoT plans and develops infrastructure to meet the needs of use designation at this formative stage in the planning process. Marine House, 1 Essex the community and its stakeholders through a number of its business units. The Street, FREMANTLE Coastal Infrastructure Business Unit (CIBU) is responsible for the planning, It is acknowledged that the planning and development of the Outer WA 6160 development and management of coastal and maritime facilities in Western Harbour Precinct is a State government project lead by LandCorp, in Australia. consultation with the local government and various other key (DOC/291866) stakeholders including the Department of Transport. No proposals for This includes: the development of this land can be progressed in the meantime, and as such, the publicly owned maritime assets within the subject area • investigating the need for boating facilities will adequately be protected by the proposed zoning.
• planning and conceptual design for the enhancement and development of It should be noted that under regulation 2 of the deemed provisions, land and water based maritime facilities
City of Bunbury Page 13 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission it is stated that: • provision of a regulatory and advisory role in relation to maritime facilities and coastal projects proposed by others (public and private sector). Where a local planning strategy for the Scheme area has been prepared by the local government in accordance with the CIBU provides this submission on the City of Sunbury draft Local Planning Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Strategy (LPS) and draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (LPS8) on the basis of its Regulations 2015 Part 3 the local planning strategy sets out the role as a maritime facility manager and as the State's coastal management long-term planning directions for the Scheme area. advisor. With regard to the City of Bunbury, our principal interest is the coastal area surrounding the Outer Harbour (Casuarina Boat Harbour) and Koombana Furthermore, under the model provisions, clause 7(2) of the Scheme Bay with secondary consideration of the Indian Ocean coast and the text makes specific reference to the Scheme needing to be read in Leschenault Inlet. This submission is divided between the two documents and conjunction with the Local Planning Strategy for the Scheme area. As for each document into three key areas of interest - Maritime Infrastructure, such, it is the function of the Local Planning Strategy as an instrument Coastal Management and Community Access. to provide the necessary policy guidance on the future intent of the subject land’s development over the next 20 years. City of Bunbury Draft Local Planning Strategy Whereas, the function of the Scheme on the other hand simply Maritime Infrastructure depicts the underlying generic zones and reserves that apply to the land at this point in time (subject to change by scheme amendments), DoT has management authority for Harbour Purposes over Lot 6192, 1035 and for the purposes of providing statutory planning procedures in dealing 1036 on Plan 30623, and Lot 501 and 503 on Plan 73513. Within this group of with proposals. Therefore, it is considered that adequate strategic reserves, DoT provides boat launching facilities in the Casuarina Boat Harbour and statutory planning intent/guidance and protections will be area, with dual launching ramps, five commercial fishing berths, 48 recreational provided by the Strategy and Scheme as drafted in regards to the boat pens plus four catamaran pens, 65 swing moorings and ample parking bays subject area. for both trailer parking and casual vehicle parking. The relevant special control area that applies to the subject land is the A Recreational Boating Facility Demand Study for Greater Bunbury Region (GBR) ‘Development Areas Special Control Area’, which does in fact include was undertaken by DoT in 2014, which assessed the present and potential a ‘purpose’ statement and set of ‘objectives’ as follows: future demand for recreational boating facilities to 2040 as having a significant shortfall in small craft facilities and infrastructure in the region. As such Purpose: retention of, and improvements to, the existing facilities is important. To designate areas requiring further investigations and Of particular interest with regard to the LPS is the focus on the Outer Harbour structure planning in relation to environmental and natural project which has been espoused in the Casuarina Vision Plan document resource values, natural hazards, land use options, produced by LandCorp and the Bunbury Marine Facilities Steering Committee infrastructure servicing requirements, transportation (now Transforming Bunbury's Waterfront Steering Committee). DoT is a infrastructure needs, landscaping and urban design. member of the Steering Committee and places great importance on the marine Objectives: facilities outcomes of the plan.
City of Bunbury Page 14 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
DoT supports LPS Strategy 7A-1.1 regarding our continued participation in (a) To identify areas requiring structure planning prior to working groups for coordinated planning and development of the Bunbury subdivision and/or development. Port’s Inner and Outer Harbour areas. We note that the Sub-Theme name of (b) To coordinate and integrate orderly subdivision, this strategy relates more directly to the Inner Harbour, whilst the Strategy infrastructure provision, land use and development in reflects both the Inner and Outer Harbour areas. areas requiring structure planning;
DoT supports, in principle, LPS Strategy 7B-1.1 to continue to support and (c) To guide the layout and design of lots, land uses and facilitate the Outer Harbour Precinct for commercial, marine and tourism developments on land within a structure plan and/or a activities. DoT will continue to actively participate in working groups to local development plan area; encourage and facilitate investment and is supportive of applying an appropriate zone and enabling provisions over the land which is currently (d) To establish a framework for the assessment of reserved for 'Port Installations'. applications for development approval within a structure plan and/or a local development plan area; DoT acknowledges the importance placed on the Outer Harbour Precinct within and the Tourism Sub-Theme and recognizes the important role the Minister for Transport's land will have to play in this Sub-Theme. (e) To institute arrangements for the implementation of the plan by landowners, infrastructure providers and the Notwithstanding the expressed support, it is vitally important that any change local government. to land use zoning in the area maintains the protection of the maritime asset until such time as the full strategy for the Outer Harbour has been adequately The text on page 121 of the Strategy document pertaining to the progressed, including the release of a large portion of the land from the 'Port Outer Harbour Precinct will therefore be modified to read as follows: Installations' reserve in the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme. To that end, and At this stage, it is important that the land area within the City with regard to the discussion at Page 119 of the LPS 'Part 2- Explanatory Guide', of Bunbury’s planning jurisdiction is suitably zoned and its DoT supports the identification of a 'Harbour Zone' for the Outer Harbour integrity safeguarded in order that it can adequately cater for precinct or another such zone that clearly identifies the marine and harbour such development, and that the port installations to the north purpose of the boat harbour. and city centre to the south are well integrated and offer a supportive, compatible setting. Consequently, until structure The matter of the appropriate zone is discussed further under the LPS8 section planning of the Outer Harbour Precinct has been finalised, the of this submission; the current draft LPS8 maps show the area as an ‘Urban majority of Lot 1035 Casuarina Drive that is managed by the Development Zone' with a 'Special Control Area' overlay. It is appropriate that Department of Transport will be included in the ‘Urban the LPS8 and LPS documents are consistent to avoid confusion over the Development Zone’ (with a Special Control Area requiring the significance of the land. preparation of a structure plan) as an interim measure. Whereas, the adjoining Lot 1034 vested in the Southern Ports Coastal Management Authority will remain predominantly ‘Ports Installations Reserve’ as currently reserved under the Greater Bunbury Coastal risk and subsequent management is appraised across the State through
City of Bunbury Page 15 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission reference to State Planning Policy 2.6: State Coastal Planning Policy (SPP 2.6). Region Scheme (GBRS). SPP 2.6 is a policy of the Western Australian Planning Commission, however, specialist technical advice is provided to the WAPC by DoT. Once the outcomes of the structure planning process are known, it is envisaged that the Western Australian Planning The Coastal Vulnerability section on page 149 discusses the outputs of the Commission (WAPC) will undertake an amendment to the GBRS Peron Naturaliste Partnership Climate Change Adaptation Options Assessment in order to reflect the new regional zone and reserve of 2012, with specific regard to the Pelican Point area. DoT acknowledges that boundaries (e.g. replacement of the ‘Port Installations Reserve’ existing development requires a specific adaptation approach, however, this with ‘Regional Centre Zone’). It can be expected that the City of section of the document fails to discuss the preferred adaptation tier of 'Avoid' Bunbury will also need to concurrently undertake a in the hierarchy for new development. consequential amendment to its local planning scheme. Likewise, the ultimate local zoning applied to the developable DoT notes there are two precincts identified in the draft LPS as regional tourism land within the precinct will be determined as an outcome of nodes, a large node identified as the Outer Harbour area, and a small high the structure planning and resulting region planning scheme density node on the inlet in East Bunbury that may be impacted by coastal amendment. vulnerability in the future. Notwithstanding DoT's general support of these Subject to the outcomes of the Outer Harbour planning process, areas we recommend that particular attention be paid to the likely risks a range of possible planning controls may be considered for the associated with new development on the waterfront (even in elevated positions regulation of development and management of reserved along the back beach) with regard to coastal vulnerability impacts. areas/infrastructure items. The eventual statutory planning framework (i.e. the various planning instruments) will need to It would be particularly useful to introduce the concept of 'Avoid' in the Local be customised to suite the ultimate intended purpose of the Planning Strategy to foreshadow both the risks of new development in precinct, the nature of its immediate environment and the built vulnerable areas as well as the limitations that may be placed on development form and function of the precinct’s desired urban design. This through application of SPP2.6. could include the introduction of a dedicated 'harbour zone’ or a new ‘special use zone’. As this approach would accentuate DoT fully supports the intention of the City of Sunbury to prepare a Climate the individuality of the location and provide the opportunity to Change Adaptation Strategy as the result of undertaking Coastal Hazard Risk implement a tailored suit of land use and development Management and Adaptation Planning (CHRMAP). standards, but only where this was deemed necessary over and above the development controls afforded by the ‘Regional Community Access Centre Zone’. A key outcome of DoT's ongoing work is to deliver strategic analysis of boating This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of needs for both industry and recreational purposes into the future. Current Modifications to the Local Planning Strategy. analysis predicts an increasing shortfall of adequate recreational facilities in the South West Region to deal with identified long term growth. Regardless of the Local Planning Strategy, it is appreciated that State Planning Policy No. 2.6 State Coastal Planning Policy remains the DoT supports the strategic vision of the City of Bunbury indicated in the draft principle planning instrument for assessing planning/development LPS to provide a more suitable recreational boating facility at Casuarina Boat
City of Bunbury Page 16 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Harbour associated with a marina precinct. DoT will continue to support proposals in the coastal zone. Consequently, where a risk assessment development of this precinct unless and until the development of the marina identifies an unacceptable level of risk to a proposed development, precinct impacts on the ability of DoT to provide for the recreational boating then it is acknowledged that appropriate adaptation measures will needs of the local community. need to be implemented (e.g. as a condition of development approval) in order to reduce those risks down to an acceptable or City of Bunbury Draft Local Planning Scheme No 8 tolerable level. As such, determining the most appropriate adaptation measures for new development should be made on a case by case Maritime Infrastructure basis in accordance with the State Planning Policy, and will need to be guided by the full range of strategy options afforded under the As indicated, DoT has management authority for Harbour Purposes over Lot policy’s coastal hazard risk management and adaptation planning 6192, 1035 and 1036 on Plan 30623, and Lot 501 and 503 on Plan 73513 in and hierarchy. surrounding the Casuarina Boat Harbour and Koombana Bay area. Under the deemed provisions, clause 67 dealing with the matters to Contrary to the recommendation in the draft LPS that the area be zoned for be considered by a local government states that: 'Harbour Purposes', draft LPS8 proposes to amend the existing scheme for Lot 1035 on Plan 30623 from a 'Special Use' zone to an 'Urban Development' zone In considering an application for development approval the with a 'Special Control Area - Development Area' overlay. Presumably this is to local government is to have due regard to the following support the long term development of the Casuarina Vision Plan, although there matters to the extent that, in the opinion of the local is nothing in draft LPS8 text to indicate this is the purpose and intent of the zone government, those matters are relevant to the development in this location. the subject of the application – (c) any approved State planning policy; Furthermore, in the Casuarina Vision Plan, DoT's recreational boating area and boat launching ramps are shown to the north of the existing site in an area Therefore, it is not necessary to reinterpret or amplify the State currently identified as a 'Port Installations' region reserve of the Greater Planning Policy within the Local Planning Strategy or the Local Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS). As the review of the local planning scheme Planning Scheme. And in Bunbury’s case, it is not possible to simply does not have statutory powers over the GSRS, no amendment to the 'Port rely upon the ‘Avoid’ tier at the exclusion of the remaining options Installations' reserve can be implemented through this LPS review. It follows under the hierarchy of the policy, as much of Bunbury’s urban area as then that no change is proposed for this area that would indicate the it pertains to the coast is already predefined. This fact is importance of the location for the future boating needs of the Bunbury acknowledged in the accompanying State Coastal Planning Policy community. Guidelines, which provides for this circumstance under its section dealing with the assessment of ‘infill development’, which is much the DoT submits that the proposed new zone for Lot 1035 is not suitable in its case for Bunbury. current form for the following reasons:
1. The current Special Use zone (S.U.10) clearly sets out to the community that the area is set aside for the purposes of 'boat launching facilities, car parking, trailer parking, marina related activities'. This description in the current scheme
City of Bunbury Page 17 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission is consistent with the purpose for which the land is reserved and ensures the rights and obligations of the Minister for Transport are recognized.
The draft LPS8 does not precisely follow the model provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations), excluding the 'Purpose' and 'Objectives' columns shown in the table at Part 6 cl.36 (2). The result is that the proposed 'Special Control Area' (SCA) is silent on the 'Purpose' and 'Objectives' of the lot.
2. The proposed 'Urban Development' zone does not provide the necessary assurances to the community that the recreational boating needs of the community will be retained, and does not communicate appropriate intent for the Minister for Transport's reserve. The SCA overlay only serves to create more confusion where the table at Schedule 7 is silent on the 'Purpose' and 'Objectives' of the lot.
3. It is possible that the community will perceive this new underlying 'Urban Development' zone to indicate that the recreational boating facility will be relocated or removed. In the absence of any detail of the purpose of this area in the Scheme, this is likely to create unnecessary concern (recognising that not all members of the community will be familiar with the LPS).
4. The area which is nominally identified to the north for the boating precinct in the Casuarina Vision Plan is reserved for 'Port Installations' in the GBRS and there is no current scheme amendment of the GBRS underway to change this. Until such time as the northern area is removed from the 'Port Installations' reserve and management handed to DoT or another suitable party, DoT does not have adequate confidence that this land will be available for future recreational boating facilities.
The draft LPS suggests a Harbour zone, which would still be wholly consistent with the purpose for which the land is reserved and would continue to recognize the important recreational boating facilities in the precinct. DoT recognizes that this inconsistency may have arisen as a result of the new Regulations excluding such a zone.
However, there is no reason why the SCA table at Schedule 7 of the draft LPS8
City of Bunbury Page 18 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission could not more closely follow the model provisions in the Regulations, providing a SCA number and then appropriately identifying in the 'Purpose' and 'Objective' columns intent that reflects the uses that are currently identified in S.U.10 of the existing scheme.
In principle, DoT supports the draft LPS8 as it applies to the Minister of Transport's reserves. However, as indicated above, some clarification and amendment is required to more adequately identify the existing and important primary function of the land.
Coastal Management
DoT fully supports the intention of the City of Bunbury to prepare a Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, as identified in the Coastal Vulnerability section on page 149 of the draft LPS. DoT welcomes the suggestion of creating special control areas over land that is identified as vulnerable within LPS8 (in the near term) to ensure appropriate and sustainable management is realised.
Community Access
As previously indicated, DoT supports the strategic vision of the City of Bunbury to provide a more suitable recreational boating facility at Casuarina Boat Harbour associated with a marina precinct. As noted in this submission, DoT holds some concern about the absence of appropriate land use planning controls or indicators in the draft LPS8, whilst generally supportive of the intent of the zone and its overlay.
This concern is largely related to the important role that DoT has to play in providing for community boating facilities across the State, and is particularly important when the area in question has an identified shortfall in the future. It is vital that the local planning framework does not have any unintended consequences for recreational or commercial boating in the area, and that the framework ensures uncompromised use of the Minister of Transport's reserves for their intended purpose under the relevant management order.
Summary
City of Bunbury Page 19 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
DoT supports the orderly and proper planning of the State and, in particular, the orderly and proper planning of lands associated with State facilities. The draft LPS and draft LPS8 documents are supported by DoT with the following exceptions:
1. Amend the draft LPS to ensure that the Outer Harbour area is consistently designated. Recommend the text on page 121 be altered from:
‘To achieve this most effectively, acknowledging the intended purpose of the facility and the very special nature of the immediate environment, the introduction of a dedicated 'Harbour' zone is considered appropriate.
This would accentuate the individuality of the location and provides the opportunity to introduce and implement a tailored suit [sic] of land use and development standards.’
to:
‘To achieve this most effectively, acknowledging the intended purpose of the facility and the very special nature of the immediate environment, the introduction of an appropriate zone should be considered that will accentuate the individuality of the location and provide the opportunity to introduce and implement a tailored suite of land use and development standards.’
2. Amend page 149 of the draft LPS to include clear discussion regarding the opportunity to achieve the 'Avoid' tier in the hierarchy of SPP 2.6 for new development.
3. Amend the Special Control Area table at Schedule 7 of the draft LPS8 to more closely follow the model provisions in the Regulations including the 'Purpose' and 'Objective' columns. Provide each Special Control Area with a specific number and reflect the intended purpose and objectives for each area within the scheme. Reflect the primary purpose of Lot 1035 on Plan 30623 as being for 'harbour purposes' including boat launching facilities, car parking, trailer parking and marina related activities. Include objectives reflecting the Casuarina Vision Plan.
City of Bunbury Page 20 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
DoT thanks the City of Bunbury for the opportunity to comment on the draft documents. We welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss our concerns directly and in greater detail should this be required, and look forward to our continued relationship in delivering better boating facilities in Bunbury.
15 DBNGP (WA) Nominees No Objection Noted. The Local Planning Strategy reflects the aspirations of the Pty Ltd local government in terms of informing higher level regional We refer to the Shire's correspondence dated 14 September 2016 inviting infrastructure planning, in so far as it affects local planning objectives comments regarding the above mentioned proposal. Neil Parry (Manager and desired outcomes. However, the delineating of regional reserves Land Management, that support regional transport infrastructure networks (e.g. for DBNGP (WA) Nominees Pty Ltd (DBP) is the owner and operator of the DBNGP Dampier Bunbury road/rail passenger and freight routes) is undertaken through the which is located within DBNGP corridor. The DBNGP corridor is managed by the Pipeline) Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS) by the Western Australian Department of Lands Infrastructure Corridors on behalf of the DBNGP Land Planning Commission (WAPC). Hence, this procedure falls outside of Access Minister and is subject to the legislation being the Dampier to Bunbury Level 6, 12-14 The the jurisdiction of the Local Planning Scheme, but the concerns raised Pipeline Act 1997 (DBPA). Esplanade, PERTH WA in the submission would normally be dealt with the by the 6000 Commissions as part of their planning processes. DBP understands that the aim of the Local Planning Strategy is to provide a document that establishes a direction for future planning, development and (DOC/292191) Nevertheless, all Local Planning Schemes are required under Part 9 of management of land uses within the City of Bunbury and Greater Bunbury sub- the Planning Development Act 2005 to depict regional reserves on the region. DBP has considered the Local Planning Strategy, Local Planning Scheme local Scheme map; and furthermore, it can be assured that Local No. 8 and would like to provide the following submission ensuring full Planning Schemes are obliged to regulate land use and development consideration is given to the Dampier to Bunbury Natural Gas Pipeline (DBNGP). around regional reserves in a manner that protects the purpose and function of the regional reserves and their encompassed DBP acknowledges that the City's intent is to plan for a regional transport infrastructure items. network of road/ rail freight routes, a future fast rail passenger transport service (Perth to Bunbury) and transport infrastructure service improvements in the Greater Bunbury sub-region. Land use in the DBNGP corridor is restricted to ensure that the integrity of the corridor and the infrastructure is not compromised. DBP will need to review any proposals for reservation of land for prospective road/rail reserves and any changes or enhancements to regional roads and public transport networks that will cross the DBNGP or affect the DBNGP corridor.
DBP appreciate the opportunity to provide comment on the Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme No. 8. Should you have any queries regarding any of the comments provided above, please do not hesitate to
City of Bunbury Page 21 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission contact me on the number above.
16 Port of Bunbury, No Objection Noted. Southern Ports The Port supports the City’s strategy for the establishment of a Port of Bunbury Authority Buffer Special Control Area around the Inner Harbour area including appropriate provisions for regulating the development of sensitive land uses in proximity of Darren Lambourn the Inner Harbour area. It is also strongly supports the City’s intention to (General Manager) continue to support and, where practicable, facilitate the efficient and responsible operation of the Port’s Inner Harbour area and any necessary future 54 Casuarina Drive, port expansion. BUNBURY WA 6230 The Port also welcomes the City’s strategy to participate in working groups for (DOC/292244) the coordinated planning of the Port’s Inner and Outer Harbour areas.
Support
17 Alan Cross Support Noted.
38 Tuart Street, [Submission Form dated 15 September 2016] BUNBURY WA 6230 I am simply a ratepayer with no commercial interest in the CBD, just and (DOC/282144 & interest in seeing the development of the City in the future. DOC/282550) I fully support the new Local Planning Scheme 8 (LPS8) as I think it will activate the CBD of Bunbury and help it confirm its title of “WA’s second city”. More people living in the CBD is an important change that will help bring vibrancy and support to local businesses. I congratulate the City Council and staff on this very progressive and positive initiative.
[Email dated 17 September 2016]
As a long-time Bunbury resident I'd like to pass on my congratulations to you, the Council and the city's planning staff on the very progressive approach that is
City of Bunbury Page 22 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission being taken with the new LPS No. 8. I think it's a real breath of fresh air and will be a key vehicle in taking us forward as WA's second city. I have made a submission along these lines - thanks for the opportunity.
18 National Trust Western Support Noted. Autralia Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8. The proposed Strategy and Scheme has been reviewed with particular Enzo Sirna (Acting Chief regard to heritage considerations. The National Trust supports the initiatives Executive Officer) for appropriate conservation of heritage under the local planning scheme. The Old Observatory, As a community organisation, the National Trust is committed to assisting local PO Box 1162, WEST governments, especially those in regional areas. Opportunities for establishing PERTH WA 6872 partnerships, setting up tax deductible heritage appeals, provision of heritage advice including assessment, conservation and interpretation of heritage places (DOC/283961) are some of the initiatives that the Trust would be able to provide or work with the City to achieve. I would be pleased to discuss these in more detail.
If there are any questions, please contact the Trust’s Heritage Services Department on 9321 6088.
19 MPM Development Support Noted. Consultants MPM Development Consultants represent Amoeba Nominees Pty Ltd, the registered owner of Lot 7 Victoria Street, Bunbury [Bunbury Cinema Complex]. Shelley Coutts The focal point of the new Planning Scheme No. 8 is the new ‘Regional Centre’ PO Box 2035, BUNBURY zoning which has been applied to the Bunbury Central Business District and, as a WA 6231 consequence, Lot 7 Victoria Street the land the subject of this submission. (DOC/288357) The proposed ‘Regional Centre’ zoning is fully supported by the owners of Lot 7 Victoria Street as it reinforces the importance and function of the Bunbury CBD area within the context of the South West region.
The Bunbury CBD is experiencing significant growth and the new zoning provisions promote and strengthen its Regional Centre status.
Bunbury is emerging as a multi-purpose city, operating not only as the hub of
City of Bunbury Page 23 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission commercial and economic activity within the Region but also as the most significant entertainment and social meeting place with numerous eateries, cafes and bars having opened recently.
The mixed use approach promoted by the ‘Regional Centre’ zoning provides opportunities for the more efficient maximisation of floor-space within the City and will potentially add greater levels of vibrancy and vitality to the City Centre.
It is envisaged that the ‘Regional Centre’ zoning will help foster urban renewal, increase activation levels throughout the day and encourage community interaction while both maintaining and improving the primacy of the Regional Centre.
It is believed that the proposed zoning will:
1. Improve the desirability of the Bunbury CBD as a place to work, live and play destination;
2 Result in an increased population living and working in the CBD; and
3. Potentially act as a catalyst for greater investment.
Should you have any questions in relation to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned on 0417 984 228.
20 Dennis Wagstaff Support Noted. [Submission form and attachment dated 25 November 2016] 39 Alyxia Drive, GLEN IRIS WA 6230 This submission is for consideration in the development of Bunbury and would I feel benefit the senior community to continue to live and enjoy the new (DOC 289553 and revitalised City of Bunbury (see attached document). 293358) [Attached document]
Seniors Downsizing Initiative Proposal
My concern is that with an ageing population there will be in the future and
City of Bunbury Page 24 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission indeed the present a need for seniors and retirees property to invest and retire to. The present opportunities are fairly limited.
• Whatever is available on the open market pre-existing?
• Retirement villages
Retirement Villages
Not everyone is suite to village style living.
The properties are fairly expensive to purchase and there are limits to what you can do in the property and should you wish to move on there are penalty clauses when you sell. Also there is usually very limited outside entertainment areas.
Retirees are normally relocating from larger properties with gardens or outside entertaining areas and find that this step too far when very little is provided.
Would it not be possible to liaise with local large builders or project builders to look at providing small complexes with retirement homes that would meet the needs of downsizers?
This would be a double edged sword as it would free up larger homes for younger families stimulating the housing market and providing homes that would appeal to the downsizing growing marketplace.
[Letter received 4 January 2017]
With regard to further ideas for the Draft Local Planning Scheme please consider the undermentioned.
Improving The Street Scene In The C.B.D.
In some towns in the UK the local councils initiated an incentive to local shops and businesses to improve their signage and shop or business frontages. On the main shopping streets they offered up to 50% of the cost of new signage and
City of Bunbury Page 25 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission shop frontage improvement that enhanced and improved the street scene. This could be costed into a temporary rate decrease until paid or a cash incentive on completion.
Unused Storage Rooms On Second Floors.
Shopkeepers and businesses could be encouraged to upgrade unused upstairs rooms into holiday accommodation. This could assist them in paying high street C.B.D. rates and help to provide increased holiday accommodation needs for the expected growth in tourism we should experience in the future years.
Bringing The Train Back Into The City.
I consider this would be advantageous for business and holiday travellers alike. I do not believe it is ideal to arrive by train into Bunbury to the suburb of Picton road and to then have to arrange transport into the city.
I believe our city is now well on the way to becoming a vibrant city of the future and decisions taken now will be crucial to our development and prosperity.
21 David Jones Support Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) We present the following submission to the draft Local Planning Scheme on Noted. The ‘Local Road Reserve’ on Lots 224 and 246 Spencer Street, 69 Graylands Road, behalf of Mr Bruce Crabb, owner of Pt Lots 224 and 246 Spencer Street, South South Bunbury, can be deleted, as the subject site is encompassed by CLAREMONT WA 6010 Bunbury (subject site) and the Karatamoglou Family Trust, joint venture a ‘Development Areas Special Control Area’, which necessitates that a partners in the future development of these lots. We are supportive of the structure plan must be submitted to guide future subdivision; and as (DOC/292090) draft Local Planning Scheme, and wish to provide support on a number of such, the creation of appropriate vehicular and pedestrian access particular clauses within the Scheme and to also request the correction to an arrangements can be determined at a later stage through this urban anomaly within the scheme maps. designing process. It is advised that the WAPC’s Liveable Neighbourhoods operational policy would therefore be the primary The subject site is a total area of 1.6128 hectares, with street addresses of 254 reference document for assessing any proposed structure plan. and 256 Spencer Street, South Bunbury. The subject site is currently zoned ‘Residential R20/30’ and ‘Road Reserve’ with a ‘Development Investigation This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Policy Area’ designation (see Figure 1). Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map.
Rather than a ‘Development Investigation Policy Area’ designation, Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 has a ‘SCA Development Area’ designation over the
City of Bunbury Page 26 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission subject site, with application requirements being the same.
We request that the City of Bunbury include in its amendments to the Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 the removal of the road reserve within the subject sites. Figure 2 indicates the zoning modification.
The current location of the road reservation on the subject site is too prescriptive and does not allow a rational and logical development of the site, particularly to a R30 density. It only allows cul-de‐sac development of the site that will not achieve a suitable lot yield for the site. The removal of the reservation will facilitate a far more satisfactory design to be implemented on the site via the structure planning process. The removal of the reservation will not have a detrimental impact on the surrounding community, nor will it hinder good planning process.
Additionally, we would like to indicate our support for Clause 37 (1) of the draft scheme, in particular the allowance of up to 50% of the Public Open Space requirement to consider communal open space. This facilitates a greater and more localised provision of open space for local residents, particularly of larger strata developments and minimises management costs of open space to the City. We wholeheartedly support this Clause and see it as an innovative way of providing quality open space to our community.
22 McRobert Planning Pty Support Lot 111 Ince Road, Glen Iris Ltd on behalf of Aqwest [Large submission document regarding various sites lodged on behalf of Aqwest Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text & Map) – refer to Annex 1.] Andrew McRobert Noted. An additional special control area titled ‘Water Treatment (Director) Plant Buffer Special Control Area’ has been drafted as a recommended modification to both the Scheme Text and Map (i.e. PO Box 2156, BUNBURY depicted around the Aqwest owned water treatment plant located in WA 6231 Glen Iris).
(DOC/292275) This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text and Map.
Lot 101 (#5) Mackinnon Way, Bunbury
City of Bunbury Page 27 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The development of the Aqwest administration and operations building on the subject site was approved in 2002 as a ‘public utility’ use (DA/2002/20/1). The site was also approved for ‘storage’ purposes through the subsequent granting of a development approval in 2008 for a storage shed (DA/2008/268/1).
The draft new Scheme does not propose to change or affect Aqwest’s ability to continue using its site indefinitely for administrative, operational and storage purposes. While the zone name is proposed to change from ‘Mixed Business Zone’ to ‘Service Commercial Zone’ (in line with the standard zone names of the model provisions), the intent of the zone does not substantively change. Aqwest’s development is equivalent to the new ‘civic use’ land use class under the draft Scheme, which would be permitted in the new Scheme as a discretionary ‘D’ use. A ‘civic use’ is defined as:
‘… premises used by a government department, an instrumentality of the State or the local government for administrative, recreational or other purposes instrumentality of the State or the local government for administrative, recreational or other purposes’
It is appreciated that the suggested exclusion of existing approved developments, including public utilities that have dedicated building floorspaces used for incidental office purposes, may represent a financial opportunity to Aqwest for reinvestment should it sell its depot as an ‘office’ instead of as a ‘civic use’. However, such an approach would be difficult to administer and would have unknown but significant implications that would likely contribute to undermining the city’s activity centre hierarchy. As such, the WAPC’s Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy (April 2012) provides the following unequivocal guidance on this matter:
3.3.5 Offices
(1) Major offices should be located in the City, District and Specialised centres (where appropriate). State and local
City of Bunbury Page 28 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission governments and other public authorities should, wherever possible, locate offices within higher-order activity centres. Office development in District centres should complement the function of the centre while Neighbourhood centres may include small-scale offices.
(2) Offices, unless incidental to or servicing industrial developments, should not be located on land zoned for industry under the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme or local planning schemes.
Consequently, the floorspace limitation of a maximum net lettable area of 200m² for ‘office’ uses that already applies in the existing ‘Mixed Business Zone’ needs to remain unchanged in the proposed ‘Service Commercial Zone’ if the draft Scheme is to remain consistent with the intent of the Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that there are a wide range of alternative land use options that the Aqwest buildings and yard could be used for under the new ‘Service Commercial Zone’. Therefore, no modification to the draft Local Planning Scheme is required or recommended.
City of Bunbury Page 29 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Lot 103 Spencer Street and Lots 442, 443 and 444 Plaza Street, Bunbury Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text & Map) Air Photo (2016)
Subject Site
Cadastral Boundaries
Subject Area
City of Bunbury Page 30 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
Subject Site
Noted. Based on the submission stating that the site will be decommissioned in ‘the short to medium term’ (i.e. the life of the new Scheme over 5 years) and that Aqwest accepts that the consequence of including Lot 103 Spencer Street in a mixed use zone means that the current development and use of the site as a water treatment plant would therefore be a ‘non-conforming use’ under the new Scheme – it is recommended that the subject lot be included primarily in the ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’ with a residential density coding of ‘R40/60’, consistent with the bulk of adjoining land to the north and south.
It is also recommended then, that Lot 103 should logically be encompassed by the same ‘Development Areas Special Control Area’ that applies to Lots 442, 443 and 444 Plaza Street, so as to allow for the comprehensive planning of the land in an integrated manner as argued for in the submission.
With respect to the ‘Development Areas Special Control Area’, the set of objectives covers a wide range of circumstances that may apply to many different land parcels. As such, the set of objectives when read together are applied generally. Each objective should not be read as
City of Bunbury Page 31 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission being relevant in all circumstances, and likewise, not all of the objectives will be applicable in each circumstance. Nevertheless, to ensure that there is no ambiguity of interpretation, objectives (a) and (b) will be revised to state as follows:
(a) To identify areas requiring structure planning and/or local development planning prior to subdivision and/or development;
(b) To coordinate and integrate orderly subdivision, infrastructure provision, land use and development in areas requiring structure planning and/or local development planning;
It should be noted that the WAPC’s Framework for Local Development Plans (August 2015) states that a local development plan is appropriate in the following circumstances: lots with an area less than 260m² and irregularly configured lots; lots where specific vehicle access and egress control is required; lots abutting public open space; local and neighbourhood centres; lots that have been identified to accommodate a future change of use; lots with particular site constraints (e.g. steeply sloping land); and to address noise buffer and amelioration requirements.
Nonetheless, it can be expected that the redevelopment of Lot 103 Spencer Street and Lots 442, 443 and 444 Plaza Street for mixed use development would represent a relatively large and complex planning exercise, and hence, will necessitate a structure plan in order to guide the reconfiguration of the existing green title lot boundaries (i.e. with its resulting complexity of survey and built strata titles).
This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of
City of Bunbury Page 32 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text and Map.
Lot 533 Bussell Highway, Lots 931 and 932 Keble Heights and Lot 1005 Winthrop Avenue, College Grove Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
Subject Site
Noted. As requested, for the purpose of consistency, the southern battle-axe leg of Lot 1005 Winthrop Avenue should be included in the local ‘Public Purposes – Infrastructure Services’ reserve.
Given that the specified 50 metre chlorine buffer does not extend beyond the boundaries of the local ‘Public Purposes Reserve’, there is no need to create an additional layer of land use or development control in the form of a Special Control Area (e.g. as is the case for Lot 111 Ince Road, Glen Iris).
All land reserved as regional ‘Public Purposes – University’ under the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS) is outside the jurisdiction of the Local Planning Scheme. Hence, any changes to the designation of this land to a more appropriate reserve type, such as regional ‘Public Purposes – Public Utilities’, would need to be made through a region scheme amendment.
This recommendation as it relates to Lot 1005 Winthrop Avenue has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning
City of Bunbury Page 33 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Scheme – Scheme Map.
Lot 933 St Johns Mews and Lot 838 Winthrop Avenue, College Grove Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
Subject Area
Air Photo (2016)
Subject Area
It should be noted that suggested changes to the draft Scheme and how they can be dealt with generally fall within one of the following four categories: 1. changes that can be accommodated now as minor modifications to the draft Scheme; 2. changes that the City can commit to exploring as possible post gazettal omnibus amendments to the new Scheme in the future;
City of Bunbury Page 34 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission 3. changes that Council can support on behalf of landowners advancing themselves in the future according to their own timeframes post gazettal of the new Scheme; and 4. changes that Council does not support, either now as a modification to the drat Scheme or in the future as an amendment to the gazetted new Scheme.
This specific proposal would represent a significant modification that has not been put to the local residential community, and hence, would likely trigger the need to readvertise the draft Scheme. Consequently, it is recommended that the proposal should be progressed by the proponent for Council’s consideration as an amendment to the new Scheme once it has been gazetted.
Lot 934 Hilda Close and Lot 935 Somerville Drive, College Grove Noted. However, all land reserved as ‘Regional Open Space’ under the GBRS is outside the jurisdiction of the Local Planning Scheme. Hence, any changes to the designation of this land to a different reserve type, such as regional ‘Public Purposes – Public Utilities’, would need to be made through a region scheme amendment.
Portion of Lot 200 and Lot 202 Robertson Drive, Davenport Noted. However, all land reserved as ‘Regional Open Space’ under the GBRS is outside the jurisdiction of the Local Planning Scheme. Hence, any changes to the designation of this land to a different reserve type, such as regional ‘Public Purposes – Public Utilities’, would need to be made through a region scheme amendment. It should also be noted that a local Special Control Area created under a Local Planning Scheme cannot apply to land reserved under a Region Planning Scheme.
Therefore, it is considered that there is little need or benefit in creating an additional layer of land use or development control in the form of a Special Control Area over Lot 202 and portions of Lot 200 and Lot 5350 (e.g. as is the case for Lot 111 Ince Road, Glen Iris). This
City of Bunbury Page 35 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission is due to the fact that the specified 50 metre chlorine buffer: is already substantially contained within the boundaries of the ‘Regional Open Space’ reserve and local ‘Public Purposes – Drainage’ reserve; and that the relatively small portion of adjoining land impinged by the buffer is included in the new ‘Light Industry Zone’, and the affected area is a rear boundary setback with no permanently occupied buildings.
23 Arpad Mencshelyi Support Noted. Compliments to City of Bunbury Planners on preparation of Draft Local Planning 6 Sampson Road, Scheme No 8, in particular the complementary standing of the comprehensive BUNBURY WA 6230 statutory Local Planning Strategy Draft is reassuring. In my opinion the City has a vigorous documented strategy that through interpretation helps ratepayer understanding lifestyle choices, and sets the scene for Town Planning circumstances unique to Bunbury.
24 Rod Scotland Support Modification to Local Planning Strategy (Map) Represents the result of a lot of hard work by a lot of people. Well done. Noted. The map symbology for the ‘Regional Recreation Node’ is to 56B Dunstan Street, be enhanced, in order to improve legibility of the Strategy map. BUNBURY WA 6230 Please note that on the City-Wide Strategy map the Regional Recreation Node is very difficult to spot. This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of (DOC/292265) Modifications to the Local Planning Strategy.
City of Bunbury Page 36 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Objection
25 Rolf Stene AM Objection Air Photo (2016) I wish to make a submission on the new Town Planning Scheme for higher 34 Picton Crescent, residential density on my land which is situated between Picton Cres and BUNBURY WA 6230 Roberts Cres. (DOC 151623) The property size is 1886 square meters. It is one of the most unique locations Subject Area in the City of Bunbury. The property has a 360 degree panoramic outlook over Bunbury city, the outer harbour, Koombana Bay, Leschenault Estuary, the Darling Ranges, Ferguson Valley, the University complex, the Indian Ocean and Cape Naturalist Lighthouse. At the western side of the property is located a large public reserve, which is an added attraction to the location. There are no private buildings adjacent to the Western side of the property due to the nearby Aqwest land.
There are two neighbouring properties comprising about half an acre each completing this unique enclave. The entry to the above three properties have a
shared access from Picton Cres, and have rear access from Roberts Cres.
I have briefed the neighbours on this request, and they are supportive subject to viewing details of the proposal. In future we would seek supporting letters Cadastral Boundaries after consultation with our immediate neighbours.
Because of its uniqueness, it has often been commented that the location is similar to Bellevue Terrace in Kings Park, where it overlooks the river and the City of Perth. Subject Area The property lends itself to a potential multi storey development, perhaps up to five storeys, because this unique property is also as close as 300 meters to the Central Business District, and it is in close walking distance of the Back Beach Tourism Precinct. Deep sewerage is located nearby diagonally across the road at the corner of Picton Cres and Cross St.
We purchased the property in 1978 because it was on top of the hill. This is where my wife and I raised up our four daughters, with the schools, shopping
City of Bunbury Page 37 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and other facilities being so close. Bunbury has been very good to us. Bunbury Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) has a unique lifestyle, and the climate is special, having been recognised as the same as Malibu in California. Bunbury also has close proximity to the most beautiful locations in Australia.
This is the sixteenth year of the 21st century, and as such, the proposed buildings would have to be of such a design and standard to be a credit to Subject Area Bunbury. The zoning and density to be considered should take advantage of this unique location. As mentioned, this would be in cooperation with the neighbours.
I have been deeply involved in planning Bunbury 2000, the Australind Village Shopping Centre, and Pelican Point (see footnotes). I sincerely believe this would be a worthy project of benefit to the community, both in its own right, and also sewing the seed for other premium projects in Bunbury, the second Noted. It is acknowledged that the subject site is situated city of Western Australia, as envisaged by Council's adopted Local Planning approximately 800 metres (or 10 minutes walking) distance from the Strategy for Activity Centres and Neighbourhoods (2010) and the new Scheme. ‘Regional Centre Zone’ (replacing the ‘City Centre Zone’). The land is also situated approximately 600 metres from the Back Beach Tourism I would appreciate it if you would give this request the consideration is Precinct. deserves, and look forward to your support for the project. It needs to be remembered that the 400/800 metre ped-shed (or 5 to 10 minutes walking distances) around activity centres define the areas within which medium and/or high density R-Codes should be considered. However, it is by no means envisaged that all land within the ped-shed of an activity centre would be suitable for medium / high density housing, as this must be balanced with other planning and urban design criteria that would need to be factored into any consideration when determining the suitability of land for medium / high density residential development within walkable catchments.
It is recommended that this submission could be progressed by the proponent as an amendment proposal to the new Scheme after it has been gazetted. This approach means that the proposal can be properly considered through a more targeted consultation process with surrounding affected landowners / residents, and avoids the necessity of readvertising the Scheme.
City of Bunbury Page 38 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
26 Andrew Woodroof Objection Air Photo (2016) Consistent with other properties fronting the commercial area bounded by Blair 105 Burrendah Blvd, Street, Strickland Street, King Road, Hawkins Street & Forrest Avenue which all WILLETTON WA 6155 have a proposed zoning of R20/60 (Mixed Uses Commercial or Mixed Use Residential). I believe it would be beneficial for lots along Forrest Avenue facing Subject Area (DOC/282400) the commercial area between Blair Street and Bray Street to be increased to R20/60 or R20/40 (Mixed Use Residential). As most of the houses along this stretch are quite old and there hasn’t been much redevelopment in this area with the current zoning of R20/30 besides the area which is already zoned R20/40.
The area is in very close proximity to parks (Forrest Park), public transport (bus and train), schools (South Bunbury Primary School & St Marys Primary School, Bunbury Catholic College) and shopping facilities. Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
Subject Area
Noted. It is recommended that this submission could be progressed as an amendment proposal to the new Scheme after it has been gazetted. This approach means that the proposal can be properly considered through a more targeted consultation process with surrounding affected landowners / residents, and avoids the necessity of readvertising the Scheme.
City of Bunbury Page 39 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
In applying the drafting principles1 in relation to the zoning and R- Coding used in formulating the new Scheme map, the recommended outcome most consistent with the established character and amenity of the area would be for the land to remain in the ‘Residential Zone’ but with an increased density coding to R20/40, which is consistent with land between #100 to #108 Forrest Avenue.
The mixed use zones as drafted have been applied along activity corridors linking activity centres (i.e. connecting node to node). Therefore, any consideration of a mixed use zoning in fringing areas along roads leading out from the city would need to be mindful of the risks of undesirable commercial ribbon development breaking out in an unplanned manner if unchecked by logical boundaries.
27 Priority Management Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text & Map) We act for Greentime Holdings Pty Ltd, the registered owner of Lot 17 and 30 Air Photo (2016) Stuart Thompson situated at the corner of Vittoria Road and Australind bypass. (Principal) We note that draft local planning scheme No. 8 zones the subject land ‘Service PO Box 29, BUNBURY Commercial’ and includes the land within two Special Control Areas; SCA WA 6231 Development Area and SCA Flood Prone Areas. Subject Area (DOC/286762) The scheme states the objectives of the ‘Service Commercial’ zone is:
• To accommodate commercial activities which, because of the nature of the business, require good vehicular access and/or large sites.
• To provide for a range of wholesale sales, showrooms, trade and services which, by reason of their scale, character, operational or land requirements are not generally appropriate in, or cannot conveniently or economically be accommodated in the Regional Centre, other activity centres or industrial zones.
The proposed permitted uses in the new scheme are consistent with the uses
1 Refer to page 77 of the Local Planning Scheme Review Report (October 2011), which accompanied the agenda item to Council’s ordinary meeting held on 29 November 2011 (Decision: 276/11).
City of Bunbury Page 40 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission our client is seeking to pursue on the subject land. Current Scheme Map (TPS7) The subject land is designated ‘SCA Development Area’ under the scheme. This designation effectively requires the preparation of a structure plan to coordinate development a provide design guidelines. Our client accepts this obligation. Subject Area The subject land is designated ‘SCA Flood Prone Areas’ under the scheme. This designation requires that flood mitigation measures be taken into account when developing sites. Work already undertaken by our client in respect to the site acknowledges the flood risks and a suitable level of fill has been established to overcome this risk.
Our client also supports the range of permitted uses within the Service Commercial zone. Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) We note the new scheme provides for a bottle shop large scale or small scale but does not provide for a tavern. In the particular instance of this property, we believe a tavern is an appropriate use as it is a suitable transitional use between ‘Service Commercial’ and the adjoining ‘Neighbourhood Centre’. We therefore suggest that a tavern should be a discretionary use in the zone. Subject Area
In conclusion, Green Time Holdings Pty Ltd supports the proposed zoning and land use provisions which apply to Lot 17 and 30 situated at corner of Victoria Road and Australind bypass, but believe there is sound town planning merit for including ‘Tavern’ as a discretionary use due to the particular circumstances of the site where such a use would be a transitional use between the ‘Service
Commercial’ and adjoining ‘Neighbourhood Centre’ zones. Noted. It is suggested that a ‘tavern’ could be considered for the subject area through the creation of an ‘Additional Use’ as a discretionary ‘A’ use in Schedule 1 - Additional Uses Table, rather than making a change of permissibility in the Zoning Table. This more targeted approach is recommended because a ‘tavern’ use may be suitable for this specific locality, but such a land use activity is not necessarily appropriate across the entire ‘Service Commercial Zone’. The reason being that the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ is primarily car- dependent by nature, and should not therefore include land uses that
City of Bunbury Page 41 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission are dependent on or require public transport and pedestrian amenities.
However, it must be recognized that there are limitations/constraints affecting any future tavern development, as there will likely be: public interest concerns regarding the site’s proximity to a school; and road safety and traffic congestion concerns regarding the level of service of the Vittoria Road and Forrest Highway intersection.
In relation to the second point above, it should be noted that Scheme Amendment 65 (which sought to modify ‘Special Use Zone No. 54 - Gateway Commercial Precinct’ by deleting the 1,000m² maximum net lettable area floorspace restriction on ‘showroom’ uses) was refused by the Minister for Planning.
One of the reasons given by the Minister for this decision was that the removal of the floorspace limitation would result in development that was contrary to the intent of ‘Special Use Zone No. 54’ (previous Scheme Amendment 29), which was to establish a small scale business park with low traffic generating land uses that would provide a transition to the distinct and separate Glen Iris-Moorlands neighbourhood centre.
Furthermore, it should be noted that the gazetted version of Scheme Amendment 29 deleted a number of high trip generating land uses (as defined in State Planning Policy 4.2 Activity Centres for Perth and Peel), which included the use class of ‘tavern’, specifically because it was considered inappropriate at this location.
Hence, it is recommended that should the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) support this modification to the revised draft Scheme, that the ‘Additional Use’ conditions should prescribe that any proposal for a ‘tavern’ use in this locality must be rigorously
City of Bunbury Page 42 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission assessed (i.e. be subject to a public interest test as part of a liquor licensing approval and a transport impact assessment2). Furthermore, while ideally a ‘tavern’ use would normally be located on Lot 31 (#33) or Lot 30 (#27) Vitoria Road in close proximity of the planned Neighbourhood Centre, it is acknowledged that in this case it would be directly opposite a school. Therefore, the precise location and extent of any ‘tavern’ use will need to be determined through a structure planning process.
This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text and Map.
28 MPM Development Objection Noted. However, when considering the intent and extent of the new Consultants ‘Light Industry Zone’, a fuller appreciation must be gained of the new MPM Development Consultants represent Amoeba Nominees Pty Ltd, the definition of what a light industry use means and its implications. registered owner of Lot 1 Proffit Street, Davenport (refer to Figure 1 below). Shelley Coutts The existing Scheme definition of ‘industry - light’ means an industry - [Figure 1 titled ‘Subject Site’ in original submission document] PO Box 2035, BUNBURY WA 6231 (a) in which the processes carried on, the machinery used, It is requested that the ‘Light Industry’ zoning proposed by Local Planning and the goods and commodities carried to and from the Scheme No.8 be reconsidered in this location. (DOC/288358) premises do not cause any injury to or adversely affect the amenity of the locality; Lot 1 Proffit Street, along with the surrounding area is currently zoned ‘Industry’ by way of the City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No.7. (b) the establishment or conduct of which does not, or will not, impose an undue load on any existing or proposed The objective of the ‘Industry’ zone under TPS No. 7 is: service for the supply or provision of essential services;
4.2.1.5 Industry zone – To provide for a wide range of general light industry The draft Scheme is based on the model provisions of the Planning uses, the storage and distribution of goods and associated uses which, by the and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, which nature of their operations, should be separated from residential areas. more simply states that an ‘industry - light’ use means:
As a result of the objective stated above, defined landuses ‘Industry’ and ‘Light … premises used for an industry where impacts on the amenity Industry’ are both considered permitted (‘P’) uses in the ‘Industry’ zone. of the area in which the premises is located can be mitigated, avoided or managed; This has enabled the development of the area with a mix of business ranging This is a subtle but fundamental change in the definition, which
2 Refer to the WAPC’s Transport Impact Assessment Guidelines, Volume 4 Individual Developments, August 2016.
City of Bunbury Page 43 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission from Engineering Fabrication and Manufacture, to Truck Workshops and trade means that any industrial activity (i.e. regardless of the processes warehouse/showrooms (such as BOC Gas, Metroof and Aussie Outdoor). Some carried on, the machinery used, and the goods and commodities of these businesses are not conducive to the proposed ‘Light Industry’ zoning. carried to and from the premises) can qualify as being a light industry activity if the development appropriately mitigates, avoids or [Figure 2 titled ‘Aerial of Proffit Street and Surrounds’ in original submission manages its impacts. document] This can be achieved through building design or other practical [Figure 3 titled ‘City of Bunbury TPS No.7 “Industry” zoned land surrounding engineering and technological solutions. Consequently, only existing subject lot’ in original submission document] industrial businesses that cannot or do not wish to meet this standard will be treated as ‘non-conforming uses’, as new developments are The objective of the ‘Light Industry’ zone, as proposed by draft Local Planning expected to responsibly operate in a manner that protects the public Scheme No.8 is: health of residents living (i.e. sensitive land uses) within 500 to 1,000 metres of industrial areas. - To provide for a range of industrial uses and service industries generally compatible with urban areas, that cannot be located in commercial zones.” Indeed, the new Scheme is not in itself a barrier to facilitating capital investment in the improvement of ‘Light Industry Zone’ land through - To encourage the development of safe, clean and attractive light industrial its redevelopment (e.g. by extending or expand existing business areas that contribute positively to the overall city image by ensuring that operations in a cleaner manner or by a wide range of new higher acceptable levels of safety and high standards of visual and environmental technology business), which is encouraged so as to increase its amenity are provided within sites.” productivity and value, and to improve the environmental performance of industrial activities. - To ensure that where any development adjoins zoned or developed residential properties, the development is suitably set back, screened or otherwise treated In the case of Lot 1 Proffit Street, a more accurate appreciation of the so as not to detract from the residential amenity.” subject site and its surrounds takes into account the fact that residential and other sensitive land uses are located within a 500 to While in principal, the objective of introducing a ‘light industry’ zone is 1,000 metre radius. supported, further consideration should be given as to where it is applied.
In the instance of Lot 1, the site is developed with an Engineering/Fabrication business. This land use is best defined as “industry” under the proposed Scheme 8.
“Industry” is defined by draft Local Planning Scheme as No. 8 as “means premises used for the manufacture, dismantling, processing, assembly, treating, testing, servicing, maintenance or repairing of goods, products, articles, materials or substances and includes facilities on the premises for any of the following purposes-
City of Bunbury Page 44 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
(a) The storage of goods; Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
(b) The work of administration or accounting;
(c) The selling of goods by wholesale or retail; Subject Site (d) The provision of amenities for employees; 500m (e) Incidental purposes.
The land use “Industry” is not permitted “X” in the ‘Light Industry’ zone. The implications of this are that the current business can continue to operate from 1,000m the site as a “non-conforming” use. The non-conforming use right allows for the continued used of the land for the purpose for which it was being lawfully used immediately before the commencement of Town Planning Scheme No.8. Air Photo (2016)
As mentioned above, the landuse that exists on Lot 1 is typical of the surrounding area, meaning there is a high chance that the majority of the businesses that exist in this area will operate as non-conforming uses. This does not give the owners of these properties certainty or incentive to re-develop, extend or expand their business operations.
As the proposed zoning ‘Light Industry’ is considered limiting to this area, it is Subject Site requested that further consideration be given to the area being zoned ‘General Industry’ by way of Local Planning Scheme No. 8.
Nevertheless, it is recommended that further clarification of the land use class term ‘industry-light’ should be provided in the form of local planning policy guidance. So as to give landowners and developers greater certainty regarding the performance measures a proposed development must satisfy in meeting the new use class definition, in conjunction with relevant regulations, policies, guidelines and codes of practice.
City of Bunbury Page 45 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
For example, the local planning policy Property Boundary could specify a single consolidated set Light Industry Zone of public/environmental health criteria, including for noise emissions, whereby all developments in the ‘Light Industry Zone’ regardless of their business activity may confidently emit up to a 60 dB (LA10) maximum of 60 dB (LA10) at all hours, as measured more simply from the property boundary.3
29 McRobert Planning Pty Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) Ltd This submission has been prepared by McRobert Planning Pty Ltd on behalf of Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) Mr S.P. and Mrs M.A. Farrell the registered owners of Lot 206 (No 50) Beach Andrew McRobert Road, Bunbury (refer to Figure 1 below). (Director) Subject Area [Figure 1 titled ‘Subject Site’ in original submission document] PO Box 2156, BUNBURY WA 6231 The submission seeks the City of Bunbury’s support in having the land included within the split residential density coding of R20/40 within proposed Local (DOC/289062) Planning Scheme No. 8.
Existing Zoning and Residential Density Coding
Under the term of the City’s current Town Planning Scheme No 7, Lot 2016 Beach Road, is currently zoned ‘Residential’ with a Residential Density Code of R15 (refer to Figure 2). Land immediately to the west and adjoining and Noted. It is recommend that this submission could be accommodated extending to the north is similarly zoned and coded. as a minor modification to the proposed draft Scheme map, given that the change only relates to both a relatively small number of lots and is [Figure 2 titled ‘Existing Zoning & Residential Density Coding Town Planning a modest increase in their residential density coding (i.e. up to
3 Based on Table 1 of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
City of Bunbury Page 46 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Scheme No.7’ in original submission document] R20/30), and is consistent with the WAPC’s Liveable Neighbourhoods operational policy and Councils’ adopted Local Planning Strategy for Other than those lots fronting Beach Road between Palm Street and Banksia Activity Centres & Neighbourhoods (2010). Street and Palm Street and Wattle Street, all other lots fronting Beach Road east of its intersection with William Street, and William Street itself, have a minimum Specifically, the justification being that the: split density coding of R20/30. Many of the lots are included within the split subject area is located in close proximity (i.e. well within the 400 R20/40 Residential Density Code. metre ped-shed or 5 minutes walking distance) of the Beach Road ‘Local Centre Zone’; Proposed Zoning & Residential Density Coding four of the existing 13 lot sizes are already smaller than what is The advertised Scheme Maps associated with draft Local Planning Scheme No 8 permitted under the R15 density coding; and propose to retain the current ‘Residential’ zoning and ‘R15’ density coding that currently apply to the land (refer to Figure 3). interfacing properties on the southern side of William Street / Beach Road are presently coded R20/30, and hence, this change [Figure 3 titled ‘Proposed Density Coding Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8’ in would be consistent with the drafting principles for the Scheme original submission document] map (i.e. having uniformity of built form character on both sides of a street. Prevailing Lot Size/Existing Density of Development The recoding of the land to R20/40 (allowing a minimum lot size of The minimum lot size prescribed by the Residential Design Codes with respect just 180m² with an average lot size of 220m²) is not considered to be to R15 coded lots is 580m². justified in this instance, given that: infill development on the interfacing stretch of William Street / Notwithstanding the current and proposed R15 density coding applicable those Beach Road is at the R20/30 density coding and has an established lots generally fronting Beach road between Wattle and Banksia Street (including medium density character; the land subject of this submission), four of those lots do not currently comply with the minimum lot size prescribed by the Residential Design Codes with the subject area of housing is still within the colloquially respect to R15 lots. recognised Tree Street character area and its development should respect this through providing a transition of built form from low Reference to Figure 4 below shows that: (R15) to medium density (R40); the R30 density coding allows for all but one of the subject lots to Lot 2 Wattles Street (564m²); be re-subdivided for single house or grouped dwelling lots down to a minimum of 260m² with an average lot size of 300m²; and Lot 2 Beach Road (436m²); presently the smallest of the lots is 436m², and the average of all Lot 1 Beach Road (557m²); and, lots is 773m².
Lot 2 Beach Road (525m²), This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of
City of Bunbury Page 47 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map. do not meet the minimum lot size requirement relevant to their current R15 density coding.
[Figure 4 titled ‘Prevailing Lot Sizes’ in original submission document]
In addition to the above, that land situated immediately to the south of the subject land has recently been developed consistent with a density coding of approximately R30. Beach Road, in the vicinity of the subject land, has an established and developing medium high density residential character.
Residential Design Codes
The stated objectives for residential development within the Residential Design Codes include the following:
“(a) to provide residential development of an appropriate design for the intended residential purpose, density, context of place and scheme objectives”
The stated ‘Context’ design element objectives of the Codes in relation to all single house(s) and grouped dwellings and multiple dwellings in areas coded less than R40 include:
“(a) to ensure that residential development meets community expectations in regard to appearance, use and density.”
Having regard to the:
1. above stated objectives of the Residential Design Codes;
2. current prevailing minimum R20/30 split density code applicable to the majority of lots fronting the eastern section of Beach Road and William Street.
3. presence of 4 existing lots that do not comply with the minimum lot size applicable to their current R15 density coding (both adjoining and within close proximity to the land the subject of this submission); and,
4. the growing number of medium density developments along the relevant
City of Bunbury Page 48 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission section of Beach Road and William Street, is considered to warrant the inclusion of the subject land within the R20/40 split residential density code. Inclusion of the land as such is considered likely to meet community expectations with respect to density.
Liveable Neighbourhoods
‘Liveable Neighbourhoods’ “is a Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) operational policy that guides the structure planning and subdivision for greenfield and large brownfield (urban infill) sites”.
‘Element 1 – Community Design’ of the policy states that “in typical walkable neighbourhoods, a residential density of around 20 dwellings per site hectare will result in 750-900 dwellings in a 400-450m radius. This will usually be the minimum yield needed to support a neighbourhood Centre corner store and reasonable levels of bus service”
As indicated by Figure 5 below, the subject land is located within 200 metres of the Beach Road local centre. Accordingly, application of the above policy statement is considered to support the inclusion of the subject land within a higher split residential density coding.
[Figure 5 titled ‘Proximity to Beach Road Local Centre’ in original submission document]
Draft Local Planning Strategy
The City’s draft Local Planning Strategy identifies the following two key ‘Housing’ strategies:
“2A-1.1 Apply medium or high density R-codes appropriate to each level of the activity centres hierarchy within the walkable catchments of the activity centres (including City Centre) and the mixed use activity corridors (an nowhere else).”
“2A-2.1 Apply a base R-Code of R20 over all residential areas, except those areas in the vicinity of activity centres to which an appropriate higher R-Code will apply.”
City of Bunbury Page 49 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Implementation of the above two key housing strategies supports the inclusion of the subject land within a higher R20/40 split density code.
In addition to the above, the draft Local Planning Strategy (LPS) ‘Housing’ strategy as it applies to the subject land is considered to be at odds with the draft LPS ‘Activity Centres Corridors Strategy’ – refer to Figure 6 and Figure 7 below. While the ‘Activity Centres and Corridors’ Strategy Map includes the subject land within the walkable catchment of the Beach Road Local Centre, the ‘Housing’ Strategy map identifies the land as ‘Least Density’. Identification of the subject land as ‘Least Density” is considered to be inconsistent with the above two key housing strategies.
[Figure 6 titled ‘Draft Local Planning Strategy ‘Housing’ Strategy Map’ in original submission document]
[Figure 7 titled ‘Draft Local Planning Strategy ‘Housing’ Strategy Map’ [sic, Activity Centres and Corridors] in original submission document]
Greater Bunbury Strategy
The Greater Bunbury Strategy Final Report (2013) lists the following as one of its “key outcomes”:
“Activity centres will provide a mix of land uses, with a significant increase in the number of dwellings provided within the activity centres.”
The draft proposals for the subject land within Local Planning Scheme No. 8 and the Local Planning Strategy are considered to be at odds with the above key outcome.
Activities Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy
The WAPC’s ‘Activities Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy’ states in relation to ‘Residential density’:
“(1) Activity centres should be coded under the Residential Design Codes, applying activity centre (defined in Appendix 1) and built form-based controls to
City of Bunbury Page 50 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission enable housing development that complements the desired scale and intensity of other development in the centre. Commercial and residential growth should be optimised through appropriately-scaled buildings and higher-density development within walkable catchments”.
The draft Local Planning Scheme and Strategy are considered to be inconsistent with the above.
Conclusion
Having regard to:
• all other lots fronting Beach Road east of its intersection with William Street, and William Street itself, having a minimum split density coding of R20/30 (other than those lots between Wattle and Banksia Streets as discussed above);
• the existence of four lots both adjoining and within close proximity to the land the subject of the submission, that do not currently comply with the minimum lot size prescribed by the Residential Design Codes with respect to their current R15 density coding;
• the existing and developing medium density character of the relevant sections of Beach Road and William Street;
• the stated objectives of the Residential Design Codes;
• Liveable Neighbourhoods policy;
•The two key ‘Housing’ strategies contained within the City’s draft Local Planning Strategy;
• The identification of the subject land within the walkable catchment of the Beach Road local activity centre,
the City of Bunbury is requested to modify the proposed Local Planning Scheme Map to have Lot 206 (House No. 50) included within the split R20/40 Residential Density Code.
City of Bunbury Page 51 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Should you have any queries in relation to this matter please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned on 0448890441 or [email protected].
30 TPG Place Match Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) TPG Place Match (TPG), on behalf of Catholic Homes Inc (CHI), is pleased to Noted. It is recommend that this submission could be accommodated Leigh Caddy (Senior provide the following submission on the draft City of Bunbury Local Planning as a minor modification to the proposed draft Scheme map, given that Planner) Scheme No. 8 as it relates to CHI’s Ocean Star Aged Care & Villas, situated at Lot it is the logical inclusion of the entire Lot 1022 (#1) Mangles Street, 1022 (No. 1) Mangles Street, South Bunbury (the ‘site’). South Bunbury, in the ‘Civic and Community Reserve’. Level 7, 182 St Georges Terrace, PERTH WA Background This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of 6000 Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Map. CHI is a long standing landowner in the area, having been situated at this (DOC/289492 and location for over 40 years. CHI’s Ocean Star facility provides a much needed 289595) service to the local community and broader regional area, providing residential facilities and specialised care for older adults to enable them to age within the local community.
The site currently comprises several existing buildings including a 22 bed high care nursing home, a 40 bed low care hostel and 40 independent living units.
CHI have a long term commitment to the site, with active plans for the future expansion and redevelopment of the facility, to enable the ongoing provision of
City of Bunbury Page 52 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission much needed services and facilities for aged people.
Draft City of Bunbury Local Planning Scheme No.8 (Draft LPS8) proposes to reclassify the majority of the site currently reserved ‘Public Purposes – Hospital’ under Town Planning Scheme No.7 (TPS7), to the ‘Civic and Community’ local reserve, as well as introduce a residential density coding of R60.
Draft LPS8 also proposes to reclassify a small portion along the southern extents currently reserved ‘Parks and Recreation’ under TPS7, to the ‘Local Open Space’ reservation.
Submission
The proposed ‘Civic and Community’ reservation is deemed consistent with the current and ongoing use of the site for aged car purposes, whilst providing for a level of flexibility with respect to the potential uses that could be accommodated on the site (contemplated within the reserve objectives under Table 1 of draft LPS8).
On this basis, the identification of the site within the ‘Civic and Community’ reservation, together with a residential density of R60 is supported.
With regard to the small portion of the site within the ‘Local Open Space’ reservation, it would appear that this is a historical anomaly that has carried through over time, and which has been inherited incorrectly within draft LPS8.
The identification of this portion of the site within the ‘Local Open Space’ reservation does not provide any community benefit, or protect any recreational values, given the land is owned by CHI. It is noted that the ‘Natural Environment’ and ‘Recreation and Open Space’ strategy maps contained within the City’s draft Local Planning Strategy do not identify this portion of the site for open space or conservation purposes.
Both TPS7 and draft LPS8 reserve extensive areas of land within the locality for open space and/or conservation purposes, which collectively are considered to adequately provide for the local community’s recreational needs, and conservation and protection of the environmental and landscape values of the
City of Bunbury Page 53 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission local area.
The removal of the open space reservation is considered negligible in the context of the extensive area of public land within the vicinity of the site reserved for open space and/or conservation purposes, which more than adequately conserves and protects the environmental and landscape values of the local area, and the recreational needs of the local community.
On this basis, the identification of the southern portion of the site within the ‘Local Open Space’ reservation is not supported.
Accordingly, this submission respectfully requests the whole of the CHI’s site be identified within the ‘Civic and Community’ local reserve. The identification of the whole site within a contiguous ‘Civic and Community; local reservation is considered a more logical and consolidated approach to planning for the site, for the following reasons:
• the facility is well located to assist with meeting the City’s future aged care needs, strategically located at the intersection of two locally important roads (in Ocean Drive and Mangles Street), in close proximity to the Bunbury CBD, and with excellent access to the wider metropolitan area and public transport;
• the identification of the whole site within a contiguous ‘Civic and Community’ local reservation will provide greater flexibility in the delivery of aged persons’ accommodation in the economically viable manner, that meets the needs of the local community, and strategic planning objectives for the broader Bunbury region, including responding to the following demographic ‘shift’ identified in the draft Local Planning Strategy:
Shift 3: retirees aged 65+ years, aging in place and downsizing within their local community, accessing aged care assistance and healthcare and community involvement will be a focus”; and
• it will enable the future detailed planning and redevelopment of the site to be undertaken in a comprehensive and holistic manner that ensure the full potential of the site is realised, having regard to the site’s physical attributes, context and surrounding area.
City of Bunbury Page 54 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The identification of the whole site within the ‘Civic and Community’ local reserve will ensure the ongoing recognition of the site in providing a much need service to the local community, and provide clarity and certainty for CHI having regard to their future intentions for the site.
We trust that our comments will be considered favourably as part of finalisation of draft LPS8. Should you have any queries or require clarification on any matters please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned on 92898300.
31 Alec Piper Objection Noted. Last week I visited Sydney where I stayed in a hotel near Darling Harbour. The 13 Banksia Street, B.C.C should send a visionary to visit to see how a big city has itself become a BUNBURY WA 6230 tourist attraction. (DOC/289577)
32 Keith Weymes Objection Noted. RV Tourism – A Moving Target 36B Winton Street, CAREY PARK WA 6230 It’s little wonder that Australia won the right to host the 2015 World RV Conference, which will saw members of the recreational vehicle industry (DOC/289578) flocking to Melbourne in February. The Caravan Industry Association of Australia says this nation’s love affair with caravanning and camping continues to grow. Try more than 60 million “visitor nights” a year!
The association has released research showing caravan registrations have experienced a higher rate of increase in recent years than any other vehicle type (5 per cent year-on-year).
There were 528,869 registered RVs in Australia in 2013 – the vast majority caravans and camper trailers – compared to 502,025 in 2012.
As of May 2014, domestic RV production was up 7.4 per cent in a year. All this means an industry generating $7 billion worth of expenditure annually. People aged 35-49 account for about half of travellers in this sector, but the new buzz word the RV industry loves is “gramping” – where grandparents take their
City of Bunbury Page 55 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission grandkids on the road with them.
Here are some other impressive statistics:
67.8 million site nights were spent in the caravanning and camping sector in 2012. 45.3 million (67%) were in a caravan holiday park with above 40 sites
Expenditure by caravanning and camping consumers is approximately seven billion dollars annually
90% of all site nights are in regional Australia 90% of caravanning and camping activity is undertaken by Australian domestic travellers
The largest user group is 35-49 year olds with approximately 50% of all travel in the sector
There are 170,000 powered and unpowered sites available nightly in Australia. At an average occupancy rate of 54%. This means 86,000 sites go unused nightly around the country
There were 528,869 RVs registered in 2013. Of these registered vehicles, 474,783 are towed product (i.e. caravans, camper trailers, tent trailers) while 54,103 are motorised (i.e. motorhome or campervan) Caravan registrations increased 5.96% to January 2012 – the highest recorded of any motor vehicle type. 85% of the Australian population has stayed in a caravan holiday park at least once in their life
For every $100 of caravan park revenue, $138 worth of direct economic benefit flows through the local economy. Local RV production in the year ending December 2013 was 20,402 (19,441 towed, 961 motorised). It is estimated up to 10,000 units (mainly camper trailers) may also be imported annually.
It will be noted that many of the above figures are now dated and have been produced by an organization comprising mainly the RV manufacturers and the caravan park industry. I doubt that there has been much input from the RVers.
Some of the significant changes since 2013 include:
City of Bunbury Page 56 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• RV registrations continue to rise each year.
• Many caravans and RV’s are now fully self-contained i.e. they have on board fresh water and grey and black water storage generally for 3 to 4 days
• Caravan parks continue to construct motel type cabins and reduce caravan bays available
• Caravan parks provide facilities that many RVers do not want or wish to pay for,
• The travelling RVer is very computer literate and has the ability alter their trip to find a camp site that suits and to bypass places,
• Many travelers are on the road for extended periods of months to years and have made a lifestyle choices.
• People have a finite budget and choose where they make their expenditures and make choices e.g. a night at the caravan park or a meal at the local pub
This significant lack of representation in the various processes including land planning and policy planning has resulted in the establishment of RVCAL which now represents some 500,000 RVers and is the umbrella group for such RV associations like CMCA
CMCA for example has been for years assisting with the development of the Australia wide Dump Point network and actively fostering the RV Friendly Towns network. They have their own phone app as do others which list all camping opportunities in Australia and the ability to rate places and leave comments. WikiCamps now has some 22,000 sites listed.
CMCA is now developing its Members Only park network for self-contained vehicles and is rolling them out Australia wide.
There are many vested interests and those who think they understand the travelling publics wants and needs. Unfortunately the travelling public are usually only ratepayers where their house or home base is and hence planning
City of Bunbury Page 57 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission occurs in their absence and without broad discussion.
Caravan parks are mostly poorly located many kilometers from town centre’s and points of interest and hence are of questionable value to short stay RVers. Many have just priced themselves out of the market. Many towns throughout Australia now provide big rig parking and in town overnight parking
People are now voting with their feet and some places are being left behind and bypassed.
We have just returned from an extensive 1 year caravan tour of the Eastern States. Our caravan is fully self-contained and hence we could camp in forests and National Parks and free camps for about 4 in every 5 nights. We always spent in the places which offered a free camp but tended bypass those that did not. We had a choice and did choose.
The City of Bunbury’s draft Town Planning Scheme makes no provision for the travelling RVers. Bunbury is not RV friendly and hence the City and its businesses miss out on probably millions of dollars each year for little or no effort input or expenditure.
RV tourism dollars are generally free. RVers even bring their own accommodation and pay their own way.
I live here and wish to see Bunbury prosper. We have seen how towns and cities which have embraced this type of tourism can prosper and those who do not just get bypassed and do not get the benefit.
Please reconsider how the City can include a better outcome for RVers and the City’s businesses.
I would be pleased to elaborate or speak to my submission.
City of Bunbury Page 58 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
33 Genelle Abolis Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text & Map) [Regarding Lots 3 and 4 (#302) Blair Street, South Bunbury] Current Scheme Map (TPS7) 38 Mooralup Turn, DALYELLUP WA 6230 We would like to acknowledge the time and effort undertaken by the City of Bunbury to prepare the draft Local Planning Scheme No 8 (LPS8) and draft Local (DOC/289801) Planning Strategy (LPS). We are aware of the challenges the Council has faced throughout the preparation of this documentation and look forward to future implementation of this documentation once endorsed by the WAPC and the Subject Site Minister.
Eversley Consulting has been engaged by the landowner (Casmat Nominees Pty Ltd) of Lots 3 and 4 Blair Street, South Bunbury to prepare a submission on the draft LPS8 and LPS. We object to the prosed ‘Residential’ Zone with a Residential coding of R20/30 as identified in the draft LPS8 and the ‘residential use’ as identified in the draft LPS, which applies to these lots.
Preliminary discussions with the City of Bunbury Planning Officer Ann Jank (November 2016) we were advised to prepare a submission which justifies the proposed land uses that would be deemed acceptable for these lots, particularly based on the current environmental conditions of the lot, which in this instance Noted. Considering that the existing zoning of the subject site is would be commercial in nature only. Detailed below is the justification for the ‘Service Station Zone’, it is suggested that the creation of ‘Additional recommended modifications to the draft LPS8 and LPS. Use’ (number 15 in Schedule 1 - Additional Uses Table) and additional specific conditions under the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (A) Previous submission of Scheme and Local Planning Strategy should be considered.
Prior to the preparation of the draft LPS8 and LPS, the landowner engaged This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Harley Dykstra Pty Ltd (formerly Harley Global Pty Ltd) to prepare a submission Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map and Text. of the Amendment No. 38 – R Codes Omnibus Amendment of City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No. 7 (TPS7) on the proposed ‘Residential’ zone and associated coding for these lots.
A formal response was submitted which detailed the reasons for objection to any form of residential development or zoning on these lots. It would be pertinent for the City of Bunbury to review the previous submission in light of this submission as a similar objection to proposed residential zoning or uses was identified in those documents. No changes have occurred to the lots since
City of Bunbury Page 59 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission lodgement of that submission and the lots are still not suitable for any form of residential development. Attachment A provides a copy of this submission for your review and consideration.
It is recommended that the City of Bunbury reviews the previous submission and considers the submission in light of those previous matters raised, together with the additional matters as presented below.
(B) Current and Proposed Zoning
Under the existing zoning for a service station, the City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No. 7 (TPS7) identifies the following land use classes:
• ‘P’ permissible uses including ‘Caretaker Dwellings’, ‘Motor Vehicle Wash’ and ‘Service Station’;
• ‘D’ discretionary uses including ‘Fast Food Outlet’ Motor Vehicle Repair’, ‘Shop’ and ‘Telecommunications Infrastructure’.
The existing zoning and land use classes identified by the TPS7 enable commercial uses to continue on these lots subject to the relevant approvals being obtained.
The proposed zoning for ‘Residential’ by the draft LPS8 identifies the following land use classes:
• ‘P’ permissible uses including ‘Ancillary Dwelling’, ‘Bed and Breakfast’, ‘Grouped Dwelling’, ‘Home Office’ and ‘Single House’;
• ‘D’ discretionary use including ‘Home Occupation’, ‘Multiple Dwelling’, ‘Single Bed Dwelling’ and ‘Telecommunications Infrastructure’;
• ‘A; discretionary uses including ‘Aged or Dependent Persons’ Complex’, Child Care Premises’, ‘Civic Use’, Club Premises’, Community Purpose’, ‘Consulting Rooms’, Family Day Care’, ‘Home Business’, ‘Place of Worship’ and ‘Residential Building’;
City of Bunbury Page 60 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• ‘X’ uses including ‘Caretakers Dwelling’, ‘Fast Food Outlet’, ‘Convenience Store’, ‘Lunch Bar’, ‘Medial Centre’, ‘Motor Vehicle boat or Caravan Sales’, ‘Motor Vehicle Repair’, Motor Vehicle Wash’, ‘Office’, ‘Restaurant/Café, ‘Serviced Apartment’, ‘Service Station’ and ‘Shop’.
The proposed zoning and land uses identified by the draft LPS8 provide limited opportunities for the commercial uses that would be deemed suitable on these lots given its current environmental condition.
At this stage, there has been potential environmental risk associated with soil and groundwater contamination on and offsite and any future residential development on these lots would be deemed unacceptable until such time further investigations, assessments and/or remediation are completed and the relevant clearances are received from the DER. These comments are further detailed in Attachment B provided by ABEC Environmental Consulting (environmental consultant) and Presna Pty Ltd (The Auditor).
Therefore this submission is requesting the City of Bunbury to include an Additional Use for these lots in Schedule 1, Table 4 (A.U.15) (refer to Attachment C) to enable future commercial uses on these lots until such time the environmental investigations, assessments and/or remediation are completed and subsequent clearances and Contaminated Sites classifications are received for the DER for these lots.
(C) Lots Current Contaminated Site Classification
According the DER Contaminated Sites register, both lots have been classified as ‘Contaminated – Remediation Required’. This classification requires that before any development shall occur, further environmental investigations, assessments and/or remediation will need to be undertaken to satisfy the provisions of the Contaminated Sites Act and associated regulations.
The City of Bunbury Environmental Services is aware of the offsite groundwater contamination impact on their land immediately south of the lots as well as the two neighbouring properties along Spencer Street. Until such time that the relevant statutory environmental investigations and assessments are completed
City of Bunbury Page 61 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission to address the on and offsite groundwater and soil impacts, no residential development shall be permitted on these lots. Reclassification of these lots and those affected lots will not occur until such time these investigations and assessments are completed and signed off by the DER.
Therefore this submission is requesting the City of Bunbury seriously considers the proposed recommendation to the draft Scheme and draft LPS (eg. Inclusion of Additional Use (A.U.15) until such time the DER reclassifies these lots to enable residential uses).
(D) Current Status of Environmental Investigations, Assessments and/or Remediation
As identified above, until such time the relevant statutory environmental investigations and assessments are completed in accordance with the Contaminated Sites Act and associated regulations, no residential land uses are suitable on these lots.
The project is expected to have a better understanding of the environmental conditions of these lots by mid-2017 with the completion of another round of groundwater monitoring and soil investigation, both on and off site. Until such time, both ABEC Environmental Consulting and Presna Pty Ltd who are currently engaged for this project have indicated that commercial uses would be most suitable to uses to be developed in the short term as opposed to residential ones. They do acknowledge that residential uses may be foreseeable in the future but this is subject to further expenditure and additional investigations, assessments and/or remediation measures which have yet to be confirmed from the current environmental investigations and assessments being undertaken to date. Attached are the preliminary email comments from ABEC Environmental Consulting and Presna Pty Ltd regarding the current status of the project (refer to Attachment B).
Therefore as raised in point C above, it is requested the City of Bunbury considers the proposed recommendation to the draft Scheme and draft LPS to enable commercial uses as opposed to residential ones until such time a reclassification of these lots has been received from the DER.
City of Bunbury Page 62 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
(E) Commercial Land Uses Suitable for Lots
As presented in points A to D above, there are many reasons for why the City of Bunbury should reconsider identifying these lots for ‘Residential’ uses to enable commercial uses to continue of these lots.
The City of Bunbury should be advised that the landowner has been approached for either the sale or lease of these lots from commercial developers seeking to invest into uses such as a service station, shop, convenience, motor vehicle wash and fast food outlets. Obviously these commercial developers are cautious of the environmental conditions currently experienced on and offsite, however given the environmental consultant and Auditor have been working toward achieving a commercial use of these lots, this has made investors consider their options more favourably for future commercial uses on these lots.
The City of Bunbury should also be informed that in the event that a ‘Residential’ use remains identified on these lots, this will not only restrict the types of commercial uses these investors are currently seeking but the future cost to construct and implement residential development could be substantial. The remediation or further investigations or assessment costs will not be available until 2017 pending the completion of the environmental investigations and assessments being undertaken to date.
Given the lots have yet to obtain the relevant environmental clearances from the DER and the landowner is required by the Contaminated Sites Act and associated regulations to address the on and offsite contamination, it is important for the City of Bunbury to also understand that no residential development will be considered acceptable under the current environmental condition of these lots. Preliminary discussions with Lomas Capellie (DER Contaminated Sites Branch) (November 2016), he advised that no residential uses would be supported on these lots until the final reports are received in 2017 and the DER has had the opportunity to determine and reclassify these lots accordingly.
Based on the abovementioned, we are requesting the City of Bunbury to
City of Bunbury Page 63 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission consider the inclusion of an Additional Use for the abovementioned lots. This would be included in Schedule 1 under Table 4 as depicted in Attachment C. The Additional Use table identifies those commercial uses suitable on these lots and identifies the Local Development Plan, traffic impact assessment and separation buffer assessments that may be necessary for completion for future development proposal on these lots.
We respectively request that the City of Bunbury undertakes modifications to the draft LPS8 to reflect the Additional Uses proposed and updates the draft LPS with reference to commercial uses on these lots not residential ones.
In summary we are requesting the City of Bunbury considers the abovementioned matters and implements the following modifications to the draft LPS8 and draft LPS:
1. Includes the Additional Use (A.U.15) (refer to Attachment C)
2. Identifies commercial uses on these lots and disregards residential uses;
3. Acknowledge that until such time Contaminated Sites reclassifications are received for these lots that commercial uses are deemed to be the most suitable uses;
4. Acknowledge the technical responses from the ABEC Environmental Consulting and Presna Pty Ltd regarding the current environmental condition of these lots; and
5. Acknowledge that from an economic perspective the imposition of residential uses on these lots will impose financial risks for any future home builder on thee lots, until such time confirmation of these risk can be determined pending final reports being received by the DER in 2017.
We respectively request your consideration of the proposed Additional use for these lots. The lots current environmental condition will not be suitable for residential uses and until further investigations, assessments and/or remediation and reclassification for any other use than commercial purposes is received by the DER, these lots should remain for commercial uses only.
City of Bunbury Page 64 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The abovementioned submission clearly details our objection to the Residential zoning or use as proposed by the draft LPS8 and draft LPS and we trust the City of Bunbury will undertake the relevant modifications to this document to enable commercial uses to continue on these lots.
[Attachment A – Submission on Amendment No. 38 – R Codes Omnibus Amendment]
Attachment B – Preliminary Comments from ABEC Environmental Consulting and Presna Pty Ltd
ABEC Environmental Consulting
1. The site is currently classified under the CS Act (2003) as Contaminated- Remediation Required and the DER have indicated that the Site is presently considered unsuitable for any use.
2. Investigations to date have relied upon the present zoning of the Site (Service Station) to determine appropriate contamination assessment criteria. In this respect the generic assessment criteria that have been selected to copare contaminant concentrations from the site are for ‘Commerical/Industrial’ landuse, as is appropriate in accordance with the DER contaminated sites guidelines.
The Commercial/Industrial landuse criteria allow for assessment of the human health risk from the contaminant substances based to adult workers exposed during a 40 hour week. This scenario tolerates greater concentrations of potentially harmful substances compared to the relevant ‘Residential’ assessment criteria. The ‘Residential’ assessment criteria consider the risk to adults, children and infants who spend the majority of their time at the residence, with potential access to soil and produce. Consequently the safe concentrations of contaminant substances acceptable under the residential criteria are much lower than is acceptable under the commercial/industrial criteria.
On this basis, it can be seen that if the site is subjected to a change in zoning to a more sensitive use, much of the investigation data would be required to be
City of Bunbury Page 65 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission revised to consider the human health risk resulting from a more sensitive landuse.
Furthermore, it may lead to additional, unforeseen costs for the remediation at the Site, as a greater amount of contaminated media (soil, groundwater and or soil vapour) may need to be treated to a greater extend, to achieve the lower contaminant concentrations that will be acceptable for residential use (compared to commercial use).
3. It should be noted by Eversley and the Site Owner, that the recent soil vapour investigation results indicate that the concentrations are below the acceptable Residential assessment criteria for soil vapour intrusion. Notwithstanding, these results do not imply that the Site is suitable for residential use, and further investigations and most likely remediation are required to amend the contaminated site classification.
Presna Pty Ltd
We note the findings of the recent soil vapour monitoring by ABEC Environmental concluded a low vapour inhalation risk for a proposed commercial development (no basement scenario) at the site.
Whilst the soil vapour monitoring also reported concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons below the adopted health screening levels for a residential land use setting, it is noted that remnant petroleum hydrocarbon impacts were reported in soil and groundwater beneath the site in excess of the adopted health screening levels (residential land use setting). Therefore, currently the soil and groundwater data suggests that the site may not be suitable for a residential land use setting.
However, it is understood that a Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) has been proposed by ABEC Environmental which will take into consideration the soil, soil vapour and groundwater data collected from the site and surrounds. The HHRA will aid in the assessment of site suitability for the proposed commercial development at the side and/or residential use (if required).
As indicated previously, the Auditor intends to engage his expert support team
City of Bunbury Page 66 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission member (Human Toxicology) to review the ABEC Environmental Soil Vapour Assessment report and HHRA (when available) and to provide expert advice to support (or otherwise) the position of the Auditor in his recommendation to the WA DER regarding classification of the site and affected sites.
Attachment C – Schedule 1, Table 4
No Description Additional Use Conditions of Land A.U.15 Lots 3 and 4 The following land use Office and Shop Uses Floor Blair Street, classes are listed as Space restrictions South discretionary ‘D’ uses: Bunbury Sum total of Office use per Convenience Store lot (including strata or survey strata lot) is limited Office to a maximum of 200sqm Shop net lettable area (nla) Consulting Rooms Sum total of Shop use per lot (including strata or The following land use survey strata lot) is limited classes are listed as to a maeximum of 30sqm permitted ‘A’ uses: nla Fast Food Outlet Contaminated Sites Act and Motor Vehicle Regulations Wash Residential uses are not Service Station permitted on the lots until such time the site is reclassified by Restaurant/Café the DER Contaminated Sites Branch to enable such land Medical Centre uses to occur. Future development proposals shall have due regard to the Contaminated Sites Act and associated regulations. Local Development Plan (a) The local government shall require the preparation and
City of Bunbury Page 67 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission submission of a Local Development Plan for the development site to be approved prior to any development approval being granted; (b) The Local Development Plan may include information or detail dealing with, but not limited to the following: a. Provisions / requirements for development site planning (including building envelopes), building design and scale; b. Buffer treatments between the surrounding residential uses and the development site; c. Urban design treatments of streetscapes and residential interfaces; d. Traffic management, including accessways and internal circulation; e. Vehicle parking and circulation areas and treatments; f. Building height and scale g. Development setbacks from boundaries; h. Landscaping within setback areas and between buildings; and i. Stormwater management plan Prior to any development
City of Bunbury Page 68 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission application being submitted to the City of Bunbury the applicant may be required to prepare and submit the following reports or supporting assessments with a development proposal for commercial related uses only. These may include but not necessarily limited to the following: (a) Preparation of buffer assessment to address any insensitive land uses to existing residential properties. This assessment shall be prepared in close consultation with the DER and consideration of the Separation Distances between Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses No. 3 policy; and (b) Preparation of traffic assessment to address access and traffic congestions associated with future land uses on the lots. This assessment shall be prepared in close consultation with Main Roads Western Australia and the local government. Access and drainage shall be in accordance with the specifications of Main Roads Western Australia and the local government. Amalgamation of these lots shall be considered for future development proposals.
City of Bunbury Page 69 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
34 Robert Nicholson Objection The following comments on the submissions pertain to those land use planning and development matters that can be statutorily addressed Regarding Regional Centre Zoning PO Box 562, BUNBURY within the scope of a Local Planning Scheme.4 WA 6230 1. Zoning Table In regards to the Zoning Table, the new ‘Regional Centre Zone’ (DOC/290810) enables a wide range of land uses to be permitted within what is a More users should be permitted (P uses) and I would suggest the following densifying and complex mixed use environment as a central business changes: district (CBD). Therefore, in order to facilitate a healthy and Use TPS8 Submission Reason productive city centre, there remains the need to provide an Proposal recommendation appropriate level of assessment in order to manage inevitable risks resulting from land use conflicts. Ancillary Dwelling D P Should be fully acceptable uses in all Bed & Breakfast D P cases. The discretionary ‘D’ level of consideration is applied to those land Caretakers dwelling X P uses that are either sensitive uses proposed in locations that could Every hotel has a compromise the economic viability of an existing non-residential Hotel D P caretakers (managers) development; or conversely, are non-residential uses proposed in dwelling. Motel D P locations that could impact on the liveability of an established residential development. Residential building D P Tavern D P In most cases, risks can be managed through good urban design and building architecture that incorporates practical engineering and 2. Height technological solutions, which can be conditioned as part of any development approval. It is suggested the height contour in the Regional Centre zone has no particular relevance apart from an attractive graduation of height once the scheme is fully In the case of a ‘caretaker’s dwelling’ in a ‘hotel’ (or any other short- realized. term / tourism accommodation use), this can be treated as being ancillary and incidental to the rest of the development, especially It would be preferable to return to the no-height restriction of TPS No6, and TPS where the caretaker’s dwelling forms an integral part of the building No7 (prior to amendment) for the following reasons: (i.e. is one of the units). 1. Large sites are more appropriate for increased height of development, much In relation to building height, it is proposed that this parameter of the core shown as 50m height are small lots, and will be impractical for these remains a matter of policy regulation, which enables a performance heights. based flexible approach that balances the proponent’s desire to maximise their development potential (further incentivised by the 2. Using the full Regional centre zone for increased height might improve the
4 Refer to ‘Schedule 7 - Matters which may be dealt with by planning scheme’ of the Planning and Development Act 2005.
City of Bunbury Page 70 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission chance of a building occurring. It is all about land ownership, and being able to new Scheme’s plot ratio bonuses) with community’s concerns obtain an appropriate site for development. regarding the impact of unchecked building height on overshadowing, loss of view sheds, etc. 3. There is no economic model on why the arbitrary heights of 7.5m, 9m, 12m... 50m have been set, or environmental for that matter. With respect to car parking, this is not a zone in the existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7, the provisions for which are set out under 3. Carparking Part 4 of the draft Scheme dealing with general development requirements. The Car Parking Table in the draft Local Planning It is disappointing that carparking has been dropped off as a zone, and this must Scheme No. 8 was reviewed based on the comprehensive amendment relate to how the City sees the relevance of carparking. work undertaken for the existing Scheme in 2011 (Scheme Amendment 33). Paid meterage has destroyed the commercial centre of Bunbury. The new Car Parking Table has nevertheless been rationalised, with Given the choice, people are tending to shop at the Forum, Eaton, the Plaza and the following examples of reduced requirements: Busselton where paid parking is not a feature. Land Use TPS7 LPS8 Someone, hopefully a planner, looks at what is happening in Victoria Street – Class the total lack of usage at the northern end, and the desertion at times which Fast Food 1 bay per 4 seats or 1 bay • 1 bay per 15 square used to be busy, and suggest policy changes to Council. Outlet per 5 square metres of nla metres of nla; plus of buildings and outdoor • a car queuing area areas used for public dining, The City has not honoured a basic obligation to the Bunbury population – a City sufficient to whichever is the greater; should step up to allow the potential of the City to grow. Bunbury City town accommodate 10 cars plus planning policy in the Regional Centre zone has tended to shut down growth. where drive through 1 bay per 15 square metres facilities are included. For example: of nla of buildings and outdoor areas used for i) In 2008, the 15 or so CBD multi-storey proposals for planning approval were storage, food preparation, not granted because of confusion over height policy. services and administration; plus ii) The previously easy access around the City – Ocean Drive and Blair Street a car queuing area have had lanes reduced, the main southern feed to the City at Spencer Street sufficient to accommodate was constricted because of target and no attempt has been made to rectify 5 cars where drive through these basic vehicular access problems. facilities are included, as determined by the Local Government. iii) The City has not honoured the obligation to provide adequate public City parking. Hotel 1 bay per 2 square metres • 1 bay per bedroom or of nla used for bar area; accommodation unit;
City of Bunbury Page 71 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission plus plus iv) Western Power and fire service provision needs an enhanced infrastructure. 1 bay per 4 square metres • 1 bay per 15 square v) No work done to improve the City centre – for example making Victoria of nla used for lounge or metres nla of floorspace Street more accessible to rear ROWs and carparking areas. garden area; plus other than that used for accommodation 1 bay per 4 seats or 1 bay purposes; plus vi) Disregard to the loss of street carparking bays. per 5 square metres of nla used for dining, reception • a car queuing area vii) A general loss of prestige, with examples of sea containers and graffiti on or assembly area, sufficient to public building have demeaned the aesthetics of the City. whichever is the greater; accommodate 5 cars plus where drive through facilities are included. This has happened at a time when carparking requirements proposed in TPS 1 bay per 15 square metres No8 will ensure little development will occur for the following reasons: of nla used for storage, food preparation, services Few Current Buildings comply with new carparking requirements and administration; plus 1 bay per bedroom or Most relevant buildings in the CBD are over 500m² therefore carparking accommodation unit; plus requirements need to be met which are substantially higher than previously a car queuing area required. sufficient to accommodate 5 cars where drive through For example: facilities are included, as determined by the Local 1. Office Previous 50m² = 1 bay, Proposed 30m² = 1 bay Government. Market 1 bay per 20 square metres 1 bay per 30 square metres Because there was no carparking requirement for areas below 3,000 then of nla of buildings and of nla of premises used for 2,000m², very few current buildings would comply with the new carparking outdoor areas used for market purposes. requirement. Hence, any change of use, will mean a stalement, and market purposes, but with development will not happen. a minimum of not less than 5 bays, whichever is the No inter-changeability of uses greater. Office 1 bay per 30 square metres 1 bay per 30 square metres The City has missed a very basic opportunity to ensure uses are interchangeable of nla, but with a minimum of nla. – allowing for dynamic change in the RCZ. To do this, carparking for all uses of not less than 5 bays, could be set at 1 bay per 90m². To determine this figure gross floor areas are whichever is the greater. divided by total car bays available, and then set as a basic standard. Restaurant / 1 bay per 2 square metres 1 bay per 15 square metres Café of nla used for bar area; of nla. At the very least, in Councils imperfect world, Offices, Restaurants and Shops plus could be set at 1 bay per 50m². This will ensure inter-changeability of use for
City of Bunbury Page 72 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
these majority uses. A statement should be added into the RCZ “that existing 1 bay per 4 square metres buildings shall be credited with car bays relevant to their existing use (even if of nla used for lounge or not physically on site), to enable redevelopment to proceed.” garden area; plus 1 bay per 4 seats or 1 bay 4 Need for a Planning Committee per 5 square metres of nla used for dining, reception The Scheme should acknowledge and set up the mechanisms which will needed or assembly area, to implement SPP7 – Apartment Design. In effect a Planning Committee is whichever is the greater; needed, charged with reviewing design quality of planning applications. A plus planning committee is vital for Bunbury to get out of the destructive culture of 1 bay per 15 square metres having planners with little local background or knowledge deciding the planning of nla used for storage, future. Planning decisions can not be taken at an executive level, particularly food preparation, services when there is no established administrative culture. and administration; plus a car queuing area 5. Disappearance of Substance from the Scheme Text sufficient to accommodate 5 bays where drive through It is regretful that policies are not incorporated into the Scheme Text. What this facilities are included, as means is that there is little surety for a developer, as a Council may change determined by the Local policies within a 3 month period – even during a submission period!! Government. Shop 1 bay per 20 square metres 1 bay per 20 square metres It is preferable to have a coherent set of policies integrated into the Scheme of nla, but with a minimum of nla. Text, with an appendix notation. We are basically being asked to review a of not less than 5 bays, proposed Scheme without knowing the actual policies or being alerted to the whichever is the greater. problem of some policies being inconsistent or out of date with the Scheme. A Tavern 1 bay per 2 square metres • 1 bay per 15 square developer requires certainty – not to be faced with a list of ‘D’ uses, or of nla used for bar area; metres of nla; plus changeable policy, remote from the Scheme Text. plus • a car queuing area 1 bay per 4 square metres sufficient to of nla used for lounge or accommodate 5 cars garden area; plus where drive through facilities are included. 1 bay per 4 seats or 1 bay per 5 square metres of nla used for dining, reception or assembly area, whichever is the greater; plus 1 bay per 15 square metres
City of Bunbury Page 73 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission of nla used for storage, food preparation, services and administration; plus a car queuing area sufficient to accommodate 5 bays where drive through facilities are included, as determined by the Local Government.
Measures such as not requiring the provision of onsite car parking for new development or changes of use that are less than 500m² in gross floor area per lot (strata lot or survey strata lot) within the ‘Regional Centre Zone’ will remain in the new Scheme. Additional relaxations for new development larger than 500m² gfa remain extant in the adopted Local Planning Policy: Access & Parking for Pedestrians, Bicycles and Vehicles.
In relation to the concept of a single car parking rate for all or a sub- set of land uses permitted in the ‘Regional Centre Zone’ (i.e. to accommodate changing tenancies and adaptive reuse of buildings), it is suggested that the feasibility of such an approach should be properly investigated, and that this work should form part of the scope of a future review of the CBD parking strategy.
In relation to the format and content of the draft Scheme, it is advised that all new Schemes are compulsorily based upon the model provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. By being one of the first to review its Scheme in accordance with new Regulations, the City of Bunbury has made a positive contribution to the Department of Planning’s post implementation review of the Regulations and subsequent amendment.
With respect to local planning policies and their relationship to the draft Scheme, it can be advised that the new Regulations have ushered in a fundamental change to the statutory weighting given to policies. As they are now a recognised planning instrument, the local
City of Bunbury Page 74 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission government in making a determination under its new Scheme must have regard to each relevant local planning policy to the extent that the policy is consistent with the Scheme.
The procedure for making, amending and revoking local planning policies is set out in Part 2 of the deemed provisions. The City of Bunbury maintains a rolling policy review programme, with the goal of continually reviewing its suite of local planning polices in step with changes in legislation, technologies, community expectations, socio- economic and environmental conditions. It can be expected that with the gazettal of the draft Scheme there will be a need (and opportunity) to further reform a refined set of local planning policies in order of priority.
35 Large Format Retail Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text) Association 1.0 Introduction During the finalisation of the draft Scheme for public advertising, the City of Bunbury raised with the Department of Planning that the Phillipa Kelly (Chief The Large Format Retail Association (LFRA) welcomes the opportunity to make a definition of the ‘bulky goods showroom’ land use class in the current Executive Officer) submission on the draft ‘Local Planning Scheme No. 8’ (‘LPS8’) released for model provisions contained minor but critical flaws that would have public comment by the City of Bunbury (City). The LFRA is striving for a planning major/strategic implications for the: PO Box 78, Balwyn and zoning regime across Australia that provides the industry with clarity, North VIC 3104 economic viability of Bunbury’s regional centre and the rest of the consistency and certainty. activity centre hierarchy; (DOC/291519) The LFRA has enthusiastically welcomed recent Western Australian planning the efficient provision of infrastructure services; and reforms to introduce new model land use definitions for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and ‘Trade Supplies’ via the ‘Planning and Development (Local distortion of activity centre and industrial zoned land values and Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015’. The LFRA continues to work closely with operations. the Department of Planning and Western Australian Planning Commission to improve the clarity, consistency and certainty of Western Australian planning Based on the current model provisions definition, a ‘bulky goods regimes as they apply to the Large Format Retail. showroom’ use need not actually sell any of the categories of goods specified in part (a) of the definition, due to the word ‘or’ which In addition to its work at a state level, the LFRA is also proactively engaging with precedes part (b) of the definition. To be considered a bulky goods local planning authorities to promote and achieve greater clarity, consistency showroom selling retail goods, premises need only be one of the and certainty within and across local planning frameworks. This engagement following (due to the second ‘or’ which precedes (ii) under subclause with local government is critical, given many of the issues facing Large Format (b)): Retail are principally concerned with land use definitions, zonings and the ‘or
City of Bunbury Page 75 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
permissibility of certain land uses under the statutory provisions of local (b) used to sell by retail goods and accessories by retail if - planning schemes. (i) a large area is required for the handling, display 2.0 The Large Format Retail Association (LFRA) or storage of the goods; or
The LFRA is Australia’s peak body representing the interests of its membership (ii) vehicular access is required to the premises for base, being Large Format Retailers, investors, owners, developers and service the purpose of collection of purchased goods; suppliers. Its vision is to encourage, develop and foster awareness of the Large Format Retail industry in Australia. Although it would be completely against all reasonable planning intent, it can be considered that arguably any ‘large’ retail shop could Retail members of the LFRA comprise some of Australia’s largest and respected be regarded as falling within the bulky goods showroom definition, Large Format Retailers, including the 62 individual business brands listed in the particularly several types of major retail anchors, for example: following table: department store; ABS Automotive Service Domayne Petbarn discount department store; or Centres Early Settler PETstock supermarket. Adairs Fantastic Furniture Pillow Talk Adairs Kids The draft Scheme corrected these identified flaws in the ‘bulky goods Forty Winks Plush showroom’ definition by making the following minor modifications: Amart Sports Freedom POCO Anaconda ‘and - Goldcross Cycles Provincial Home Living Autopro Guests Furniture Hire Ray’s Outdoors (b) used to sell by wholesale or retail, or hire, goods and Autobarn accessories if - Harvey Norman Rebel Babies R Us IKEA Recollections (i) a large area is required for the handling, display Baby Bunting or storage of the goods of a bulky nature; and JB Hi-Fi Sleepys Barbeques Galore JB Hi-Fi Home Snooze (ii) vehicular access is required to the premises for Bay Leather Republic the purpose of collection of purchased goods; Joyce Mayne SPACE BCF Kitchen Warehouse Spotlight but - Beacon Lighting Le Cornu Suite Deals (c) does not include a shop.’ Beaumont Tiles Lincraft Super A-Mart Bedshed The draft Scheme definition is therefore more consistent with the Masters Home Supercheap Auto intent of State Planning Policy 4.2 Activity Centres for Perth and Peel Bunnings Improvement The Good Guys and the WAPC’s Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy (April
City of Bunbury Page 76 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Bursons Midas Auto Service Toys R Us 2012). As such, the Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy states Experts that bulky goods retailing is to comply with the following: City Farmers Urban Home Republic National Tiles Costco (1) In general, bulky goods retail (defined in Appendix 1) is Officeworks unsuited to the walkable catchment or the core of Curtain Wonderland activity centres given their size and car-parking Original Mattress Factory Decathlon requirements, low employment densities and need for OZ Design Furniture freight vehicle access.
The LFRA is supported by its Patron, PwC, and the following 69 Associate (2) Bulky goods are displayed and sold from retail members that comprise of Large Format Retail developers, investors, owners showrooms that typically comprise extensive display and and service suppliers: storage areas with direct vehicle access and car parking. Bulky goods retailing does not include the sale of food, ACTON Commercial DOME Property Group McMullin Group clothing or personal effects goods. ADCO Constructions Eureka Home Maker Morgans Financial Limited Centre (3) The responsible authority should promote clusters of Aeris Environmental Newmark Capital Limited bulky goods retail adjacent to, or in close proximity to Excel Development Group Aigle Royal Properties Philips Lighting activity centres and the regional road and public Gazcorp transport networks. This should maximise the use of ALTIS Property Partners Primewest Gibb Group infrastructure, including the shared use of car parking; Arise Developments Properties & Pathways limit the number of car trips; and economically support Gibbens Group Arkadia QIC other activity centre business. Gregory Hills Corporate Avalon Airport Ray White Retail Park (4) The encroachment of bulky goods retail into residential Aventus Property Realmark Commercial zones should be avoided. Furthermore, locating such Griffin Group development in an ad hoc manner or as ribbon AXIMA Logistics REST Industry Super HLC Constructions development along regional roads is discouraged. Bulky AXIOM Properties Limited RPS Australia Asia Pacific goods retail should be developed with access and urban Home Consortium design controls so as not to interfere with traffic flow BLIX Savills Humich Group and safety, or detract from the amenity of public BWP Trust Sentinel Property Group Jana Group of Companies transport or the locality. Blueprint S.B. Investments JBA (5) Local planning schemes and planning decision-making Burgess Rawson SI Retail JLL for bulky goods retail should include consideration of CarbonetiX StarTrack land requirements based on demonstrated future Johns Lyng Group floorspace needs and the need to retain affordable CBRE Terrace Tower Group JV Property Management industrial land. Colliers International The Buchan Group
City of Bunbury Page 77 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Comac Retail Property Lander & Rogers Lawyers TIC Group (6) The preferred sequence of suitable locations is: Group LaSalle Investments 151 Property I. edge-of-centre sites integrated with, but not Cornwall Stodart LEDA Holdings Vaughan Constructions within, the walkable catchment or core activity Cushman & Wakefied centre precincts; Leedwell Property Vend Property CV Signage Solutions Leffler Simes Architects Virtus Insurance Brokers II. where it is demonstrated that sufficient suitable Deep End Services sites in or adjacent to activity centres are not Mainbrace Constructions available, out-of-centre mixed business or Major Media equivalent zones integrated with established and well-located bulky-goods nodes; and The LFRA is committed to supporting continued appropriate business expansion based on the current and projected economic growth in both population and III. in limited circumstances where it is demonstrated new home ownership throughout Australia. Our members provide the essential that sufficient suitable sites in or adjacent to ‘homemaker’ goods and services to support this growth and are arguably the activity centres or within or integrated with most affected by planning regulations that govern this market sector. existing bulky-goods nodes are not available, other out-of centre mixed business or equivalent The LFRA is a key stakeholder in planning and zoning laws that regulate this zones. market sector; we are actively involved across Australia in numerous reviews of planning policy and planning regulations that affect our industry. The Department of Planning acknowledged the identified flaws in the present model provisions definition for ‘bulky goods showroom’, The Large Format Retail industry in Australia is facing difficulties as a direct which is why the department allowed for the City’s draft Scheme to result of planning and zoning legislation across Australia. The LFRA is striving for be publicly advertised with the appropriate modifications in line with a planning and zoning regime across Australia that provides the industry with the intent of the State Planning Framework. clarity, consistency and certainty. This modification specifically links the need for a large area and 3.0 Economic Overview vehicular access requirement to the well‐established range of retail categories currently accepted to be showrooms, when implemented The Large Format Retail sector is an important employment generator. in a large format. Nationally, the Large Format Retail sector employs more than 425,500 (FTE) people both directly and indirectly. In Western Australia (WA), the sector Critically the proposed minor modification to part (b) of the definition employs more than 51,400 (FTE) people both directly and indirectly. also addresses the fact that Bunbury, with its large primary and secondary industry base, caters for many businesses that provide The Large Format retail market has, in recent times, been the fastest growing goods (by wholesale, retail or hire) that are principally used for sector in the retail market. This can be attributed to a variety of reasons commercial or industrial purposes. In addition, regardless of the type including: of goods, this slightly modified clause also amplifies the fact that the land use class of ‘bulky goods showroom’ remains principally for • The increase in demand for ‘do-it-yourself’ home improvement products;
City of Bunbury Page 78 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission goods of a bulky nature, consistent with the historically sound • The home renovation market; application of the ‘showroom’ definition. • The technology revolution has provided a substantial increase in new The City is awaiting the outcomes of the Commission’s own consumer products and the obsolescence of traditional household goods; deliberations on the matter, when it determines what if any changes it wishes to make to the ‘bulky goods showroom’ definition proposed • Shopping has evolved into a leisure and lifestyle experience for many in the department’s post implementation review of the Planning and Australian families, particularly in relation to household goods expenditure; Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. As it can be expected that the outcome of this process will confirm what the final • Increased supply of Large Format/homemaker retail facilities and the definition of ‘bulky goods showroom’ will be in the new Scheme. provision of choice, convenience and competition provided by this increase in supply; and With respect to the appropriateness of permitting ‘shop’ and ‘restaurant/café’ uses in the ‘Service Commercial Zone’, it must first • The emergence of the green market due to climate change. be acknowledged that the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ objectives are:
The market for Large Format/homemaker retail products is estimated to • To accommodate commercial activities which, because of continue its current growth particularly in response to the planned increase in the nature of the business, require good vehicular access population and number of new households planned for Australian capital cities and/or large sites. up to 2030 and beyond. • To provide for a range of wholesale sales, showrooms, trade The LFRA is committed to continue business expansion in Australia based on the and services which, by reason of their scale, character, current and projected economic growth. Our members provide the essential operational or land requirements, are not generally ‘homemaker’ goods and services to support this growth. appropriate in, or cannot conveniently or economically be accommodated in the regional centre, other activity centres In 2016, the Large Format Retail sector generated more than $66 billion in sales. or industrial zones. The sector accounts for 23.3% of total retail sales in WA, or more than $1 out of every $5 in sales generated by WA’s retail industry. However, the uncertainty A cursory appreciation of the above objectives by a reasonable person and difficulties faced when delivering Large Format Retail floorspace in WA can should recognise that permitting ‘shop’ and ‘restaurant/café’ uses in result in an under-supply in the Large Format Retail sector and a missed the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ would undermine orderly and proper opportunity for additional jobs and investments. planning of the city; and when taken in conjunction with an ineffectual definition for ‘bulky goods showroom’, would effectively Improvements to the WA planning system would create more certainty for negate the zoning system. Permitting ‘shop’ and ‘restaurant/café’ Large Format Retail operators, and ensure more suitably located and zoned land uses in the ‘Service Commercial Zone’, such as in the Homemaker is made available for Large Format Retail uses, addressing this undersupply and Centre example, would expect to have far reaching and deleterious encouraging increased investment and jobs in this sector. It is important that implications for the future of the regional centre and other activity the Large Format Retail sector is supported through appropriate planning centres. frameworks so that it can continue to make a significant contribution to the WA retail economy.
City of Bunbury Page 79 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
4.0 Structural Shift in Retail In regards to the suitability of ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses as permitted ‘P’ uses in the ‘Regional Centre Zone’, it is recommended There is an undeniable structural shift in the retail market. Many influences that this type of use (unlike shop) should remain discretionary. impacting on the market are entwined; they include online sales, technological Principally because portions of the central business district (CBD) are advances including smart phones, increased travel overseas, price specialising as entertainment precincts with constrained road harmonisation, and the low value import threshold. Retail needs to be adaptive; reserves, it is prudent therefore to ensure guidance is provided on the planning and zoning laws need to provide for the flexibility to allow retailers to location and urban design of ‘bulky goods showroom’ developments. meet current and future challenges. Specifically, given that ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses are by their nature high traffic generating and require customer and service In order to compete, most of the Australian Large Format retail market is in vehicle (i.e. truck) access to the premises for the purpose of delivery urgent need of the appropriate freeing up and harmonisation of planning and and collection of purchased goods. zoning laws that impact our market. This perspective is supported by the following reports/reviews: In relation to the practicality of permitting ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses in the ‘Local Centre Zone’, it must first be appreciated that the • Federal Government’s 2015 ‘Competition Policy Review’ otherwise known as objectives of the zone are: the ‘Harper Review’; • To designate land for future development as a Local Centre. • ‘Cutting Red Tape’ regulatory reform agenda being undertaken by the Federal • To provide services for the immediate neighbourhoods, that Government; are easily accessible, which do not adversely impact on adjoining residential areas. • Productivity Commission’s 2011 inquiry into the ‘Economic Structure and Performance of the Australian Retail Industry’; • To provide for Local Centres to focus on the main daily household shopping and community needs. • Productivity Commission’s 2010 ‘Performance Benchmarking of Australian Business: Planning, Zoning and Development Assessments’; • To encourage high quality, pedestrian-friendly, street- orientated development. • Productivity Commission’s 2007 review into the ‘Market for Retail Tenancy Leases in Australia’; and • To provide a focus for medium density housing. • To ensure the design and landscaping of development • ACCC’s 2008 ‘Inquiry into the Competitiveness of Retail Prices for Standard provides a high standard of safety, convenience and Groceries’ amenity and contributes towards a sense of place and community. Particularly of note is ‘section 8.4’ in the Productivity Commission’s report on the ‘Economic Structure and Performance of the Australian Retail Industry’ • To provide a basis for future detailed planning in which we wish to draw to your attention: accordance with the structure planning provisions of this Scheme and the Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy. “…Prescriptive Local Planning Restrictions on Retailers
City of Bunbury Page 80 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
To meet evolving product market requirements, store formats must also be As such, local centres are typically situated inside of neighbourhood allowed to adapt. Restrictions on store formats impact on a retailer’s ability to cells on local distributor roads, as opposed to higher order centres adapt to new competition and changing consumer preferences within the and bulky goods showrooming precincts, which tend to be located market. between suburban areas fronting onto district/primary distributor roads. The goal of good neighbourhood design is to create The Commission’s recent benchmarking report identifies that even where neighbourhoods with a sense of enclosure and a human scale with a businesses are allowed to operate in a particular locality — because their low vehicle speed regime. business model is consistent with the overarching activity centre policy or zone description — they then face a raft of local planning restrictions. This regulatory Within their neighbourhood cells, local centres need to be designed in overlap arises because the legal framework for zones is at the state and a manner that protects the quality and amenity of their surrounding territory level, but the detailed specification of zones is at the local level. residential environment, as they are intimately imbedded with housing - ideally serving a catchment of 400 to 600 dwellings for their It is recognised that at times restrictions on competition may be required to daily convenience shopping needs, usually serviced by public achieve the objectives of the planning system, such as public amenity or transport (e.g. a bus stop) and accessed by local traffic only. In this equitable access to facilities and services. This is because commercial businesses setting ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses are by their definition are usually focused on the private costs and benefits of a development or fundamentally incompatible, and instead, the land use class of ‘shop’ planning proposal and may not necessarily consider the public environmental, performs the full range of necessary functions to satisfy the needs of social or economic costs and benefits associated with their decisions. Consistent the local community and business. with this rationale for government intervention, Stockland suggests: Likewise, the practicality of permitting ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses … local governments should focus on those issues with external impact (either in the ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’, must first be cognizant of the on the community or sites) such as traffic, servicing, noise, overshadowing objectives of the zone, which are: where such issues impact public space or adjoining site amenity. (sub. DR203, p. 3) • To facilitate development of residential and non-residential land uses in strategic locations that complements the Nonetheless, there are large numbers of prescriptive requirements which can hierarchy of designated activity centres and activity be found in approved council plans in some or all jurisdictions which appear to corridors, including the Mixed Use - Commercial Zone, with unjustifiably or needlessly restrict competition, including: a predominantly residential character and amenity that meets both the medium to higher density housing and • restrictions on business type (defined retail categories) allowed in particular employment needs of the city. zones in some council plans in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia • To facilitate the development of walkable and vibrant places: • site-specific restrictions on type and size of businesses allowed . with a distinctive sense of place that maintains a high • restrictions on business numbers (maximum) for different activities standard of urban design and amenity;
• restrictions on business size via use of floor space minimums and/or caps in all
City of Bunbury Page 81 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
states and territories, but particularly in the ACT and some councils in Victoria . with a land use mix appropriate to the role and and South Australia functions of the locality in supporting desired economic and social activity that services the needs of • restrictions on business location (zones for individual retailer types) predominantly residents; and
• restrictions on business mix (floor space ratios) . with provision of greater transit oriented development that supports the viability of public transport and other • detailed specifications on aspects such as the internal fit-out of developments, infrastructure. landscaping, advertising signage, and the minimum provision of vehicle and bicycle parking (PC 2011b). • To ensure that the scale of development and intensity of land use activity does not generate nuisances detrimental Many of these local restrictions limit business expansion opportunities and to the health, welfare and safety of residents and capacity to compete. At worst, they may even discourage or prevent some transitions sensitively into surrounding residential areas. businesses from entering the market in the first place. For example, restricting competition by placing limits on the number of a type of business that can While the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ is to provide for establish in a particular geographic area or activity centre can have a number of intensification of residential and non-residential land use activities adverse consequences. Protected from localised competitive pressure, along activity corridors that connect between high order activity incumbent businesses have greater incentive and more opportunity to charge centres (e.g. CBD to Bunbury Plaza); the purpose of the ‘Mixed Use – higher prices and/or offer a lower quality…” Residential Zone’ is to provide for a transition or buffer between the residential neighbourhoods that surround the higher intensity ‘Mixed The full report ‘Economic Structure and Performance of the Australian Retail Use – Commercial Zone’ precincts framing activity centres. Industry’ can be accessed via the following link: The extent of the ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’ is informed by the http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/retail-industry/report location of existing ‘Frame Areas’ under Local Planning Policy: Non- Residential Development within or adjoining Residential Areas. As There have been some recent initiatives in some jurisdictions, (such as Victoria such, ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses are not compatible with the and Western Australia), which have sought to overcome out-dated and rigid predominantly residential built form and character of land included in regulatory controls impeding investment in the Australian Large Format retail the ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’, and hence, permitting their sector. development in such sensitive areas would unduly impact on established amenity and quality of life of residences. Since the publication of the Large Format Retail Directory 2015/16, pleasingly, after years of advocacy by the LFRA, the WA Government has introduced new The issue of requiring structure planning of larger and more complex model definitions for ‘Bulky Goods Showrooms’ and ‘Trade Supplies’ within mixed use development sites does not have relevance to the ‘Service ‘schedule 1’ of the ‘Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Commercial Zone’ and or a direct bearing on bulky good Regulations 2015’. The model provisions are intended to guide the preparation showrooming. Instead, the requirement is recommended to be for a of new schemes or amendments to existing schemes. Any uptake and Local Development Plan, which only pertains to the development of application of these definitions within existing schemes will depend on the rate land included in a mixed use zone (modified clause 38). The modified
City of Bunbury Page 82 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission at which local governments review and introduce new planning schemes based provision has been refined accordingly: on the model provisions. The preparation, submission and approval of a local This is an important step toward achieving a planning regime for the Large development plan to the specifications and satisfaction of the Format Retail sector that provides clarity, certainty and consistency. However, local government prior to subdivision or development occurring further work is required to implement these model definitions consistently in the Mixed Use – Commercial Zone, Mixed Use – Residential across all local planning schemes in WA. Zone and Mixed Use – Tourism Zone may be required for - (a) large and complex proposals involving the development 5.0 LFRA Submission on Draft LPS8 and Local Planning Strategy or redevelopment of a lot greater than 3,000m² in area, or the amalgamation of three or more lots (whichever is 5.1 Land Use Definitions the lesser); or
The LFRA has reviewed the City’s draft ‘LPS8’ land use definitions against the (b) the extension or expansion of an existing development ‘Model Provisions’ of the ‘Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) (other than the refurbishment of an existing building) on Regulations 2015’. A side by side comparison of the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ a lot, where the proposed new development is greater and ‘Trade Supplies’ definitions is provided in the table below. than 2,000m² nla. MODEL LAND USE DEFINITION DRAFT LPS8 LAND USE DEFINITION The draft Scheme’s minimum floorspace area requirement of 200m² “…bulky goods showroom means “…bulky goods showroom means net lettable area (nla) for ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses reflects the premises - premises - current Town Planning Scheme No. 7 requirements, and respects the (a) used to sell by retail any of the goods (a) used to sell by retail any of the goods prevailing need for genuine showrooming development outcomes. It and accessories of the following types and accessories of the following types can be expected that deletion of this requirement as advocated by the that are principally used for domestic that are principally used for domestic submission, would result in ‘Service Commercial Zone’ precincts purposes - purposes - merely being developed with effectively ‘shop’ uses outside of mixed (i) automotive parts and accessories; (i) automotive parts and accessories; use areas and activity centres.
(ii) camping, outdoor and recreation (i) camping, outdoor and recreation Whereas, the draft Scheme’s maximum floorspace areas for ‘bulky goods; goods; goods showroom’ (and other specified) uses that apply to the ‘Mixed (iii) electric light fittings; (ii) electric light fittings; Use – Commercial Zone’, is to encourage true mixed use development (iv) animal supplies including equestrian (iii) animal supplies including equestrian with good urban design outcomes that promote walkability, diversity and pet goods; and pet goods; and human scale.
(v) floor and window coverings; (iv) floor and window coverings; In seeking to provide a Local Planning Framework that ensures clarity, (vi) furniture, bedding, furnishings, (v) furniture, bedding, furnishings, consistency and certainty (and flexibility) as advocated for by the fabrics, manchester and homewares; fabrics, manchester and homewares; submission – an holistic perspective must be taken in the formulation (vii) household appliances, electrical (vi) household appliances, electrical of the Strategy and its Scheme on behalf of all stakeholders over a five to 20 year timescale – not just accommodating one sector’s
City of Bunbury Page 83 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission goods and home entertainment goods; goods and home entertainment goods; immediate desire in isolation, which if catered to arbitrarily may likely (viii) party supplies; (vii) party supplies; disrupt and threaten the city’s longer term economic sustainability.
(ix) office equipment and supplies; (viii) office equipment and supplies; Nevertheless, the following are recommended changes to the draft (x) babies’ and children’s’ goods, (ix) babies’ and childrens’ goods, Scheme text that can be entertained without invalidating the aims of including play equipment and including play equipment and the Scheme and its zoning objectives: accessories; accessories; making the ‘bulky goods showroom’ land use class a permitted ‘P’ (xi) sporting, cycling, leisure, fitness (x) sporting, cycling, leisure, fitness use in the Zoning Table within the ‘Neighbourhood Centre Zone’. goods and accessories; goods and accessories; making ‘bulky goods showroom’ a discretionary ‘D’ use in the (xii) swimming pools; (xi) swimming pools; ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’. or and - making both ‘bulky goods showroom’ and ‘trade supplies’ land use (b) used to sell by retail goods and (b) used to sell by wholesale or retail, or classes permitted ‘P’ uses in the Zoning Table within the ‘Light accessories by retail if - hire, goods and accessories if - Industry Zone’. (i) a large area is required for the (i) a large area is required for the handling, display or storage of the goods; handling, display or storage of the goods These recommendations have been captured in the Schedule of or of a bulky nature; and Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text. (ii) vehicular access is required to the (ii) vehicular access is required to the premises for the purpose of collection of premises for the purpose of collection of purchased goods; purchased goods; But – (c) does not include a Shop.
MODEL LAND USE DEFINITION DRAFT LPS8 LAND USE DEFINITION “…trade supplies means premises used “…trade supplies means premises used to sell by wholesale or retail, or to hire, to sell by wholesale or retail, or to hire, assemble or manufacture any materials, assemble or manufacture any materials, tools, equipment, machinery or other tools, equipment, machinery or other goods used for the following purposes goods used for the following purposes including goods which may be assembled including goods which may be assembled or manufactured off the premises — or manufactured off the premises - (a) automotive repairs and servicing; (a) automotive repairs and servicing; (b) building including repair and (b) building including repair and
City of Bunbury Page 84 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission maintenance; maintenance; (c) industry; (c) industry; (d) landscape gardening; (d) landscape gardening; (e) provision of medical services; (e) provision of medical services; (f) primary production; (f) primary production; (g) use by government departments or (g) use by government departments or agencies, including local government…” agencies, including local government...”
The draft ‘LPS8’ definition for ‘Trade Supplies’ is consistent with the ‘Model Provisions’, and is therefore supported by the LFRA. Conversely, the draft ‘LPS8’ definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ is inconsistent with the ‘Model Provisions’ and is strongly opposed by the LFRA, for the following reasons.
Legislative Requirements
‘Section 257A subsection (2)’ of the ‘Planning and Development Act 2005’ requires that:
“…Subject to subsection (3), a local planning scheme prepared or adopted by a local government must include any model provisions that –
(a) are prescribed by regulations in force at the time the scheme is approved under section 87; and
(b) apply to the scheme.
‘Subsection (3)’ of the same section provides that:
“…When approving a local planning scheme under section 87, the Minister may approve the exclusion from, or variation in, the scheme of a model provision…”
The effect of ‘section 257A’ of the ‘Act’ is that the ‘Model Provisions’ (including land use definitions) must be included in ‘LPS8’ unless the Minister approves the exclusion. The draft ‘LPS8’ documentation does not address or provide any justification for the proposed variations to the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’
City of Bunbury Page 85 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission definition, and as such, are not supported by the LFRA and should not be supported by the Council or Minister for Planning.
Impracticality and Restrictiveness
The use of ‘and’ instead of ‘or’ in the draft ‘LPS8’ definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition is impractical and overly restrictive. The requirement to satisfy both parts ‘(a)’ and ‘(b)’ limits the application of the definition (contrary to the intent and purpose of the model definition) and does not provide for showrooms which may require large areas for display and/or direct vehicle access but do not fall under the prescribed list of standard ‘Bulky Goods Showrooms’.
Additionally, the requirement that both elements of part ‘(b)’ of the ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition be satisfied is unrealistic and onerous. It does not consider circumstances such as kitchen showrooms where large areas for display are required, but where customers may not necessarily be taking products directly home with them. Nor does it contemplate premises such as carpet showrooms which may be able to hang and stack carpets to minimise display area, but where the products sold are bulky and cumbersome and would necessitate direct access for customer loading.
Unnecessary Elements
The ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition under draft ‘LPS8’ also states that the land use does not include a ‘Shop’. This statement is considered to be unnecessary, given any proposal for development is to be categorised under the most appropriate land use (i.e. either ‘Shop’ or ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’) based on the characteristics of the use.
Clarity, Consistency and Certainty
Consistent application and implementation of the ‘Model Provisions’ definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ across all new and amended local planning schemes is required to provide clarity, consistency and certainty for retailers. At present, the wide variation in land use definitions across local planning schemes presents major challenges and barriers for retailers, not only when developing
City of Bunbury Page 86 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission new sites but also when seeking to attract and secure new tenants in vacant showroom premises.
The ‘Model Provisions’ definition acknowledges that some products may not be captured under the standard list for a ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’, but would still be bulky enough to require a large area for handling, storage and display or direct customer loading. In this way, they allow for innovation and evolution in the Large Format Retail sector to encompass retailing that may not have been envisaged by policy makers, but which may still involve the sale of Large Format goods.
For the various reasons noted above, it is requested that ‘LPS8’ adopts the exact land use definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ (and all other land use classes) as per the ‘Model Provisions’ of the ‘Regulations’.
5.2 Zoning and Land Use Permissibility
Under draft ‘LPS8’, the proposed permissibility of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and ’Trade Supplies’ land uses is summarised as follows:
ZONE BULKY GOODS TRADE SUPPLIES SHOWROOM PERMISSIBILITY PERMISSIBILITY
Regional Centre Zone D – Requires Council to P – Permitted exercise discretion and grant planning approval.
District Centre Zone P – Permitted P – Permitted
Neighbourhood Centre D – Requires Council to D – Requires Council to Zone exercise discretion and exercise discretion and grant planning grant planning approval. approval.
City of Bunbury Page 87 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Local Centre Zone X – Prohibited X – Prohibited
Mixed Use – X – Prohibited D – Requires Council to Commercial Zone exercise discretion and grant planning approval.
Mixed Use – Residential X – Prohibited X – Prohibited Zone
Tourism Zone X – Prohibited X – Prohibited
Residential Zone X – Prohibited X – Prohibited
Private Community X – Prohibited X – Prohibited Purpose Zone
Service Commercial P – Permitted P – Permitted Zone
Light Industry Zone D – Requires Council to D – Requires Council to exercise discretion and exercise discretion and grant planning grant planning approval. approval.
General Industry Zone X – Prohibited X – Prohibited
Rural Zone X – Prohibited X – Prohibited
Urban Development N/A – Land use N/A – Land use Zone and Industrial permissibility subject to permissibility subject to Development Zone preparation of a preparation of a structure plan. structure plan.
Special Use Zone N/A – Land use N/A – Land use permissibility subject to permissibility subject to
City of Bunbury Page 88 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission preparation of a preparation of a structure plan. structure plan.
Having considered the proposed permissibility of land uses across all zones, the LFRA provides the following comment and advice:
‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ should be a ‘P’ (Permitted) land use within the Regional Centre and Neighbourhood Centre zones, consistent with the stated zone objectives to provide a variety/range of shopping and commercial services and employment opportunities.
‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ should be a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use within the Local Centre zone, acknowledging that this land use has already been supported by Council for land identified as Local Centre under draft ‘LPS8’ (e.g. Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard).
‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ should be a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use within the Mixed Use - Commercial and Mixed Use – Residential zones, given the range of ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ retailing activities that are compatible with a mixed use development form (e.g. homewares, electrical goods, babies and children’s goods etc.)
‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and ‘Trade Supplies’ should be a ‘P’ (Permitted) land use within the Light Industry zone, given their general compatibility with light industrial land uses, which often have similar site land and site requirements (e.g. relatively flat, large and easily accessed landholdings).
Shop and Restaurant/Café land uses should be a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use within the Service Commercial zone, to ensure Large Format Retail precincts can provide an appropriate level of supporting amenity/services for customers. The provision of these ancillary retail offerings is increasingly important in Large Format Retail precincts where families will often spend large amounts of time per visit, and require food and refreshments during this time.
5.3 Activity Centre Plan or Structure Plan
‘Clause 40’ of draft ‘LPS8’ states as follows:
City of Bunbury Page 89 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
“…The preparation, submission and approval of an activity centre plan or structure plan to the specifications and satisfaction of the local government prior to any subdivision or development may be required for large and complex proposals involving the development or redevelopment of a lot greater than 3,000m² in area, or the amalgamation of 3 or more lots (whichever is the lesser); or extension or expansion of an existing development (other than the refurbishment of an existing building) on a lot, where the proposed new development is greater than 2,000m² nla…”
This clause has the potential to hinder and frustrate Large Format Retail development proposals on lots greater than 3,000m² or where the new floorspace is greater than 2000m² net lettable area. Individual development proposals, particularly on redevelopment sites, should be considered on individual merit and not trigger a pre-requisite planning process that requires significant time and financial investment.
The WA Planning Commission’s ‘Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy’ already requires an activity centre plan as a pre-requisite to ‘major development’, defined in that policy as follows:
“…Development of any building or extension/s to an existing building where the building or extensions are used or proposed to be used for shop/retail purposes and where the shop/retail NLA of the:
Proposed building is more than 10,000m; or
extension/s is more than 5000m²…”
Proposed ‘clause 40’ of draft ‘LPS8’ is inconsistent with the WAPC’s ‘Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy’ (already in place and being applied in the Greater Bunbury Region), and is contrary to the Large Format Industry’s requirements for clarity, consistency and certainty. It is therefore requested that ‘clause 40’ be deleted from draft ‘LPS8’.
5.4 Floorspace Restrictions
‘Strategy 7C1.1 - Commercial Areas’ of the draft ‘Local Planning Strategy’ seeks
City of Bunbury Page 90 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission to replace the existing ‘TPS8 Mixed Business’ zone with a ‘Service Commercial’ zone, including redefining the objectives boundaries and permitted uses within that zone. While the overarching objectives are generally noted, the LFRA is particularly concerned by the proposed incorporation of “…appropriate and adequate commercial floor space controls in order to accommodate a wide range of bulky goods retailing, wholesaling, servicing and allied business activities…”. Similar strategies for ‘Activity Centres’ and ‘Corridors (9I-1.1)’ seeking to apply retail floorspace maximums are also concerning and not supported.
‘Schedule 5’ of draft ‘LPS8’ sets out a range of additional development requirements for specific zones. Of note to the LFRA are the following floor space requirements for Large Format Retail activities:
Mixed Use – Commercial Zone: ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and ‘Trade Supplies’ land uses are limited to a maximum of 500m² NLA per lot, or 1000m² max NLA per lot if part of mixed use development.
Mixed Use – Residential Zone: ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land uses are limited to a maximum of 500m² NLA per lot.
Service Commercial Zone: ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ land uses must constitute at least 200m² NLA per lot.
The application of floorspace requirements on a ‘per lot’ basis is highly questionable, particularly for Large Format Retail premises which can either be arranged on individual freehold or strata lots, or alternatively, clustered on a much larger single landholding such as a Homemaker Centre. Furthermore, the application of floorspace limitations to a proposed prohibited use (i.e. Bulky Goods Retail within the Mixed Use - Commercial and Mixed Use - Residential zones) is confusing and unnecessary.
The LFRA does not support floorspace limitations of any kind for Large Format Retail premises. The removal of floor space requirements encourages owners and developers to be more creative and innovative in the dissection of floorspace, which in turn creates a more interesting and competitive retail offering. This should be encouraged by the City of Bunbury and the WA Planning
City of Bunbury Page 91 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Commission.
The LFRA requests the removal of any floorspace requirements for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and ‘Trade Supplies’ from ‘schedule 5’ of draft ‘LPS8’, and the removal of any strategies concerning floorspace restrictions from the ‘Local Planning Strategy’.
6.0 Conclusion
The updating of ‘Local Planning Schemes’ to reflect contemporary planning practices and adopt the new model land use definitions contained the ‘Regulations’ (specifically ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’) is strongly advocated by the LFRA.
Having reviewed the city’s draft ‘LPS8’ and ‘Local Planning Strategy’ in detail, the LFRA requests the following amendments:
• The land use definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ (and all other land use classes) be worded exactly as per the ‘Model Provisions’ of the ‘Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015’, as required by ‘section 257A’ of the ‘Planning and Development Act 2005’.
• ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ be made a ‘P’ (Permitted) land use within the Regional Centre and Neighbourhood Centre zones.
• ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ be made a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use within the Local Centre zone.
• ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ be made a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use within the Mixed Use - Commercial and Mixed Use – Residential zones.
• ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and ‘Trade Supplies’ be made a ‘P’ (Permitted) land use within the Light Industry zone.
• Shop and Restaurant/Café land uses be made a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use within the Service Commercial zone.
City of Bunbury Page 92 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Deletion of ‘clause 40’ concerning triggers for Activity Centre Plans and Structure Plans.
• Deletion of all floorspace requirements for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ and ‘Trade Supplies’ from ‘schedule 5’ of draft ‘LPS8’, and the removal of any strategies concerning floorspace restrictions from the Local Planning Strategy.
Should you wish to discuss any aspect of this submission, please do not hesitate to contact the LFRA’s CEO, Philippa Kelly on (03) 9859 5000 or [email protected].
36 Gabi Ghasseb [Submission Form dated 11 December 2016] Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) 30 Kalari Rise, Our property located at 133 Spencer St. Existing building to be retained is a BUNBURY WA 6230 former church. It is suited more to commercial based rather than residential based. The Scheme 8 text give definite advantages for mixed use commercial (DOC/291542) over mixed use residential, which we believe helps with future use options for the genuine benefit of the community.
Our submission is “that the property located at 133 Spencer St (crnr Prosser St) Subject Site be amended to mixed use commercial instead of mixed use residential”. Justification –
1) This property fronts Bunbury Plaza Neighbourhood Centre
2) Property is on a major activity corridor. This provides opportunity to frame Prosser St as an entry statement using good design principles. Noted. It is recommended that this submission could be accommodated as a minor modification to the proposed draft Scheme 3) Directly across on west side of Spencer St is proposed as mixed use map, given that the change would be to another mixed use zoning, commercial. Projecting line from this Eastwards would include our property. does not relate to the residential density coding, and due to the size of the lot, would result in only a modest increase in the development [Attached letter dated 11 December 2016] potential of the land for non-residential uses. It is a pleasure to make a submission regarding City of Bunbury Draft Local The subject site interfaces the Bunbury Plaza neighbourhood centre Planning Strategy Scheme 8. Congratulations on the work done so far. (i.e. immediately inside the 400 metre ped-shed or 5 minutes walking distance), and hence, this change would be consistent with the zoning 133 Spencer St (corner Prosser St)
City of Bunbury Page 93 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission drafting principles for the Scheme map. Our submission is specifically relating to our property located at 133 Spencer St (corner Prosser St). The existing iconic building, which we would like to retain on This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of the property, is a former Church, now St Marks Mews. It is suited more to Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map. commercial based and community use rather than residential based use which is proposed in Scheme 8. The scheme text give some definite advantages for Mixed Use Commercial over Mixed Use Residential, which we believe would help with the future use options, for the genuine benefit of the community.
We provide the following justifications towards amending to Mixed Use Commercial:
This property fronts directly onto Bunbury Plaza Shopping Centre, a Neighbourhood Centre. The Shopping Centre main façade/parking entry face directly to our property.
The property is located on a major activity corridor. This location provides an opportunity to frame Prosser St as an entry statement, using good design principles. Of note is the verge large road reserve which we have been maintaining at substantial input.
Directly across the road, West side of Spencer St, Scheme 8 proposes Mixed Use Commercial. If a line was projected Eastwards from this zone’s Southern limit, it would include our property. This would be a good rounding-off to the Mixed Use Commercial.
Based on the above brief outline, our submission to City of Bunbury is:
“That the property located at #133 Spencer St (Corner Prosser St) be amended to Mixed Use Commercial rather than Mixed Use Residential.”
Prior to Council making a final consideration on this submission, we seek and welcome a meeting as an opportunity to provide more details to Council for our submission. We would also welcome the opportunity to present our submission at the relevant Council meeting.
City of Bunbury Page 94 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
37 John Drinkwater Objection Air Photo (2016) I would like to make a submission regarding to the new Town Planning Scheme 38 Picton Crescent, 8 for higher residential density at 38 Picton Crescent Bunbury. BUNBURY WA 6230 The land at 38 Picton Crescent comprises of 2234m², zoned R15 and has access (DOC/291755) from Picton Crescent and a portion at the rear which adjoins the end of Roberts Subject Area Crescent.
The property has virtually 360 degree views, overlooking the City, ocean and south over the Big Swamp Parklands. Views of the outer harbor, Koombana Bay, Leschenault Estuary and the Darling Ranges are also unobstructed views from the property. There are two neighbouring properties which are similar in land size and have almost identical views of Bunbury.
The three properties together make up a unique node or enclave, which share access from Picton Crescent and all have individual rear access from Roberts
Crescent.
All three land owners aware of the submission being made to Council. In particular Rolf Stene at 34 Picton Crescent who is also very much in favour of
higher residential density for the three properties.
This node represents a unique opportunity for a multi storey development, potentially up to 5 storeys. Being only 300 metres to the CBD, this type of Cadastral Boundaries development would be in keeping with the City of Bunbury's vision of increasing the number inner city dwellings.
I believe that if approval was granted and with the co-operation of all three property owners a quality residential development with front and rear access would be a possibility. The precinct lends itself to a high-end luxury style Subject Area development.
I would appreciate if this submission be given due consideration.
City of Bunbury Page 95 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
Subject Area
Noted. It is acknowledged that the subject site is situated approximately 800 metres (or 10 minutes walking) distance from the ‘Regional Centre Zone’ (replacing the ‘City Centre Zone’). The land is also situated approximately 600 metres from the Back Beach Tourism Precinct.
It needs to be remembered that the 400/800 metre ped-shed (or 5 to 10 minutes walking distances) around activity centres define the areas within which medium and/or high density R-Codes should be considered. However, it is by no means envisaged that all land within the ped-shed of an activity centre would be suitable for medium / high density housing, as this must be balanced with other planning and urban design criteria that would need to be factored into any consideration when determining the suitability of land for medium / high density residential development within walkable catchments.
It is recommended that this submission could be progressed by the proponent as an amendment proposal to the new Scheme after it has been gazetted. This approach means that the proposal can be properly considered through a more targeted consultation process with surrounding affected landowners / residents, and avoids the necessity of readvertising the Scheme.
City of Bunbury Page 96 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
38 Halsall & Associates Objection Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) Halsall and Associates have been engaged by the Catholic Diocese of Bunbury Andrew Blee and Anglican Diocese of Bunbury to prepare a submission on draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (LPS No. 8) in relation to Lots 11 and 12 Clarke Street, PO Box 29, MARGARET South Bunbury. The proposal is to have the lots reallocated from 'Residential' to RIVER WA 6285 'Mixed Use — Commercial'. The following submission provides context and justification to this request. (DOC/291767) Subject Site
Lot 12 Clarke Street is currently owned by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Bunbury (7/8 share) and The Bunbury Diocesan Trustees (1/8 share). Lot 11 is Subject Site owned by The Bunbury Diocesan Trustees. The lots are 2109.3m² and 1937, 13m² in area respectively. Figure 1 below shows the subject lots in the context of the broader area. The historical development of the subject site as a church and [Figure 1 titled ‘The subject site and surrounds’ in original submission community purpose facility is understood to go back to 1985. As document] such, both the ‘place of worship’ and ‘community purpose’ land use classes are discretionary ‘A’ uses in the ‘Residential Zone’ of the The site currently functions as one lot with access via the existing battle-axe leg existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7 and draft Local Planning Scheme to Lot 11 which runs to the rear of the property to St Elizabeth's Church and No. 8. parking area. This parking is also utilised for the main building located on Lot 12. Figure 2 shows the key characteristics of the site. As a low rise development well setback from residences, its use as a ‘place of worship’ and for ‘community purpose’ does not unduly [Figure 2 titled ‘Site characteristics’ in original submission document] conflict with surrounding sensitive land uses (dwellings) and is sympathetic to its established residential neighbourhood character The main building is a substantial purpose built office/administration building and amenity. with approximately 640m² of NLA. This building is currently occupied by Centrecare Inc., a not for profit Catholic organisation that provides community The extent of the proposed ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ is services such as counselling, support, mediation and training. The Church at the explained in the Local Planning Strategy, which in summary is to rear is currently used for a Sunday morning service. The following photos provide for intensification of residential and non-residential land use demonstrate the level of development on the subject site. activities along activity corridors that connect between high order activity centres (e.g. CBD to Bunbury Plaza). [Image titled ‘Front façade of the Centrecare building as seen from Clarke Street’ in original submission document] The purpose of the ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’ is to provide a transition and buffer between the residential neighbourhoods that
City of Bunbury Page 97 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission surround the higher intensity ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ [Image titled ‘Centrecare parking and entrance located toward the front of the precincts which likewise frame activity centres. The extent of the property adjacent to the battle-axe accessway’ in original submission ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’ is therefore informed by the location document] of existing ‘Frame Areas’ under Local Planning Policy: Non-Residential Development within or adjoining Residential Areas. [Image titled ‘St Elizabeth’s Church and car parking at the rear of the property’ in original submission document] In this case, the subject site is not located with frontage onto Spencer Street and is at the very periphery of the activity corridor, with Current zoning and land use proximity only to a local centre. The current zoning under Town Planning Scheme No. 7 for both lots is It is appreciated that changing the subject site from ‘Residential Zone’ 'Residential' with an 'R40' density coding allocated to the land. It is considered to ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ would enable both the existing that the two current land uses operating on the site are 'Place of Worship' and development and/or significant redevelopment of the site for 'Community Purpose', both of which are 'A' uses under the Scheme. commercial purposes, which would represent a financial opportunity to the Catholic and Anglican dioceses for reinvestment should they Whilst the current uses are compatible with the current zoning, the site has wish to sell its ‘place of worship’ and ‘community purpose’ facilities. limited flexibility in what it could be used for in the future, particularly 'office'. However, this specific proposal is not strategically justifiable and would represent a significant change to the draft Scheme to what was Future intentions for the site publicly advertised, warranting consultation with the established residential community, and hence, would likely trigger the need to The existing Centrecare building is substantial with some 640m² of NLA and can readvertise the draft Scheme. therefore provide for a range of land uses into the future. On this basis the building itself will remain on the site with periodical maintenance and upgrades It is recommended that this submission could be progressed by the provided when required. proponent as an amendment proposal to the new Scheme after it has been gazetted. This approach means that the proposal (i.e. Given the flexibility that the building provides, it is anticipated that a range of potentially for ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’) can be properly land uses would be interested in occupying the building into the future and considered through a more targeted consultation process with beyond Centrecare's tenure. These uses would include office, consulting rooms, surrounding affected landowners / residents, and avoids the necessity medical centre and educational establishment. of readvertising the Scheme. The long term intention for the Church is uncertain however where there are declining congregations, the trend is towards consolidating services back to nearby large capacity church buildings and deconsecrating these smaller church buildings for other uses. This may include some commercial type uses subject to Council approval.
It is therefore important to note that the site is unlikely to be used as a 'Place of Worship' into the future.
City of Bunbury Page 98 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
It is clear from the level of development, the current use and future intentions for the site that a 'Residential' zoning allocation under LPS No. 8 is not appropriate.
Spencer Street is in close proximity to the subject site with the majority of this street north of Clarke Street allocated the new 'Mixed Use — Residential' zoning, including the land directly north of the subject site. Logically this zoning could be extended to accommodate Lots 11 and 12 also.
However, this zoning would not suit the site for a number of reasons. The proposed provisions for the 'Mixed Use — Residential' zoning allow for the following:
"The sum total of each of the below uses per lot (including a strata or survey strata lot) is limited to:
• Bulky goods showroom - a floorspace maximum of 500m² nla.
• Office - a floorspace maximum of 200m² net lettable area (nla).
• Shop - a floorspace maximum of 300m² nla."
As mentioned previously the existing building has approximately 640m2 NLA, however the provision above only allows for 200m² of office space. This therefore limits the use of the building and relies on other land uses to occupy the remaining 440m² NLA.
Given that the building is existing, it is considered that it should be granted ultimate flexibility under the Scheme where it can be demonstrated that the proposed zone will not impact on the amenity of the area. On this basis, the most appropriate zoning would be 'Mixed Use — Commercial' which provides for the following:
The sum total of each of the below land uses per lot (including a strata or survey strata lot) is limited to:
City of Bunbury Page 99 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Bulky Goods Showroom - a floorspace maximum of 500m² nla or if the use is part of a mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 1,000m² nla.
• Office - a floors pace maximum of 500m² net lettable area (nla); or if the use is part of a mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 1,000m² nla.
• Shop - a floorspace maximum of 300m² nla; or if the use is part of a mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 500m² nla.
• Trade Supplies - a floorspace maximum of 500m² nla or if the use is port of a mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 1,000m2 nla. This zoning allows for up to 1000m² of office space which is commensurate with the size and layout of the building.
Impact on the amenity of the area
It is considered that the impact the future zoning would have on the amenity of the area would be minimal. This is on the basis that the development and use of the land for commercial purposes is existing and has been for many years.
It is acknowledged that the proposed zoning would open up an opportunity for additional land uses that may be considered on the subject site that are currently not permitted. The use of the site for other land uses would be highly unlikely unless the site was redeveloped for a particular use. Further the majority of land uses that can be considered are still commercial in nature and would have a similar impact to the current use of the land in terms of vehicle movements, noise etc.
The majority of uses are also discretionary in nature and therefore Council have the ultimate control as to whether certain uses would be appropriate in this location.
Conclusion
Based on the above, it is considered that draft LPS No. 8 should be amended to include Lots 11 and 12 Clarke Street, South Bunbury within the 'Mixed Use — Commercial' zoning. This will reflect the existing size of development on the site
City of Bunbury Page 100 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and provide greater flexibility to the future use of the land which is ideal for office use.
We trust this submission will be appropriately considered in finalising the draft Scheme and should you require any additional information or clarification on the above, please don't hesitate to contact me on 0415 918 315.
39 Halsall and Associates Objection The proposal to include Lot 23 (#4) in isolation and/or the western side of Zoe Street in the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ would [Regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27) Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Andrew Blee represent a significant modification that has not been put to the Bunbury] surrounding landowners of what is now ‘Mixed Business Zone’ (future PO Box 29, MARGARET ‘Service Commercial Zone’) land; and hence, considering this change Halsall and Associates have been engaged by the landowner Geoffrey Daniel RIVER WA 6285 would likely trigger the need to readvertise the draft Scheme. Prosser to prepare a submission on the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (draft LPS No. 8). The submission in part is based on the properties above, but also (DOC/291964, 292043) Instead, it is recommended that this aspect of the submission could relates to the broader development requirements outlined under the Scheme. be progressed as an amendment proposal to the new Scheme after it has been gazetted. This approach means that the proposal (i.e. The subject lots fronting Spencer Street contain an existing large industrial type potentially rezoning the western side of Zoe Street, from Cornwall shed which is occupied by Beaurepaires Tyre franchise. The lot fronting Zoe Street down to George Street, to ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’) can Street is currently vacant. Figure 1 below shows the subject land and surrounds. be properly considered through a targeted consultation process with affected landowners. [Figure 1 titled ‘Subject site and surrounds’ in original submission document]. However, it should be noted that a drafting principle for determining The future intention of all three properties is to function as one, with access via zone boundaries used in formulating the new Scheme map, is that both Spencer and Zoe Street. This will allow for the separation between Staff street alignments should be avoided as land use boundaries – instead and customer parking and loading and unloading facilities. The exact land use mid-block / rear cadastral boundaries should be utilised where mix and development design is not yet known and will largely be dictated by the practicable. This avoids the problem of creating inconsistent land use final requirements of draft LPS No. 8. activities on either side of a shared street, and ensures a harmonious streetscape of interfacing urban form and character. With regard to the zoning, Lots 1 and 2 Spencer Street are proposed to be zoned 'Mixed Use - Commercial' and Lot 23 Zoe Street is proposed to be zoned In the meantime, it is advised that given that Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street is 'Service Commercial' under draft LPS No. 8. Given that the intention for the 1,011.7m² in area, there are no known constraints imposed by the property has always been to develop as one, the differing zonings will limit how draft Scheme for its development for a wider range of land use the site can be developed and what land uses can be considered. It is therefore classes, which includes ‘bulky goods showroom’ use. Indeed, a requested that, as a minimum, Lot 23 Zoe Street be rezoned to 'Mixed Use- number of modifications in the land use permissibility of the ‘Service Commercial' to match the remainder of the site. Commercial Zone’ have been recommended in the table below:
City of Bunbury Page 101 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The nature of existing development along Zoe Street and to make it more Land Use Class Existing Draft Proposed practical for developments to share parking at the rear, it may be beneficial to TPS7 LPS8 Modifications rezone the entire western side of Zoe Street to provide a more rounded zoning Art Gallery N/A D - and additional opportunities for living close to the City. Betting Agency A X A Given the nature of the subject site and the fact that it has potential access Bulky Goods Showroom P P - points from 3 separate roads, there is a large degree of flexibility in relation to Car Park X D - the location of car parking and access points. However, the proposed provisions of the Scheme in relation to car-parking in the mixed use zone are considered Caretaker’s Dwelling D D - restrictive. The provisions state as follows: Child Care Premises D A -
"Car parking bays/areas to be located to the side or rear of the development Civic Use D D - site. No parking within the front setback area(s), except for instances involving Club Premises D D - only the change of use of an existing building where opportunities for car Commercial Vehicle Parking N/A P - parking to the side and/or rear are impractical." Community Purpose P D - It is acknowledged that the purpose of this clause is to create development that Consulting Rooms P P - better addresses the street, makes it more pedestrian friendly and encourages mix use development. It is considered that in reality this approach is not Convention Centre X D - practical particularly in relation to some of the land uses that can be considered Dry Cleaning Premises N/A A - such as 'showroom'. Further this area is still part of an activity corridor that links between activity centres and therefore it is also going to be more dependent on Educational Establishment D D - vehicles and therefore rely on car parking. Further some areas of 'Mixed Use - Exhibition Centre X D - Commercial' back onto residential areas. The proposed parking requirements would put car parking areas in close proximity to these therefore creating the Fast Food Outlet A A D potential for land use conflict. It is therefore considered that the parking Freeway Service Centre N/A D - elements need to be expanded to provide greater flexibility. Funeral Parlour P P - For example if a showroom development was undertaken on the subject land in Garden Centre P P - accordance with this clause, parking would be required to be provided at the Industry – Light D D - rear. Given the nature of this land use and the dependence on the car particularly given that products are normally more bulky in nature, the entrance Laundromat N/A P - would also need to be at the rear. Therefore it would create a development that Liquor Store – Small N/A A has no active frontage to the road (essential has its back to the road) and therefore creates security issues both during business hours and after hours as Liquor Store – Large N/A A well as having a negative impact on the streetscape. Lunch Bar P P -
City of Bunbury Page 102 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
This site is also on a corner and no guidance has been provided in relation to Medical Centre P D - how parking on these sites will be dealt with. Further, the requirement for such Motel A X A long access driveways to the rear of lots within the proposed mixed use zone significantly limits the amount of developable space on the site, this is a Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan P P - Sales particular concern for some of the smaller lots further down Spencer Street (no corner lots are as small as 14m wide, with one corner lot only 10m wide). Motor Vehicle Repair D D - Motor Vehicle Wash D D - It is considered that the current parking provisions are most relevant to a mixed use development that has a combination of retail, office and/or residential shop Office* (n.b. max 200m² nla) D D - frontage where passing traffic both vehicular and pedestrian is more important. Place of Worship D D - However, for developments proposing only one land use and those located on corner lots, the proposed provisions should be expanded and be more flexible. Reception Centre D X D We suggest the provisions be amended as follows: Recreation – Private P D - Restricted Premises A X A 7. Vehicle Access and Parking: Self Storage Complex D P - 7.1 Where mixed use development is proposed, Car parking bays/areas to be Service Station D A - located to the side or rear of the development site. Telecommunications Infrastructure D P - 7.2 Car parking will be considered in the front setback area for all other land Trade Display P P - uses permissible in the zoning table and in the following circumstances: Trade Supplies N/A P - a) where the proposal is for a change of use of an existing building where car Transport Depot A D - parking is existing or opportunities for car parking to the side and/or rear are impractical; Veterinary Centre A D - Warehouse / Storage D P - b) the proposal has dual road frontage; With regards to the permissibility of ‘bulky goods showroom’ use, a c) access/egress points providing access to the rear are considered unsafe; and modification has been recommended to make ‘bulky goods showroom’ a discretionary ‘D’ use in the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial d) any other circumstance that the local government considers appropriate. Zone’, as discussed in relation to submission number 35 (made by the Large Format Retail Association). 7.3 In addition to the requirements listed in clause 38 of the Scheme, where car parking is proposed within the front setback area and does not fall within the With respect to the level of discretion applied in the draft Zoning circumstances listed in clause 7.2, the local government will consider the Table to other land use classes in the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’, following: it must be appreciated that a wide range of land uses may be permitted within what will be a high density mixed use environment.
City of Bunbury Page 103 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Therefore, in order to facilitate sound place-making with a high a) the impact the proposed car parking will have on the streetscape and quality of amenity for both living and working in, there remains the amenity of the area, taking into account development on adjoining properties; need to provide an appropriate level of assessment in order to and manage inevitable risks resulting from land use conflicts. b) the nature of the land use proposed and the number of bays required for the The discretionary ‘D’ and ‘A’ levels of consideration are applied to development. those land uses that are either sensitive uses proposed in locations that could compromise the economic viability of an existing non- 7.4 Where car parking within the front setback is approved, the local residential development; or conversely, are non-residential uses government may impose additional landscaping requirements to those listed in proposed in locations that could impact on the liveability of an clause 6 above. established residential development. In certain cases, such as for liquor stores (and other licensed premises), there is already a 7.5 Drive through facilities are not permitted as part of any Fast Food Outlet or statutory requirement to undertake public notification in accordance Restaurant I Cafe developments. with the Liquor Control Act 1988. It is acknowledged that the City is trying to encourage mixed use development In most cases, risks can be managed through good urban design and in this zone for obvious reasons. This has been expressed through the floor building architecture that incorporates practical engineering and space bonuses for such development as follows: technological solutions, which can be conditioned as part of any development approval. Floorspace: The sum total of each of the below land uses per lot (including a strata or survey strata lot) is limited to: It is advised that the draft Local Planning Scheme does in fact address the incentivisation of mixed use development, with commercial 2.1 Bulky Goods Showroom- a floorspace maximum of 500m² nla or if the use is floorspace bonuses and corresponding car parking relaxation. part of a mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 1,000m² nla. Reference should be made to modified clause 42 (clause 38(8) of the advertised Scheme text) dealing with car parking requirements, which 2.2 Office- a floorspace maximum of 500m² net lettable area {nla}; or if the use reads as follows: is part of a mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 1,000m² nla. 42. Car Parking Requirements 2.3 Shop - a floorspace maximum of 300m² nla; or if the use is part of a mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 500m² nla. (9) For a mixed use development, the number of car parking bays required for the overall development may be 2.4 Trade Supplies - a floorspace maximum of 500m² nla or if the use is part of a reduced by a maximum of up to 30 percent provided mixed use development, a floor space maximum of 1,000m² nla.” that the peak hours of operation of the different uses on the lot/development site are different or do not It is considered that these density bonuses are futile without some concessions substantially overlap and the bays are clearly marked in regard to car parking. The reason being that as soon as you increase the floor limiting the purpose for which the parking may be used area for each type of use in a mixed use development, the requirement for at different times of the day. additional car parking also increases. Therefore the combination of both and the
City of Bunbury Page 104 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission land requirements to accommodate them means that they essentially cancel It is appreciated that the suggested wording of ‘7. Vehicle Accessing each other out. The provisions would work better the other way, where a single and Parking’ as supplied in the submission would readily land use can achieve a greater floor area and incentives for mixed use could accommodate the development of ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses in then be investigated through other means such as height bonuses or plot ratio their traditional format (i.e. setback from the street with all car increases. parking to the front), which is envisaged as being most appropriate in the ‘Service Commercial Zone’. In addition to the changes above, it is recommended that Bulky Goods Showroom (clause 2.1) use be removed from the floorspace restrictions It should be appreciated however, that the provisions of the Scheme altogether. This type of development should be considered on its merits and the and supporting local planning policies should promote consistently ability for a site to fit the building, access and car parking. This is particularly good urban design outcomes in line with the ‘Mixed Use – relevant where larger lots exist and can cater for a larger building. As mentioned Commercial Zone’ objectives. And that this only occurs when all previously this is an activity corridor and therefore will also be more car development along a street (regardless of the approved use of any lot dependent and attract uses such as showroom. in isolation) observes commonly recognised principles of good urban design. Hence, it would be illogical for the provisions of the Scheme There are recent developments and redevelopments such as Geographe Ford, to make an arbitrary exception for ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses if the Toyota and SKG that have set the scene for this corridor. This is a factor in many city is expected to seek to achieve the mixed use zoning objectives. of the changes proposed in this submission. Put simply, the intent of the zone (i.e. orderly and proper planning) won’t occur if only the mixed use development is designed The proposed clause relating to building height reads as follows: appropriately. Building Height: As such, the draft Scheme’s maximum floorspace areas for ‘bulky goods showroom’ (and other specified) uses that apply to the ‘Mixed 3.1. Maximum building height of 15m (4 storeys) above natural ground level. Use – Commercial Zone’, is to encourage true mixed use development with good urban design outcomes that promote walkability, diversity 3.2. Minimum building frontage height of 7.5m (2 storeys) for a minimum depth and human scale. of 10m from the front property boundary for mixed use and non-residential development. Nevertheless, with the fundamental change to the statutory weighting given to local planning policies, now recognised as a planning The first clause is straight forward and sets the maximum building height under instrument that the local government must have regard to, it is the 'Mixed Use - Commercial' zone. However, it is considered that clause 3.2 is accepted that Part 4 and Schedule 5 of the draft Scheme text can be somewhat confusing. It would appear that the purpose of the clause is to set a rationalised. This means that clause 38 of the advertised version of consistent facade and building bulk, to set the streetscape and character for the the draft Scheme is recommended to be deleted, which had stated area. This clause is only relevant to mixed use and non-residential development. the following. Therefore a proposal for a single storey dwelling could be proposed that would be totally out of character to the surrounding buildings. It is considered that this 38. Vehicle Access and Parking clause needs to be extended to all development that proposes to be setback less than 10m. (1) Vehicle parking, servicing, loading and unloading areas
City of Bunbury Page 105 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and accessways are to be located where they will not It is considered that changing the zoning should not limit the options that could dominate the streetscape and not detract from be developed under the current zoning through the permissibility of particular convenient and safe pedestrian and vehicular land-uses, as such the zoning table needs to be amended as follows: movement.
• Bulky Goods Showroom - Change from 'X' to 'P', particularly given that (2) Service vehicle loading/unloading bays/areas provided development standards specifically talk about this land use. on-site are to be separated from pedestrian access areas and readily accessible from all non-residential uses on • Liquor Store 'small'- from 'A' to 'P'. the lot/development site.
• Community Purpose- from 'D' to 'P'. (3) Entrance points to parking and unloading/loading areas are to have clear and unobstructed visibility of • Office -from 'D' to 'P'. pedestrian pathways, with pedestrian crossing points clearly identified which give priority to pedestrians. • Restaurant- from 'A' to 'D'. (4) Vehicle parking bays/areas adjoining residential The Regulations stipulate the model definitions that should be implemented premises are visually and acoustically screened from any into the Scheme. The current definition for 'Bulky Goods Showroom' is not adjoining dwelling. consistent with the Regulations whereby it actually changes the intent of the land use. The definition should therefore be changed as follows: Consequently, it is recommended that most of the urban design controls (e.g. building height) in Part 4 and Schedule 5 of the “bulky goods showroom means premises - advertised version of the draft Scheme text should be incorporated into a local planning policy, which will ensure adequate flexibility for (a) used to sell by retail any of the goods and accessories of the following types the designing and assessment of development proposals within the that are principally used for domestic purposes - ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ (and all other zones).
(i) automotive parks and accessories; It is also recognised that mixed use zone precincts are in constant transition through infill development over time, and that any zone (ii) camping, outdoor and recreation goods; code policy will need to allow for a certain degree of flexibly in order to accommodate changes of use to existing buildings. Hence, the (iii) electric light fittings; recommended wording of any policy provision is as follows:
(iv) animal supplies including equestrian and pet goods; Vehicle parking bays/areas are to be located to the side and/or rear of the premises (behind the primary building setback line) (v) floor and window coverings; or underground (basement), except for instances involving only the change of use of an existing building where opportunities (vi) furniture, bedding, furnishings, fabrics, manchester and homewares; for car parking to the side and/or rear are impractical. Subject to the local government exercising its discretion by granting
City of Bunbury Page 106 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission development approval, car parking is not permitted within the (vii) household appliances, electrical goods and home entertainment goods; front setback area(s) of new development. (viii) party supplies; In relation to the suggested modification to the ‘trade supplies’ land use class definition, the words ‘(b) building including repair and (ix) office equipment and supplies; maintenance’ refers to the sale of building products, it does not relate to the actual building that the trade supplies business occupies. It can (x) babies' and childrens' goods, including play equipment and accessories; be advised that no change is necessary to allow for administrative areas within such developments, as these can be treated as incidental (xi) sporting, cycling, leisure, fitness goods and accessories; and ancillary to the predominant use of the premises. (xii) swimming pools; or
(b) used to sell by retail goods and accessories by retail if-
(i) a large area is required for the handling, display or storage of the goods; or
(ii) vehicular access is required to the premises for the purpose of collection of purchased goods;
Whilst the 'Trade Supplies' definition is model scheme text compliant, it is considered that it would benefit from the addition of the word administration to point (b) as follows:
(b) building administration including repair and maintenance;
This does not change the intent of the uses that the definition covers, but rather acknowledges that such a premises would also include the administration side of the business, including but not limited to a place to meet with the contractors each day, a place to meet with clients and the general running of the business.
In summary, the key outcomes of this submission are:
• To rezone Lot 23 Zoe Street to 'Mixed Use- Commercial' to allow its development with Lots 1 and 2 Spencer Street and if considered appropriate continue this zoning along the entire western side of Zoe Street;
City of Bunbury Page 107 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Implement the proposed changes to the car parking provisions to provide greater flexibility and acknowledge different circumstances that may arise;
• Review the floorspace provisions to remove bulky goods showroom from the cap, look at providing larger floor areas for single uses and investigating incentives for mixed use development through mechanisms such as building height or plot ratio;
• Review the building height clause relating to minimum building height within 10m of the front boundary;
• Changes to the permissibility of land uses within the zoning table relevant to the 'Mixed Use -Commercial' zoning; and Changes to the 'Bulky Goods Showroom' and 'Trade Supplies' definitions.
The above changes have been requested to provide greater certainty to landowners within the proposed 'Mixed Use -Commercial' zoning when considering redevelopment of their land. Should greater certainty not be provided through draft LPS No. 8 then Citygate Properties Pty Ltd would request that Lots 1 and 2 Spencer Street be rezoned to 'Service Commercial' to reflect Lot 23 Zoe Street .
Halsall and Associates along with the landowner Geoffrey Daniel Prosser would be happy to work closer with the City regarding the above submission to come up with a set of provisions that are flexible and practical in the current economic environment.
Should you require any additional information of clarification on the above, please don't hesitate to contact Andrew Blee on 0415 918 315.
40 Priority Management Objection It is advised that scheme amendments to the existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7 that are approved by the Minister for Planning prior to We act for Azuna the owner of strata lot 40, lot 105 Old Coast Road. Stuart Thompson Council’s final adoption of the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 will (Principal) be reflected in the revised Scheme prior to its gazettal. The above mentioned land has been the subject to Town Planning Scheme Amendment Number 88 to the Town Planning Scheme Number 7 which has 17 McKenna Place, recently been adopted by council for final approval and forwarded to the
City of Bunbury Page 108 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission SOUTH BUNBURY WA Department of Planning and Minister for Planning. 6230 We note the provisions which have been developed for amendment number 88 (DOC/292038) vary from those proposed in Draft Town Planning Scheme Number 8.
It is requested that Draft Town Planning Scheme Number 8 be modified to reflect the permitted uses and provisions detailed in amendment 88.
41 Priority Management Objection It is advised that scheme amendments to the existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7 that are approved by the Minister for Planning prior to We act for S & H Thompson Lot 75, Thompson Super Pty Ltd Lot 80 and Stuart Thompson Council’s final adoption of the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 will Royalport Holdings Pty Ltd Lot 81 on the corner of Higgins and Ward Street. (Principal) be reflected in the revised Scheme prior to its gazettal. The above mentioned land has been the subject to Town Planning Scheme 17 McKenna Place, Amendment Number 90 to the Town Planning Scheme Number 7 which has SOUTH BUNBURY WA recently been adopted by council for final approval and forwarded to the 6230 Department of Planning and Minister for Planning. (DOC/292038) We note the provisions which have been developed for amendment number 90 vary from those proposed in Draft Town Planning Scheme Number 8.
It is requested that Draft Town Planning Scheme Number 8 be modified to reflect the permitted uses and provisions detailed in amendment 90.
City of Bunbury Page 109 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
42 MPM Development Objection Air Photo (2016) Consultants I am the registered owner of Lot 5 Verschuer Place, Davenport (refer to Figure 1 below). Shelley Coutts [Figure 1 titled ‘Subject Site’ in original submission document] PO BOX 1725, BUNBURY WA 6231 It is requested that the 'Light Industry' zoning proposed by Local Planning Scheme No.8 be reconsidered in this location. (DOC/292078)
Lot 5 Verschuer Place, along with the surrounding area is currently zoned Subject Site 'Industry' by way of the City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No.7.
The objective of the 'Industry' zone under TPS No. 7 is:
4.2.1.5 Industry zone - To provide for a wide range of general and light industry uses, the storage and distribution of goods and associated uses which, by the Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) nature of their operations, should be separated from residential areas.
As a result of the objective stated above, defined landuses 'Industry' and 'Light Industry' are both considered permitted ('P') uses in the 'Industry' zone.
This has enabled the development of the area with a mix of businesses including
Panel Beaters and Painters, Welding and Fabrication, Machinery Hire and the Department of Agriculture. Some of these businesses are not conducive to the
proposed ‘Light Industry’ zoning. 268m Subject Site [Figure 2 titled ‘Aerial of Verschuer Place and Surrounds in original submission document]
[Figure 3 titled ‘City of Bunbury TPS No.7 “Industry” zoned land surrounding subject lot’ in original submission document] The subject site adjoins a waterway that is an ‘environmentally sensitive area’5 and is located 268 metres from residential zoned land. The objective of the 'Light Industry' zone, as proposed by draft Local Planning Hence, based on the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) Scheme No.8, is: Guidance Statement No. 3 – Separation Distances Between Industrial
5 Refer to Environmental Protection Act 1986.
City of Bunbury Page 110 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and Sensitive Land Uses (June 2005), the subject area is not suitable - To provide for a range of industrial uses and service industries generally for higher impacting general industry activities. It is also noted that compatible with urban areas, that cannot be located in commercial zones. land in Verschuer Place, Davenport, was previously include in a ‘Light Industry Zone’ under Town Planning Scheme No. 6. - To encourage the development of safe, clean and attractive light industrial areas that contribute positively to the overall city image by ensuring that Therefore, the draft Scheme seeks to balance the need to manage acceptable levels of safety and high standards of visual and environmental risks to public and environmental health with the desire to maximise amenity are provided within sites. the productivity of industrial land by introducing a ‘Light Industry Zone’. As discussed in relation to submission number 28 (made by - To ensure that where any development adjoins zoned or developed residential MPM Development Consultants), the existing Scheme definition of properties, the development is suitably set back, screened or otherwise treated ‘industry - light’ means an industry - so as not to detract from the residential amenity. (a) in which the processes carried on, the machinery used, In the instance of Lot 5, the site is developed with a Panel Beating and Painting and the goods and commodities carried to and from the business. This land use is best defined as "Industry" under the proposed Scheme premises do not cause any injury to or adversely affect 8. the amenity of the locality;
"Industry" is defined by draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 as: "means premises (b) the establishment or conduct of which does not, or will used for the manufacture, dismantling, processing, assembly, treating, testing, not, impose an undue load on any existing or proposed servicing, maintenance or repairing of goods, products, articles, materials or service for the supply or provision of essential services; substances and includes facilities on the premises for any of the following purposes- The draft Scheme is based on the model provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, which (a) The storage of goods; more simply states that an ‘industry - light’ use means:
(b) The work of administration or accounting; … premises used for an industry where impacts on the amenity of the area in which the premises is located can be mitigated, (c) The selling of goods by wholesale or retail; avoided or managed;
(d) The provision of amenities for employees; This is a subtle but fundamental change in the definition, which means that any industrial activity (i.e. regardless of the processes (e) incidental purposes. carried on, the machinery used, and the goods and commodities carried to and from the premises) can qualify as being a light industry The landuse "Industry" is not permitted "X" in the 'Light Industry' zone. The activity if the development appropriately mitigates, avoids or implications of this are that the current business can continue to operate from manages its impacts. the site as a "non-conforming" use. The non-conforming use right allows for the continued use of the land for the purpose for which it was being lawfully used This can be achieved through building design or other practical immediately before the commencement of Town Planning Scheme No.8. engineering and technological solutions. Consequently, only existing
City of Bunbury Page 111 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission industrial businesses that cannot or do not wish to meet this standard As mentioned above, the landuse that exists on Lot 5 is typical of the will be treated as ‘non-conforming uses’, as new developments are surrounding area, meaning that there is a high chance that the majority of the expected to responsibly operate in a manner that protects the public businesses that exist in this area will operate as non-conforming uses. This does health of residents living (i.e. sensitive land uses) within 500 to 1,000 not give the owners of these properties certainty or incentive to re-develop, metres of industrial areas. extend or expand their current business operations. Consequently, the new Scheme is not in itself a barrier to facilitating There are a substantial number of properties in the City of Bunbury's industrial capital investment in the improvement of ‘Light Industry Zone’ land areas (such as Davenport) that are vacant and it is very difficult to get tenants in through its redevelopment (e.g. by extending or expand existing this market. 'Separating' the TPS7 Industry zone into 'Light' and 'General' business operations in a cleaner manner or by a wide range of new industry further magnifies the problem of obtaining tenants due to the higher technology business), which is encouraged so as to increase its decreased number of uses permitted in the proposed 'Light Industry' zone. productivity and value, and to improve the environmental performance of industrial activities. The existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7 allows for a range of industrial development and allows for some flexibility to respond to market conditions. The City of Bunbury regulates the development of industrial properties through Planning and Building Approvals. It is considered unnecessary to separate the industry zone into 'light' and 'general' especially in the fringe areas such as that surrounding Lot 5.
As the proposed zoning 'Light Industry' is considered limiting to this area, and the properties are developed with industrial buildings and workshops it is requested that further consideration be given to the area being zoned 'General Industry' by way of Local Planning Scheme No. 8.
43 Planning Solutions Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text) Planning Solutions acts on behalf of Citygate Properties Pty Ltd, the registered Noted. It is recommended to make the ‘shop’ land use class a Ross Underwood proprietor of Lot 12 (1) Island Queen Street, Withers (subject site). permitted ‘P’ use in the Zoning Table within the ‘Neighbourhood (Senior Planner) Centre Zone’. We thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the City’s draft Level 1, 251 St Georges Local Planning Strategy (LPS) and the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (LPS8), This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Terrace, PERTH WA and are pleased to present this submission. Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text. 6000 In summary, we support the intent and general objectives of the proposed LPS (DOC/292097) and LPS8, and submit a number of changes should be made to the documents prior to their approval, as outlined in this submission.
City of Bunbury Page 112 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Details of our submission follows.
The subject site is proposed to be zoned ‘Neighbourhood Centre’ (R100), pursuant to the draft LPS8 Map. Land use permissibility in the Neighbourhood Centre zone is set out in the Zoning Table of LPS8.
A Shop is proposed as a ‘D’ use in the Neighbourhood Centre zone under LPS8, meaning the use is not permitted unless the local government has exercised its discretion by granting development approval.
We submit a Shop should properly be a ‘P’ (permitted) use in the Neighbourhood Centre zone.
A Shop is a use which is entirely consistent with the LPS8 objectives for the Neighbourhood Centre zone, as it is a use which is necessary to provide a variety of retail shopping options to meet the daily needs of the retail catchment area population.
It not considered necessary or desirable to require a development application to be made for a change of use to a Shop in a Neighbourhood Centre zone.
On this basis, it is submitted a Shop should be designated as a ‘P’ (permitted) use in the Neighbourhood Centre zone.
We would be pleased to meet with you to discuss the contents of this submission in more detail. We request the opportunity to address any Committee/Council meeting in which LPS8 is considered in the future.
44 Planning Solutions Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text & Map) Planning Solutions acts on behalf of Citygate Properties Pty Ltd, the registered Noted. However, pending Scheme Amendment 78 to Town Planning Ross Underwood proprietor of Lot 59 (2) Austral Parade, East Bunbury (subject site). Scheme No. 7, which seeks to introduce Special Use Zone No. 61 to (Senior Planner) create a new local centre at Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard, reflects the We thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the City’s draft proponent’s desired development intentions for that specific site. Level 1, 251 St Georges Local Planning Strategy (LPS) and the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (LPS8), Hence, why a Special Use Zone was applied instead of the more Terrace, PERTH WA and are pleased to present this submission. general ‘Shopping Centre Zone’. The listed special uses and their level 6000 of consideration also reflect the site’s unique circumstances and
City of Bunbury Page 113 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission conditions, in that it is located on a major intersection of Sandridge (DOC/292098) In summary, we support the intent and general objectives of the proposed LPS Road and Picton Road with frontage to ‘Other Regional Roads’ and LPS8, and submit a number of changes should be made to the documents reserves under the Greater Bunbury Regional Scheme (GBRS). prior to their approval, as outlined in this submission. Lot 59 (#2) Austral Parade in East Bunbury is more typical of a Details of our submission follows. traditional local centre, in that it is situated inside of the neighbourhood cell on local distributor roads, as opposed to higher The subject site is proposed to be zoned ‘Local Centre’ (R100), pursuant to the order centres and bulky goods showrooming precincts, which tend to draft LPS8 Map. be located between suburban areas fronting onto district/primary distributor roads (e.g. Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard, which also fronts Land use permissibility in the Local Centre zone is set out in the Zoning Table of onto future ‘Service Commercial Zone’ land). LPS8. The goal of good neighbourhood design is to create self-contained We submit the land use permissibility in the Local Centre zone should be neighbourhoods with a sense of enclosure and a human scale with modified as per the following table. low traffic volumes and vehicle speed regime. As such, the objectives Use Class Draft LPS8 Requested of the ‘Local Centre Zone’ are: permissibility permissibility Betting Agency ‘X’ ‘P’ • To designate land for future development as a Local Centre. Bulky Goods Showroom ‘X’ ‘P’ • To provide services for the immediate neighbourhoods, that Liquor Store – Small ‘X’ ‘P’ are easily accessible, which do not adversely impact on Shop ‘D’ ‘P’ adjoining residential areas. Justification for the proposed changes to land use permissibility follows. • To provide for Local Centres to focus on the main daily household shopping and community needs. Betting Agency • To encourage high quality, pedestrian-friendly, street- On 12 July 2016, the Council resolved to support Amendment 78 to introduce orientated development. the SU61 zone. A Betting Agency was identified as an ‘A’ use in the SU61 zone. To maintain consistency with Council’s previous decision, it is considered a • To provide a focus for medium density housing. Betting Agency should be included as a permissible use in the Local Centre zone under LPS8. • To ensure the design and landscaping of development provides a high standard of safety, convenience and Furthermore, a Betting Agency is a use which is does not adversely impact the amenity and contributes towards a sense of place and amenity on adjoining residential areas, contributes to a sense of place and community. community, and is compatible with a high-quality, pedestrian-friendly street • To provide a basis for future detailed planning in oriented development. A Betting Agency is therefore considered to be a use accordance with the structure planning provisions of this which is consistent with the LPS8 objectives for the Local Centre zone, and
City of Bunbury Page 114 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission should be designated as a ‘P’ (permitted) use. Scheme and the Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy.
Bulky Goods Showroom Within their neighbourhood cells, local centres need to be designed in a manner that protects the quality and amenity of their surrounding Schedule 1 (Model Provisions) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning residential environment, as they are intimately imbedded with Schemes) Regulations 2015, gazetted in August 2015, replaced the Model housing - ideally serving a catchment of 400 to 600 dwellings for their Scheme Text in the Town Planning Regulations 1967. One of the resultant daily convenience shopping needs, usually serviced by public changes to the model land use definitions was the replacement of the transport (e.g. a bus stop) and accessed by local traffic only. In this ‘Showroom’ definition with a new ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ definition. setting ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses are by their definition fundamentally incompatible, and instead, the land use class of ‘shop’ The new Model Provisions definition for Bulky Goods Showroom encompasses performs the full range of necessary functions to satisfy the needs of premises retailing specific types of goods, regardless of the floor area of the the local community and business. premises, and may include the retail of bulky goods from premises traditionally found in small (typically less than 300m²) tenancies along main streets, with In relation to the desired level of consideration given to development possible examples including but not limited to: proposals for ‘shop’ uses in the ‘Local Centre Zone’, it is acknowledged that under the deemed provisions of the new Regulations, that ‘P’ • Pet supply shop uses will no longer require any development approval. Given the potential for significant impacts resulting from a ‘shop’ use in a local • Party supplies store centre (which may be up to 2,000m² nla in size), it is considered essential that such proposals be given a proper level of assessment, • Toy store and where necessary, conditions of development approval.
• Bicycle shop. The land use classes of ‘betting agency’ and ‘liquor store – small’ present a range of potential socially related risks that may or may not On 12 July 2016, the Council resolved to support Amendment 78 to introduce be acceptable to a local community or adequately manageable in a the SU61 zone. A Showroom was identified as a ‘P’ use in the SU61 zone. To particular place. Furthermore, a ‘betting agency’ is not a compatible maintain consistency with Council’s previous decision, and consistent with the use with the objectives of the ‘Local Centre Zone’. Model Provisions definition for Bulky Goods Showroom which includes the retail of bulky goods from main street tenancies, it is considered a Bulky Goods Nevertheless, it is recommended to make the ‘liquor store - small’ Showroom should be included as an ‘P’ use in the Local Centre zone under LPS8. land use class a discretionary ‘A’ use in the draft Zoning Table within the ‘Local Centre Zone’. Liquor Store - Small With regards to Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard, it is also recommended LPS8 introduces a new land use definition for Liquor Store – Small, which is that the boundaries within the lot denoted by Special Use Zone No. 61 consistent with the Model Provisions. A Liquor Store – Small, by very definition, (i.e. excluding that portion denoted by Special Use Zone No. 62) be comprises premises which are no larger than 300m². Given the small-scale of included in an ‘Additional Use’ (number 16 in Schedule 1 - Additional such an activity, it is considered Liquor Store – Small is a use which is Uses Table) under the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8. As per
City of Bunbury Page 115 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission appropriate in the Local Centre zone. Scheme Amendment 78 documentation, the additional uses being as follows: Shop The following ‘P’ uses: A Shop is a use which is entirely consistent with the LPS8 objectives for the Local (a) Bulky Goods Showroom (up to 500m² nla). Centre and Neighbourhood Centre zones, being: The following ‘A’ uses are permitted only where the local government • A use which is necessary in order to provide the main daily household has exercised its discretion by granting planning approval: shopping needs for the immediate neighbourhood. (a) Betting Agency. • A use which lends itself towards high-quality, pedestrian-friendly, street- oriented development. The subject site has also been included in Schedule 3 – Additional Site and Development Requirements Table, so as to fully reflect the • A use which does not adversely impact on adjoining residential areas. Special Use Zone conditions of Scheme Amendment 78. This more targeted approach enables the outcomes of Scheme Amendment 78 Further, it not considered necessary or desirable to require a development to be fully reflected in the draft Scheme without upsetting the logic of application to be made for a change of use to a Shop in a Local Centre or the new Scheme’s zones. Thus enabling the site to be developed in Neighbourhood Centre zone. accordance with an approved local development plan, as required by Special Use Zone conditions of Scheme Amendment 78. On this basis, a Shop should be designated as a ‘P’ (permitted) use in the Local Centre and Neighbourhood Centre zone. These recommendations have been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text and Map. We would be pleased to meet with you to discuss the contents of this submission in more detail. We request the opportunity to address any Committee/Council meeting in which LPS8 is considered in the future.
45 Planning Solutions Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text) [Large submission document regarding Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard, East It is advised that scheme amendments to the existing Town Planning Ross Underwood Bunbury, lodged on behalf of Hornell Nominees Pty Ltd – refer to Annex 2.] Scheme No. 7 that are approved by the Minister for Planning prior to (Senior Planner) Council’s final adoption of the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 will be reflected in the revised Scheme prior to its gazettal. Level 1, 251 St Georges Terrace, PERTH WA In relation to the levels of permissibility and consideration given to 6000 land use classes of ‘betting agency’, ‘bulky goods showroom’, ‘liquor store – small’ and ‘shop’, please refer to the comments provided in (DOC/292099, 292372) response to submission number 44 above (made by Planning
City of Bunbury Page 116 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Solutions) regarding Lot 59 (#2) Austral Parade, East Bunbury.
With respect to the making of a cash-in-lieu contribution for public open space (POS) for the development of dwellings on Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard specifically and more generally in relation to infill developments, it is acknowledged that Development Control Policy 2.3 Public Open Space in Residential Areas (DC2.3) explicitly provides for Schemes to include provisions requiring a contribution towards open space - so as to meet the needs of individual local governments where land has not already been given up in an earlier subdivision and an under provision of POS can be demonstrated, which is the intent of the recommended redrafted (modified) clause 39 (clause 37 of the advertised Scheme text) below:
39. Public Open Space
(1) Development of more than three new/additional dwellings (including built strata proposals and infill development in existing suburbs) requires the provision of 10 percent of the gross subdivisible area for public open space (POS) in the form of cash-in-lieu to the local government for the purposes of open space and recreation facilities within or adjoining the same zone, with the land valued in accordance with section 155 of the Planning and Development Act 2005, regardless of any prior POS contribution; or alternatively where:
(a) the applicant cannot demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Commission that land has already been given up for POS in an earlier subdivision; or
(b) the proposal is within a locality where the Commission, on the advice of the local government, following an assessment of the locality, has concluded that there is insufficient POS in that locality.
City of Bunbury Page 117 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Up to 50 percent of the POS requirement may be transferred into communal open space, where residential and mixed use development incorporates communal open space as common property in association with grouped dwellings or multiple dwellings provided for the exclusive use of occupants/residents.
Note: Communal open space areas within a multiple dwelling or mixed use development may include indoor areas (e.g. gymnasiums, recreational games rooms, pools, etc.) where they are maintained for that purpose in common property.
(2) The cash in lieu contribution shall be paid to the local government at the time a development approval is granted or subdivision clearance of conditions (of a subdivision approval) is requested for the proposal, whichever occurs first.6
The above provision is now not considered to be inconsistent with DC2.3 or State Planning Policy 3.6 Development Contributions for Infrastructure (SPP3.6), which states that:
5.6 Form of contributions
Conditions relating to development contribution requirements can be satisfied by -
• the ceding of land for roads, public open space, primary school sites, drainage and other reserves;
• construction of infrastructure works which are transferred to public authorities on completion;
• monetary contributions to acquire land or undertake works by or on behalf of public authorities; or
6 Noting that the payment of the cash in lieu contribution can be conditioned as part of a development approval.
City of Bunbury Page 118 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• a combination of the above.
Furthermore, under ‘Appendix 1 – Standard development contribution requirements’ of SPP3.6, it specifies that:
Public open space
Public open space equivalent to 10 per cent of the gross subdivisible area, or alternatively, a cash-in-lieu contribution, in accordance with WAPC policies and the Planning and Development Act 2005.
Modified clause 39 now provides a head of power and clarity on when a POS cash-in-lieu contribution is required by: (a) ensuring consistency of approach in dealing with proposals for infill residential development regardless of whether or not this involves the subdivision of land; and (b) harmonising between clause 152 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 in respect to subdivisions that create less than 3 lots and clause 3.1.5 of DC2.3 referring to 5 lots or less, by requiring that a contribution is made as a provision of the Scheme, where: . it cannot be demonstrated to the Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC) satisfaction that the land has already been given up for open space in an earlier subdivision; or . the proposal is within a locality where the Commission, on the advice of the local government, following an assessment of the locality, has concluded that there is insufficient open space in that locality.
The subdivision of Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard, which has an area of 9,615m², for a portion of high density residential development (of more than 5 dwellings) would as a requirement of the Planning and
City of Bunbury Page 119 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Development Act 2005 necessitate the ceding of 10% POS as a standard condition of subdivision. As it cannot be demonstrated that the land has already been given up for open space in an earlier subdivision.
However, in this instance, where the POS area would be impracticably small and the developer does not wish to incorporate any POS within their development (which is the case for the subject site), then the making of a cash contribution in lieu of the land towards the improvement of an existing park within the Sandridge Park neighbourhood would be acceptable.7
Nevertheless, in accordance with modified clause 39, a POS contribution would only be required for the residential component of the development on the subject site, which would be required in the form of a cash-in-lieu contribution at the time a development approval is granted (i.e. as a condition of development approval) or at the clearance of subdivision conditions.
With respect to the originally drafted requirement of clause 40 for an Activity Centre Plan or Structure Plan, it can be advised that this provision has been revised to only relate to the need for a Local Development Plan for larger and more complex mixed use zone development sites, as follows:
38. Requirement for Local Development Plans in Mixed Use Zones
The preparation, submission and approval of a local development plan to the specifications and satisfaction of the local government prior to subdivision or development occurring in the Mixed Use – Commercial Zone, Mixed Use – Residential Zone and Mixed Use – Tourism Zone may be required for -
(a) large and complex proposals involving the
7 Refer to clause ‘153. Payment in lieu of giving land for open space, when permitted’ of the Planning and Development Act 2005.
City of Bunbury Page 120 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission development or redevelopment of a lot greater than 3,000m² in area, or the amalgamation of three or more lots (whichever is the lesser); or
(b) the extension or expansion of an existing development (other than the refurbishment of an existing building) on a lot, where the proposed new development is greater than 2,000m² nla.
Regarding the requirement for a Local Development Plan over the subject site, this requirement (as opposed to a Structure Plan) has been specified by the WAPC as part of its final modifications to the Scheme Amendment 78 documentation. Nevertheless, as stated in the comments on submission number 22 (made by McRobert Planning Pty Ltd), minor modifications to the provisions of the Development Areas Special Control Area are recommended, with the addition of the following clause which clarifies when a Structure Plan is required (as opposed to a Local Development Plan):
2. The local government may require the preparation and submission of a Structure Plan where:
(a) a State Planning Policy requires a Structure Plan to be prepared for the area; or
(b) a proposed development and/or use of premises within a Special Control Area and/or Urban Development Zone or Industrial Development Zone involves the reconfiguration of lots through subdivision and/or amalgamation.
With respect to the requested designation of a portion (north east corner) of the Homemaker Centre for ‘Local Centre Zone’, it is advised that this specific proposal would represent a significant modification that has not been put to the local residential community, and hence, would likely trigger the need to readvertise the draft Scheme. Consequently, it is recommended that the proposal, supported by a Retail Sustainability Assessment prepared in accordance with the
City of Bunbury Page 121 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission WAPC’s Activity Centres for Greater Bunbury Policy (April 2012), could be progressed by the proponent for Council’s consideration as an amendment to the new Scheme once it has been gazetted.
In relation to development setbacks in the ‘Service Commercial Zone’, it can be advised that most of the urban design controls in Part 4 and Schedule 5 of the advertised version of the draft Scheme text are recommended to be incorporated into a local planning policy, which will ensure adequate flexibility for the designing and assessment of development proposals within the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ (and all other zones). Furthermore, specified side and rear setbacks for the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ given in the rationalised Schedule 5 is recommended to be modified as follows:
Where not adjoining Residential Zone premises, minimum nil (0m) building setback to rear and side boundaries, subject to appropriate car parking, access and loading arrangements.
Where adjoining Residential Zone premises, the building setback is to be not less than half the height of the wall of the proposed building with a minimum setback of 3.0m.
Subject to the discretionary approval of the local government, a building on the boundary abutting a Residential Zone premises is to be a maximum height of 3.5m above natural ground level as measured from the adjoining residential property for 2/3 the length of the balance of the boundary behind the front setback.
These recommendations have been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text.
46 Planning Solutions Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) [Large submission document regarding Lot 107 (#42) Strickland Street, Lot 38 Refer to comments provided in response to submission numbers: Ross Underwood (#4) Mervyn Street and Lot 500 (closed road), Bunbury (Homemaker Centre) (Senior Planner) 35 (made by the Large Format Retail Association (LFRA)) regarding lodged on behalf of Citygate Properties Pty Ltd – refer to Annex 3.] bulky goods showrooming; Level 1, 251 St Georges Terrace, PERTH WA 39 (made by Halsall and Associates) regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27)
City of Bunbury Page 122 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission 6000 Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Bunbury; 43 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 12 (1) Island Queen (DOC/292100, 292372) Street, Withers; 44 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 59 (#2) Austral Parade, East Bunbury; and 45 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 107 (#42) Strickland Street, Bunbury.
It is acknowledged that Lot 500 (formerly a portion of Mervin Street) should logically be included in the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ as requested.
This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map.
47 Todd Brown Objection It must be appreciated that the Local Planning Strategy sets out a vision for the development of the city over a 20 year timeframe, and [Large submission document regarding Strata Lot 1 on Strata Plan: 74138 (#8) 32 Churchill Drive, that the Local Planning Scheme only deals with the next 5 years. Rose Street and 11 Bourke Street, Bunbury – refer to Annex 4.] BUNBURY WA 6230 Therefore, the draft Scheme seeks to implement only those aspects of the inaugural Strategy that are feasible, acceptable and suitable to do (DOC/292186, 292211) over the immediate and short term. The purpose of the Local Planning Strategy, therefore, is to provide guidance on subsequent scheme amendments and the next scheme review. As it is through the statutory procedures for scheme amendments and review that Council and its community can consider the appropriate timing for making any charges as foreseen in the Local Planning Strategy.
The suggestion of including all of the land encompassed by Zoe Street, Cornwall Street, Blair Street and Rose Street in the ‘Mixed Use - Commercial Zone’ would represent a significant modification that has not been put to the surrounding landowners of what is now ‘Mixed Business Zone’ (future ‘Service Commercial Zone’) land; and hence, considering this change would likely trigger the need to readvertise the draft Scheme.
City of Bunbury Page 123 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
It is therefore recommended that this issue could be investigated as an amendment proposal to the new Scheme after it has been gazetted or at the time of the next Scheme review. This approach means that the proposal (or the interim proposal of potentially rezoning the western side of Zoe Street, from Cornwall Street down to George Street, to ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’) can be properly considered through a targeted consultation process with affected landowners.
48 Lush Fire & Planning Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text) Introduction Noted. The description of land at A.U.10 in Table 4 of Schedule 1 - Geoffrey Lush Additional Uses Table will be modified to delete reference to ‘Portion The land subject of this submission is Lot 100 DP61127 Wimbridge Road as of Lot 7’. PO Box 114 contained in Certificate of Title Volume 2697 Folio 327. This submission is made WOODANILLING WA on behalf of the landowners’ being: This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of 6316 Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text. • Dardanup Butchering Company Nominees Pty Ltd (DBC); and (DOC/292240) All land reserved as regional ‘Primary Regional Roads Reserve’ under • Fieldgrass Pty Ltd the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS) is outside the jurisdiction of the Local Planning Scheme. The subject land has been developed as an abattoir with associated infrastructure. Dardanup Butchering Company (DBC) was founded in 1948 by Frank Panizza.
The site has an extensive planning history with the most recent events being:
a) The endorsement of the Wimbridge Structure Plan by Council on the 29th April 2015 following Appeal DR398 of 2014; and
b) The gazettal of Amendment 85 on the 27th September 2016.
The aim of the Structure Plan is to facilitate the urban development of the Wimbridge precinct as part of an integrated and coordinated mixed business and industrial hub of Glen Iris and Moorlands, and in accordance with the Glen Iris – Moorlands Local Area Plan. The Structure plan seeks to achieve this aim by encouraging good urban design that protects nearby residential amenity, co-
City of Bunbury Page 124 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission location of uses within the industrial buffer that are compatible with the operations of the existing DBC abattoir, inclusion of urban water sensitive design principles, management of existing drainage issues and integrate road and open space networks in a manner that is sympathetic to the existing environment.
The Structure Plan was subject to extensive preparation and approval processes. This included review by Council; the Department of Planning and subsequently by the State Administrative Tribunal.
Subsequently Amendment No 85 to Local Planning Scheme No 7 was prepared and gazetted to give effect to various structure plan provisions.
It is expected that these provisions will be carried forward into the draft Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme No 8.
Submission
In relation to Local Planning Scheme No 8 it is submitted that:
1. The landowners support the inclusion of Lot 100 as Additional Use Zone No 10 with the associated conditions in Table 4;
2. The landowners support the Special Control Area Abattoir Notification and Special Control Area Abattoir which apply to the land surrounding Lot 100;
3. The landowners object to the Description of Land in Table 4 making reference to Lot 100 and Portion Lot 7. Lot 7 is an adjacent property which is not part of the abattoir licenced area. The endorsed Structure Plan Map and provisions clearly only make reference to Lot 100 in relation to the provisions which have not been included in Table 4. It is further noted that Scheme Map No 9 does not show Lot 7 being included in Additional Use Zone No 10.
4. The landowners continue to object to the proposed regional road Winsor Road connection to the Port Access Road which impacts on the south eastern portion of Lot 100. While acknowledging that this road reserve was introduced by Amendment 0027/57 to the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme, the
City of Bunbury Page 125 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission landowners maintain their objection to this on the basis that:
• The reservation unacceptably encroaches on the abattoir operations and reduces the area of irrigable land required in winter required to meet DEC licence requirements;
• The proposed road deviation is not required and the whole of that reservation should be removed or relocated away from DBC land; and
• The owner will require to be fully compensated for the impacts of the GBRS reservation on DBC’s operations and interests, including the long –term blight caused by the sterilisation of the land, and potential reduction of production capacity, if the reservation is not removed.
49 RPS Busselton Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission numbers: RPS is pleased to provide the following submission on behalf of Bunnings with 34 (made by Robert Nicholson) regarding car parking; Matt Young (Manager) respect to the abovementioned documents that are currently being advertised 35 (made by the Large Format Retail Association (LFRA)) regarding by the City of Bunbury. PO BOX 749 the ‘bulky goods showroom land use class definition and in About Bunnings relation to the recommendation to make ‘bulky goods showroom’ BUSSELTON WA 6280 a discretionary ‘D’ use in the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’; Bunnings is the leading retailer of home improvement and outdoor living (DOC/292241) 39 (made by Halsall and Associates) regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27) products in Australia and New Zealand and a major supplier to project builders, Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Bunbury, regarding commercial tradespeople and the housing industry. Operating from a network expanded land use permissibility of the ‘Service Commercial Zone’; of large warehouse stores, smaller format stores, trade centres and frame and truss sites, Bunnings caters for consumer and commercial customers. Revenue 43 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 12 (1) Island Queen across the 2016 financial year totalled $10.5 billion. As at December 2016 there Street, Withers, in relation to the ‘shop’ land use class being were 248 warehouses, 73 smaller format stores, 33 trade centres and three recommended as a permitted ‘P’ use in the ‘Neighbourhood frame and truss centres operating across Australia and New Zealand. At Centre Zone’; December 2016 Bunnings employed more than 41,000 team members. 44 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 59 (#2) Austral Parade, East Bunbury, in relation to the ‘liquor store - small’ land Key Summary use class being recommended as a discretionary ‘A’ use in the ‘Local Centre Zone’; and Being a company that operates on a national basis, Bunnings has constantly advocated for state-wide if not national consistency for the planning process 45 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 107 (#42) Strickland generally, including land use planning definitions, zoning table and model Street, Bunbury.
City of Bunbury Page 126 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission scheme provisions to provide for a level playing field and to minimise bureaucracy and red tape.
The Draft scheme and strategy contain a significant number of departures from the current TPS 7 and planning strategy. Bunnings has some concerns with the following specific elements of the draft Local Planning Scheme No 8.
Land Use Definitions
Objection: Bulky Goods Showroom Defintion. The proposed definition for ‘Bulky Goods Showroom’ is inconsistent with that provided in the model local planning scheme provisions provided in Schedule 1 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. This is a major cause for concern and objection. There is no logical justification for draft LPS 8 to vary the definition of Bulky Goods Showroom as provided for in the Regulations.
This proposed definition of Bulky Goods Showroom that the City is seeking to include in draft LPS 8 continues to reflect the concerns that Bunnings has previously raised in terms of statewide consistency of scheme text provisions. The proposed definition, which set out a range of permissible uses where goods and accessories require a large area for the handling, display or storage of the bulky goods, is impractical and restrictive.
It is important to note that Bunnings stock some merchandise that does not satisfy part (a) of the definition but would satisfy part (b) of the definition i.e. bulky goods that require a large retail area.
The specifying of and (and not or) in draft LPS 8 results in parts of the current Bunnings retail offering in Bunbury to either become non-conforming or not being permitted for display or sale. We do not believe that this is the intention of the definition.
In summary, the definition of Bulky Goods Showroom in draft LPS 8 should be consistent with the model scheme provisions in the LPS Regulations and should not restrict / prevent Bunnings from conducting its current offering.
Support: Inclusion of Wholesale and Hire. The inclusion of the terms ‘wholesale’
City of Bunbury Page 127 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and ‘hire’ in the proposed draft LPS 8 definition for Bulky Goods Showroom is logical and something that Bunnings is prepared to support in the event that any departures from the LPS Regulations are permitted by the Minister.
Zoning and Land Use Permissibility
Comment: Broadening of permitted and discretionary uses should be considered in zoning table. With a typical Bunnings site being classified as a Bulky Goods Showroom, there are a number of zones that are identified in the draft LPS 8 Zoning Table where use permissibility for Bulky Goods Showroom should be relaxed or broadened.
• Regional Centre and Neighbourhood Centre Zone: Bulky Goods Showroom should be a ‘P’ (Permitted) land use within the zones, consistent with the stated zone objectives to provide a variety/range of shopping and commercial services and employment opportunities.
• Light Industry Zone: should be a ‘P’ (Permitted) land use within the Light Industry zone, given the general compatibility of this use with light industrial land uses which commonly have similar site land and site requirements.
• Local Centre Zone: should be a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use.
• Mixed Use – Commercial and Mixed Use – Residential Zone: should be a ‘D’ (Discretionary) land use given the range of bulky goods showroom retailing activities that are compatible with a mixed use development form (e.g. homewares, electrical goods, babies and children’s goods etc.)
Floorspace Restrictions
Objection: Inclusion of Floor Space Limits for Bulky Goods Showroom. A range of additional development requirements are set out in Schedule 5 of draft LPS 8 with respect to:
• Mixed Use – Commercial Zone: Bulky Goods Showroom land use is limited to a maximum of 500m2 NLA per lot, or 1000m2 max NLA per lot if part of mixed use development.
City of Bunbury Page 128 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Mixed Use – Residential Zone: Bulky Goods Showroom land use is limited to a maximum of 500m2 NLA per lot.
• Service Commercial Zone: Bulky Goods Showroom land use must constitute at least 200m² NLA per lot.
The application of floorspace requirements on a ‘per lot’ basis is problematic. Bunnings does not support floorspace limitations of any kind for bulky goods showroom premises. The removal of floor space requirements encourages owners and developers to be more creative and innovative in the dissection of floorspace, which in turn creates a more interesting and competitive retail offering. Floorspace requirements for Bulky Goods Showroom should be removed from Schedule 5 of draft LPS 8.
Car Parking
Comment: Prescription of Car Parking Spaces Needs to be Reduced. Table 7 of draft LPS 3 indicates that the ratio of parking bays for Bulky Goods Showroom is 1 bay per 50 square metres of NLA of premises open to the public and used for display, sale or hire; plus 1 bay per 100 square metres of NLA of premises not open to the public and used for storage.
Due to the diverse nature of the Bunnings business, it is considered that more flexibility should be provided to determine car parking space ratios. Many local authorities have moved to car parking standards being set out in their Local Planning Policy framework which provides more flexibility to consider a ‘merits based’ approach to the provision of car parking spaces. The existing approach under TPS 7 and proposed LPS 8 is overly prescriptive. The inclusion of Table 7 in draft LPS 8 should be reconsidered with a view to having car parking standards set out in planning policy rather than the Scheme.
General Comments
The draft Local Planning Strategy contains some promising focus areas with regard to activity centres, and the focus away from overly prescriptive floorspace limits is strongly supported. However, this focus needs to translate
City of Bunbury Page 129 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission into reduced floor area prescription in draft LPS 8.
50 Lush Fire & Planning Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) Introduction Noted. The zoning/reserving of the relevant portion of Lot 58 Geoffrey Lush Woodley Road and all of Lot 201 Willinge Drive, Glen Iris, will be This submission lodged in respect of Lot 58 and 201 Woodley Road Picton. The modified on the Scheme map so that the subject land is included in PO Box 114 subject land is owned by Fieldgrass Pty Ltd and contained in the following the ‘Urban Development Zone’ or ‘Industry Development Zone’ as WOODANILLING WA Certificates of Title: appropriate, which will enable the staged implementation of the 6316 Wimbridge Structure Plan in accordance with the proponent’s desired Lot Plan Area (ha) Vol Folio Owner timeframe for subdivision and development. However, it should be (DOC/292242) noted though that ‘basic’ amendments will need to occur to the draft 58 2751 12,773 2789 400 Fieldgrass Pty Ltd Scheme once it has been gazetted in order to enable the local government to grant development approvals. 201 72252 9.26 2791 989 Fieldgrass Pty Ltd This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of The site has an extensive planning history with the most recent events being: Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map.
a) The endorsement of the Wimbridge Structure Plan by Council on the 29th April 2015 following Appeal DR398 of 2014; and
b) The gazettal of Amendment 85 on the 27th September 2016.
The aim of the Structure Plan is to facilitate the urban development of the Wimbridge precinct as part of an integrated and coordinated mixed business and industrial hub of Glen Iris and Moorlands, and in accordance with the Glen Iris – Moorlands Local Area Plan. The Structure plan seeks to achieve this aim by encouraging good urban design that protects nearby residential amenity, co- location of uses within the industrial buffer that are compatible with the operations of the existing DBC abattoir, inclusion of urban water sensitive design principles, management of existing drainage issues and integrate road and open space networks in a manner that is sympathetic to the existing environment.
The Structure Plan was subject to extensive preparation and approval processes. This included review by Council; the Department of Planning and subsequently by the State Administrative Tribunal.
City of Bunbury Page 130 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Subsequently Amendment No 85 to Local Planning Scheme No 7 was prepared and gazetted to give effect to various structure plan provisions.
It is expected that these provisions will be carried forward into the draft Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme No 8. It is noted that Strategy Map shows the general land uses and road layout as contained in the Wimbridge Structure Plan. The existing site conditions and an extract of the endorsed Wimbridge Structure Plan are shown on Plan 1.
The proposed zoning of the subject land is shown below:
[Figure of draft Scheme Map extract of subject area in original submission document]
Lot 58 is proposed Lot 201 is proposed
• Part Residential; • Part Service Commercial;
• Part Service Commercial; • Part Public Open Space Reserve;
• Part Public Open Space Reserve; • Fully SCA Abattoir Notification;
• Part SCA Abattoir Notification; • Fully SCA Abattoir;
• Part SCA Abattoir; • Fully SCA Environment; and
• Fully SCA Environment; and • Part SCA Development Areas
• Part SCA Development Areas
Submission
Issue 1 Multiple Structure Plan Requirements
The draft Planning Scheme is silent on any transitional provisions associated with the endorsed Wimbridge structure plan while noting that in accordance with Clause 28 of Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning
City of Bunbury Page 131 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Schemes) Regulations 2015, the structure plan is valid for a period of 10 years.
A literal interpretation of the Scheme would be that additional individual structure plans are now also required under both the Bushland Special Control Area for the whole of the site and the Development Special Control Area for part of the site. The Wimbridge structure plan provides for the further investigation of development issues within the Development Special Control Area.
Clause 24 of the LPS Regulations provides that a structure plan may provide for later approval of details of subdivision provided that these would not result in a substantial departure from the plan. Redesigning the subdivision design shown on the Scheme Maps as a result of any structure plan required under the Bushland SCA would be a major departure from the endorsed Wimbridge structure plan.
Issue 2 Bushland Special Control Areas
The landowners object the inclusion of Lots 58 and 201 in the Bushland Special Control Area both in the Local Planning Scheme and as shown on the Natural Environment Strategy Map for the reasons outlined below:
1. The Bushland Special Control Area is not restricted to the central drainage area located between Lots 58 and 201 but has now been expanded to include all of the area of both lots. The purpose of the Bushland Special Control Area as stated in Schedule 7 of the Scheme is:
To designate areas that are known or likely to include ecological assets, values or features of local, regional or state significance.
2. The designation of an ecological corridor along the drainage areas of this land and the adjoining properties has been reflected in the local strategic planning for more than 20 years. However, this has never extended to cover all of the lots. This is shown on Plans 2, 3 and 4 which contain extracts from the original 1995 Glen Iris Structure Plan through to the 2013 Greater Bunbury Structure Plan.
City of Bunbury Page 132 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
3. An enlargement of the existing site conditions is shown on Plan 5. The proposed Residential zone in Lot 58 contains only a very minor portion of remnant vegetation. There are no ecological assets in this section of Lot 58 and this issue formed part of the advertising and referral of the Wimbridge structure plan.
4. Similarly, the proposed Service Commercial zone only has a minor area of vegetation as shown on Plan 5. The final approval of the Wimbridge structure plan retained this area in the Mixed Business land use category without designating it for further investigation or review.
5. The designation of the Bushland Special Control Area over the Residential and Service Commercial zones will create uncertainty especially when there is already an endorsed structure plan in place.
Issue 3 Public Open Space Reserve
The landowners object the designation of the land within the Development Special Control Area as Public Open Space Reserve.
The purpose of the Development Special Control Area in this location is to require further investigation of the drainage areas under the Wimbridge structure plan. In particular, this relates to the Department of Housing land on the northern side of Woodley Road and the finalisation of the structure planning and subdivision design in that area.
The Public Open Space Reserve designation pre-empts the outcome of any further investigation. It is submitted that this area:
• Should be zoned as Urban Development which has the objective of providing an intention of future land use and a basis for more detailed structure planning in accordance with the provisions of this Scheme.
• That it is unnecessary to have both the Bushland and Development Special Control Areas overlapping each other.
[Plan 1 air photo and extract from Wimbridge Structure Plan of subject area in
City of Bunbury Page 133 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission original submission document]
[Plan 2 extract from original Glen Iris Structure Plan (1995) and Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS) of subject area in original submission document]
[Plan 3 extract from draft 2006 Glen Iris Structure Plan and 2008 approved Moorlands Local Area Plan (sic) of subject area in original submission document]
[Plan 4 extract from 2013 Greater Bunbury Structure Plan of subject area in original submission document]
[Plan 5 aerial photo showing area of Lot 58 consistent with Wimbridge Structure Plan and area of vegetation on Lot 201 within ‘Service Commercial Zone’ in original submission document]
51 Steve Prosser Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 47 (made by Todd Brown) regarding the suggestion of including all of the [Letter dated 16 December 2017 with enclosed report by McRobert Planning] 11 Mummery Crescent, land encompassed by Zoe Street, Cornwall Street, Blair Street and EAST BUNBURY WA Rose Street in the ‘Mixed Use - Commercial Zone’. Town Planning Scheme No. 8 submission closes today December 16, 2016. 6230 Attached is my submission. Investigation and formulation of provisions for a ‘Regional Centre (DOC/292243) Transition Zone’ would represent a significant amount of work, and The proposed Scheme with its setback, landscaping and car parking is more furthermore, would be a major/strategic modification that has not restrictive that TPS7, which was workable. Also the uncertainty of the “use” been put to affected landowners of what is now ‘Mixed Business table with A & D requirements and not many “P” uses when deciding to develop Zone’ (future ‘Service Commercial Zone’); and hence, considering this an existing Lot of land in Bunbury. change would likely trigger the need to readvertise the draft Scheme. As there is increased competition for commercial and industrial development in It should also be noted that it is expected by the Western Australian neighboring Shires like Harvey, Dardanup and Capel, I hope the City will view Planning Commission (WAPC) that the suite of zones used in Local these submissions when considering the finalization of the Scheme. Planning Schemes should conform to the nomenclature and objectives that are set out in the model provisions of the Planning and Should you wish to discuss my submission or require further clarification I can Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. be contacted on 9791 1589.
[Attached large submission document regarding land between Blair Street and Spencer Street south of the current ‘City Centre Zone’ and north of Strickland Street – refer to Annex 5.]
City of Bunbury Page 134 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
52 Anthony Greig Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission numbers: I own several properties within the City of Bunbury and have serious concerns 39 (made by Halsall and Associates) regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27) 4 Eden Street, SOUTH with the proposed changes from the current "Mixed Business" zone to "Service Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Bunbury, regarding BUNBURY WA 6230 Commercial". My property at 1 Teede Street (corner Zoe Street, Lot 20P2854) expanded land use permissibility of the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ and its future development potential will be severely restricted by the proposed and levels of discretion in the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’; and (DOC/292270) changes. 47 (made by Todd Brown) regarding the suggestion of including all I am a Licensed Property Valuer and have lived and worked in Bunbury and the of the land encompassed by Zoe Street, Cornwall Street, Blair South West region having valued property in this region for 20 years, and Street and Rose Street in the ‘Mixed Use - Commercial Zone’. believe my observations for Bunbury have merit.
In February 2007, I placed a submission to Council with respect to the Planning Policy amendment identifying "Areas of Commercial Primacy", where residential development was to be discouraged, the aim being to protect core commercial areas of the Central City area. My main concern was that an existing permitted use was removed from "Mixed Business" zoned development options available to me without having any other additional benefits conferred.
As an approved "Office" use, my property was vacant for over 3 years and from February this year I have had to return it to a residential tenancy.
This area of "Commercial Primacy" has been neglected by the City in many ways. The roads, kerbing etc. are a disgrace and offer no incentive for development.
This "Commercial Primacy" area has been diluted in its effectiveness with Council approving Mixed Use proposals in Forrest Avenue (which already has an appalling traffic situation and a zoning of R60 has been ignored by potential developers), and Strickland Street with the same issues. The vacancy rate of Commercial premises in the CBD would appear to support the obvious failure of these decisions. Also, there appears to have been no consultation with adjoining property owners for non-compliant premises - I cite the 2 storey offices on Zoe Street which exceed the maximum 200m² floor area that compromise the adjoining residential property 'solar panels', and the offices with mezzanine level forming a second floor on Strickland Street (the premises which
City of Bunbury Page 135 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission temporarily housed the Bunbury City Library during re-construction).
Residential componentry within business areas offer security to business premises as the "eyes on the street" for crime reduction and support to small business in the area. This area between Blair Street and Spencer Street will be denied Residential Building, Home Business, Home Occupation, Home Office, Home Store and Single House. This area was the backbone of the CBD in years past with most lot sizes being 1000m² or smaller. I do not see these selling like "hot cakes", but quite the opposite. To aggregate two or more properties for development under TPS8, would be prohibitive in costs, approvals and red tape.
With TPS8, the mixed residential focus will be upon Spencer Street, Beach Road and Strickland Street - busy roads. The Omnibus amendment which applied a residential dual zoning (eg R20/30) to many residential areas was said to be used to address the number of driveways and vehicles turning into these properties. I see traffic problems replicated to the same extent as the Medical/Consulting Rooms area of Spencer Street.
Restaurant/Café is not a permitted use? The Council owned Car Parks within these areas can support this use. It was an approved use in TPS6.
Changing focus to the Mixed Business area East of Blair Street, there are also glaring issues for the proposed "Service Commercial" zoning. Two of the most important are the fact that Denning Road and Mummery Crescent are not sewered and do not have sufficient Mains Supply water pressure for fire services. (Low water pressure is also a factor affecting the area west of Blair Street). This area is predominantly Light Industrial use - how can the proposed Scheme identify "Light Industry" as a discretionary use? The larger lot sizes found in this area do have merit for Bulky Goods Showroom use.
I believe the TPS8 is premature in its delivery. The results of the 2016 Census have not yet been released for public consumption, which may have an influence on forecasting and modelling decisions for the future of this critical area. Additionally, I have not seen or know of any research into the mix and use of businesses within these areas and would think it prudent to conduct market research into the current use classifications found in the current "Mixed
City of Bunbury Page 136 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Business" area prior to adopting these radical changes.
I hope these comments assist Council to get the correct blend within the current Mixed Business zone. There are currently two distinct areas that require a different strategy to get the right `mix'. I do not believe the current proposal achieves the desired outcome, for the short or intermediate term.
Should you wish to discuss this further, I would be happy to speak with you and may be contacted on 0403 751 317 or by email attached to the submission form.
53 McRobert Planning Pty Objection Noted. As advised in comments on submission number 34 (made by Ltd Robert Nicholson), In relation to building height, it is proposed that Lot 210 (No 18) Wellington Street, Lot 174 (No 24) Molloy Street and Lot 1 (No this parameter remains a matter of policy regulation (to accord with 22) corner of Wellington and Molloy Streets, Bunbury Andrew McRobert the Residential Design Codes), which enables a performance based (Director) flexible approach that balances the proponent’s desire to maximise This submission has been prepared by McRobert Planning Pty Ltd on behalf of B their development potential (further incentivised by the new & K Superannuation Fund, the BKMT Futures Fund and Mr B. Catalano the PO Box 2156 BUNBURY Scheme’s plot ratio bonuses) with community’s concerns regarding registered owners of Lot 210 (No 18) Wellington Street, Lot 174 (No 24) Molloy WA 6231 the impact of unchecked building height on overshadowing, loss of Street and Lot 1 (No 22) corner of Wellington and Molloy Streets in Bunbury, view sheds, etc. respectively (refer to Figure 1 below). (DOC/292272) The submission seeks the City of Bunbury's support in modifying the proposed building height limitations contained within draft Local Planning Scheme No 8 and Local Planning Policy 3.12 as they apply to the land the subject of this submission. It is recommended that the proposed height limitations contained in each should accord with Table 4 of the Western Australian Planning Commission's State Planning Policy 3.1 'Residential Design Codes'.
[Figure 1 – Subject Site in original submission document]
The subject land is included within the 'Regional Centre' zone of proposed Local Planning Scheme No 8. The Residential Density Code `R-AC3' is also proposed to be applied to the subject lots within Local Planning Scheme No 8 (refer to Figure 2 below).
[Figure 2 – Extract from Proposed Local Planning Scheme No 8 Scheme Map in
City of Bunbury Page 137 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission original submission document]
Table 4 of the Western Australian Planning Commission's State Planning Policy 3.1 'Residential Design Codes' (refer to Figure 3 below) provide for maximum building heights of between 18 metres and 21 metres for land coded 'R-AC3'.
[Figure 3 – Extract from the Residential Design Codes in original submission document]
Notwithstanding the land's proposed inclusion within the R-AC3 density code, proposed Map A 'Regional Centre Zone Building Height Map' (refer to Figure 4) as contained within draft City of Bunbury Local Planning Scheme No 8, proposes a height limitation of 12 metres for the land the subject of this submission.
[Figure 4 – Map A ‘Regional Centre Zone Building Height Map’ in original submission document]
The stated objectives for the 'Regional Centre' zone contained within draft Local Planning Scheme No 8 include "To ensure the provision of residential opportunities within the Regional Centre including high density housing and tourist accommodation that supports the role of the Regional Centre and meets the needs of the community." The recommendations contained within this submission are considered to be consistent with this objective.
Proposed 'Schedule 5 (and Table 8) - Additional Zone Development Requirements' includes the following requirements for the Regional Centre Zone in relation to building height:
2. Building Height:
2.1 Maximum building height above natural ground level to be in accordance with Regional Centre Zone Building Height Map (Map A), except where located within a local planning policy, activity centre plan or structure plan area, where building heights are to be in accordance with the design guidelines of the relevant local planning policy, activity centre plan or structure plan.
2.2 Any variations to the maximum building height must be in accordance
City of Bunbury Page 138 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission with the relevant local planning policy, subject to the discretion of the local government.
2.3 Where located in the ‘Pedestrian Core’ of the Regional Centre Zone in accordance with the Regional Centre Zone Setback and Pedestrian Core Map (Map B), minimum building frontage height to be 7.5m (2 storeys) above natural ground level for a minimum depth of 10m from the front property boundary.
Note: Refer to Diagram 1.
It is recommended that 'Requirement' 2.1 be amended generally in accordance with sub-clause 5.10.2.3.1 of existing Town Planning Scheme No 7 to instead read: "2.1 All residential development/use within the Regional Centre zone, whether in a mixed use development or not, shall conform to the applicable standards and requirements prescribed in the Residential Design Codes and any relevant Local Planning Policy."
As a consequence of the proposed changes to building heights within Local Planning Scheme No 8, it will be necessary for the City to amend its Local Planning Policy 3.12 'Building Height'. It is further recommended by way of this submission that the Local Planning Policy instead be amended to facilitate building heights upon land coded R-AC3 in accordance with the Residential Design Codes.
Having regard to Provision 8.2.1 of the City's Local Planning Policy 3.12 'Building Height', it is noted that the subject land is located in excess of the 300 metre horizontal setback datum established within 'Statement of Planning Policy 2.6: State Coastal Planning Policy'.
Having regard to the:
1. limited area of the Bunbury Central Business District;
2. extent of land within the CBD currently impacted by the 300 metre horizontal separation imposed within the State Coastal Planning Policy; and,
3. current constraints to the future expansion of the Regional Centre,
City of Bunbury Page 139 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
it is considered to be of paramount importance that available land be utilised as efficiently as possible including maximising building heights.
The City of Bunbury is therefore, respectfully requested to modify the proposed Local Planning Scheme No 8 and Local Planning Policy 3.12 in accordance with the above recommendations.
Should you have any queries in relation to this matter please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned on 0448890441 or [email protected].
54 Calibre Consulting Objection A meeting between representative of Calibre Consulting and officers of the City of Bunbury was held on 16 February 2017, at which the [Large submission document enclosure to cover letter – refer to Annex 6.] Gary Barbour (Manager following matters were raised by Calibre Consulting as being the key South West) issues of their submission regarding the draft Local Planning Strategy [Letter dated 16 December 2016] and draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8: Unit 5, #53 Victoria I refer to the above matter and write to provide the City of Bunbury with our Calibre Consulting – the Scheme and Strategy are too big and Street, BUNBURY WA feedback about these important planning documents. complex, as the schemes for Geraldton and Busselton are much 6230 shorter. We have evaluated the draft Local Planning Strategy (LPS) and Local Planning (DOC/292273) Officers advised that Part 4 and Schedule 5 of the advertised Scheme 8 (TPS8), and overall, we are pleased to see that the City has reached version of the draft Scheme text will be rationalised, with most of the important milestone of advertising their intentions. the urban design controls going into local planning policy. From our evaluation, we have considerable concern about critical aspects of Calibre Consulting - it had taken a long time to get to this point but these two proposed documents and their impact. acknowledges that the City of Bunbury experienced delays (e.g. due to Bunbury Growth Plan, R-Code changes, and new We strongly encourage the City to fundamentally review and make Regulations), and some of the strategies require review already, improvements to the LPS before it is adopted. The LPS in its present form seeks such as for housing and tourism. to implement many land use planning strategies that are yet to be investigated and proven. It is premature to give effect to undeveloped local planning Officers advised that the Local Planning Strategy is a living strategy, and to commence implementing this through new Scheme provisions. document that is intended to be regularly updated over the life of the Scheme, with other supporting strategies also being reviewed In this regard, we ask the City to follow the example of many other local in due course based on Council’s priorities. governments and work to improve, then seek to finalize and have the LPS Calibre Consulting - housing density along Back Beach and around approved first, separate to, rather than concurrently with TPS8. The current the High School, GWN site should be increased, as Back Beach is a approach creates inherent risk and unwarranted complexity, and is in our wasted opportunity for redevelopment. Land along Back Beach opinion, erroneous. should be zoned residential with medium to high densities, as
City of Bunbury Page 140 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission enough tourism sites exist along Koombana Bay and Marlston Our feedback and concerns are elaborated upon in detail in the two attached Waterfront. Finance for development in a tourism zoning is not submissions, one for the LPS and one for TPS8. In summary, our most critical possible, even for unrestricted length of stay. Development comments are that: requirements for current Special Use Zone sites are hard to find in the new Scheme, as you have to look at ‘Additional Use’, • Both the LPS and TPS8 are unnecessarily complex and the process has lacked ‘Restricted Use’ and development schedules to find all the an overall game plan that explains how, where and why changes have been information. made. This has added considerably to the task of appreciating both documents. Alongside this, the LPS consistently overlaps into operational areas beyond the The format and contents of the new Scheme is in accordance with scope of the City’s Planning Department. the model provisions, as specified in the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. • The LPS and TPS8 fail to recognise and respond to Bunbury’s pivotal role in the It is advised that the residential densities applied in the draft Greater Bunbury and South West Region. This positioning strongly influences Scheme reflect the outcomes of the comprehensive R-Code land use planning strategy yet it is absent. Omnibus Amendment (Scheme Amendment 38, gazetted 6 December 2011) made to the existing Town Planning Scheme • There is no explanation as to how feedback from key sectors and stakeholders No. 7. As such, the R-Code Omnibus Amendment implemented has been addressed in the LPS. the recommendations of the adopted Local Planning Strategy for Activity Centres and Neighbourhoods. • The LPS is lacking sufficient, current investigation and analysis about some of the most fundamental land use planning issues that Bunbury faces. New In preparing the draft Local Planning Strategy and its strategic directions in TPS8 must be embedded in and proven by sufficient accompanying revised draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 it was investigation before they are implemented. Some of these ideas are desirable, considered that the residential density codes applied through the however they must be fully developed before being introduced. R-Code Omnibus Amendment largely remain valid, albeit with changes enabled by the introduction of the new activity centre • Many of the new provisions of the Draft TPS8 will not practically achieve their and mixed use zonings. intended impact, and translation from current TPS7 is not always successful. The new ‘Tourism Zone’ that replaces the ad hoc Special Use Many provisions in TPS8 will have unintended, negative consequences. Zones reflects a balance between the State government and Council’s strategic goals for promoting tourism development in the • There are many significant new directions in the LPS that warrant exposure, city and investor’s desire for flexibility in the provision of short- notice to landowners and consideration in their own right, not hidden amongst term accommodation for visitors or unrestricted length of stay the complexity of this much bigger process. opportunities for residents. As such, the new Scheme strikes this In their present form, these two new documents could make planning processes balance in accommodating both tourism and lifestyle choice in its version of the ‘Tourism Zone’. and decision making in Bunbury even more complex, uncertain and difficult to engage with. This may actually stifle new development rather than support or Modification to Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme ideally incentivize investment. (Text & Map) Noted. Officers agree that while the model provisions specify the It is absolutely essential that the LPS and TPS8 decision making framework is
City of Bunbury Page 141 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission solid, transparent and easily understood so that it can be consistently applied title of ‘Tourism Zone’, the City of Bunbury’s version of this zoning with longevity, regardless of who is involved at any given point in time. It is reflects its unique circumstance, by enabling a range of critical to get the LPS right and working first, ahead of implementation through unrestricted length of stay options and allied non-residential land a new Scheme. uses. Consequently, it is recommended at this time that the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) permits the City Aside from this, we make the point that a lack of community comment about of Bunbury to modify the name of the zone to ‘Mixed Use – these involved and technical planning documents should not be construed as Tourism Zone’, so that it properly reflects its objectives and more public support. Similarly, we flag that in all of the promotion of TPS8, the LPS explicitly forms part of the suite of new mixed use zones. does not seem to have received the attention it equally deserves. This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme - Scheme Text and We hope that the City will take this feedback seriously and make constructive Map, with a notation to also be included in the draft Local change and improvements to both the LPS and TPS8, ideally improving the LPS Planning Strategy. first, ahead of advancing TPS8. Calibre Consulting – do not agree with the mixed use zoning but We would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in more detail about this do not see it as a barrier. Questions why two mixed use zones, but important matter. We look forward to hearing back from you. believes that more land uses in mixed use zones is encouraging. Officers explained that the current concept of ‘Frame Areas’ in [Attachments: Calibre Consulting Local Planning Strategy Submission and Calibre Local Planning Policy has been translated into the Mixed Use – Consulting Local Planning Scheme 8 Submission] Residential Zone in order to provide certainty. Under the existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7, some commercial land uses are discretionary ‘A’ uses in the ‘Residential Zone’, and as such, there is currently no certainty that non-residential uses will be approved. With the new ‘Mixed Use – Residential Zone’ there is an expectation that small scale commercial uses that are compatible with a medium to higher density residential amenity can be permitted more confidently - with urban design controls that encourage better harmonisation between residential and non- residential development and an appropriate land use mix to support both economic and social activities. Dual use coding, cannot see it working. What are we achieving by having dual codes, why not scrap it like City of Canning did? The City of Canning Town Planning Scheme No. 40 still contains provisions for dual residential coding. Officers explained that so far development has not been refused because of dual coding,
City of Bunbury Page 142 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission subdivision clearances are coming through with reciprocal rights of access easements, in a manner that enables adjoining landowners to take up the benefits of shared accessways, which supports the achievement of better urban design for infill development. Structure plans should not be required for 3000sqm lots or three lot amalgamations, adds unnecessary layer of development control.
Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text) Noted. Officers advised that this clause will be changed to Local Development Plan (or LDP) rather than structure plan. This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme - Scheme Text.
55 Calibre Consulting Objection Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) 4 Brown Street and 19 Bourke Street, Bunbury Gary Barbour (Manager South West) I refer to the above matter and advise that Calibre Consulting has been engaged by Wildan Properties Pty Ltd and Wildan Property Trust, the owners of the Unit 5, 53 Victoria Lot 33 above properties, to investigate and consider the implications of the draft Local Street BUNBURY WA Planning Strategy (LDP) and Local Planning Scheme 8 (TPS8). 6231 Background (DOC/292280) The subject land is presently located in the Mixed Business Zone under the
current Local Planning Scheme 7 (TPS7). The laneway between the two properties is Zoned Public Purpose. It is advised that Lot 33 remains a ‘Public Purpose – Drainage Reserve’. Under proposed TPS8, the subject land will become Mixed Use – Commercial with an R-Code of R40/60. The zoning for the laneway is not possible to In relation to the matter of permitting ‘bulky goods showroom’ uses in distinguish on the provided maps. the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’, please refer to the comments provided on submission number 35 (made by the Large Format Retail This, and the current TPS7 zoning, is shown in the attached plan. Association (LFRA)), which included a recommendation to make ‘bulky goods showroom’ a discretionary ‘D’ use in the ‘Mixed Use – 19 Bourke Street is presently developed as a warehouse/ showroom that is Commercial Zone’, which it is considered could be entertained as a
City of Bunbury Page 143 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission occupied by Dennings Boxing Gym. 4 Brown Street was recently developed as minor modification at this time without invalidating the aims of the dual showrooms. Scheme and its mixed use zoning objectives.
Issues Other land use classes such as ‘industry, light industry, motor vehicle sales and repair, warehouse / storage uses and the like’, as advocated Our client is broadly agreeable to the mixed use outcome for this for in this submission, are fundamentally not compatible with neighbourhood, including the combination of multi storey residential residential (and other sensitive) land uses occurring in such close accommodation above mixed commercial use at the ground floor, This area is proximity, as envisaged by a mixed use zone. Such uses where they an ad hoc mix of new and old development, and what is proposed is a desirable exist have either been captured as an ‘Additional Use’ in the new and realistic long term aspiration for this area. Scheme or would otherwise continue to enjoy ‘non-conforming use’ rights as model provisions under the draft Scheme. We do however seek to ensure that existing use and development potential is preserved. The inclusion of all land use classes (i.e. especially industrial activities) currently permitted in the ‘Mixed Business Zone’ is not considered to It is of concern that some existing and suitable land use and development within be an orderly and proper planning approach and is not consistent with this area will no longer be permissible under TPS8. current best practice for place-making within mixed use precincts. Indeed, the existing range of conflicting land uses allowed for in the This includes the loss of permissibility for Showroom, Industry, Light Industry, ‘Mixed Business Zone’ was recognised in the Local Planning Scheme Motor Vehicle sales and repair, Warehouse / storage uses and the like, all of Review Report (October 2011), as it was identified then that the which are proposed to become X uses within the Mixed Use – Commercial zone inherent flaw of the ‘Mixed Business Zone’ meant that it was falling under TPS8. The existing buildings on the subject land have been deliberately short of achieving its stated zone objectives. As such, the Scheme constructed for these purposes. Review Report acknowledged that:
Alongside the new mixed use vision, it would be shortsighted to remove and The balance of zones is sub-optimal; in particular the absence discourage uses such as these that provide employment, rely on small, of a true mixed use zone and the reliance upon a single conveniently located and exposed sites in order to remain viable, and which can commercial zone (spanning formerly general commercial continue to contribute to the vibrant mixed use outcomes being proposed. through to light industry areas) that is potentially overly broad and may in part be failing to provide adequate guidance to the 8 Finally, we query the intended zoning for the laneway that runs between these market place. two properties given that this cannot be distinguished from the maps provided. If it is no longer required for a public purpose ie drainage, we suggest As advised in the comments on submission number 39 (made by arrangements be made for this land to be made available to the adjoining Halsall and Associates), the permissibility and level of discretion landowners. applied in the draft Zoning Table for the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’, seeks to accommodate a wide range of land use opportunities Recommendations within what will be a high density mixed use environment. Therefore,
8 Refer to page 74 of the City of Bunbury, Local Planning Scheme Review Report (October 2011).
City of Bunbury Page 144 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission in order to facilitate sound place-making with a high quality of In light of these comments, we urge the City to improve and resolve the LPS amenity for both living and working in, there remains the need to ahead of further work on TPS8. In summary, we recommend the following: provide an appropriate level of assessment in order to manage inevitable risks resulting from land use conflicts. • Retain existing land use permissibility’s within the full extent of the existing Mixed Business zone. A desirable Mixed Use outcome for this area must The discretionary ‘D’ and ‘A’ levels of consideration are applied to acknowledge and incorporate what already exists here. those land uses that are either sensitive uses proposed in locations that could compromise the economic viability of an existing non- • Determine the zone for the rear laneway and advise adjoining landowners. residential development; or conversely, are non-residential uses proposed in locations that could impact on the liveability of an We would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in more detail about this established residential development. important matter. We look forward to hearing back from you. In most cases, risks can be managed through good urban design and building architecture that incorporates practical engineering and technological solutions, which can be conditioned as part of any development approval.
56 Calibre Consulting Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) 61 and 63 Spencer Street, Bunbury Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) Gary Barbour (Manager South West) I refer to the above matter and advise that Calibre Consulting has been engaged by Markym Developments, the owners of 61 and 63 Spencer Street, Bunbury, to Unit 5, 53 Victoria investigate and consider the implications of the draft Local Planning Strategy Street, BUNBURY WA (LPS) and Local Planning Scheme 8 (LPS8) upon their land. 6230 Subject Site Background (DOC/292281) The subject land is presently located in the Mixed Business Zone under the current Local Planning Scheme 7 (TPS7). The land has an R60 R-code over all save for the small portion of land that indents to the north, at the rear of 2 George.
Under proposed TPS8, the subject land is shown within two zones. All of 63 Spencer Street is within the Mixed Use – Commercial Zone, yet 61 Spencer Noted. The inclusion of all of Lot 71 (#61) Spencer Street, Bunbury, in Street is Mixed Use – Commercial at the front of the site, and Service the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ with a residential density coding Commercial at the rear. For the land within the Mixed Use – Commercial Zone, of ‘R60/100’ could be accommodated as a modification to the
City of Bunbury Page 145 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission an R-Code of R60/100 is depicted. proposed draft Scheme map, given that the change is to land adjoining Lot 6 (#63) Spencer Street (also owned by Markym This, and the current TPS7 zoning, is shown in the attached plan. Developments Pty Ltd), thus rounding off the frontage to George Street and enabling the opportunity to develop both lots in an We acknowledge that the subject land has historically been used for a range of integrated manner that achieves better urban design outcomes. It commercial, light industrial and service industry purposes, including the present should be noted then that the need for this to be undertaken through use of Motor Bike Showroom at 61 Spencer Street, and up until only recently, as the preparation of a Local Development Plan would become all the a Coventry’s Showroom at 63 Spencer Street. more critical given the size and complexity of the development site.
Issues This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map. Our client is concerned that development rights and redevelopment potential will be lost or diminished through some of the concept, provisions and mapping With respect to the other issues raised in this submissions, please proposed by the LPS and TPS8. refer to comments provided in response to submission numbers: 35 (made by the Large Format Retail Association (LFRA)) regarding However, our client is broadly agreeable that a mixed use outcome, that bulky goods showrooming; combines multi storey residential accommodation above mixed commercial use at the ground and maybe also first floor, is a desirable and realistic long term 39 (made by Halsall and Associates) regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27) aspiration for this land, as well as the Spencer Street locality in general. Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Bunbury in relation to expanded land use permissibility of the ‘Service Commercial Zone’; Zone boundary 45 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 107 (#42) Strickland We query and seek correction of the zone boundary proposed across the rear of Street, Bunbury, in relation to the requirements for cash-in-lieu 61 Spencer Street. We seek to have this entire lot, including the small portion contribution for public open space (POS) and the need for a Local that indents to the north, contained within the same zone as 63 Spencer Street Development Plan; and all of the other lots that front Spencer Street. 54 (made by Calibre Consulting) regarding the draft Local Planning Strategy and draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 generally; and We understand that this unusually shaped part of the land has always been a part of this lot. The arrangement is such that this part of the site is landlocked 55 (made by Calibre Consulting) regarding Lot 1 (#4) Brown Street and without alternative access. and Lot 115 (#19) Bourke Street, Bunbury, in relation to permitted land uses in the ‘Mixed Use - Commercial Zone’. It would be impractical to redevelop this lot with the zone arrangement as suggested. Land amalgamation and large lots like these two parcels are highly desirable in order to maximize redevelopment potential, and in this instance, achieve the mixed use outcome being sought.
Similarly, the R-Code applied should cover the whole property, and we suggest
City of Bunbury Page 146 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission that this be one R-Code and not a split R-Code. An R-Code of R100 is supported give that this will be the vehicle most likely to realize a mixed use development of the scale sought for here. Backing onto an existing Mixed Use area that is intended to remain Mixed Use/ Service Commercial does not compel transition in use, height or built form.
Mixed Use concept
This said, the detail and execution of the Mixed Use precinct along Spencer Street is yet to be sufficiently developed within the LPS. It is premature to fully implement these ideas, and to the extent proposed into TPS8 now, when much of the background strategic investigations are recognized in the LPS as being yet to occur.
This adds considerably to uncertainty here, and would make our client reluctant to invest in redeveloping in the manner suggested, Confidence in clear, reasonable Scheme requirements are critical as well as a realistic vision for Spencer Street, in order for this type of risk to be taken.
Building height
Similarly, a 5 storey mixed use building is a far more economically viable and likely scenario to be invested in than a 4 storey one. Comparison to mixed use apartment style development occurring elsewhere would demonstrate the business case for this, particularly where the upper floor is stepped back and largely not visible from street level.
This stems from the need for costly lifts above 3 floors, and the additional fire protection and construction costs when constructing at this height and in a mixed use manner.
Land use
It is also of concern that some existing and thriving land use and development here along and around Spencer Street will no longer be permissible under TPS8.
This includes the loss of permissibility for Showroom, Industry, Light Industry,
City of Bunbury Page 147 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Motor Vehicle sales and repair, Warehouse/ storage uses and the like, all of which are proposed to become X uses under TPS8.
Alongside the new mixed use vision, it would be shortsighted to remove and discourage uses such as these that provide employment, rely on small, conveniently located and exposed sites in order to remain viable, and which can continue to contribute to the vibrant mixed use outcomes being proposed.
Zone & TPS8 provisions
In terms of the zone provisions suggested in the new Mixed Use – Commercial zone, we question why the distinction of mixed use between two new Mixed Use zones and not the one, singular Mixed Use zone which should largely just elaborate upon the Mixed Business zone that already applies under TPS7.
The purpose of both the new Mixed Use zones are largely predicated on amenity considerations and limiting scope. The reality is that apartment style living and commercial operations in a mixed use area assumes very different amenity thresholds (Including parking, noise and overshadowing etc) to typical single dwellings on large lots.
This, and the need for flexible, adaptable commercial floor spaces, must be acknowledged before developers will risk new development in the style suggested. This is also required before investors in either commercial or residential tenancies in mixed use buildings will commit to purchase or ongoing occupation of tenancies.
Recommendations
In light of these comments, we urge the City to improve and resolve the LPS ahead of further work on TPS8. In summary, we recommend the following:
• Retain the concept of Mixed Use around Spencer Street in the LPS, but carry out the missing and essential strategic investigations and add these outcomes into the LPS first, before drastic limitation and change is implemented into TPS8.
• Retain existing land use permissibility’s along Spencer Street and within the
City of Bunbury Page 148 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission full extent of the existing Mixed Business zone. A desirable Mixed Use outcome for this area must acknowledge and incorporate what already exists here.
• Provide one mixed use zone, rather than two separate mixed use zones within TPS8.
• Remove split R-Codes and aim to retain an R100 density in the core mixed use area abutting Spencer Street, for the full extent of properties, including all of 61 and 63 Spencer Street.
• Ensure that all of 61 Spencer Street is within the one zone and R-Code.
• Reduce the complexity and obligations of TPS8 with regards to new development in the Mixed Business – Commercial zone. This includes:
- Delete Clause 40 which requires a Structure Plan to be prepared before a DA could be lodged to redevelop land. This is expensive, time consuming and unnecessary. This clause inappropriately captures most types of development and misapplies the intention and purpose of Structure Plans. Design considerations are adequately deal with through Design WA, through local planning policy or indeed through the DA process.
- Recognize different amenity and design expectations for Mixed Use developments and for living in commercial areas. This includes considerable revision of Schedule 3 and 5, and Clauses 33, 34, 35, 36 and 41 of TPS8 to minimize unnecessary regulation so that good quality design and flexible, desirable built form outcomes can realistically be achieved;
- Increase building height for properties fronting Spencer Street to 5 floors; and
- Delete Public Open Space obligations beyond the R-Codes at Clause 37.
Conclusion
Although the concept for Mixed Use along Spencer Street is supported, the new provisions are not as yet sufficiently developed to be put in place. This creates risk and uncertainty. Some of the new TPS8 provisions are overly restrictive and
City of Bunbury Page 149 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission will not deliver the intended result. We encourage the City to avoid removal of existing land use and development rights from this part of Bunbury.
It is concerning that these major changes in direction are hidden within these overwhelming, complex and technical documents. We hope that all affected landowners have been made aware of the implications.
We would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in more detail about this important matter. We look forward to hearing back from you.
57 Calibre Consulting Objection Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) 8 and 10-12 Mummery Crescent, Bunbury Gary Barbour (Manager South West) I refer to the above matter and advise that Calibre Consulting has been engaged by Wildan Properties Pty Ltd, the owners of the above properties, to investigate Unit 5, 53 Victoria and consider the implications of the draft Local Planning Strategy (LPS) and Street, BUNBURY WA Subject Area Local Planning Scheme 8 (TPS8). 6230 Background (DOC/292282) The subject land is presently located in the Mixed Business Zone under the
current Local Planning Scheme 7 (TPS7). Under proposed TPS8, the subject land will become Service Commercial. With respect to the issues raised in this submission, please refer to comments provided in response to submission numbers: This, and the current TPS7 zoning, is shown in the attached plan. 39 (made by Halsall and Associates) regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27) We acknowledge that the subject land was redeveloped from vacant land over Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Bunbury, regarding the last few years to now accommodate Brogen Hire, a long term vehicle hire expanded land use permissibility of the ‘Service Commercial Zone’; business. 45 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 107 (#42) Strickland Street, Bunbury, in relation to the requirements for Local Issues Development Plans; and Our client seeks to have existing development rights and redevelopment 54 (made by Calibre Consulting) regarding the draft Local Planning potential preserved. The new Service Commercial Zone considerably reduces Strategy and draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 generally. existing land use permissibility from the existing Mixed Business Zone that currently applies.
City of Bunbury Page 150 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The addition of Mixed Use – Commercial abutting to the north of the subject land is also questioned. Considerable additional cost and design considerations have been required for our client’s site when it was recently developed, and at the time, the City refused to acknowledge the different amenity expectations of this interface area.
Mixed Use concept
This locality is an existing Mixed Use precinct. A large new area of Mixed Use – Commercial is proposed along Strickland Street and King Road adjoining this area in what is presently a Residential zone. This is without basis in the LPS. Why this area would be developed for Mixed Use ahead of intensification of mixed uses within the existing large area of Mixed Business Zone is illogical. This approach could detract from the existing areas of Mixed Business that exist here now.
Approach to Industry
Mummery Crescent and this locality is not just a service commercial area but an invaluable mix of industry, light industry, service industry and a broad array of commercial land uses that are all important local employers and contributors to the local economy. Whilst this area has a supporting role to larger, heavier industry elsewhere,, it is nonetheless crucial support and service to the Bunbury community.
The new LPS and TPS8 promote a new Light Industry zone “that promotes cleaner, high tech industrial parks” on the fringe of Bunbury, with aspiration of shifting historical industry and servicing businesses away from this part of Bunbury and out to these more remote sites. Existing businesses here do not need large remote sites, but rather smaller, conveniently located sites from which to operate and be readily accessed by their customers.
There is no strategic basis, including in the LPS, justifying why such a fundamental shift in approach to industry is needed in Bunbury.
There is also no strategic basis explaining why the existing industrial and service industry landscape in Bunbury generally, and particularly in this area of
City of Bunbury Page 151 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Bunbury, should be changed either.
The 2011 Scheme Review Report that was prepared in anticipation of the new LPS and TPS8 makes no reference to the need to fundamentally change historical industry and industrial land use or industrial land availability within the City. More recent economic and industry based analysis, such as in the Bunbury Geographe Regional Growth Plan, reinforces the heavy and mixed nature of industry in Bunbury and how integral this is to employment and population sustainability, and as a means of attracting, promoting and retaining a sustainable and prosperous population.
Even more concerning is that despite putting these change sin to action through TPS8, the LPS acknowledges that the rationale for shifting the zoning here from mixed Use to Service Commercial still requires more work. In context of the other Mixed Use and Activity Centre concepts being promoted in the LPS, it is questionable as to what land uses are actually suitable here. It is premature to fully implement these ideas when much of the background strategic investigations are recognized in the LPS as yet to occur.
Land use
It is of concern that some existing permissible land use and development will no longer be permissible under TPS8.
This includes the loss of permissibility for all residential and ancillary residential uses, all tourist and holiday accommodation, retail and commercial uses such as Shop and betting agency, and especially for Industry, all of which are proposed to become X uses under TPS8.
It would be shortsighted to remove and discourage uses such as these that provide employment, rely on small, conveniently located and exposed sites in order to remain viable, and which can continue to contribute to the vibrant mixed use and more service commercial focus outcomes being proposed. Flexibility and adaptability of sites over time is crucial, especially in tight economic conditions.
Zone & TPS8 provisions
City of Bunbury Page 152 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
In terms of the zone provisions suggested in the new Service Commercial zone, we question why maximum and minimum floor areas are being specified. This does not reflect what exists or what our client considers to be economically viable here. Many existing tenancies here are already well below 200m² in size, or conversely, are large enough to warrant officer space that is in excess of 200m² for ancillary office.
Similarly, are the suggested building setbacks, some of which will be unachievable on many of the small lots that exist, and which do not reflect the zero lot line development, including zero front setbacks, for existing development. This existing character should not be changed without substantiated reason.
Recommendations
In light of these comments, we urge the City to improve and resolve the LPS ahead of further work on TPS8. In summary, we recommend the following:
• Fundamentally review and revise the approach to industry, service commercial and activity centres, acknowledging the important ongoing role areas such as this part of Bunbury make.
• Remove the concept of additional Mixed Use along Strickland Street and King Road.
• Ensure that the mixing and essential strategic investigations are done and the outcomes added into the LPS first, before drastic limitation and change is implemented into TPS8.
• Retain existing land use permissibility’s within the full extent of the existing Mixed Business zone. A desirable Mixed Use and/or Service Commercial outcome for this area must acknowledge and incorporate what already exists here.
• Reduce the complexity and obligations of TPS8 with regards to new development in the Service Commercial zone. This includes:
City of Bunbury Page 153 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
- Delete Clause 40 which requires a Structure Plan to be prepared before a DA could be lodged to redevelop land. This is expensive, time consuming and unnecessary. This clause inappropriately captures most types of development and misapplies the intention and purpose of Structure Plans. Design considerations are adequately dealt with through Design WA, through local planning policy or indeed through the DA process; and
- Recognize different amenity and design expectations for Mixed Use and service commercial developments and revise TPS8 Schedules and Clauses accordingly.
Conclusion
We encourage the City to avoid removal of existing land use and development rights from this part of Bunbury. The new provisions of the LPS and TPS8 for this area are not as yet sufficiently developed to be put in place. This creates risk and uncertainty. Some of the new TPS8 provisions are overly restrictive and will not deliver the intended result.
It is concerning that these major changes in direction are hidden within these overwhelming, complex and technical documents. We hope that all affected landowners have been made aware of the implications.
We would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in more detail about this important matter. We look forward to hearing back from you.
City of Bunbury Page 154 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
58 Calibre Consulting Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) [1/12 and 2/12 George Street, 2 Stuart Street and 14 Stone Street, Bunbury] Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) Gary Barbour (Manager South West) I refer to the above matter and advise that Calibre Consulting has been engaged by Wildan Properties Pty Ltd and Wildan Property Trust, the owners of the Unit 5, 53 Victoria above properties, to investigate and consider the implications of the draft Local 14 Stone St Street, BUNBURY WA Planning Strategy (LPS) and Local Planning Scheme 8. (TPS8). 6230 Background (DOC/292283) The subject land is presently located in the Mixed Business Zone under the 2 Stuart St & current Local Planning Scheme 7 (TPS7). Under proposed TPS8, the subject land 12 George St will become Service Commercial.
This, and the current TPS7 zoning, is shown in the attached plan.
We acknowledge that the subject lots have historically been used for a range of As advised in comments on submission number 39 (made by Halsall commercial, industrial and service industry purposes, including the present use and Associates), the inclusion of isolated land parcels such as Lot 143 by ARB for industry and showroom for the land at the corner of George and (#14) Stone Street and/or all of the eastern side of George Street in Sturt Street. the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ would represent a significant modification that has not been put to the surrounding landowners of The land at 14 Stone Street is presently undeveloped. what is now ‘Mixed Business Zone’ (future ‘Service Commercial Zone’) land; and hence, considering this change would likely trigger the need Issues to readvertise the draft Scheme.
Our client is concerned that development rights and redevelopment potential Instead, it is recommended that this aspect of the submission could will be lost or diminished through some of the concept, provisions and mapping be progressed as an amendment proposal to the new Scheme after it proposed by the LPS and TPS8. has been gazetted or as part of a future Scheme review. This approach means that the proposal (i.e. potentially rezoning of the The new Service Commercial Zone considerably reduces existing land use western side of Zoe Street, from Cornwall Street down to George permissibility from the existing Mixed Business Zone that currently applies, and Street, to ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’) can be properly considered this new zone promotes an outcome that is quite different to the mixed use, through a targeted consultation process with affected landowners. including multi storey residential aspirations, our client was led to believe was also being proposed throughout this broader area, as well as along Spencer The inclusion of Lot 56 (#2) Stuart Street and Lot 1 (#12) George Street. Street, Bunbury, in the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’ with a residential density coding of ‘R60/100’ may be accommodated as a
City of Bunbury Page 155 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission modification to the proposed draft Scheme map, given that the Mixed Use & Industry approach change is a rounding off to land fronting onto a ‘Local Distributor Road Reserve’ (i.e. a vital east-west connecting road between Spencer This locality is an existing Mixed Use precinct. It is not just a service commercial Street and Blair Street), and would also enable the opportunity to area but an invaluable mix of industry, light industry, service industry, some develop both lots in an integrated manner that achieves better urban housing and a broad array of commercial land uses that are all important local design outcomes. employers and contributors to the local economy. Whilst this area has a supporting role to larger, heavier industry elsewhere, it is nonetheless crucial This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of support and service to the Bunbury community. Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map. The new LPS and TPS8 promote a new Light Industry zone “that promotes With respect to the other issues raised in this submissions, please cleaner, high tech industrial parks” on the fringe of Bunbury, with aspiration of refer to comments provided in response to submission numbers: shifting historical industry and servicing businesses away from this part of Bunbury and out to these more remote sites. Existing businesses here do not 22 (made by McRobert Planning Pty Ltd) regarding Lot 101 (#5) need large remote sites, but rather smaller, conveniently located sites from MacKinon Way, East Bunbury, in relation to maintaining the office which to operate and be ready accessed by their customers. floorspace cap of 200m² nla; There is no strategic basis, including in the LPS, justifying why such a 39 (made by Halsall and Associates) regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27) fundamental shift in approach to industry is needed in Bunbury. Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Bunbury, regarding expanded land use permissibility of the ‘Service Commercial Zone’ There is also no strategic basis explaining why the existing industrial and service and levels of discretion in the ‘Mixed Use – Commercial Zone’; industry landscape in Bunbury generally, and particularly in this area of 45 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 107 (#42) Strickland Bunbury, should be changed either. Street, Bunbury, in relation to the requirements for Local Development Plans; The 2011 Scheme Review Report that was prepared in anticipation of the new LPS and TPS8 makes no reference to the need to fundamentally change 54 (made by Calibre Consulting) regarding the draft Local Planning historical industry and industrial land use or industrial land availability within Strategy and draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 generally; and the City. More recent economic and industry based analysis, such as in the 55 (made by Calibre Consulting) regarding Lot 1 (#4) Brown Street Bunbury Geographe Regional Growth Plan, reinforces the heavy and mixed and Lot 115 (#19) Bourke Street, Bunbury, in relation to permitted nature of industry in Bunbury and how integral this is to employment and land uses in the ‘Mixed Use - Commercial Zone’. population sustainability, and as a means of attracting, promoting and retaining a sustainable and prosperous population.
Even more concerning is that despite putting these changes into action through TPS8, the LPS acknowledges that the rationale for shifting the zoning here from Mixed Use to Service Commercial still requires more work. It is premature to fully implement these ideas when much of the background strategic
City of Bunbury Page 156 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission investigations are recognized in the LPS as yet to occur.
Land use
It is of concern that some existing and thriving land use and development will no longer be permissible in this area under TPS8.
This includes the loss of permissibility for all residential and ancillary residential uses, all tourist and holiday accommodation, retail and commercial uses such as Shop and betting agency, and especially for Industry, all of which are proposed to become X uses under TPS8.
Zone & TPS8 provisions
In terms of the zone provisions suggested in the new Service Commercial zone, we question why maximum and minimum floor areas are being specified. This does not reflect what exists or what our client considers to be economically viable here. Many existing tenancies here are already well below 200m² in size, or conversely, are large enough to warrant office space that is in excess of 200m² for ancillary office.
Similarly, are the suggested building setbacks, some of which will be unachievable on many of the small lots that exist, and which do not reflect the zero lot line development, including zero front setbacks, for existing development. This existing character should not be changed without substantiated reason.
Recommendations
In light of these comments, we urge the City to improve and resolve the LPS ahead of further work on TPS8. In summary, we recommend the following:
• Fundamentally review and revise the approach to industry, service commercial and activity centres, acknowledging the important ongoing role areas such as this part of Bunbury make. Place focus on keeping these existing areas viable ahead of creating more new Service Commercial/ Mixed Use zone land beyond what presently exists in the Mixed Business zone under TPS7.
City of Bunbury Page 157 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Retain the concept of Mixed Use around Spencer Street in the LPS, and consider broadening this to include the subject land and the full extent of the area between Spencer Street, across to Blair Street, being the full extent of the existing Mixed Business zone under TPS7.
• Ensure that the mixing and essential strategic investigations are done and the outcomes added into the LPS first, before drastic limitation and change is implemented into TPS8.
• Retaining existing land use permissibility’s within the full extent of the existing Mixed Business zone. A desirable Mixed Use and/or Service Commercial outcome for this area must acknowledge and incorporate what already exists here.
• Reduce the complexity and obligations of TPS8 with regards to new development in the Service Commercial zone. This includes:
- Delete Clause 40 which requires a Structure Plan to be prepared before a DA could be lodged to redevelop land. This is expensive, time consuming and unnecessary. This clause inappropriately captures most types of development and misapplies the intention and purpose of Structure Plans. Design considerations are adequately deal with through Design WA, through local planning policy or indeed through the DA process; and
- Recognize different amenity and design expectations for Mixed Use and service commercial developments and revise TPS8 Schedules and Clauses accordingly.
Conclusion
We encourage the City to avoid removal of existing land use and development rights from this part of Bunbury. The new provisions of the LPS and TPS8 provisions are overly restrictive and will not deliver the intended result.
It is concerning that these major changes in direction are hidden within these overwhelming, complex and technical documents. We hope that all affected landowners have been made aware of the implications.
City of Bunbury Page 158 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
We would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in more detail about this important matter. We look forward to hearing back from you.
59 Calibre Consulting Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text) Toyota dealership, 30, 34, 40 & 42 Spencer Street, Bunbury All existing car dealerships on Spencer Street (approved as ‘motor Gary Barbour (Manager vehicle, boat or caravan sales’ and/or ‘motor vehicle repair’ uses) South West) I refer to the above matter and advise that Calibre Consulting has been engaged have been captured in Schedule 1 - Additional Uses Table as by HMA Architects for P & J Krikke Family Trust, the owners of the Bunbury Additional Use number 9 (‘A.U.9’). The Additional Uses Table has Unit 5, 53 Victoria Toyota dealership in Spencer Street. We have been asked to investigate and been carried over from the old Model Scheme Text (MST) into the Street, BUNBURY WA consider the implications of the draft Local Planning Strategy (LPS) and Local new model provisions, and is commonly used in local planning 6230 Planning Scheme 8. (TPS8) upon their land. schemes throughout Western Australia. (DOC/292295) Background The purpose of ‘Additional Uses’ is to provide certainty that a particular land use that may not be appropriate in all localities across The subject land is presently located in the Mixed Business Zone with an R60 R- a zone can nevertheless be developed and used in perpetuity on a Code under the current Local Planning Scheme 7 (TPS7). specific lot or group of lots, given their unique circumstances and history, over and above the full range of other land uses also Under proposed TPS8, the subject land is shown to be within the Mixed Use – permitted in that zone. Commercial zone with an R80/100 R-Code. Nevertheless, consistent with the existing ‘Mixed Business Zone’, it is The subject land is also covered by the Additional Use 9 categorization, which recommended that the level of consideration and discretion given to stipulates at Clause 19 and Schedule 1 of TPS8 that Motor Vehicle, Boat or both uses can be safely reduced from being ‘A’ uses accordingly: Caravan sales and Motor Vehicle repairs are discretionary ‘A’ uses on this land. Within the new Mixed use – Commercial zone, both of these uses otherwise ‘P’ - ‘motor vehicle, boat or caravan sales’; and become ‘X’ not permissible. ‘D’ - ‘motor vehicle repair’ uses.
This, and the current TPS7 zoning, is shown in the attached plan. This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text. The subject land has been occupied by Bunbury Toyota and affiliated car dealerships for the purpose of Motor Vehicle Sales and Repairs for With respect to the other issues raised in this submissions, please approximately 50 years. The Krikke family purchased the existing dealership in refer to comments provided in response to submission numbers: 1973. 39 (made by Halsall and Associates) regarding Lots 1 and 2 (#27) Over the course of the last 2 years, 40 and 42 Spencer Street were acquires and Spencer Street and Lot 23 (#4) Zoe Street, Bunbury in relation to incorporated into the operations as part of a major redevelopment of the the level of discretion applied to land uses in the ‘Mixed Use – southern two thirds of this overall site into a brand new, contemporary, Commercial Zone’;
City of Bunbury Page 159 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission purpose built dealership and servicing facility. 45 (made by Planning Solutions) regarding Lot 107 (#42) Strickland Street, Bunbury, in relation to requirements for Local The Krikke family have invested more than $5 million into this redevelopment, Development Plans; securing their long term commitment to this prominent site in Spencer Street for the ongoing purpose of car sales and vehicle servicing. They intend to 54 (made by Calibre Consulting) regarding the draft Local Planning complete this transformation by redeveloping the northern part of this site to Strategy and draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 generally; and the same high standard in the immediate future. 55 (made by Calibre Consulting) regarding Lot 1 (#4) Brown Street and Lot 115 (#19) Bourke Street, Bunbury, in relation to permitted Issues land uses in the ‘Mixed Use - Commercial Zone’.
Whilst our client is broadly agreeable to the Mixed Use concept being proposed for Spencer Street, they are concerned that this approach deliberately seeks to remove motor vehicle sales, an established, long term land use from this area.
In addition to Toyota, other dealerships have also recently invested in updating and modernizing their sites in Spencer Street. These actions collectively and firmly establish motor vehicle sales and repair as a prominent and existing gland use within this area. From our client’s perspective, this is a viable and highly desirable location within which to locate, and is one that will continue to underpin the mixed use nature of this part of Bunbury.
The suggestion in the LPS that all existing dealerships should relocate out to Picton is illogical.
The new Toyota dealership has been developed to a modern and highly desirable standard. This has added considerably to the vibrancy and freshening up of Spencer Street, reinforcing the established commercial character in this area.
Mixed Use concept
Although the mixed use concept is generally supported, the detail and execution of this along Spencer Street is yet to be sufficiently developed within the LPS, and then into TPS8. It is premature to fully implement these ideas, including to the extent of excluding existing and prominent land uses, when much of the background strategic investigations are recognized in the LPS as yet to happen.
City of Bunbury Page 160 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Aside from Motor Vehicle sales and repair, this also includes the loss of permissibility for Showroom, Industry, Light Industry, Warehouse/ storage uses and the like, all of which are proposed to become X uses under TPS8.
We consider it to be shortsighted to remove and discourage these existing uses when they provide employment, and are reliant on the small, conveniently located and exposed sites that exist in this broader Spencer Street area. All of these uses, as well as Motor Vehicle sales and repair, are uses that contribute to a desirable mixed use character.
Alongside these comments, we note that the provisions as they are proposed add considerably to uncertainty here, including for continued or even expanded investment into existing land use. It also deliberately prevents other like and complementary new sites being developed for the same purpose.
Confidence in clear, reasonable Scheme requirements are critical as well as a realistic vision for Spencer Street, in order for existing business to remain viable and for the risk into new development to be taken.
Building form
Our client accepts the addition of mixed use apartment style development into the Spencer Street precinct. Their new building and site landscaping reflects this aspired contemporary urban design.
Whilst they presently have no intention to redevelop their site for this purpose, they agree that increased building height in this area is desirable.
Zone & TPS8 provisions
In terms of the zone provisions suggested in the new Mixed Use – Commercial zone, we question why the distinction of mixed use between two new Mixed Use zones and not the one, singular Mixed Use zone which should largely just elaborate upon the Mixed Business zone that already applies under TPS7.
The purpose of both the new Mixed Use zones are largely predicated on amenity considerations and limiting scope. The reality is that apartment style
City of Bunbury Page 161 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission living and commercial operations in a mixed use area assumes very different amenity thresholds (including parking, noise and overshadowing etc) to typical single dwellings on large lots.
This, and the need for flexible, adaptable commercial floor spaces, must be acknowledged before developers will risk new development in the style suggested. This is also required before investors in either commercial or residential tenancies in mixed use buildings will commit to purchase or ongoing occupation of tenancies.
Aside from this, Spencer Street is already a mixed use area where a range of land uses exist. This includes direct interface with residential zoned land, such as immediately abutting the subject land in Oakley Street. A different level of amenity is expected here than in more isolated residential areas. The presumption of conflict and therefore regulation and restriction between land uses is not required.
Additional Use
We do not agree with the application of the Additional Use provisions to this land and to other existing dealerships along Spencer Street. Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan sales and Motor Vehicle repairs should remain permissible uses under the zone.
Recommendations
In light of these comments, we urge the City to improve and resolve the LPS ahead of further work on TPS8. We strongly encourage existing, established land uses along and around Spencer Street to remain permissible uses.
In summary, we recommend the following:
• Retain the concept of Mixed Use around Spencer Street in the LPS, but carry out the missing and essential strategic investigations and add these outcomes into the LPS first, before any drastic limitation and change is implemented into TPS8.
City of Bunbury Page 162 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Retain existing land use permissibility’s along Spencer Street, specifically retaining Motor Vehicle, Boat or Caravan sales and Motor Vehicle repairs as permissible uses within the zone.
A desirable Mixed Use outcome for this area must acknowledge and incorporate what already exists here.
• Reduce the complexity and obligations of TPS8 with regards to new development in the Mixed Business – Commercial zone. This includes:
- Delete Clause 40 which requires a Structure Plan to be prepared before a DA could be lodged to redevelop land. This is expensive, time consuming and unnecessary. This clause inappropriately captures most types of development and misapplies the intention and purpose of Structure Plans. Design considerations are adequately deal with through Design WA, through local planning policy or indeed through the DA process.
- Recognize different amenity and design expectations for Mixed Use developments and for living in commercial areas. This includes considerable revision of Schedule 3 and 5, and Clauses 33, 34, 35, 36 and 41 of TPS8 to ensure good quality design and flexible, desirable built form outcomes can realistically be achieved;
Conclusion
Although the concept for Mixed Use along Spencer Street is supported, we strongly encourage the City to avoid removal of existing land use and development rights, especially for Motor Vehicle sales and repair, from this part of Bunbury.
In addition, the new provisions are not as yet sufficiently developed to be put in place. This creates risk and uncertainty. Some of the new TPS8 provisions are overly restrictive and will not deliver the intended result, largely because they fail to recognize what already exists here.
It is concerning that these major changes in direction are hidden within these overwhelming, complex and technical documents. We hope that all affected
City of Bunbury Page 163 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission landowners have been made aware of the implications.
We would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in more detail about this important matter. We look forward to hearing back from you.
60 Kanella & Darren Hope Objection Noted. We are the owners of 15 Wattle Street, Bunbury. This letter is our submission in 15 Wattle Street, response to the proposed new Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning BUNBURY WA 6230 Scheme 8. (DOC/292298) We have chosen to review these documents and make comment because we love living in Bunbury and want to see Bunbury prosper. Getting this planning framework right, alongside a can do facilitative approach to new development, is crucial to achieving this.
In our view, the draft documents do not successfully achieve their intent, and they do not capitalise upon this opportunity.
This is because the Local Planning Strategy is too long and complicated. Focus and priority is lacking in the Planning Strategy about the land use planning issues that will most affect Bunbury’s prosperity.
Many of the new directions being promoted in the Strategy are not underpinned by current and relevant facts, analysis and reasoning. Without basis in proven land use strategy, it is premature to express these intentions in TPS8.
The new Scheme is generally more complex and harder to use than the current Scheme.
Please simplify what is in progress and get the LPS improved ahead of TPS8. A can do attitude that aims for a simpler more relevant planning framework in Bunbury is critical. The current complicated, over regulated approach is a disincentive to investment and is undermining Bunbury’s prosperity and potential.
City of Bunbury Page 164 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Aside from these general comments, we also make the following specific comments:
Priority issues like Housing, the CBD, Industry and protecting existing business and employment opportunities, do not have adequate focus or priority in the LPS ahead of other, less important matters.
We do not agree with the continued focus in the LPS and TPS8 on tourism and tourism accommodation. Bunbury is a regional centre in which to live and work. Providing employment opportunities and housing choice for our changing population is paramount. Considerable housing potential is being lost due to this outdated tourism emphasis.
We ask the City to recognise that the back beach precinct, aside from immediately abutting the CBD, is foremost a coastal open space area for people who live here. The back beach overall is very different to the CBD and the three waters environment immediately adjoining this.
The Wattle Hill Nursing Home should not be within the Public Purpose Zone. Wattle Hill is a private, not a Government facility, and any changes to use and development here should continue to be regulated through the Scheme.
We also do not support the Irwin Street Reserve being shifted to a Conservation Reserve. This shift has not been explained. Known bushfire risk for this land is at odds with the intent to carry out bushland regeneration and replacement planting here.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
61 LandCorp Objection A meeting between representative of LandCorp and officers of the City of Bunbury was held on 17 January 2017, at which the matters [Letter dated 16 December 2016 with enclosed submission form and tables] Suzanne Woolhouse raised in the submission were discussed and clarified accordingly. (Policy and Strategy LandCorp is pleased to make this “In Camera” submission on the City of Manager) The City of Bunbury greatly values its partnership with LandCorp and Bunbury’s draft Local Planning Strategy (Strategy) and draft Local Planning the continuing contribution that it has already made to supporting the Scheme #8 (LPS8).
City of Bunbury Page 165 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission social and economic prosperity of Bunbury as the second city of Locked Bag 5, Perth LandCorp is generally supportive of the intent and content of the City’s Strategy Western Australia. Business Centre, Perth and draft Local Planning Scheme #8. WA 6849 The local ecological linkages depicted on the draft Strategy natural LandCorp does however have specific concerns relating to the inconsistencies environment map is informal and simply serves to illustrate patches of (DOC/292302) with the Preston Industrial Park Northern Precinct (PIPNP) District Structure remnant native vegetation that may currently serve to provide for the Plan area which is currently progressing through environmental approvals. This movement of threatened species (e.g. black cockatoos) across the impacts on the future potential for industrial in the area. These concerns are landscape by virtue of their close proximity to one another. outlined in our attached The Bushland Areas Special Control Area depicted on the draft LandCorp would appreciate a meeting with the City’s planning staff to discuss Scheme map was applied tenure blind across public and private the matters raised in detail. This can be arranged via our Regional Manager, landholdings, and simply seeks to ensure that the necessary Matthew Whyte. environmental approvals are undertaken upfront so that this step better informs the structure planning design process. [Attached tables to submission form]
DRAFT LOCAL PLANNING STRATEGY: The Bushland Areas Special Control Area is merely a process tool, not a protection mechanism. It seeks to ensure that existing State and PART 1: LAND USE PLANNING THEMES federal legislation and policy are given due regard from the outset of Page # / Clause # Review Comments / Issues to be Raised the planning process, which is consistent with the State government’s previous published positions in the EPA’s Environmental Protection 54/84, Map 5 Natural Do not support LandCorp’s land holdings (Lots 4 & Environment 200 Temple Road North Picton) being designated an Bulletin No. 20 (2013) and WAPC’s Directions Paper on the Integration SCA “bushland special control with an additional local of NRM and Land Use Planning (2011). ecological linkage. No consultation has been undertaken with LandCorp. Consequently, the draft Bushland Areas Special Control Area approach is in line with the Perth - Peel strategic assessment, which likewise PART 2: EXPLANATORY GUIDE seeks to maxims market certainty and confidence whilst also reducing Appendix 3 ‐ background to Statement that affected landowners, were consulted community concerns (n.b. as has been previously demonstrated in a the preparation of Local to confirm status of the land. LandCorp has not been Council resolution in relation to Glen Iris). Bushland Conservation formally or hold a record contact on this matter. A Planning Framework P.199 LandCorp officer attended one information session on For many landowners and purchasers, not presently having a proposal the scheme which is not considered consultation for being considered means that they may not be fully aware of the State individual proposals or matters within the scheme. and federal environmental legislation obligations. Appendix 3 ‐ background to Definition of the bushland special control areas for the preparation of Local further planning to determine conservation areas on It is also helpful to remember that the City of Bunbury, like many local Bushland Conservation identified lots. Specifically on lots 44 & 200, the COB governments, may express biodiversity targets as a guideline, but that Planning Framework P. 206 is indicating that 35‐39ha of the 119ha (up to a third) the final determination/outcome of how much bushland is ultimately would require conservation. preserved or offset is not a local government decision.
City of Bunbury Page 166 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
This is contrary to what could be achieved via State As such, under the Planning and Development (Local Planning and Federal approvals under EPBC & Offsets. Schemes) Regulations 2015, the local government is obliged to GENERAL COMMENTS advertise a structure plan proposal as submitted, and has limited ability to facilitate the necessary balance and trade-offs that may be Rezoning of lots 200 & 44 to If lots 4 & 200 are rezoned as Bushland Special Bushland Special Control Control Area: required to be made between the proponent and State and federal Area. government agencies before the ultimate structure plan design can be • LandCorp would be required to retain 35‐39ha of approved. vegetation on lots 4 &200 as conservation (as identified by Strategy), Hence, it is the local government’s experience that proposed • With potentially an increased area due to the structure plans have regularly needed to undergo lengthy and requirement for developers in BSCA to submit detail expensive revisions in order to satisfy State and federal environmental flora surveys, legislation and policies. This would disrupt: Hence, to avoid this cost and inefficiency, the City of Bunbury has •LandCorp finalising and implementing the PIPNP sought to follow best practice (as promoted by WALGA and WAPC’s district structure plan negotiated with Bunbury DOP and OEPA, being a proposal to develop of lots 44, 200 Perth Biodiversity Guidelines) by signalling upfront in the inaugural & 2010, offset by setup conservation area on SWDC Strategy and new Scheme what bushland/wetland clearing will need lots 42, 43 & 4. to be approved in light of what is desirable if the local government is to achieve its biodiversity targets (as a guide). •LandCorp opportunity as a developer following environmental approval processes in place under In the case of the Preston Industrial Park Northern Precinct, it is State and Federal policy and legislation, and appreciated though that structure planning has already been • Add a step to the approvals process under the local undertaken as the basis for proposed land clearing, and that this is planning environmental policies, currently being assessed by the relevant State and federal authorities. If LandCorp were required to conserve even the minimum 35ha identified, this would remove any The intent of the draft Strategy and Scheme is to respect and be necessity to provide an offset to development. This consistent with those State and federal environmental approvals would leave the implementation of the proposed processes, which as you have advised, LandCorp is undertaking over conservation area up to someone else to resolve. the next 6 months. Hence, it is assured that the provisions of the Term of Bushland Special The definition of Bushland in the Bush Forever Text: Bushland Areas Special Control Area do not require the duplication of Control Area any environmental investigations or approvals. Instead, the fact that “bushland is land on which there is vegetation which all necessary State and federal agency approvals have been obtained is either a remainder of the natural vegetation of the land or, if altered, is still representative of the (and can be evidenced) satisfies the requirements of the Bushland structure and floristics of the natural vegetation and Areas Special Control Area. Accordingly, in such circumstances, no provides the necessary habitat for native fauna” further environmental investigations or approvals are required by the local government. The majority of the vegetation on Lots 44 and 200 is
City of Bunbury Page 167 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission not representative of the structure and floristics of the natural vegetation as the mid and lower stories In relation to any remnant bushland in the city, it is acknowledged have become very degraded or no longer exist. The that scientific flora surveys as required by State and federal scientific definition of the existing vegetation is ‘open governments, is the appropriate mechanism for determining the parkland’ on degraded rural land ground-truth extent, quality and significance of the remnant native vegetation found onsite. North‐South Blue Road in The alignment in the Strategy does not appear to North Picton match the current planning being undertaken by DoP for the area. Can this be clarified The actual quality and amount of remnant vegetation required to be retained onsite (versus offset) via the State and federal government’s Investigations into Partial The City of Bunbury is investigating the pursuit of environmental assessment processes will of course be determined by Redevelopment of Misc partial redevelopment of surplus land in several the process LandCorp is currently undertaking, and it can be assured parks sporting ovals/parks. This intent should be flagged will not be affected by the draft Strategy or Scheme (noting though within the Strategy to provide a basis for the investigations. (e.g. Withers, Hands Oval, Payne Park that the significance of the site’s vegetation may have been increased etc by virtue of the listing of the ‘Banksia woodlands of the Swan Coastal Plain ecological community’ under the Commonwealth Environment Road and Rail access to the Should be shown on the mapping, currently appears Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), which Port as white space. may be a new consideration that has not been factored into the Bunbury Equine Racing The designation of these areas should be reviewed to LBCPF as yet. A link is provided to the federal Department of the Precinct allow the Clubs to undertake complimentary Environment and Energy’s mapping commercial and/or residential developments within http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/communiti their landholdings supplementary primary private es/pubs/131-indicative-distribution-map.pdf). recreation purpose.
Please be assured that the City of Bunbury has sought to engage directly with LandCorp in preparing the draft Strategy and Scheme, DRAFT LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME #8 and in particular, sought to reach out through its discussion paper released between 8 April 2013 and 20 May 2013, during which time a Scheme Mapping key stakeholder workshop was held on 2 May 2013 (copy of invitation Page # / Element # Review Comments / Issues to be Raised attached). Map 6 Not supported LandCorp’s land holdings lot 4 & 200 being proposed to be designated/rezoned as The City of Bunbury is keen to see a positive and productive outcome bushland special control area being reached through the State and federal government environmental assessments, and looks forward to facilitating the Scheme Text implementation of LandCorp’s finalised structure planning for what is P 28 to 30 – Local Planning Tree protection policy. Can this be applied to area a strategically important future industrial precinct for not only Scheme that has achieved State and Federal environmental Bunbury but also the sub-region. approvals? Section 7, Special Uses Proponents holding land identified as bushland
City of Bunbury Page 168 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission table, P 112 to 114 special control areas are required to submit an application to the City to demonstrate proposal prior to progression of the development. Added provision 2.e may provide the allowance for LandCorp to proceed with the proposal as it is currently planned being the achievement of relevant state and federal approvals to progress the DSP which was expanded in 2011 in to a district structure plan and environmental assessment. General Comments Document / Page # Review Comments / Issues to be Raised Designation of Lots 200 & If implemented could; 44 ‐ Bushland Special • Require LandCorp to retain 35‐39ha of vegetation Control Area. on lots 4 &200 as conservation (as identified by the Strategy), • With potentially an increased area due to the requirement for developers in BSCA to submit detail flora surveys, This would disrupt; • LandCorp finalising and implementing the PIPNP District Structure Plan as currently discussed with Bunbury DOP and the OEPA of pursuing a proposal to develop of lots 44, 200 & 2010 offset by the setup of conservation area on lots 42, 43 & 4, • LandCorp as a developer following environmental approval processes in place under State and Federal policy and legislation, and • Add a step to the approvals process under the local planning environmental policies, If LandCorp were required to conserve even the minimum 35ha identified, this would remove the necessity to provide an offset to development. This would leave the implementation of the proposed conservation area up to someone else to resolve.
City of Bunbury Page 169 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Other Comments – Impact of Related Policies
Currently LandCorp is progressing planning for the Preston Industrial Park Northern Precinct – district structure plan and environmental assessment (DSPEA), and subject to associated planning and environmental approvals, LandCorp will develop landholdings to release industrial and employment land to the market.
Vegetation subject to EPBC legislation has been identified on the subject landholding with State and Federal approvals required to progress development. LandCorp is in the process of drafting a proposal to offset the clearing of any vegetation by setting up the conservation area on neighbouring lots 4, 42, & 43.
If approval for the clearing of vegetation on lots 4 & 200 is not granted, there is no other proponent currently identified to undertake the works necessary to provide adequate protection for lots 4, 42, and 43 which is considered the core of the DSPEA conservation area. LandCorp have been working in consultation with DPAW, DOP (Bunbury) and OEPA. It is anticipated that both State and federal submissions will be made in the next 6 months.
62 David Smith Objection The Planning and Development Act 2005 sets out in Schedule 7 the matters which may be dealt with by a local planning scheme, which is The planning strategy does not seem to explain the changes in zoning being 8 Picton Crescent then further defined in the model provisions under Schedule 1 of the promoted. I would have expected that each change in zoning or development BUNBURY WA 6230 Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations conditions would be enumerated and the relationship to any changes to the 2015. strategy identified. The specific queries I have are included in the pages (DOC/292370, 292567) attached: The zones and reserves used in the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 generally conform to the nomenclature and objectives that are set out Specific objections and queries. in the model provisions of the Regulations. The rationale for where the zones and reserves are applied is explained in the draft Local 1. Impacting on home at 8 Picton Cres Bunbury Planning Strategy, which was prepared in accordance with the Western Australian Planning Commission’s (WAPC) Local Planning a. The area at the rear of our property is shown as being road reserve (to Manual (March 2010). Withers Crescent) rather than part of the Boulters Height Nature Reserve as identified in the adopted new plan for that reserve. The boundaries of the proposed zones and reserves were derived
City of Bunbury Page 170 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission through the application of the drafting principles for formulating the b. The boundaries of the Reserve should be resurveyed and identified by new Scheme map9, accordingly: markers and should include those parts of the reserve that are accessed from Scott Street, Withers Crescent or Picton or Haig Crescent. 1. Maintenance of the current zoning of land should be respected and carried over to the revised Scheme Map, with down-zoning c. The zonings remain higly pigly. Parts of Withers Crescent seem to be R20 to to be considered only in accordance with the Region Planning R60. This part of Picton Crescent between Money and Turner Streets, despite Scheme (i.e. GBRS). their elevation are R15, those on Money (where there are existing units and 2. Obsolete or use class specific zones that do not reflect those where are not) are zoned R20 except for the Cathedral Precinct, which contemporary practice or do not meet community and industry seems to be R60 (but coloured green), Sampson Road is R20, those on Turner, needs should be replaced with a commensurate zone under including heritage properties R20, but part of Turner is CBD, as is the whole of the model Scheme Text (MST). Edward Street, which would allow high rise residential. This includes the heritage properties at 3 Turner and the senior citizens. The properties in Scott 3. Street alignments are to be avoided as land use boundaries – and Haig Crescent are R20 or R15 including those that have units or duplexes. instead mid-block / rear boundary cadastral boundaries should Cross Street is R20 to R60 and R20 as is Sampson Road. Oakley is R20 to R60. be utilised where practicable. Spencer seems to be R60 to R100. 4. The potential for land use conflict is to be avoided between:
If we are looking for higher density, could not all of these be R15 to R30. Many . industry / mixed business and sensitive land uses such as have heritage houses that ought to be protected, as should most of the tree residential in order to minimise public health risks, street area. . high impact uses and areas of high ecologically and/or An alternative would be to zone all of this area R15 to R30 with a limitation on culturally value, roof height to the level of Withers Crescent and where there are houses of . high and low residential density areas, and heritage value to R15 and the older non heritage houses being up to R30. . intensive community activities and residential uses; I note 6 Picton Crescent has already been subdivided and in my view the rear lot by using appropriate land use and open space buffers where is almost inaccessible. possible. 5. Activity centre based commercial zoning should be A R30 would allow three units on 8 Picton Crescent, perhaps two on 6 Picton proportionate to the adopted activity centre hierarchy both Crescent. locally and regionally. Therefore, any expansion of an activity centre’s zone should avoid the potential for significant Increasing density to R40-100 is likely to cause ongoing disharmony at both a increases in retail floor space unless the site is obviously community and neighbourhood level. constrained and a justifiable unmet demand exists that is commensurate with the site’s designation in the hierarchy of 2. The same sorts of issues arise in that the area between Minninup, Goldsmith
9 Refer to page 77 of the Local Planning Scheme Review Report (October 2011), which accompanied the agenda item to Council’s ordinary meeting held on 29 November 2011 (Decision: 276/11).
City of Bunbury Page 171 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and Halsey and Spencer are R20-30, with some R40 and R60 but the area activity centres. between West Road and Mangles remains R20 except for some in the NE corner 6. Allocation of a more mixed use zoning should be considered in is R20 to R40. I cannot see any reason, if these are based on existing use or the locations that poses a critical majority of the following urban activity centre of Mossops Store, why you would not include the whole area attributes or functions: bounded by Glen Roy, Minninup and Mangles and Mansfield as R20 -30. . immediately around and in close to activity centres (using As you know increasing density is not always easy to achieve. It depends on the 400 metre and 800 metre ped shed distances as a guide); age and quality of existing buildings, and where they sit on a lot. Most people who are happy with what they have will not take advantage of the higher . along activity corridors (incorporating main street principles density until they move on. of mixed uses in low speed traffic environments that are of good amenity and well serviced by public transport); However it seems strange that no ‘standard’ density being XXX for is R20, but . suitable for redevelopment of older industrial and mixed some are being left at R15, while others are increased to R30 or R40 with little business areas into mixed use precincts; or no explanation of why particular areas are left as R15, while ones are becoming R20-R60. . immediately around and in close proximity to regional services and infrastructure, and As I have said there needs to be some rationale for each of the XXXX to explain . on water fronts to the ocean and the harbour/inlet where why each area that is being changed is justified while similar areas are being left located within walkable catchment (ped shed) distance of at R15 or R20. activity centres and serviced by adequate public open space and community infrastructure services, subject to If the longer term objective is to increase density to accommodate a city mitigation of land use conflicts and risks associated with sea population of 50000 within the life of TPS8 – presumably 5 to 15 years, you also level rise. need to be confident that there will be redevelopment in enough of the R20 and above to achieve this. Carey Park has got a significant result from R20 to R30 7. Consideration of the potential for increasing the extent and/or without becoming an eye sore or creating social problems. Having more R20- intensity of non-activity centre based commercial zoning (i.e. R30, will ensure targets are reached. Having only some at R20 and leaving areas intensifying uses and scale of development outside of centres) that are comparable at R15 seems contrary to the intent. Allowing more R20 to should only be given in areas that have a demonstrated need R30, with approval at R30 depending on specific factors is more likely to achieve and the opportunity to capitalise on the consolidation of what is being sought without unduly affecting the character of individual areas. existing infrastructure and established or emerging nodes / Higher densities also attract higher valuations which suits the land owners and clusters of allied industries, and which are in close proximity to the City. activity centres and transport facilities. 8. Land with isolated spot zonings, special use zones or additional [Further information (wording slightly different to above) received 20 December uses should be rationalised into the predominate surrounding 2016] zone where practicable and appropriate. Specific Concerns and Concerns 9. Unzoned land (e.g. coloured white due to lifting of a reserve) should be placed into the predominate surrounding zone or
City of Bunbury Page 172 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission most appropriate reserve based on its ultimate intended 1. Impacting on home at 8 Picton Crescent Bunbury. purpose. (a) The area at the rear of our home is shown as being road reserve (to Withers 10. Local reserves should be substituted with that of a more Crescent) rather than being part of the Boulters Heights Nature Reserve. appropriate reserve or zone, in accordance with its ultimate intended purpose, where this has been determined and is at (b) What is road reserve and what is part of the nature reserve needs to be variance with its present reservation status. defined by resurvey and the same applies to the boundary between the reserve and the rear of the properties in Picton Crescent, Scott Street, Haig Crescent, With respect to residential densities, it is advised that the R-Coding and Withers Crescent and Turner Street. applied in the draft Scheme reflect the outcomes of the comprehensive R-Code Omnibus Amendment (Scheme Amendment (c) The zonings in our area are higgly piggly. Parts of Withers Crescent are 38, gazetted 6 December 2011) made to the existing Town Planning between R20 and R60. That part of Picton Crescent and Picton Way which is Scheme No. 7. As such, the R-Code Omnibus Amendment between Money Street and Turner Street despite their elevation remain R15, implemented the recommendations of the adopted Local Planning those in Money Street, including the lots with units on are R20, the Catholic Strategy for Activity Centres and Neighbourhoods. Cathedral has both a public purpose and a R60 zoning, Sampson Road is R20, Those on the west side of Turner, which have heritage status are R20, the In preparing the draft Local Planning Strategy and its accompanying Senior Citizens Centre and 3 Turner both of which ought to have State Heritage revised draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 it was considered that the Status, are CBD as is the whole of Edward Street which would allow high rise residential density codes applied through the R-Code Omnibus residential. The properties in Scott Street and Haig Crescent vary from R15 to Amendment largely remain valid, albeit with changes enabled by the R20 including some that have units or duplexes on them. Oakley includes some introduction of the new activity centre and mixed use zonings. As R60 as does part of Cross Street and Sampson Road. Spencer Street seems to be such, supplemented by guidance offered in the WAPC’s Liveable R60 to R100. I understand the need for higher density and to protect the Tree Neighbourhoods (Ed 4, October 2008) operational policy, the R-Code Street heritage values but there needs to be some consistency while also mapping principles applied were as follows: protecting view lines. 1. Medium to higher R-Codes may be considered in areas according to the following criteria: Achieving higher density is not easy as many of the properties that have higher R codes have substantial homes many of which have heritage value so they are . 20 dwellings per hectare for family sized single housing in not likely to be redeveloped in the medium term. If you are looking for early suburban (structure plan) areas; redevelopment you almost need to assess on an individual lot basis so that there can be higher coding on those that have older non-heritage value such as . 20 to 30 dwellings per hectare for areas within a 400m (5 6 and 8 Picton Crescent which go to R30 to R40 but on the basis that the roof min) walking distance of neighbourhood centres; and heights not be more than 2 metres above Withers Crescent. In any event I . 30 to 40 dwellings per hectare for areas within a 400m (5 suggest that the Codes have a proper identified rationale and consistency and min) walking distance of district centres. reflect those that already have units on. As indicated above I would prefer a R30 to R40 for our home with the above height limit. 6 Picton Crescent has already . Immediately around and in close proximity to activity been subdivided into two lots with the rear lot having a very steep access. centres or employment nodes (using a 400 metre ped shed
City of Bunbury Page 173 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission distances as a guide). 2. Property held with Ronald Kevin Smith in Trust at 7 Hillcrest Avenue. When this property was purchased we were told it had a R20 Zoning. If I am reading . Within a ped shed walking distance to educational TPS 8 correctly it appears to be R15. We would prefer the whole of Hillcrest establishments (e.g. 400 metre walking distance of a Avenue to be R20 to R30. I note that the nearest activity centre is the Mossop primary school). Street Store which is between Minninup Road and Mossop Street. There . Along activity corridors (incorporating main street appears to be several rezonings to R20 to R30 between Minninup and Spencer principles of mixed uses in low speed traffic environments but not on the West of Minninup Road, which are closer to the Mossop activity that are of good amenity and well serviced by public centre and to higher R codes up to R60. The area including Hillcrest is relatively transport). flat with older houses that have no heritage value and are relatively small houses. They now have access to sewerage. In short it is an area that is ripe for . Immediately around and in close to public transport redevelopment and if you are looking for some early wins on higher density this interchanges (e.g. Transit Oriented Developments adjacent is an area that should be R20 to R 30. In fact a logical extension of the Mossop to a railway station). Activity area would include the whole of the area bounded by Glenroy Street, . Locations suitable for redevelopment of non-functioning Minninup Road, and Mangles and Mansfield Street as R20 to R30. On the industrial and mixed business areas into mixed use opposite side of Minninup the draft TPS gives a R20 to R30 between Minninup precincts that do not compromise commercial functions of and Mangles and Goldsmith, Halsey and Spencer. That could have been adjoining land. extended to Timperley. The people who live in Hillcrest and Glenroy, and West and Mansfield certainly use The Mossop Street Store as their local centre. . Locations that support regional services and infrastructure. General As I have said increasing density is not always easy to achieve. lt . On water fronts to the ocean and the harbour / inlet. depends on the age and quality of the existing housing and the age of the current residents and the size of the families, and where the buildings are on . Land use efficiency (subdivision potential and plot ratio each lot, and whether sewerage is available. opportunities). . In areas of degraded housing stock (not including heritage I believe Hillcrest Avenue meets those criteria, and specifically 7 Hillcrest. precincts) that satisfy the above criteria. Retirement Villages and Aged accommodation in general. I am surprised that more work has not been done on ensuring that both existing residents and 2. As the walking distance from these facilities increases beyond those from elsewhere in greater Bunbury ,the South West and metropolitan the 400m ped shed, the density code should reduce to reflect area who wish to retire to the South West have ample opportunity to find established character and amenity. appropriate accommodation within the City of Bunbury including high value 3. Street alignments are to be avoided as residential density options near the Ocean and Bay. boundaries – instead mid-block / rear boundary cadastral boundaries are to be utilised where practicable. Some of Councils land and State owned land could have been identified for this purpose to offer to the major Aged accommodation providers including the 4. Consideration of decreasing or maintaining present the Punchbowl, and appropriately zoned sites between 4000 and 20000 square intensity of residential densities (spot coding) on sites that are metres. There is no real reason why Council should not suggest to land owners isolated from services, facilities, etc. and developers that they could have a specific zoning for that purpose or to 5. Character and heritage areas should not be given higher
City of Bunbury Page 174 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission include such a use in a general high density zoning. residential density codings, despite their proximity to services and facilities, where this may detrimentally affect the character As I have said before I was expecting that in the advertising of the draft TPS 8 of the local area and/or encourage the demolition of heritage there would have been a enumerated list of every change in Zoning or density listed dwellings. proposed and a short explanation of why a particular lot or area was chosen for 6. Dual coding should be applied where infill development in that rezonings or density. established areas is required to ensure adequate frontages, minimisation of crossovers, maintenance of character & This should have also included an explanation of how TPS8 is going to enable amenity, reduce excessive battle axing, retention of heritage Bunbury City to grow its population to between 50,000 to 75,000 in the lifetime sites, provision of reticulated water and sewerage. of TPS8. 7. The strategic regional centre (CBD) should have higher R-Codes I also wondered whether Council has notified every landowner of any changes allocated on the basis of precinct areas. These are: to the Zoning or density of their individual lots and the rationale for that change. . Residential frame area is to provide for an interface to surrounding residential areas. Fringing blocks should be dual coded to allow for a range of densities in suitable locations of the built environment to: . ensure an equivalent level of medium density to fronting residential developments and consistent streetscapes; and . a gradient of increasing density towards the centre for allotments facing inwardly and opposite commercial developments, which are developed at the higher coding along mid-block cadastral boundaries and not roads. . Mixed use areas are also to be dual coded in fringing areas and incorporate a range of intermediate levels of density towards the centre. This is to ensure a consistent urban form / streetscape, with residential and commercial developments of commensurate scale and bulk. . Commercial core is to achieve an urban form that supports the achievement of a strategic regional centre status, which is the next highest in order of hierarchy after the Perth Central Area (CBD). This precinct should ideally be coded R- AC1, R-AC2 and R-AC3 as appropriate guided by desired building height and plot ratio. 8. Regard for existing residential density on the ground and the R-
City of Bunbury Page 175 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Coding of the land on the Scheme map.
63 Harley Dykstra Pty Ltd Objection It is advised that scheme amendments to the existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7 that are approved by the Minister for Planning prior to Harley Dykstra has been engaged by the landowner of Lots 21 - 26 Jubilee Road, Lindsay Bergsma Council’s final adoption of the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 will Lots 40 - 42 Jeffrey Road and Lot 44, 101 and portion Lot 45 Woodley Road, (Planning Consultant) be reflected in the revised Scheme prior to its gazettal. Glen Iris to prepare a submission on the City of Bunbury's draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (draft LPS 8) in relation to these parcels of land. With respect to the operation of the Bushland Areas Special Control PO Box 778 Area depicted on the draft Scheme map, please refer to comments We thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and we recognise the BUNBURY WA 6231 provided in response to submission number 61 (made by LandCorp) considerable effort and time expended to date by the City of Bunbury to above, regarding the Preston Industrial Park Northern Precinct prepare the draft LPS8. (DOC/292367) (PIPNP) District Structure Plan area which is also well advanced in gaining requisite environmental and planning approvals. The purpose of this submission is to comment on how draft LPS 8 affects the subject land and to request further modifications as outlined in more detail below.
Site / Project History
Extensive planning and environmental work has been undertaken for the subject land over the past three years. Through this process, and the associated discussions, a number of key regional issues were identified. This resulted in the formulating of a Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS) Amendment being lodged with the Department of Planning which sought to address the key regional issues identified. The GBRS Amendment currently being considered by the DoP seeks to modify the existing 'Urban' and 'Regional Open Space' boundaries relating to the land under the GBRS. Attached are plans showing the existing and proposed zonings under the GBRS. The GBRS Amendment has identified, considered and responded to the following key regional issues:
• Approval from the Department of the Environment under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act);
• The 500m buffer required for the existing DBC abattoir in the locality;
• Aboriginal heritage considerations relating to the subject land;
City of Bunbury Page 176 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• The Environmental Protection Policy (EPP) Wetland located on the subject land; and
• Bulletin 1108 and the associated Ministerial Statement No. 697.
The first reason for this submission therefore is to ensure that the City is aware of the current GBRS Amendment proposal being processed by the DoP and request that the urban development zoning and Regional Open Space footprints on the LPS 8 maps be updated to reflect the GBRS Amendment, prior to the formal gazettal of LPS 8.
Proposed Changes Affecting The Subject Land In Draft LPS 8
It is noted that the current 'Development Zone- Residential' zoning relating to the subject land under the existing Town Planning Scheme No. 7 is proposed to change to 'Urban Development' Zone under the draft LPS 8. Nothing significantly changes in this regard since the requirement for a Structure Plan to be completed for the land remains for the proposed 'Urban Development' Zone.
It is also noted however that draft LPS 8 proposes an 'Environment Special Control Area (SCA) over the Urban Development zoned portion of the subject land. The 'Bushland Areas Special Control Area' listed in Schedule 7 of draft LPS 8 then sets out the objectives and provisions relating to the SCA, including the submission of adequate information and adequately justifying a proposal in terms of its environmental considerations.
We believe the Environment SCA requirements of draft LPS 8 should not be attached to the subject land due to the following:
• As noted earlier, substantial environmental work has already been completed for the subject land including that which forms part of the GBRS Amendment;
• It is highlighted that this includes the approval already received from the Federal Department of the Environment for an urban development footprint and a conservation footprint based on the extensive environmental work completed. The footprint respects the buffer to the abattoir in the locality and the other planning and environmental issues relevant to the site at a regional
City of Bunbury Page 177 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission level, as articulated in the current GBRS Amendment proposal;
• In any case it is noted that the 'Urban Development' zone in draft LPS 8 will trigger the need for a Structure Plan which will allow for the necessary environmental considerations to be further considered and assessed as part of that process.
It is noted that the provisions that form part of the 'Bushland Areas Special Control Area' listed in Schedule 7 of draft LPS 8 include matters such as development approval from the local government and Structure Plan requirements. These requirements are already automatically in place as a result of the Urban Development zone and therefore it is unnecessary to apply those provisions to this site, especially in light of the substantial environmental work has already been completed for the subject land. The net result is unnecessary procedures and inefficient additional layers of planning approval which are not achieving substantial gain.
We therefore formally request that the Environment SCA be removed from the subject land.
Conclusion
It is respectfully requested that the City of Bunbury take into consideration the above matters when considering the draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8 and implement the recommended changes when finalising the draft Scheme. In summary we request that:
• The urban development zoning and Regional Open Space footprints on the LPS 8 maps be updated to reflect the associated GBRS Amendment, prior to the formal gazettal of LPS 8; and
• The proposed Environment SCA be removed from the subject land.
We await a formal response on the above matters positive outcome in relation to these matters from the City of Bunbury and look forward to a positive outcome in relation to these matters.
City of Bunbury Page 178 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Please do not hesitate to contact me on 9792 6000 should you wish to discuss the above information.
[Attachment - Amending map pages]
64 John Sherwood Objection The Planning and Development Act 2005 sets out in Schedule 7 the matters that may be dealt with by local planning schemes, which is Below is a summary of issues which I believe LPS8 ought to address, in order to 53A Stockley Road then further defined in the model provisions under Schedule 1 of the improve the quality and equity of Bunbury's operation as a regional city. BUNBURY WA 6230 Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations Research into LPSs of relevant local governments in WA and other states can 2015. offer ways in which their Planning Schemes are addressing these or similar (DOC/292368) issues. I discussed all the items below with City staff in the LPS 8 Planning Forum Any draft Local Planning Scheme therefore must necessarily be on 7.12.16, and now formally make requests as part of the public comment constrained by these overriding statutes, and must concern land use period on LPS 8. planning matters, as opposed to broader social justice issues. Community All development must satisfy equal access standards as specified under the Building Code of Australia (BCA), and hence, this matter is I am very concerned that vulnerable members of the Bunbury community are adequately dealt with outside of the Scheme text. not protected by TPS 7 from ejection from their homes by developers. For example, a low rental block of flats on the eastern boundary of the Plaza While the comments supporting the draft Schemes differentiation of Shopping Centre was purchased and demolished in the recent redevelopment, public open space into ‘Conservation Reserve’ and ‘Local Open Space and to my knowledge no process was used to ensure that the low income, Reserve’ are noted, suggestions in relation to the types of zones and vulnerable residents had alternative accommodation with similar access to reserves applied in the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS) is a essential services. Many of these residents have mental health issues or matter under the control of the Western Australian Planning disabilities which meant that their flats, prior to their ejection, were ideally Commission (WAPC). located and within their budgets. The Draft Local Planning Scheme 8, section B2.1 or p23 states goals to which the City of Bunbury is committed. Heritage protection is addressed by the deemed provisions under Part 3 in Schedule 2 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning 1 l request that LPS 8 include a Policy on Low Rent Housing which would ensure Schemes) Regulations 2015), and hence, this matter is adequately that no development be allowed to buy and demolish existing low rent housing dealt with outside of the Scheme text. without providing similar in rental cost, location, access to services and related protections.
Accessibility
I believe that LPS 8 should contain measurable targets for universal access,
City of Bunbury Page 179 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission increasing over the near future.
2 l request that all previous reviews of accessibility in the city be examined, to check all locations in which accessibility was claimed to not meet universal access standards.
3 request that LPS 8 include a target of 30% of all new or redeveloped apartments and units meeting universal access requirements, and that targets be set for other types of buildings.
Environmental
I commend the City of Bunbury for differentiating Public Open Space (POS) and Environmental Conservation in the draft LPS. It is hoped that this long-awaited reform is also implemented in the final LPS. For about 20 years the South West Environment Centre (SWEC) and I have requested in submissions to the City of Bunbury (with POS) and the WA Government (with ROS) that such differentiation be made, both in textual writing and in colours on maps. Until now, planning documents have used a single category to combine reserves for parks, gardens and recreation with reserves for conservation. To have the same colour coding for recreation grounds, often totally cleared, grassed, fertilised and mowed, and for intact bushland and forests needing protection and conservation, is bad planning in the extreme. This single categorisation has caused confusion and misunderstandings, as well as weaker protection, planning and management of conservation reserves.
4 / request that TPS 8, including all its associated documents, comprehensively differentiates reserves for Public Open Space MOS) and those for Environmental Conservation, in textual passages and in maps.
Most WA Government planning documents continue the above single categorisation, called Regional Open Space (ROS) reserves for parks, gardens and recreation, and also for reserves for conservation. This makes reading of planning documents more difficult, impedes appropriate planning, reduces adequate protection of areas needing conservation, and weakens management of the two different types of reserves.
City of Bunbury Page 180 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The City of Bunbury, which appears to be about to change this confusing categorisation in its LPS 8, can choose to play a leading role in enabling change at the state level.
5 I request that the City of Bunbury, in association with other councils, requests the WA Government to make similar dual categorisation of reserves for Regional Open Space (ROS) in all state planning documents.
Heritage
The draft Local Planning Scheme does not contain a heading in the Table of Contents, and therefore people wanting to read what the scheme has to say about this topic are denied the opportunity to go directly to it, and are given the impression that the LPS does not address Heritage.
6 I request that the IPS include a heading in the Table of Contents, and a full section on Heritage, including but not confined to explaining the state's new role, list of deemed provisions, and providing links to other information and fact sheets.
Objection - Lot 500 Jetty Road
65 Ray Parker Objection Air Photo (2016) [Large amount of submission documentation primarily regarding Lot 500 on Committee Koombana Deposited Plan: 73513 (Reserve Number: 51781) Jetty Road, Bunbury – refer to Bay (Dolphin Cove) Subject Area Annex 7.] Care/Future Group
27 Bonnefoi Boulevard, BUNBURY WA 6230
PO Box 1199, BUNBURY WA 6231
(DOC/283208, 283391, 286894, 291973,
City of Bunbury Page 181 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission 291974 and 292210) Cadastral Boundaries
Subject Area
Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS)
Subject Area
City of Bunbury Page 182 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Current Scheme Map (TPS7)
Subject Area
Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
Subject Area
City of Bunbury Page 183 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Lot 500 Jetty Road is included in the ‘Regional Centre Zone’ under the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBRS), but is not presently zoned under the City of Bunbury Town Planning Scheme No. 7 (TPS7).
Therefore, the subject site is considered to be ‘unzoned’ under the City of Bunbury’s existing Scheme, and hence, does not specify any development controls over the land, including the specification of any minimum setbacks or maximum building height.
Consequently, it is the expectation of the Department of Planning that the subject site should be included in a local zone, for which it is proposed that the new ‘Regional Centre Zone’ would be the most appropriate.
It is also proposed on the draft Scheme map to encompass the subject site within a Development Areas Special Control Area; which depending on the nature of the ultimate proposal, requires either a Structure Plan or Local Development Plan to first be approved prior to any subdivision or development. The purpose of the Development Areas Special Control Area is given in Schedule 7 of the draft Scheme text, which states:
To designate areas requiring further investigations and structure planning in relation to environmental and natural resource values, natural hazards, land use options, infrastructure servicing requirements, transportation infrastructure needs, landscaping and urban design.
Hence, the extent and nature of any approved development permitted on the subject site will need to be determined in the future through the preparation of a proposed Structure Plan or Local Development Plan, which would be prepared by a proponent and approved by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) in the case of any Structure Plan proposal.
The procedure for considering a proposed Structure Plan or Local Development Plan is set out in the deemed provisions of the Planning
City of Bunbury Page 184 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, which includes a statutory public advertising period. As such, the City of Bunbury will provide affected landowners and other stakeholders in the community with the opportunity to make a submission on any draft proposed Structure Plan or Local Development Plan, which would ultimately be determined by the WAPC or the local government in the case of a Local Development Plan proposal, based upon a consideration of the proposal and any submissions received.
Any developer seeking to undertake the filling of Lot 500 would be required to obtain the necessary environmental approvals from a range of State government agencies including for example the Department of Environment Regulation, Department of Parks and Wildlife and the Department of Transport. However, it should be noted that the Environmental Protection Authority has already considered the proposal as part of the region planning scheme amendment.
66 Ben Bryant Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Reference to Bunbury Marlston North Precinct, Lot 500 Jetty Road, R.U.1 – Part 3/27 Bonnefoi 2 C1.20. Boulevard, BUNBURY WA 6230 • Filling in Koombana waterways with land fill, no need other land is available in Bunbury. (DOC/284006) • No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct waterfrontage, especially by having to fill with land fill.
• Loss of Koombana bay water frontage for public and marine associated public activities.
• Leave valuable existing waterfrontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy it.
• Don’t fill in water way area for short stay accommodation as proposed by COB Plan Scheme No. 8.
City of Bunbury Page 185 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Filling in the dolphin cove area in will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way areas.
• Dolphin Habitue protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins very prevalent in the cove area.
• Keep in line with Dolphin Sanctuary area at the “cut” and “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay.
• Planned usage in contradiction to past and existing height limitations on existing developments.
• Maintain existing available car parking area for local business working staff and visitors.
• Affects existing Bonnefoi Blvd past developments, is too close, too confronting, will destroy vista.
• Is poorly advertised planning and not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
67 Janina Cambrea Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Reference to Bunbury Marlston North Precinct, Lot 500 Jetty Road, R.U.1 – Part 3/27 Bonnefoi 2 C1.20 Boulevard, BUNBURY WA 6230 • Filling in Koombana waterways with land fill, no need other land is available in Bunbury. (DOC/284007) • No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct waterfrontage, especially by having to fill with land fill.
• Loss of Koombana bay water frontage for public and marine associated public activities.
• Leave valuable existing waterfrontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy it.
City of Bunbury Page 186 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Don’t fill in water way area for short stay accommodation as proposed by COB Plan Scheme No. 8.
• Filling in the dolphin cove area in will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way areas.
• Dolphin Habitue protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins very prevalent in the cove area.
• Keep in line with Dolphin Sanctuary area at the “cut” and “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay.
• Planned usage in contradiction to past and existing height limitations on existing developments.
• Maintain existing available car parking area for local business working staff and visitors.
• Affects existing Bonnefoi Blvd past developments, is too close, too confronting, will destroy vista.
• Is poorly advertised planning and not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
68 Alan Hogg Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. The future of dolphins in the cove will be in jeopardy and the effect on these S/14 Skews Street, animals would be ongoing. Has a survey been done to see what the effect BUNBURY WA 6230 would be? This could be vital. (DOC/284257)
69 Iver Robertson Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. I do not believe in filling any more waterways as has been done in the past. The 147 Ocean Drive, inlet waterways, free flowing rivers such as Brunswick, Collie River and diverting BUNBURY WA 6230 the Preston River has led to closure of Turkey point and natural flushing ceased. Outer harbour access blocked off and beach area power station to the “cut”
City of Bunbury Page 187 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission blocked off to local residents. Do not fill in jetty road, Lot 500, further reduces (DOC/284489) our water front access.
My name is Iver Robertson, I live at 147 Ocean Drive, one of the first house built along Ocean Drive, Bunbury W.A. I am now 96 years of age, I was a councillor on the Bunbury Council for over 23 years, 17 as Deputy Mayor.
I did own several boats called “Jipsee” and moored in Bunbury and Quindalup in holiday time, I used my boat for fishing out of Bunbury for pleasure for some 76 years before I had to stop going out so I have a very good perspective of the Bunbury waterways and inlet waterways.
I sold the boat some three years ago as I could no longer go out fishing.
The worst thing we did as councillors was to allow the closure of the passage from the Bunbury Yacht Club Sea Scouts area public jetty (Valdermar left from here) area through to the Turkey Point, the cut and into the Australind inlet.
This destroyed what still could have been an iconic passage through our waterways and still an iconic picnic area at Turkey point that many Bunbury older families would remember, it was also a major tourist attraction just like Mandurah is today.
I remember when it was deep and clear water at Turkey Point.
I have included a photo taken of me in 1936 standing next to my father’s new boat “Cairncorn” at the Bunbury Yacht Club slipway. My father purchased this boat from Perth at 100 pounds and came down on a Perth Bunbury train carriage, was taken out the old main jetty rail way line and then it was picked up by the wharf crane and put in the water, my father and I then took it through the skeleton jetty area into the inlet to the yacht club.
In those days we Bunbury people had access to one of the finest waterways through the inlets however bad decisions always have bad consequences.
If we continue to fill our waterways, we are still continuing to destroy each generations access to waterways, so I can only say to the council of today, think
City of Bunbury Page 188 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission no more of this and at least save the waterways for the next generations.
Bunbury has been good to me but we have not been good to Bunbury at times.
70 Anonymous Objection Anonymous submissions do not comply with requirements regulation 24 (1c) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) I refer to the Draft Planning Strategy DL Planning Scheme No. 8 and 100% (DOC/284490) Regulations 2015, which outlines that submissions must state the Object. name and address of the person making the submission. We are not Singapore and we do not have to back fill dolphin cover to put up 5, 6, 7 storey high rises.
Building over water in our bay has future high tide (i.e. 250mtrs above normal water line) risks.
We have enough available land at Back Beach, up by the high school behind 5 Prinsep Street and Old Glade Caravan Park, to build more high rise apartments.
Instead build a sea wall from the land back wharf all the way around to the Restaurant then from Aristos’s continue wall/pathway, using natural water/tide line to Dolphin Cove and put all that area into small fishing marina like in Freo and have fish sales from the boats, pop up food van cooking seafood like in Hobart, Tasmania. It (the foreshores) all around that areas has to be for mall vendors and the public to use. Only for public.
If you want a satellite high rise city, build a bridge over the cut and develop all that beachfront and develop the estuary
The potential over that area is huge.
More parks can be developed over past mistakes and put more trees.
You need vision/ look 100 year ahead where will we be. Look what Mandurah/Rockingham has done with its foreshores. We are pretty much stuck in the old old days and need to revamp a bit better.
We need to develop our coastline more for people to swim/play/pleasure/walk/cycle. You cannot keep telling that you can only build
City of Bunbury Page 189 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission 2 storey in the past and then come along and say now 5, 6, 7 storey – that is not on.
You either buy everyone out/rezone and rebuild to high rise. That’s what they did on the Gold Coast.
If you make a start to develop the foreshores it will all fall into place as you go along.
Bunbury is a Port City so keep it that way develop fish wharf marina, more restaurants even floating ones, a board walk/Jetty light, park, benches shade, BBQ. All where there is water, people love that. A walk that starts at Hastie Street goes all the way into Dolphin Cove. Make a sea wall plus jetties and marina better. It’s all over the place at the moment.
The old Jetty Baths used to be the ski/fast boat area in the old days now you get the place full of moorings and too many boats. Not a good sight, needs to be a proper marina/pens etc.
Need to tidy up things a lot more and it means restrictions, then have meetings and rim it and implement.
We cannot keep going this way we have changes needed.
Build a multi-storey car park with a carnival/fun faire/games alley and restaurant at the top of it – now that’s a wow factor for the future, just do it stop talking and act.
Also, southwest highway as an entry statement into Bunbury is a total disgrace. Dirty/weeds/unswept/dull/poor road markings/ no landscaping, absolute disaster from the railway line all the way into Picton, it is appalling for a city in 2016 to present like it does, a total disgrace. Go drive it and look and critique it. The verges are a disgrace it’s so old and dirty needs a real clean up and paint/sweep. I think your contractors need a good shake-up, if they mow the grass then kill the weeds and sweep up all dirt/stones etc all goes together. That’s all I want to say :) Ratepayer.
City of Bunbury Page 190 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
71 Private, Concerned Objection Anonymous submissions do not comply with requirements regulation Elderly Citizen 24 (1c) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) [Regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road – RUI – Part C1.20] Regulations 2015, which outlines that submissions must state the (DOC/284768) name and address of the person making the submission. The area is naturally sensitive/habitat for Dolphin feeding.
Just continue a nice sea wall around for public open space use and more seafood restaurants.
Other sites are available for high rise development.
I 100% object. No.
Just stop wasting money and develop “normal” land sites.
Leave foreshores for people’s use.
This whole jetty precinct is to be only developed for boating/fishing/public walks/cycling/small restaurants or even food vans, pref. “seafood”.
72 Samantha Malcom Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. 1. Filling in of Koombana water way area not needed for proposed type Unit 1A -27 Bonnefoi development – alternate land is plenty available in Bunbury. Boulevard, BUNBURY WA 6230 2. Filling in area destroys swimming beach area. (DOC/287193) 3. Fills in Dolphin activity area of feeding.
4. Will block out already established apartments at Bonnefoi and Jetty Road complex.
[Attachment]
Objections to the C.O.B planning proposal are: Reference to Bunbury Marlston North Precinct Lot 500 Jetty Road R.U.1 – Part 3 C1.20
1. Filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, to create land for
City of Bunbury Page 191 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission short stay accommodation is not required as there is no need because plenty of other land is available around for short stay accommodation that remains unbuilt on.
2. No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct water frontage, is in contradiction to existing development apartments are already restricted to height limitations of only two storey by CoB in Bonnefoi Bvd. CoB must demonstrate support for developers and unit purchasers.
3. Leave valuable existing water frontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy our water ways what are left, must be left as is for public and marine associated public activities.
4. Maintain the existing car park area for local business workers, and turn the existing water front grass area in public picnic areas, install BBQ and shelters, tables etc, keep grass mowed and area tidy for recreational and marine activities.
5. Do not fill in the dolphin cover area, it acts as a feed ground, will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way area. Maintain parallel support for Dolphin Discovery Centre.
6. Dolphin Habitué protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins are very prevalent in the cover area, are monitored and recorded back to support the Dolphin Discovery Centre.
7. Dolphin habitat protection – keep I line with protection of Dolphin sanctuary area at the “Cut” and protection area at Koombana Bay beach areas used by the “Discover Centre” Koombana Bay beach area used by the “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay, cover forms part of the dolphins activity triangle over the Koombana bay area.
8. Proposed development is too close, too confronting, destroys harbour side vista and planning is poorly advertised not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
9. Needs to be a public referendum on this by the CoB to the ratepayers public
City of Bunbury Page 192 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission of Bunbury, save our waterways, look at the poor current state of our harbour and inlet silting that is taking place.
10. Support Dolphins not destruction of our waterways areas as proposed.
73 Valerie Myles Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Objections to the C.O.B planning proposal are: Unit 1/29 Bonnefoi Boulevard, BUNBURY Reference to Bunbury Marlston North Precinct Lot 500 Jetty Road RU1 – part 3 WA 6230 C1.20. (DOC/287355) • Filling in Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, no need other land is available in Bunbury.
• No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct waterfrontage, especially by having to fill with land fill.
• Loss of Koombana bay water way frontage for public and marine associated public activities.
• Leave valuable existing waterfrontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy it.
• Don’t fill in water way areas for short stay accommodation as proposed by COB plan Scheme #8.
• Filling the dolphin cove area in will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way area.
• Dolphin Habitue protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins very prevalent in the cove area.
• Keep in line with Dolphin sanctuary area at the “Cut” and “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay.
• Planned usage in contradiction to past and existing height limitations on
City of Bunbury Page 193 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission existing developments.
• Maintain existing available car parking areas for local business working staff and visitors.
• Affects existing Bonnefoi Bvd past developments, is too close, too confronting, will destroy vista.
• Is poorly advertised planning and not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
74 Robert Nash Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Objections to the C.O.B. planning proposal are: 13 Sungrove Avenue, WOLLASTON WA 6230 Reference to Bunbury Marlston North Precinct Lot 500 Jetty Road R.U.1 – Part 3 C1.20. (DOC/287478) 1. Filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, to create land for short stay accommodation is not required as there is no need because plenty of other land is available around for short stay accommodation that remains unbuilt on.
2. No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct water frontage, is in contradiction to existing development apartments are already restricted to height limitations of only two storey by CoB in Bonnefoi Bvd. CoB must demonstrate support for developers and unit purchasers.
3. Leave valuable existing water frontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy our water ways what are left, must be left as is for public and marine associated public activities.
4. Maintain the existing car park area for local business workers, and turn the existing water front grass area in public picnic areas, install BBQ and shelters, tables etc, keep grass mowed and area tidy for recreational and marine activities.
5. Do not fill in the dolphin cover area, it acts as a feed ground, will annihilate
City of Bunbury Page 194 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission the Dolphins feeding activities water way area. Maintain parallel support for Dolphin Discovery Centre.
6. Dolphin Habitué protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins are very prevalent in the cover area, are monitored and recorded back to support the Dolphin Discovery Centre.
7. Dolphin habitat protection – keep I line with protection of Dolphin sanctuary area at the “Cut” and protection area at Koombana Bay beach areas used by the “Discover Centre” Koombana Bay beach area used by the “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay, cover forms part of the dolphins activity triangle over the Koombana bay area.
8. Proposed development is too close, too confronting, destroys harbour side vista and planning is poorly advertised not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
9. Needs to be a public referendum on this by the CoB to the ratepayers public of Bunbury, save our waterways, look at the poor current state of our harbour and inlet silting that is taking place.
10. Support Dolphins not destruction of our waterways areas as proposed.
75 Lloyd Parker Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Objection - to filling in with land fill Koombana Bay water way area 1 Rodwell Place, BUNBURY WA 6230 Bunbury Town Planning Scheme #8 Reference R.U.1 Lot 500 Jetty Road – Part 3 C1.20. (DOC/287907) Lot 500 Jetty Road Bunbury – corner Bonnefoi Bvd and Jetty Road causeway
Under no circumstances should they be planning to fill in Lot 500 as this is just more destruction of the water ways, like they did filling in the inlet estuary navigation passage from Bunbury to the Leschenault estuary, closing it off and silting it up as everyone knows.
No high rise wanted in this location, destroys the Vista so close over the
City of Bunbury Page 195 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission waterway. Koombana Bay already under extreme silting all over, does the C.o.B. not know this.
Destroys the beach and activities swimming, fishing, also is observation and picnic area.
Destroys the Dolphins active feeding path along the beach area, their feed ground will be gone.
Do not destroy any more of Bunbury waterway frontage, go somewhere else and build, do not need this water way filled in to make land in Bunbury, we are not Singapore or Dubai.
76 Ron Swansen Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. I object to the proposed fill for the Residential High Rise Lot 500 Jetty Road 59 Holylake Avenue, causeway area and any other fill in Koombana Bay. As the Bay should be kept BUNBURY WA 6230 for future generations to enjoy and should not be used as revenue raising for council and Government. Pollution from residential is also a pollution hazard to (DOC/288257) sea life.
Bunbury Marlston North Precinct Lot 500 Jetty Road R.U.1 – Part 3 C1.20
1. Filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, to create land for short stay accommodation is not required as there is no need because plenty of other land is available around for short stay accommodation that remains unbuilt on.
2. No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct water frontage, is in contradiction to existing development apartments are already restricted to height limitations of only two storey by CoB in Bonnefoi Bvd. CoB must demonstrate support for developers and unit purchasers.
3. Leave valuable existing water frontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy our water ways what are left, must be left as is for public and marine associated public activities.
City of Bunbury Page 196 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
4. Maintain the existing car park area for local business workers, and turn the existing water front grass area in public picnic areas, install BBQ and shelters, tables etc, keep grass mowed and area tidy for recreational and marine activities.
5. Do not fill in the dolphin cover area, it acts as a feed ground, will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way area. Maintain parallel support for Dolphin Discovery Centre.
6. Dolphin Habitué protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins are very prevalent in the cover area, are monitored and recorded back to support the Dolphin Discovery Centre.
7. Dolphin habitat protection – keep I line with protection of Dolphin sanctuary area at the “Cut” and protection area at Koombana Bay beach areas used by the “Discover Centre” Koombana Bay beach area used by the “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay, cover forms part of the dolphins activity triangle over the Koombana bay area.
8. Proposed development is too close, too confronting, destroys harbour side vista and planning is poorly advertised not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
9. Needs to be a public referendum on this by the CoB to the ratepayers public of Bunbury, save our waterways, look at the poor current state of our harbour and inlet silting that is taking place.
10. Support Dolphins not destruction of our waterways areas as proposed.
77 Kim Hough Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Objection – to filling in with land fill Koombana Bay water way area 33 Matilda Avenue, AUSTRALIND WA 6233 Bunbury Town Planning Scheme # 8 Reference R.U.1 Lot 500 Jetty Road – Part 3 C1.20 (DOC 288956) When filled in could cause flooding in other areas eg City of Bunbury, shire of
City of Bunbury Page 197 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Dardanup and Shire of Harvey.
Bunbury Marlston North Precinct Lot 500 Jetty Road R.U.1 – Part 3 C1.20
1. Filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, to create land for short stay accommodation is not required as there is no need because plenty of other land is available around for short stay accommodation that remains unbuilt on.
2. No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct water frontage, is in contradiction to existing development apartments are already restricted to height limitations of only two storey by CoB in Bonnefoi Bvd. CoB must demonstrate support for developers and unit purchasers.
3. Leave valuable existing water frontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy our water ways what are left, must be left as is for public and marine associated public activities.
4. Maintain the existing car park area for local business workers, and turn the existing water front grass area in public picnic areas, install BBQ and shelters, tables etc, keep grass mowed and area tidy for recreational and marine activities.
5. Do not fill in the dolphin cover area, it acts as a feed ground, will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way area. Maintain parallel support for Dolphin Discovery Centre.
6. Dolphin Habitue protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins are very prevalent in the cover area, are monitored and recorded back to support the Dolphin Discovery Centre.
7. Dolphin habitat protection – keep I line with protection of Dolphin sanctuary area at the “Cut” and protection area at Koombana Bay beach areas used by the “Discover Centre” Koombana Bay beach area used by the “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay, cover forms part of the dolphins activity triangle over the Koombana bay area.
City of Bunbury Page 198 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
8. Proposed development is too close, too confronting, destroys harbour side vista and planning is poorly advertised not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
9. Needs to be a public referendum on this by the CoB to the ratepayers public of Bunbury, save our waterways, look at the poor current state of our harbour and inlet silting that is taking place.
10. Support Dolphins not destruction of our waterways areas as proposed.
78 Kim Royce Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Landgate Deposit 73513 – “Lot 500” Octopus Garden Marine Charter I am making this submission on behalf of Octopus Garden Marine Charters (Kim Royce & Associates Pty Ltd t/as) – “OGMC”. PO Box 1680, BUNBURY WA 6231 “OGMC” are attempting to attract tourists to Bunbury, to enjoy our wonderful waterways, which are also home to the Koombana Bay dolphin population. (DOC/289315 and 289456) “OGMC” operates the charter vessel Cross Country – she has been based in Bunbury for over 20 years – “OGMC” has owned her for 9 years.
“OGMC” conducts “scenic cruises” of Koombana Bay; Casuarina Boat Harbour; Marlston Waterfront & open ocean off Bunbury.
Submission:
“OGMC” objects to the proposal (To fill in Lot 500 Jetty Road & develop) This is an active Dolphin Feeding Ground.
Reasons:
1/ reclaiming of the cove will impact on marine species (mainly dolphins)
2/ no need for “high rise” there – PLENTY of other land available ( DOT land north along Casuarina Drive)
City of Bunbury Page 199 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
3/ “eye sore” – look at the Gold Coast
4/ appears to be “money making” exercise at the expense of the environment ( City of Bunbury no doubt will profit from sale of reclaimed land)
5/ tourists will be denied shore viewing of dolphins ( Jetty Road is popular for tourists to sit/stand & watch dolphins feeding & playing in waters that you wish to reclaim
79 Alan & Urszula Baxter Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Objection to filling in with land fill Koombana Bay water way are, Bunbury Town 17 Tilley Crescent, Planning Scheme #8 Reference R.U.1 Lot 500 Jetty Road – Part 3 C1.20. BUNBURY WA 6230 Lot 500 Jetty Road Bunbury – corner Bonnefoi Bvd and Jetty Road causeway (DOC/289482) 1. Filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, to create land for short stay accommodation is not required as there is no need because plenty of other land is available around for short stay accommodation that remains unbuilt on.
2. No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct water frontage, is in contradiction to existing development apartments are already restricted to height limitations of only two storey by CoB in Bonnefoi Bvd. CoB must demonstrate support for developers and unit purchasers.
3. Leave valuable existing water frontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy our water ways what are left, must be left as is for public and marine associated public activities.
4. Maintain the existing car park area for local business workers, and turn the existing water front grass area in public picnic areas, install BBQ and shelters, tables etc, keep grass mowed and area tidy for recreational and marine activities.
5. Do not fill in the dolphin cover area, it acts as a feed ground, will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way area. Maintain parallel support for
City of Bunbury Page 200 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Dolphin Discovery Centre.
6. Dolphin Habitué protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins are very prevalent in the cover area, are monitored and recorded back to support the Dolphin Discovery Centre.
7. Dolphin habitat protection – keep I line with protection of Dolphin sanctuary area at the “Cut” and protection area at Koombana Bay beach areas used by the “Discover Centre” Koombana Bay beach area used by the “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay, cover forms part of the dolphins activity triangle over the Koombana bay area.
8. Proposed development is too close, too confronting, destroys harbour side vista and planning is poorly advertised not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
9. Needs to be a public referendum on this by the CoB to the ratepayers public of Bunbury, save our waterways, look at the poor current state of our harbour and inlet silting that is taking place.
10. Support Dolphins not destruction of our waterways areas as proposed.
80 Nigel Davies Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Objection - to filling in with land fill Koombana Bay water way area 13 The Strand, BUNBURY WA 6230 Bunbury Town Planning Scheme #8 Reference R.U.1 Lot 500 Jetty Road -Part 3 C1.20: (DOC/290011) 1. Disruption of Dolphin Habitat
2. Major devaluation of adjoining home values
3. Loss of views by Residents
4. We have too much business influence in this city and to regard for rate payers and voters.
City of Bunbury Page 201 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
5. We are developing every available water front space – Leave it alone
81 Errol Barrett Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Objection – to filling in with land fill Koombana Bay water way area 14 Elizabeth Crescent, BUNBURY WA 6230 Bunbury Town Planning Scheme # 8 Reference R.U.1 Lot 500 Jetty Road – Part 3 C1.20 (DOC/290782) As a person who has swum for many years in Koombana bay, every year the water is becoming less attractive to swim in. It is becoming stagnate. You can’t see the bottom, the weed on the bottom is growing more each year and the sand out by the proposed development seems to be creeping further east each year. The bay will be dead soon. The proposal for Lot 500 Jetty road will only accelerate the death of our bay.
82 Lyn Henderson Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Lot 500 Jetty Road Bunbury 53 Hudson Road, WITHERS WA 6230 Objection – to filling in with land fill Koombana Bay Water Way Area (DOC/291761) Bunbury Town Planning Scheme #8 Reference R.U.1 LOT 500 Jetty Road – Part 3 C1.20
The area of lot 500 should not be filled in to drive the drive the dolphins out of the area and fill in the existing beach area for activities that myself and other public use.
There is a lot of other land in Bunbury that is available vacant land for this purpose.
83 Carol Bailey Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. As per attached – supporting Dolphin Cove Group 199 Ocean Drive, BUNBURY WA 6230 [Attachment:]
City of Bunbury Page 202 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
(DOC/291972) Reference to Bunbury Marlston North Precinct Lot 500 Jetty Road R.U.1 – Part 3 C1.20.
1. Filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, to create land for short stay accommodation is not required as there is no need because plenty of other land is available around for short stay accommodation that remains unbuilt on.
2. No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct water frontage, is in contradiction to existing development apartments are already restricted to height limitations of only two storey by CoB in Bonnefoi Bvd. CoB must demonstrate support for developers and unit purchasers.
3. Leave valuable existing water frontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy our water ways what are left, must be left as is for public and marine associated public activities.
4. Maintain the existing car park area for local business workers, and turn the existing water front grass area in public picnic areas, install BBQ and shelters, tables etc, keep grass mowed and area tidy for recreational and marine activities.
5. Do not fill in the dolphin cover area, it acts as a feed ground, will annihilate the Dolphins feeding activities water way area. Maintain parallel support for Dolphin Discovery Centre.
6. Dolphin Habitué protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins are very prevalent in the cover area, are monitored and recorded back to support the Dolphin Discovery Centre.
7. Dolphin habitat protection – keep I line with protection of Dolphin sanctuary area at the “Cut” and protection area at Koombana Bay beach areas used by the “Discover Centre” Koombana Bay beach area used by the “Discovery Centre” Koombana Bay, cover forms part of the dolphins activity triangle over the Koombana bay area.
8. Proposed development is too close, too confronting, destroys harbour side
City of Bunbury Page 203 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission vista and planning is poorly advertised not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
9. Needs to be a public referendum on this by the CoB to the ratepayers public of Bunbury, save our waterways, look at the poor current state of our harbour and inlet silting that is taking place.
10. Support Dolphins not destruction of our waterways areas as proposed.
84 J. Green Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. As a private citizen, my interests include the protection of the current feeding The Boulevard, habitat of our precious and unique Dolphin population. There is absolutely no AUSTRALIND WA 6230 good reason to fill in our waterways. (DOC/292208) Please find attached. I have a strong objection to Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8.
[Attachment:]
Reference to Bunbury Marlston North Precinct Lot 500 Jetty Road R.U.1 – Part 3 C1.20:
• Filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with land fill, no need other land is available in Bunbury.
• No high rise 5/7 storey required on direct water frontage, especially by having to fill with land fill.
• Loss of Koombana bay water way frontage for public and marine associated public activities.
• Leave valuable existing water frontage access for future generations to enjoy, do not destroy it.
• Don’t fill in water way area for short stay accommodation as proposed by C.O.B plan scheme #8.
City of Bunbury Page 204 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
• Filling the dolphin cove area in will annihilates the Dolphins feeding activities water way area.
• Dolphin Habitué protection, feeding and activities of Dolphins very prevalent in the cove area.
• Keep in line with Dolphin sanctuary area at the ‘Cut’ and ‘Discovery Centre’ Koombana Bay.
• Planned usage in contradiction to past and existing height limitations on existing developments.
• Maintain existing available car parking area for local business working staff and visitors.
• Affects existing Bonnefoi Bvd past developments, is too close, too confronting, will destroys vista.
• Is poorly advertised planning and not transparent to direct public, lacks information.
85 Gerald Durell Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. 1. There is no need to fill in Koombana Bay waterways with land fill as there is 21 The Strand, plenty of other land available for short stay accommodation. BUNBURY WA 6230 2. No need to risk the Dolphin feeding activities which may affect the number of (DOC/292285) dolphins the bay can support.
3. Dolphin activity is great for Tourism so why risk this industry by interring with their playing/feeding grounds.
4. Our water frontage access is already limited in this area so why put more limits on it?
5. Short-stay accommodation of this size would cause traffic control issues in this region. On busy times it is already difficult to manoeuvre through the area.
City of Bunbury Page 205 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
6. It is already difficult to locate a parking bay in this area. If the proposed 5/7 storey short-stay accommodation buildings go ahead they will be on land that is regularly used for parking by workers and visitors. Hence more problems in finding a parking bay and this would be detrimental to business activity and the number of visitors who could use this area for recreation/sightseeing/shopping/eating etc. This land area is used for parking by young families and kids for parking while swimming at Jetty Baths area.
7. What is also very worrying is that once we start filling in the Koombana Bay waterways for needless development, when will it stop? There is nothing to prevent the government in the future to introduce more lots for development in our waterways similar to this lot 500 Jetty Road.
8. The needs of the community should be first, not development of our waterways that are unnecessary.
9. Scheme #8 has been poorly advertised and even the people who do know of its existence have little idea it involves filling in existing Koombana Bay waterways with landfill. When told they are in a state of disbelief and disgust. Even at a recent forum on Scheme #8 (organised by COB council) very few attendees realised what Lot 500 Jetty Road involved and most were surprised and disgusted.
86 Judith Durell Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Live in the vacinity (owner/occupier) 21 The Strand, BUNBURY WA 6230 General interest in how it will impact the dolphins and tourism as well as increased traffic risks. Ref RUI Lot 500 Jetty Rd. (DOC/292286) 1. I do not believe there is any reason (other than financial for developers and State Government) to infill Koombana Bay to build 5/7 storey short stay apartments. (other land available).
2. Dolphins have been a major tourist drawcard for many years dating back to the 1960’s/1970’s when Mrs Smith used to feed them near the Parade Hotel. Any disturbance to their feeding areas may be jeopardising their continued use
City of Bunbury Page 206 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission of this area.
3. Waterfront access is already limited. Lots of people use this area. We do not need to reduce this any further.
4. The impact of traffic if the development goes ahead would be detrimental to people (including lots of children using the Jetty beach) accessing facilities in the region. Cyclists ride around/ through this area as well.
5. I do not believe 5/7 storey apartments would enhance this area in any way, as well as being unfair to local residents who bought/built in previous years not knowing there were plans to infill the area listed. Also no reason if one lot is developed, that the rest of the pegged land would not be developed as well. This is a substantial amount of infilling. It would then impact the dolphins even more seriously, risking them moving elsewhere.
6. Community recreational needs should come before the unnecessary infill of the waterways. There is already restrictions of where boats, yachts etc can be moored. This need will grow as the Bunbury region grows.
7. Public awareness of Scheme #8 is very poor. Lots of residents would be shocked to realise the full implications of this scheme. Not many could conceive the idea to reclaim land already under water, and used by many people for boating, fishing etc.
87 Marc Jury Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Object to the proposal of infilling bay adjacent to Jetty Road. 88 Stockley Road, BUNBURY WA 6230 The impact on the bay, environment in general, Dolphin habitats, boating, fishing and leisure activities is unacceptable. (DOC/292356)
88 David Raphael Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. I object to the development of the area in the vicinity of Lot 500 / Lot 501 Jetty 3/14 Acacia Street, Road. BUNBURY WA 6230
City of Bunbury Page 207 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
(DOC/292358) Development in this area will negatively impact on the natural environment including the dolphin habitat in Koombana Bay. Boating, fishing and other leisure and recreation activities will also be adversely affected.
89 Ian Phibbs Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Concerns private citizen who uses they bay for fishing and recreation. 4/6 Kendle Close, PELICAN POINT WA Objection to the proposed development of the Bay for fill in of Lots 500 & 501. 6230 Believing this will ruin the view for existing residents and impact the area for recreational purposes. Local dolphin population, and the well-being of the area (DOC/292359) in general.
90 Owners of #29 Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 Bonnefoi Boulevard, (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Object to the proposal to develop and/or reclaim proposed Lot 500 & Lot 501 BUNBURY WA 6230 off Jetty Road, due to negative impact and reduction in value and enjoyment of our combined units; negative impacts on natural environment and in particular (DOC/292360) the dolphin habitat in Koombana Bay.
91 Geoff Williams Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. I object to the proposed reclamation and development of Lot 500 & Lot 501 PO Box 162, BOYANUP Jetty Road. WA 6237 This will have a negative impact on the natural environment both visible and (DOC/292361) invisible. It will severely affect marine life and dolphins, the leisure activities in the area for which there is no realistic alternative (water skiing) not to mention sailing and fishing.
As yet there would appear to be no consolidated plan proposed for the entire area of the old jetty and the outer harbour without this there can be no valid approval.
I object to a waste of time and energy in progressing a major project in a piecemeal manner and without an end objective.
City of Bunbury Page 208 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
92 T Cooke Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. I object due to potential environmental impacts i.e. Dolphins & bird life to the 12 Boab Court, SOUTH development of Lot 500 & Lot 501 off Jetty Road. There would be a further BUNBURY WA 6230 impact on leisure activities i.e. boating & fishing. (DOC/292632)
93 Colleen Skipsey Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Object to the proposal City of Bunbury Local Planning Scheme No. 8 #2/29 Bonnefoi Development and infill of Lot 501 & Lot 500 Jetty Road. This proposal impacts Boulevard, BUNBURY the natural environment. The area of the bay that will be impacted is a popular WA 6230 feeding ground for the Bunbury dolphins, especially in the winter months where they are feeding daily. From a leisure point of view this area is great fishing (DCO/292363) ground and regular place for water sport enthusiasts.
Furthermore the proposed development has a negative effect on the value of our property and on our lifestyle.
94 Dave Rowlands Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Object to the proposal to develop and/or infill of Lot 500 & Lot 501 Jetty Road. 19 Jones Way, ABBEY WA 6810 Proposed development will impact the mature environment and dolphin habitat in Koombana Bay. Will also impact leisure activities such as kayaking, boating, (DOC/292364) fishing etc.
95 Robert Skipsey Objection Refer to comments provided in response to submission number 65 (made by Ray Parker) above regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury. Object to proposal for the development of and/or land infill of Lot 500 and/or #2/29 Bonnefoi Lot 501 Jetty Road, due to erosion of our sea facing property value and the Boulevard, BUNBURY potential environmental impact of reducing a known habitat for our Koombana WA 6230 Bay dolphins. (DOC/292366)
City of Bunbury Page 209 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Late Submissions
96 Calibre Consulting No Objection Noted. I refer to the above matter and advise that Calibre Consulting has been engaged Gary Barbour (Manager by Southern Port Authority – Port of Bunbury to broadly investigate and South West) consider the implications of the draft Local Planning Strategy (LPS) and Local Planning Scheme 8 (TPS8) upon their land. Unit 5, 53 Victoria Street, BUNBURY WA Background 6230 The subject land is presently, and predominantly located within, the Port (DOC/293108, 293276) Installations category under the Greater Bunbury Region Scheme (GBBRS). Land around the Port is Waterways (ocean and harbor), as well as Regional Open Space under the GBRS.
Whilst the current Local Planning Scheme 7 (TPS7) largely does not apply to the Port, the Port interfaces with the land affected by TPS7 including Primary Regional Roads, Distributor Roads, Special Use zones and the Industrial zone.
Under proposed TPS8, the subject land continues to be within the same arrangement, however a new Special Control Area (SCA) for Flood Prone Areas has been added affecting the inner harbour precinct across to the Cut.
Local Planning Strategy Submission
The Bunbury Port is a regional facility that is integral to Bunbury and the South West. The Port is the pivot point for worldwide distribution of products, linked with rail and road networks. It is strategically located providing distribution for mining, manufacturing and agriculture from the Greater Bunbury region, as well as the South West and Wheatbelt areas of Western Australia.
1. Transport
Efficient transport linkages into the Port are vital for the ongoing growth and operations of the Port. The Port of Bunbury supports the City’s proposed strategies on page 31 of the LPS relating to Regional roads and Freight
City of Bunbury Page 210 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Networks.
2. Business and Commerce
The Ports positioning and Bunbury’s strategic and locational advantages strongly influence land use planning strategy. It is pleasing to see that the draft LPS recognizes the strategic importance of the Port of Bunbury and includes a number of strategies on pages 49 an d50 relating to the future port expansion and the future Port Buffer Special Control Area. The Port of Bunbury supports these Strategies.
Local Planning Scheme 8 Submission
As identified in the draft Local Planning Strategy, the Port of Bunbury has commenced a Buffer Definition Study to assess potential future impacts of the Port operations. It is intended that the management of any identified potential impacts would be assisted through development controls in the Town Planning Scheme.
It is now widely accepted that build form and design requirements, implemented through the planning system, is an appropriate strategy for dealing with urban encroachment on port activities. A suitable planning arrangement can mandate that residential and noise sensitive uses are unsuitable in the vicinity of port areas without appropriate noise and dust control design measures incorporated into the design of new buildings.
There are a number of Town Planning Schemes that now include buffers and controls for impacts from Port operations. These include the Town Planning schemes for Shire of Esperance and Cities of Albany, Fremantle and East Fremantle.
The Port of Bunbury appreciates that the draft TPS8 includes Special Control Areas under Part 5 of the Scheme. This is supported by the Port and we believe that this would be an appropriate mechanism to introduce the future landuse and development controls identified through the Buffer Definitions Study through an appropriate amendment to the Scheme in the near future.
City of Bunbury Page 211 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Conclusion
We would welcome the opportunity to speak with you in more detail about this important matter. We look forward to hearing back from you.
97 Department of Health No Objection Noted. Thank you for your letter dated 14 September 2016 requesting comment from Richard Theobald the Department of Health (DOH) on the above proposal. (Acting Director, Environmental Health The DOH provides the following comments: Directorate) 1. Health Risk Assessment PO Box 8172, PERTH BUSINESS CENTRE WA Although the documents encourage 'positive' outcomes/developments for the 6849 City, they do not address potential negative impacts in relation, to such outcomes/developments. You could consider a health risk assessment of the (DOC/292570) scheme/strategy so that any potential risks may be mitigated.
For your reference, consider the enHealth document 'Risky Business' — A resource to manage environmental health risks specifically tailored for local governments. The document is available for download at: http://vvvvw. public. health.wa.gov.au/2/1400/2/health_risk_assessment. pm
2. Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal
The scheme should require that any proposed developments are required to connect to scheme water and reticulated sewerage in accordance with the draft Country Sewerage Policy (as appropriate).
Any water management plan including the utilisation of recreational water and any waste water recycling is to comply with DOH guidelines and requirements which are available for download from: http://www. public. health.wa.gov.au/2/1062/2/water.pm http://wvvvv.public. health.wa.gov.au/3/1275/2/recycled_water_guidelines_and_publications. pm
3. Public Health Impacts
City of Bunbury Page 212 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
DOH has a document on 'Evidence supporting the creation of environments that encourage healthy active living' which may assist you with planning elements related to this scheme and strategy. A copy is attached or may be downloaded from: http://www. public. health.wa. gov. au/cproot/6111/2/140924_wahealth_evidence_statement_be_health. Pdf
Should you have queries or require further information please contact Vic Andrich on 9388 4978 or [email protected]
Attachment – Evidence supporting the creation of environments that encourage healthy active living (Dept of Health, 2014).
98 Department of Parks No Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text & Map) and Wildlife The following comments are provided to aid the proposed strategy and scheme Noted. The term ‘Special Control Area [SCA] Environment’ referred to review. in the legend of the Scheme map sheets is incorrect. The correct term Regional Manager, is ‘Bushland Areas Special Control Area’. A correction is to be made to South West Region The Regional Open Space (ROS) boundaries were drawn on small scale maps the Scheme map legend in order to ensure consistency of terminology without necessarily undertaking field checks to verify the suitability of the used between the Scheme text and Scheme map. PO Box 1693, BUNBURY boundaries. WA 6231 The additional provision 2(d) of the ‘Bushland Areas Special Control Zones adjacent to ROS in particular, plus those adjacent to other areas Area’ will be modified to read as recommended, accordingly: (DOC/292471) supporting natural values, need to indicate that boundaries may be modified to achieve better protection and management of the natural values associated (d) may require the preparation of an ecological survey with the ROS. (flora, fauna and/or wetland assessment) of the area, and associated supporting development impact LPS Part 4 Section 26 (Modification of R-codes) Item 31 “Environmental statement, by the proponent as described in the local Conditions” (Page 21) and Schedule 3 (Pages 69 to 71) could include objectives government’s Local Planning Strategy and/or relevant to consider ROS boundary modifications which achieve improved protection local planning policy; and management of the natural values associated with ROS. These recommendations have been captured in the Schedule of Schedule 7 (Page 112) refers to “Bushland Areas Special Control Area”. Is this Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text and Map. meant to be the same as the “Special Control Area (SCA) Environment” referred to in the legend of the Local Planning Scheme Maps? If so, it is recommended that the same terminology be used in the scheme text and the scheme maps. If these areas are different to SCA Environment, then the scheme text should
City of Bunbury Page 213 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission include a definition of the “Bushland Areas Special Control Areas”.
Park and Wildlife recommends that Schedule 7 (Page 113) Additional Provisions (d) be amended to read “…may require the preparation of an ecological survey (flora, fauna and/or wetland assessment) of the area…”
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Please contact Tracy Teede at the Parks and Wildlife’s South West Region Office if you have any queries regarding this advice.
99 Housing Authority No Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) The Housing Authority acknowledges the City of Bunbury’s commitment to Draft Scheme Map (LPS8) Beth Ferialdi (Planner) reviewing the existing planning framework, to adequately address the changing nature of the City and better guide future planning. We thank you for the 99 Plain Street, EAST opportunity to provide comment on the proposed Local Planning Strategy (draft PERTH WA 6004 Strategy) and Local Planning Scheme No. 8 (draft LPS8) and provide the below for your consideration. (DOC/293182) Subject Lots The comprehensive draft Strategy for the city-wide planning sets a solid foundation for informing the draft LPS8. The draft LPS8 addresses key themes such as community, housing, transport, commerce and resiliency, as well as providing targeted local area planning for twelve identified localities. Future strategies and policies may be required to support the provisions of the Scheme and better ensure implementation of the draft Strategy objectives. In particular, those strategic priorities identified within the draft Strategy and Greater
Bunbury Strategy in response to housing needs: Noted. While not necessary for the development of the site at Lot 2 • Promote and increase housing diversity, adaptability, affordability and choice; #94 Beach Road (as the commercial element would front Beach and Road), it is recommended that this submission could be accommodated as a minor modification to the proposed draft Scheme • Create attractive, safe, function, and well-connected neighbourhoods and map, given that the change would not relate to the residential density towns. coding, and due to the size of the lot, would result in only a modest increase in the development potential of the land for non-residential The State’s Affordable Housing Strategy 2010-2020 (AHS) presents housing uses. targets and strategies to increase the supply and diversity of appropriate, affordable and accessible housing across Western Australia. The AHS commits This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of
City of Bunbury Page 214 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission the Government to ‘opening doors' and providing a range of diverse housing Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map. opportunities. The Authority acknowledges the City’s intention to support initiatives focused on providing social, affordable and disability housing. The commitment to assist the State Government with studies and strategies is also commended. The AHS strongly encourages the preparation of Local Housing Strategies by Local Government Authorities with provisions for facilitating the development of affordable housing. It is recommended the draft Strategy give strong consideration to the AHS and the development of a Local Housing Strategy to encourage accessible, appropriate and affordable housing development within the City of Bunbury.
The following have been identified within the draft Strategy as relevant trends to be considered in regards to planning for future housing:
• Steady population growth;
• Significant ageing of the population;
• Rapidly increasing numbers of one and two person households; and
• Future housing demand to focus on flats, units, semi-detached dwellings and townhouses.
The Authority supports increased opportunity for medium and high density residential development in locations with high amenity. Targeted density, like that proposed around activity centres and along activity corridors, is key to addressing a number of the above trends. Activation of existing centres and corridors requires increased density to allow for increased populations, in particular by addressing the need for smaller dwellings for smaller households, and opportunity for a range of commercial and other tenancies providing supportive services and amenities. The Authority supports the proposed density increases, notably in relation to meeting the projected future demand of medium and high density dwellings at 31% of total dwellings by 2026. Areas identified for future residential are also acknowledged as a strategy for addressing population increased. The noted locations are considered appropriate in terms of proximity to existing residential development, infrastructure and future neighbourhood centres.
City of Bunbury Page 215 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The ageing population will present a significant challenge across the state, with an increased need to deliver appropriate housing and services to support daily needs. The inclusion of a use class dedicated to ‘Aged or Dependent Person’ Complex’ and notable degree of permissibility of this in a number of zones is a good step towards focused delivery of aged housing through planning instruments. The proximity of these zones to activity corridors and existing support services and amenities is also well considered. The ‘Private Community Purpose Zone’ in particular presents adequate density coding to achieving a village community type development for internal support and safety. Should the City prepare a Local Housing Strategy in the future it is recommended aged and dependent persons’ and other purpose built housing be addressed. The Authority would like to express its willingness to liaise with the City in regards to addressing seniors housing opportunities in the future.
We note one of the Authority’s assets at Lot 2 #92 Beach Road has a proposed rezoning from ‘Residential’ with a density coding of R20/40 to ‘Mixed Use Residential’ with no change to the density coding. The proposed rezoning however has only be applied to the southern half of the lot fronting Beach Road, as to be consistent with lots of shorter depth to the east. As the rear portion of the lot is essentially landlocked and does not have access from Garvey Place to the north, it is recommended that the rezoning extend to the northern boundary of both Lot 2 #92 Beach Road and the adjoining Lot 4 #94 Beach Road, which is in the same predicament. This will allow for a more consolidated development outcome for both these lots.
In general, we find that both the draft Strategy and draft LPS8 to be clear and concise planning documents, with notable focus on planning for the future and significant consideration given to growing the inner city urban area to support the Greater Bunbury urban area. I trust the above comments provide support and considerations for the proposed Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme No. 8. We thank you again for the opportunity to comment and look forward to working with the City to provide a range of housing options.
Please note proposed changes affecting the Authority’s large undeveloped landholdings has been addressed in a separate submission.
City of Bunbury Page 216 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
100 Bernhard Bischoff Support/No Objection [Submission dated 28 December 2016] 15 Forster Street Tourism BUNBURY WA 6230 Since having been member of the Tourist Promotion Committee in the 1980’s (DOC/293292, 293293, Noted. The comments made in the submission are more relevant to a my interest has not waned. A strategy is needed to change the perception that 293294, 293295, tourist destination strategy or a more detailed tourism strategy. Bunbury lacks attractions of significance. See pg 133. 293296, 293297, Nevertheless, it is advised that there is a reference made to tourism 293298, 293299, site identification on p.130. Strategies 8A-1 to 8A-8 do not address the above issue. Add Strategy: Identify, 293300) Research, then promote items of significance: e.g. Aboriginal Heritage, basalt,
Indian Ocean, landforms, coast, beaches, water ways, biodiversity, dolphin centre, history early documents, heritage buildings (including Silo’s), 3 premiers,
forests, wildflowers, shipwrecks, 2 cathedrals, stirling’s grants, changes from agriculture to railway centre to industry to port city and modern city.
[Attachments of history of Bunbury]
[Submission dated 21 December 2016]
Bushfire Risk – Resilience
Suggestion that a fire lookout structure be considered for the old tip site in The tip site is located on Lot 9000, Bussell Highway, which is College Grove, which is a risk point (>40m) halfway between the Ocean and understood to comprise Unallocated Crown Land (i.e. is not under the Preston R. local government’s control). Furthermore, the State government has assumed responsibility for the tip site as an outcome of the College The tipsite itself is a fire hazard waiting to explode. A mass of tall weeds (e.g. Grove Joint Venture negotiations. wild radish) has been allowed to mature and dry on the tipsite this season.
A fire lookout, mounted or equipment with a CCTV Camera would/could raise alarm at the first sight of smoke especially in the well vegetated proposed
PRORP Regional Park
[Submission dated 29 December 2016]
Two 'Typo’s
City of Bunbury Page 217 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Local Planning Strategy (Draft)
Page 10. The bracket top left appears to be the wrong way around?
Page 109. Annexure 3 should probably read Appendix 3.
[Submission dated 27 December 2016]
Bushland Area Special Control Area Sites (Lot 505 South Western Highway) Noted. The City of Bunbury recognises the ecological values of Lot 505 South Western Highway, as reflected by its inclusion in the While being mapped as Southern River at the 1:250,000 scale the area is Bushland Areas Special Control Area. actually past Pinjarra Plain (Wetland) and past Bassendean (Wetland).
It was given special consideration in system 6 update Andrew Webb (June 2016) identified Pinjarra plain dampland (Map 2), bushland in very good condition (Map 3) and TEC (Map 5).
The Special Control Area Site No. 30 appears to include the substantial area uses for motor bike and car purposes and is therefore under smaller in terms of bushland.
It is also significant as a link to the Preston River. Because of the weeds introduced by unauthorised landfill its edge weeds special attention.
The fencing by itself does not eliminate threats posed by the invasive weeds.
The area because of its significance should/must be managed irrespective of The City of Bunbury apportions its bushland management resources whether it is an offset site or an addition to the proposed Pro Park (PRORP). strategically by focussing on priority management issues in priority reserve areas. [Submission dated 28 December 2016]
Natural Environment
RE 5A-10 – Considering the years time has past since the above reports (Manea Park Weed Management 2003, PRORP Establishment Plan 2011, Usher The City of Bunbury recognises that invasive weeds are a serious Dalyellup Region Park Management Plan 2001) were completed weed issue. Unfortunately, the local government has limited capacity to management plans need updating and urgently acted on. Decline in condition control the management of weeds on external landholdings. Further,
City of Bunbury Page 218 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission and abundance of healthy ecologically intact remnant vegetation through the City of Bunbury undertakes management of weeds on its lands human activities and progress of invasive exotics has been unprecedented commensurate with available resources and in balance with other despite under good work over the last 4-5 years. management issues (e.g. dieback, access control, pest animals etc.). Anecdotally, the City of Bunbury has not observed a widespread [Submission dated 27 December 2016] decline in vegetation condition across its lands in recent years.
Cultural Heritage
I support fully the strategies and intentions, but feel that without a good Noted. understanding of the history of the place heritage cannot fulfil its potential. The reading about the local history, the learning and researching needs to be encouraged and rewarded.
[Submission dated 28 December 2016]
Cultural Heritage – History Transport – walking and cycling the City
As the author of the Bunbury Heritage Trail and booklet I am disappointed that the trail, a walking and cycling trail, has been allowed to be neglected and disappear.
The Heritage Trail, a WA State initiative to celebrate Australia’s Bicentenary was created more or less single handily and voluntarily by myself because the City Council had been fully occupied with its 150th Celebrations in 1986. It had no interest or energy to contribute to Australia’s bicentenary celebrations in 1988.
[Submission dated 28 December 2016]
Cultural Heritage
As the author of the Bunbury Heritage Trail booklet I have to express my disbelief about the way one of its paragraphs has been used. Changing the heading of my article from ‘European Settlement’ to ‘European Heritage’ appears to be not just a mistake. Please explain.
RE Theme 3 Cultural Heritage Part 2 Page 83.
City of Bunbury Page 219 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
The chapter “European Settlement” on Page 3 of the Bunbury Heritage Trail Modification to Local Planning Strategy Booklet has been copied (reprinted) here word by word under the heading Noted. Reference: Bunbury Heritage Trail, A Commonwealth/State “European Heritage” to compliment the also copied article on “Aboriginal Bicentennial Project (1988). Heritage”.
[Submission dated 21 December 2016]
City Profile – History of Settlement (Page 11). See also ‘European Heritage’ on page 83, a chapter which is a copy of the article ‘European Settlement’ on page
3 of the Bunbury Heritage Trail Booklet. Modification to Local Planning Strategy Bunbury was not settled in 1829! Noted. Replace beginning of first paragraph for History of Settlement According to J.S. Roe Bunbury – then Port Leschenault – was planned to become (Page 11) accordingly: the first settlement outside Perth area in 1830. The first settles John and Helen Scott and family arrived in 1838. The first town lots became available in 1841. The coastal port city of Bunbury is located 175km south of Perth, Western Australia. The Noongar Aborigines have lived The history of the town of Bunbury starts as Port Leschenault, which was continuously in this area for at least 35,000 years. In 1838, discovered by the French and named after Leschenault de la Tour, the botanist Governor Stirling brought John and Helen Scott and their family of the Baudin expedition of 1803. From the numerous Aboriginal names used to Bunbury as the district’s first settlers and town lots were for the various landscapes within the townsite we can assume that this surveyed and released in 1841. [continue paragraph with, In peninsula was a favourite of the local Aborigines. 1871 the Municipality of Bunbury was gazetted,...]
Nine month after the foundation of the Swan River colony in March 1830 Lieut. Governor James Stirling came to Port Leschenault accompanied by a group of investors and agents as well as the Surveyor General John Septimus Roe. Stirling had received encouraging reports about the Leschenault district from Lieut. Preston who with Dr. Collie had discovered the rivers which carry their names and intended to establish there the first settlement outside the Swan river area. He urgently needed to open up new land to accommodate the big influx of would-be settlers, some of whom threatened to leave the colony for the more established Eastern States. He also was looking for large areas of good land to reserve for himself. The northern boundary of the selection which was granted to him as Leschenault Location 26 in 1841 became more or less by default the southern boundary of the townsite. Even at the time he was criticised for taking all the good land and leaving only tidal flats and sand dunes for the town to
City of Bunbury Page 220 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission develop with the result that despite him leaving a military attachment behind the planned settlement failed. During a meeting at Port Leschenault between Governor Stirling and Lieut. Bunbury who had trekked from Pinjarra to the Vasse area the name 'Bunbury' was proposed for the new townsite in 1836. This date has traditionally been accepted as the year of the foundation of Bunbury even though it took until 1841 that the new name became official and the town was gazetted.
The first settler was John Scott who had been encouraged by Stirling to move with his family and farm stock from Guildford to Port Leschenault in 1838 to farm 400 acres of his land on the left bank of the Preston River.
The town was laid out by the Surveyor Ommanney. But not until the sudden great demand created by the collapse of the Australind venture Progress continued to be slow. For other milestones see 'Excellent Connections', 'Bunbury Heritage Trail' etc.
101 Phillip Smith Support/No Objection Noted. As a private citizen, I am interested in the issues outlined by John Sherwood’s 23 Dunstan Street Submission. SOUTH BUNBURY WA [Submission number 84]. 6230
(DOC/293585)
102 Bunbury Chamber of Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Text) Commerce and Comments: Noted. It is recommended that the bulk of the urban design controls Industries (e.g. building height) in Part 4 and Schedule 5 of the advertised The Bunbury Chamber of Commerce and Industry sees the priorities of TPS8 to version of the draft Scheme text should be incorporated into a local be; planning policy, which will allow adequate flexibility for the designing and assessment of development proposals within the various zones. Purpose The procedure for making, amending and revoking local planning The plan should be focused on the future, not the past or present, as a 20 year policies is set out in Part 2 of the deemed provisions. The City of plan it should include a reference to the Marine Facilities Alliance, berths 1 and Bunbury maintains a rolling policy review programme, with the goal of
City of Bunbury Page 221 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission 2 of the outer harbour, autonomous cars and their parking, electric vehicle continually reviewing its suite of local planning polices in step with charging stations and linking the CBD to the Leschenault Inlet and East Bunbury. changes in legislation, technologies, community expectations, socio- economic and environmental conditions. It can be expected that with The Plan Should Be the gazettal of the draft Scheme there will be a need (and opportunity) to further reform a refined set of local planning policies Applicant friendly in order of priority.
Flexible As such, the concepts of ‘flexibility’ and ‘certainty’ cannot both be achieved in absolute terms when drafting the provisions of any A high degree of certainty for any application planning instruments. Allowing for absolute flexibility means no certainty of outcome for applicants or other affected landowners, Comments while conversely; ensuring absolute certainty means no flexibility in decision-making. Instead, when drafting planning instruments it is The volume of TPS8 is very large in comparison to most other plans recently only possible to endeavour to strike the right balance of trade-offs approved comprising more than 200 pages in the strategy and over 120 pages in between flexibility and certainty as determined by the local the draft scheme. By comparison, the Greater Bunbury Strategy is 31 pages government in consultation with its community. long, Busselton draft LPS is 52 pages long. With respect to the aims of the Scheme, it can be advised that Local The new regulations that came in were supposed to align all schemes except for Planning Schemes are subordinate to and instruments of the Planning small local nuances. There have only been a couple of schemes completed since and Development Act 2005. Local Planning Schemes as statutory the regulations came in. Geraldton is one and is also a very similar city. Their planning instruments that are not meant to be aspirational new scheme text is 37 pages long. Melville is another and theirs is 55 pages. documents, as this is the intended purpose of the Local Planning Strategy. The volume of the document will intimidate many would be applicants and add to the cost of applications. We would strongly advise that reducing the size of Local Planning Schemes should not purport to do more than what the the plan be a priority to make it more applicant friendly. Much of what is in the legislation enables them to do as a head of power, which is defined in scheme text could be transferred to policy. the Act at Schedule 7 - Matters which may be dealt with by planning scheme. As such, the ‘aims of the Scheme’ should tangibly and We are being asked to comment on the scheme which is the subject of about 60 directly relate to land use planning and development matters and be policies many of which will need to edited or have new policies written. Without measurable or evidencable. While not invoked routinely, the that detail, it is difficult to be as accurate as we would wish. Scheme’s aims are meant to be an expression of the final incontrovertible desired outcomes for assessing land uses and Aims of the scheme development when Council is considering an amendment or variation to a requirement of the Scheme. TPS8 is being promoted as an aspirational document. The aims need to reflect that and need to be changed to an aspirational statement of the expected Therefore, for this clause to perform this critical function, the wording outcomes from the implementation of the scheme in terms of; of the aims must be sufficiently rigorous enough to be demonstrable.
City of Bunbury Page 222 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission Aspirational aims may be appealing to read but their utility and As an example, leadership, community, arts, culture, education, sustainability, effectiveness is limited in terms of providing final guidance to Council built form etc. or a test in SAT. The City of Bunbury’s new Scheme and even its existing Scheme have always been far more efficacious. Certainty Leadership, community, arts, culture, education issues are instead We acknowledge the plan needs to provide certainty where it is required and better dealt with in the Strategic Community Plan, which is the reason flexibility to adapt applications to achieve the best outcomes. Where policies for why they were introduced by the State government through its are the prime source of information there needs to be a deemed to comply or Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework reforms in 2010. It similar plus a performance path. should be noted though that the City of Bunbury is the first local government to explicitly design its inaugural Local Planning Strategy Building Orientation and Entrances (which sits above the new Scheme as the aspirational guiding document) to directly synchronise with Council’s own Strategic We believe that this section would be better handled as policy but we will make Community Plan. some general comments. So it is the Local Planning Strategy that should be referred to when (1) this assumes there will be a maximum development, if it is a partial speaking about the future (i.e. over 20 years). The Scheme only deals development it may be more appropriate that part of the residential with the planning controls of today (i.e. up to 5 years). And as such, development is on ground level. This would be better handled on a Bunbury’s draft new Scheme aims seek to advance matters of performance basis or transferred to policy. sustainability, built form, etc. That is:
(4) and (6) do they contradict each other? 9. Aims of Scheme
(5) Separate pedestrian Entrance. This may not be the most appropriate The aims of this Scheme are - solution for every development. It may be better to have one wider set of stairs than 2 sets of more narrow stairs, this would be better handled on a (1) to coordinate and integrate planning at the local level performance basis or in policy. with planning at regional and state levels; (2) to avoid and/or mitigate land use and development Environmental, Public Health and Amenity Protection impacts on environmental and public health;
Are the Acoustics covered by state legislation, if so it should be removed from (3) to provide for the adequate and efficient servicing of the text and just a reference to the appropriate place to find it? development;
General Definitions Used In The Scheme (4) to facilitate the effective implementation of the State Planning Framework, including the Greater Bunbury Bed and breakfast Strategy, Greater Bunbury Region Scheme and Greater Bunbury Structure Plan; We would support 3 rooms rather than 2 as if it is a family with husband wife
City of Bunbury Page 223 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
and two children of different sex it would require three rooms. (5) to facilitate the effective implementation of the Local Planning Framework, including the local planning Caretaker's Dwelling strategy, local planning polices, structure plans, activity centre plans and local development plans; and We would also support temporary accommodation as a caretakers dwelling including a caravan providing it complies with all health and open space (6) to seek to achieve greater ecological sustainability that requirements. We would suggest that the R40 code apply to the Caretaker’s balances and integrates - dwelling as a guide to open space and that landscaping, adequate light, solar access and positioned so that it is not subject to excessive noise. If the (a) preservation of biodiversity and conservation of accommodation does not have toilets and showers contained within it must be natural resources; within a reasonable distance of those facilities within the commercial building. (b) facilitation of economic development; and Caretaker’s on site help to reduce criminal activity. (c) maintenance of social, cultural and wellbeing of Zoning Table people and communities; by managing the process and effects of land use and development There appears to be a number of the uses which are shown as D uses which in a manner that applies the precautionary should be P uses. principle and principle of intergenerational equity. Tourism Development, these are D uses; bed and breakfast, hotel motel, serviced department and tourist development. This issue was recognised at the outset of the Scheme Review Project when workshopping with Council, and has been fundamentally built Mixed Residential, these are D uses; grouped dwelling, residential building and into the product deliverables (i.e. a Strategy and Scheme), given the single bedroom unit. inherent limitations of the model provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. Under district Centre, D uses are; restaurant or café Nevertheless, to give more comfort that aspirational outcomes will Light industry, D uses are; light industry and trade supplies. indeed be factored into the daily implementation of the new Scheme, it is recommended that the inclusion of an extra aim may be Rural zone, an ancillary dwelling unit is a D use where it should be a P use. An beneficial, with suggested wording as follows: ancillary dwelling unit in a residential zone is a permitted use on a lot of over 450 square metres. It appears inconsistent that a rural lot which would be much (1) to implement the intentions and desired outcomes of larger would not have as a P use the ability to build an ancillary dwelling unit. the Local Planning Strategy in support of the Strategic Community Plan as amended; Dual Coding Indeed, such an approach would be consistent with the existing Dual coding been retained in the scheme but does not appear to have achieved Scheme, which includes the following aim: any measurable positive outcome since it was introduced. For the City to
City of Bunbury Page 224 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
achieve a high level of infill density it needs to strongly encourage higher 1.6.2 In implementing the Scheme, the local government will densities. The higher end of the coding is the preferred option and there have regard to the City of Bunbury Strategic Plan, 2000 - appears to be no valid reason to retain the dual coding. 2005 (as amended).
In most cases, the development retains the existing dwelling and development When Town Planning Scheme No. 7 was drafted there was no such behind the dwelling does not impact on the streetscape. Many of the existing thing as a Local Planning Strategy, and hence, the authors at that time dwellings and the landscaping have not been brought up to an acceptable saw the value and necessity of linking the Scheme to the next best standard which has the most impact on the streetscape. There needs to be a thing available, an overarching corporate strategic plan. much stronger emphasis on improving the aesthetics of the original dwelling. The dual coding is an out of date mechanism. The city of Canning recently Therefore, adapting this approach to today’s circumstances achieves reviewed this issue as part of their LPS and concluded the following; the same outcome of explicitly tying the Scheme into the Strategic Community Plan via the Local Planning Strategy up front, as opposed Dual density code serves no useful purpose and the higher density code should to just relying upon the more prosaic wording of model provisions replace the dual codes as it is considered that higher density is desired outcome clause 7(2) and deemed provisions clause 2.
Government sewerage policy prevents subdivision of lots to a size less than Lastly, it is recommended that the final aim (presently number 6) be 700m² so is not required to prevent unsewered land being subdivided augmented by replacing the term ‘ecological sustainability’ with the more robust term ‘ecologically sustainable development’, as this more minimum frontage requirement does not serve an adequate purpose in guiding than just symbolically infers proactivity of decision making when streetscape and built form balancing and making trade-offs.
Dual density codings provide an additional layer of difficulty to the planning This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Framework Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Text.
Schedule 5 – Additional Zone Development Requirements In regards to the Zoning Table, the draft zones enable a wide range of land uses to be permitted within what is an increasingly Most of this schedule should be policy, particularly the built form items. Having densifying/intensifying and complex urban environment. Therefore, it in the Scheme is overly prescriptive and does not allow for variations. The in order to facilitate a healthy and productive city, there remains the WAPC have just released a new apartment code which includes mixed use need to provide an appropriate level of assessment/consideration in which deals with built form far better than the proposed scheme and allows for order to manage inevitable risks resulting from land use conflicts. innovation. We must use this new code if we are going to attract investment as developers will be using it everywhere else. The more we vary, the less likely A fundamental change introduced by the Planning and Development developers are to develop here because of the uncertainty. (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, is that changes of use in premises to a permitted ‘P’ use does not require development Industry Zone approval where there are no ‘works’ involved. The new Scheme’s Zoning Table has been drafted with this in mind, and takes advantage Basis for industry assumptions and trends that have led to the removal of of the new suite of zones in order to facilitate adaptive reuse of
City of Bunbury Page 225 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission portions of industry zone? Pushes industry uses away from Bunbury. Limits buildings for those activities (i.e. ‘P’ uses) that promote achievement scope for enterprise and new business incubation. Sterilises so much land into of the zone objectives. non-sensitive service and light industry. Opposite effect of flexibility. Impacts presently managed through Health & Environmental regulation regardless of The draft Scheme draws upon its strategic objectives by formulating the TPS Why make a distinction between mixed commercial and mixed new activity centre and mixed use zones, each with their respective residential? range of compatible or complimentary land uses in conjunction with provisions, which seek to facilitate and incentivise new development Fringe/interface around activity centres should just be higher density or redevelopment through commercial floorspace bonuses and car residential. parking relaxation.
Don’t need such fine level control within an activity centre. Core retail A risk based approach has also been incorporated into the surrounded by mixed use or all mixed use. Emphasis should be on flexible and methodology for preparing the draft Scheme’s Zoning Table. The adaptable floor spaces that can change over time. Eg on the fringe, an office discretionary ‘D’ and ‘A’ levels of consideration are applied to those could become a café could become a medical centre could be used as a dwelling land uses that are either sensitive uses proposed in locations that with home based business – all mixed use, dictated by economics and market. could compromise the economic viability of an existing non- residential development; or conversely, are non-residential uses Tourism proposed in locations that could impact on the liveability of an established residential development or another type of sensitive land Too much to emphasis on the back beach area all for tourism, particularly in use class. light of the waterfront redevelopment which has/will significantly increase the tourism product. Lack of demand for tourism product is a large reason why A risk based approach was incorporated into the methodology for there are still large vacant blocks in this area. Bunbury is a regional commercial preparing the draft Scheme’s Zoning Table. The discretionary ‘D’ and centre that has elements of tourism, it is not predominantly a tourist town. Back ‘A’ levels of consideration are applied to those land uses that are Beach is a prime area in which to live and for recreation and more high density either sensitive uses proposed in locations that could compromise the residential in this area would serve a better purpose. economic viability of an existing non-residential development; or conversely, are non-residential uses proposed in locations that could Multiple dwellings are only permitted in a neighbourhood centre zone or local impact on the liveability of an established residential development or centre zone when they are developed as part of a mixed use development. This another type of sensitive land use class. is a constraint. Focus should be on providing flexibly designed ground level floor space to meet the changing market needs. In most cases, risks can be managed through good urban design and building architecture that incorporates practical engineering and Drive thru not permitted in local centres zone, regional centres zone, mixed use technological solutions, which can be conditioned as part of any – commercial, mixed use – residential and tourism – this is not being flexible development approval. and meeting a changing market. Does not appear to be any justification as to why. In relation to the dual coding provisions, it can be advised that development has not been refused because of dual coding, Very little flexible land use outcomes, zones too narrow. Economic and market subdivision clearances are coming through with reciprocal rights of
City of Bunbury Page 226 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission decisions drive investment, planning framework needs to be ready for a broader access easements, in a manner that enables adjoining landowners to scope of options. Being “open for business” is about having a simple, flexible take up the benefits of shared accessways, which supports the planning tool. achievement of better urban design for infill development.
CBD Regarding the proposed new ‘Light Industry Zone’, the extent of the proposed zone was informed by the Environmental Protection We have received strong feedback that while TPS8 expands the CBD which is Authority (EPA) Guidance Statement No. 3 – Separation Distances supported, it does not have an aspiration for the CBD. There is a general opinion Between Industrial and Sensitive Land Uses (June 2005), which that there needs to be a structure plan/master plan for the CBD and the number defines buffer distances typically of 500m to 1,000m for higher 1 priority is how we are going to link the CBD to the inlet. That building over impacting general industry activities. Blair St may be an option at the Bunbury Regional Entertainment Centre, Bicentennial Square and Centre Point. The height (clearance) of the tunnel Nevertheless, when considering the intent and extent of the new would determine how many trucks would need to find an alternative route ‘Light Industry Zone’, a fuller appreciation must be gained of the new through the CBD. The Graham Farmer Tunnel has a clearance of 4.9m but this is definition of what a light industry use means and its implications. probably too high as it would affect the visual amenity too much. The existing Scheme definition of ‘industry - light’ means an industry - CBD Residential. (a) in which the processes carried on, the machinery used, As part of a master plan we need to consider the position on residential. The and the goods and commodities carried to and from the centre of the CBD for commercial is arguably around the tower. However, the premises do not cause any injury to or adversely affect centre of residential is normally around a major shopping Centre, which in this the amenity of the locality; case is Centrepoint. We would normally then have a zone around it of 800m (b) the establishment or conduct of which does not, or will which would take it almost to King Road in East Bunbury. Perhaps it should be a not, impose an undue load on any existing or proposed City Centre Residential Zone or Inner City Residential Zone. service for the supply or provision of essential services; Autonomous Cars The draft Scheme is based on the model provisions of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, which will be on the market in 3 years. Do we need to determine if there is any more simply states that an ‘industry - light’ use means: technology needed for COB to be an early adopter? By 2025 there will be some impact and by 2030 there will be a significant impact. Where will these cars park … premises used for an industry where impacts on the amenity and what policies will be needed? of the area in which the premises is located can be mitigated, avoided or managed; TPS8 must have the flexibility to accept a master plan without needing a scheme amendment. This is a subtle but fundamental change in the definition, which means that any industrial activity (i.e. regardless of the processes carried on, the machinery used, and the goods and commodities carried to and from the premises) can qualify as being a light industry
City of Bunbury Page 227 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission activity if the development appropriately mitigates, avoids or manages its impacts.
This can be achieved through building design or other practical engineering and technological solutions. Consequently, only existing industrial businesses that cannot or do not wish to meet this standard will be treated as ‘non-conforming uses’, as new developments are expected to responsibly operate in a manner that protects the public health of residents living (i.e. sensitive land uses) within 500 to 1,000 metres of industrial areas.
Indeed, the new Scheme is not in itself a barrier to facilitating capital investment in the improvement of ‘Light Industry Zone’ land through its redevelopment (e.g. by extending or expand existing business operations in a cleaner manner or by a wide range of new higher technology business), which is encouraged so as to increase its productivity and value, and to improve the environmental performance of industrial activities.
Nevertheless, it is recommended that further clarification of the land use class term ‘industry-light’ should be provided in the form of local planning policy guidance. So as to give landowners and developers greater certainty regarding the performance measures a proposed development must satisfy in meeting the new use class definition, in conjunction with relevant regulations, policies, guidelines and codes of practice.
Regarding the new ‘Tourism Zone’ that replaces the numerous ad hoc Special Use Zones, it is advised that this reflects a balance between the State government and Council’s strategic goals for promoting tourism development in the city and investor’s desire for flexibility in the provision of short-term accommodation for visitors or unrestricted length of stay opportunities for residents. As such, the new Scheme strikes this balance in accommodating both tourism and lifestyle choice in its version of the ‘Tourism Zone’.
However, it is acknowledged that while the model provisions specify
City of Bunbury Page 228 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission the title of ‘Tourism Zone’, the City of Bunbury’s version of this zoning reflects its unique circumstance, by enabling a range of unrestricted length of stay options and allied non-residential land uses. Consequently, it is recommended at this time that the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) permits the City of Bunbury to modify the name of the zone to ‘Mixed Use – Tourism Zone’, so that it properly reflects its objectives and more explicitly forms part of the suite of new mixed use zones.
103 Western Australian No Objection Noted. Police Western Australia (WA) Police have reviewed the proposed planning scheme No. 8 and if the scheme proceeds will take this into consideration to any further Les Bechelli (Acting works in the Bunbury region. Director, Asset Management)
2nd Floor, 2 Adelaide Terrace, EAST PERTH WA 6004
104 Thompson Surveying No Objection Modification to Local Planning Scheme (Map) Consultants [Lot 100 on Plan 16032, Sanctuary Golf Resort] Air Photo (2016) John Taylor I refer you to our meeting at your office when we discussed the abovementioned. also in attendance was Anthony Pick from the City of Bunbury PO Box 1719 and Mr Kim Host representing the owners. Subject Site BUNBURY WA 6231 At the meeting we discussed the possibilities of Lot 100 shown within the attached plan and currently zoned R20 under TPS 7.
As indicated on the attached, the majority of the land is currently utilised as a drainage basin. As we know the engineering design plans allow for any flooding event to have an overland relief flow south from the basin and onto the golf course. We acknowledge the requirement to maintain this facility. It is the owners desire to leave the existing drainage infrastructure as is, inclusive of the relief flow area. We are of the opinion that in addition to this there is an
City of Bunbury Page 229 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission opportunity for the owners to create a residential lot (Lot 500 being 553m2) as Cadastral Boundaries indicated on the attached plan.
We recognise that there is likely to be a requirement for a revised engineering drainage study. However at this stage we seek your consideration to this proposal being included within the Draft Local Planning Scheme 8. Subject Site
We thank you for your consideration and look forward to advise at your earliest.
Current Scheme Map (TPS7)
Subject Site
City of Bunbury Page 230 of 238 Schedule of Public Submissions: Draft Local Planning Strategy and Draft Local Planning Scheme No. 8
# Name and Address Details of Submission Comments on Submission
Draft Scheme Map (LPS8)
Subject Site
Noted. It is recommended that this submission could be accommodated as a minor modification to the proposed draft Scheme map, based on the fact that the change is to retain a portion of the land in its present zoning of ‘Residential Zone’, and that any development of the site can only occur where the unimpeded functioning of the detention basin for stormwater management purposes can be guaranteed.
This recommendation has been captured in the Schedule of Modifications to the Local Planning Scheme – Scheme Map.
City of Bunbury Page 231 of 238 Annex 1
Submission Submission in Relation to the City of Bunbury (Draft) Local Planning Scheme No. 8 & Local Planning Strategy (November 2016) Prepared for Aqwest Prepared by McRobert Planning Pty Ltd
City of Bunbury Page 232 of 238 Annex 2
Submission Lot 100 Bunning Boulevard, East Bunbury Prepared by Planning Solutions (AUST) Pty Ltd Lodged on behalf of Hornell Nominees Pty Ltd
City of Bunbury Page 233 of 238 Annex 3
Submission Lot 107 Strickland Street, Lot 38 Mervyn Street and Lot 500, Bunbury (Homemaker Centre) Prepared by Planning Solutions (Aust) Pty Ltd Lodged on behalf of Citygate Properties Pty Ltd
City of Bunbury Page 234 of 238 Annex 4
Submission Regarding 8 Rose Street and 11 Bourke Street, Bunbury Lodged by Todd Brown
City of Bunbury Page 235 of 238 Annex 5
Submission Submission in Relation to the City of Bunbury (Draft) Local Planning Scheme No. 8 & Local Planning Strategy (November 2016) Prepared for Mr S.R. Prosser Prepared by McRobert Planning Pty Ltd
City of Bunbury Page 236 of 238 Annex 6
Submission Lodged by Calibre Consulting (Aust) Pty Ltd
City of Bunbury Page 237 of 238 Annex 7
Submission Regarding Lot 500 Jetty Road, Bunbury Lodged by Ray Parker
City of Bunbury Page 238 of 238