Last week councillors had a two day workshop to formulate a 20 year strategic plan for Denmark. One of the first things we struggled with is a vision for Denmark and how large we want to be. It is clear from the Ratepayer Survey recently conducted by the shire that many people are concerned about this. The survey is full of comments such as " we dont want to be like Mandurah/Margaret River/Busselton ".
Bear with me now as this might get a bit tricky.The graph above - I am sorry for the poor quality - ( it is hard to post large docs. on google ) shows Denmarks population from 1976 to 2006 in the red columns - these are the official Australian Bureau of Statistics figures. The figures on the Y axis are population in thousands from 1 to 20, the X axis is years from 1976 to 2046 in 10 yr intervals. The curved lines show 1%,2% and 3% growth lines from 2006. The pink column shows what the population would be in 2046 with a 3.5% growth rate - about 18,000. The shaded area shows potential population increase that is catered for from lots already identified by the Shire in the present planning strategy.It is not a exact number but the best and latest estimate from our planning department. It should also be noted that this does not include urban infill and development on existing vacant sites. It is clear to me that we have more than ample stock to handle future growth to 2029. It should also be noted that the past 10 year growth rate has been 2% , if this continues the population will be about 7100 in 2029.
The bottom line here is how big do you want Denmark to be ? Its fair to say that there is some disagreement amongst councillors about this . It should also be noted that ultimately we dont really have any control over this as we are dictated to by State and Federal Government. Never the less I believe that we can have goals/targets in our vision and its something we should think about very carefully. There are many examples of communities that have had uncontrolled high rates of growth only to come unstuck and have to apply restrictions when its too late.
So on the right is a poll where you can say how big you would like Denmark to be , of course you can also leave a more detailed comment below. ( yes I know below only has one L ! ) I have also changed my settings so you can post a comment more easily .... please give it a go !
The size is not so much the question, the future will work that out for itself, the question is how and where. There should be more thought to developing the outer areas than concentrating all the growth in the town, ie Kenton, Bow Brige, Peaceful Bay and Nornalup.
ReplyDeleteHi Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI do agree that thought needs to go into outer area development. However I DONT agree with the statement that size is not the question and it can be left to work it out itself. Perhaps my emphasis needs to change. When I talk about how big , I certainly am thinking about how and where also. What I trying to do is raise peoples awareness of the future challenges and choices facing Denmark. Broadly speaking I favour smaller higher quality development over larger lower quality type. See Zen & the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirsig . Quality vs. quantity is what it boils down to for me.
We have problems with water as it is... ie we have reached an un-sustainable size on at least one criterion. Why grow bigger..?? certainly not because we want to improve the quality of life for those already living here.
ReplyDeleteIn which case, for whom are we growing Denmark? I would suggest growth is primarily driven by those who want to make money from land development. If people want to experience a "Denmark" lifestyle, there is a problem: constant growth will gradually erode the current quality of life that Denmark enjoys.
I would only support two kinds of development for Denmark: urban infill, which provides housing for more people but within the current built envelop in town, and nodal residential development in the surrounding district, which grows existing businesses without expanding Denmark to the point where it looses its current character and values.
cheers
Simon
I can agree with some comments from JS, anonymous and Simon but need to add my own additional views. I am concerned at the current apparently haphazard expansion which seems to be driven more by the demands of real estate development than by the needs of the town. There are too many Bob Jellys in this town and it is already sprawling over the region with clear signs that block sizes are too big, there are too many, and they are already eating away at the integrity of the landscape. Continuing the current shoddy development will be a disaster for the innate beauty of this region which, in my view, is already badly degraded.
ReplyDeleteJohn mentions “smaller higher quality development over larger lower quality type”. What is needed is land development benchmarked to the highest quality designed by the finest planners who understand the connection between subdivision and topography for both large and small blocks. This should be done following a decent town plan carried out by the best town planners money can buy.
If this is carried out at a significant professional level and includes pockets of high density population with row houses and clustered 2 and 3 storey apartments, designed by the finest architects, there is no reason why Denmark could not reach a population of 15,000 with its ambience improved. Unfortunately, I have no faith that this will happen.
To those people who believe that any development is bad I can only ask “Do you think the planning to this point is any good?” It isn’t the growth in numbers that is spoiling this town – it’s ignorance and complacency about what is possible when you develop with a sense of vision and passion about preserving the region’s best qualities.
Hello David
ReplyDeleteThanks very much for your comments. I largely agree with you. To be clear I am not saying that any development is bad , rather that bad development is just that ..... bad ! We do have at the moment an excellent Planner , Eber Butron who we snatched from Tweed Head. Unfortunately the reality of local government is that you are never starting with a clean slate and must try to deal with past planning approvals that shall we say are questionable. Plus of course it requires a commitment from councillors ... the planner needs direction from them as to how the community will develop.
Please keep your comments coming ! and say hi to Sam from me.
BTW I loved your titanium artwork !
Western Australia has so little overall in forest scrub and wild life that building more of any thing will rub out feed, places to hide from prey,places to nest and so on Many people who have come to live in Denmark enjoy the scenery and birds then proceed to clear and clear until Denmark is changed and too late Denmark no longer exists.Looking to the future is fine but when it comes to policing development nothing doing,I have first hand knowledge and it is sad to see. Jenny
ReplyDeleteI'm no expert on town planning, far from it. but I have lived in Denmark for 15 years and watched it grow from small village to town and beyond. we have very little by way of growth in public facilities, business... jobs, and even now as the town grows, growth is largely concentrated on wealthy tourists owning empty houses that bring no revenue for the town and only anxiety over the crime that such resident encourage.
ReplyDeleteI know full well that we can't stop increasing population, lord if I wanted to prevent the town from growing I shouldn't have come here myself, but that is impractical and I would not like to prevent any human enjoying the lifestyle that I've found since becoming (well almost) a local myself.
The notion that we have a sensible and courageous town planner is somewhat comforting, I have seen what our previous greedy narrow minded councillors have done to much of our pristine environment. what can we do about rescuing our environment from the greed of our western ways? well I don't know, but what I do know is that there's no chance in hell that we can prevent the town from growing, world population and Australian policy will see to that. The only thing we can do is consider what is here and how to protect the good things we have given ourselves.
I would like to trust our shire council, I would like to think that our councillors have the best in mind for our town, but I can't police the policy makers and even if I could, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
My two cents worth... Lets think sustainability. with the insanity in the rest of the world trying to impact on Denmark, the only thing I would like to ensure is the sustainability of environment for all those who will live here in the end. Ensure our water is ample and clean, ensure our power needs doesn't cause enviromnetal problems, enusre our town's growth doesn't perpetuate environmental problems. There's plenty of room here for what ever population growth we have, but sensibility and sustainability are what we need to make sure Denmark grows as a quaint village and not a suburb of Albany.
Very simplistic question open to lots of interpretation, Does BIG mean population or land area taken by residents/absentee landowners.
ReplyDeletePersonally I am appalled that such a limited, so called "survey" would be undertaken at a time when it appears, to me at least, that land developments are taking place at what is clearly, even in these economic tough times,a blatant grab for money!!
Rather than consider what may be an appropriate target for the future some 20 years hence, I would humbly suggest that a moratorium be instituted on new land developments for 2 years.
I understand that it is difficult to prove a need for additional infrastructure without the population base, but that would only lead us to the number of vacant homes currently in place.
I believe that unless the levels of land development are seriously curbed now, there is no point in considering "Big" levels for the future.
It's great to plan, but as you say, let's fix the problem at its roots.
Hi Ken
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments. Just to be clear , yes I know this is a simplistic
question open to interpretation. The purpose of this site is to get people thinking about the issues facing Denmark especially as there is a council election coming up in October. The survey again is a way of trying to get people to think. It is NOT a official shire survey , no claims about statistical validity and there are no promises that anyone will act on the results -- apart from I WILL take note of what people say --- and I know that other councillors visit this site to see what I am up to ! I am constrained a little as what i can say about the council sometimes, however you can see from the population graph that something is not quite right. If I was King of Denmark we would have had a moratorium some years ago. To me the key is to plan and that will fix the problem at its roots. Thanks again for you comments -- keep them coming and tell your friends !
JOHN