Bundaberg Regional Council votes to increase building heights at Bargara

Residents have slammed their local council and Mayor after a sensational decision to allow buildings to be built significantly higher along the turtle sensitive beachfront at Bargara.

Building heights in Bargara will get higher, but not everyone is happy about the decision, such as Bargara woman Karen Tulk (left). Opponents have lashed out at Bundaberg Mayor Jack Dempsey (right).

There was not a single mention of Bundaberg's unique loggerhead turtle population on Tuesday when a majority of Bundaberg Regional Council voted to dramatically change the Bargara skyline.

The controversial decision drew ire from members of public watching the meeting, as seven voted in favour of raising Bargara’s building heights and four voted against.

It means heights will increase to up to five or six storeys in some areas of the pristine tourist hotspot.

Building heights have long been a cause for debate at Bargara, after plans were lodged for a nine-storey high-rise and rooftop bar dubbed the Bargara Jewel.

The Jewel, as it became known, went against the town’s guidelines which stipulated a maximum of three storeys, or five on exception.

Concerns have centred on the risk to the region’s turtle hatchlings at Bargara and nearby Mon Repos because baby turtles follow the moon’s glow and can easily become confused by light pollution.

The controversial project ended up being called in by then planning minister Cameron Dick on December 21, 2018, stipulating that a building height of five storeys on the Esplanade and six on the See St rear was all that would be allowed.

Could the slumbering Jewel awaken?

Jewel developer Sheng Wei bunkered down in hopes of a change in government, vowing to follow through with his “nine storeys or nothing” plan.

And while the Jewel never scored a mention in Tuesday’s ordinary council meeting, concerns were held over what a change to guidelines could spell for the future of the coastal township.

On September 22, 2022, Deputy Bundaberg Mayor Bill Trevor wrote to the state government to give notification of plans for a qualified state interest amendment which would see allowance of five storeys on the foreshore and six on See St.

A letter addressed to council CEO Stephen Johnston on October 18, from the Executive Director of Planning and Development Services Anna McGrath, states that design measures to prevent excess light, coupled with five storeys on the foreshore, was sufficient to prevent harm to the region‘s turtles.

The government’s reassurance was not taken as gospel by concerned locals who said the glow from Bargara was already powerful enough to be seen from Mon Repos and that turtle hatchlings were already wandering into traffic because of light pollution.

Cries of “you’re gone Jack” and “your meal ticket is over” rang out in council chambers on Tuesday, November 29, as angry locals expressed their upset at the mayor and councillors who opted to allow five and six storey developments.

Mr Dempsey and councillors John Learmonth, Bill Trevor, Jason Bartels, Tanya McLaughlin, Vince Habermann and Steve Cooper voted in favour of the building height change, while Greg Barnes, Wayne Honor, Tracey McPhee and May Mitchell voted against.

Questions were raised by those in the gallery over whether the change could bring the slumbering giant, the Jewel, out of hibernation.

“It was always about the Jewel,” one meeting attendant said in the aftermath of the decision.

Bundaberg councillor John Learmonth lives in Bargara and says people want “progress”.

Upset as councillors switch it up

Locals expressed upset that councillors Mr Learmonth and Mr Habermann had changed their tune on voting in favour of the building height increase.

Mr Habermann said there were three main reasons for why he changed his vote since the motion was last put before the council.

He said concerns he’d previously had around the impact of increased lighting were addressed in an October 18 letter from the state government.

Councillor Vince Habermann also had a change of heart of the building heights.

“I previously accepted Cr Barnes’s representations on behalf of the ‘vast majority’ who opposed the Amendment No. 11 – Building Heights, but I have since learnt of the overwhelming support for the amendment throughout the region,” Mr Habermann said.

He said the other reason he voted for the amendment was because permitted building heights in Bargara could not be changed in isolation from the rest of the region without another State Interest Amendment Review and Public Notification.

Mr Learmonth said he had also been convinced by additional information from the minister.

“I am not a supporter of heights above the recommended five to six storeys and will not be,” he said.

“As a resident of Bargara I want to see it progress, as do many others who have contacted me in support of the amendment.”

Bargara councillor Greg Barnes had questions around infrastructure.

Questions over infrastructure

Bargara councillor Mr Barnes centred his objection to the new building heights around infrastructure concerns.

He told the meeting that 77 submissions had been made around new building heights, with 80 per cent being strongly opposed.

Mr Barnes said he had never opposed five-storey developments on the foreshore, but said there had been no studies into traffic or how an increased population from higher storeys would impact the town.

“While some people turn around and say that we have to have progress and we have to cram as many people in as we can, the fact is that the planning scheme is in place to sensibly accommodate the growth of the region,” he said.

“When people start tampering with that process the community has a right to respond and sometimes angrily.”

Mr Barnes said he had been “inundated” by queries from the public, and that the main concerns were around infrastructure such as traffic and parking.

The councillor hit out at a recent move by the council to slash car parks at the Bargara foreshore, allegedly without his knowledge.

He said he read every word of every submission and that there was “a lot of anger”.

Mr Barnes called for councillors to respond to the community, to either reject the submission or vote to defer it so a traffic study could be conducted.

Bargara’s Karen Tulk spoke out against the plan for higher buildings at Bargara.

Locals express lack of faith in government

Meeting attendee David Richards reacted with anger at the outcome, telling Mr Dempsey his “meal ticket was over”.

The Bargara man said he had worked in local government in New South Wales for 19 years and had never seen “a mayor have such an influence on so many people”.

“Where in the hell is the infrastructure coming from, let alone the sewerage? It stinks,” he said.

“This council isn’t here for the people, they’re here for themselves.

“We’re employing them and they’re telling us what to do.”

Mr Richards accused the council of using “back alleys” to get what it wanted.

He said there had been no public meetings held in Bargara.

“I just can’t get over the mentality of the mayor,” Mr Richards said.

“He’s got no idea.”

He also questioned plans to allow construction of a new tavern while there was no 24-hour police presence in the town.

Bargara man Peter Gill also attended the meeting and said it was nearly impossible to find a place to park in the town and questioned how Bargara Rd would cope with increased traffic.

“Now we’re going to need a four-lane road,” he said, with others agreeing but saying there was no way to make Bargara Rd four lanes without taking back houses.

Planning minister Steven Miles gave the council the green light for making a call on the building heights.

Mr Gill said he had to jump through hoops with building a car port at his home to ensure it wouldn’t shade neighbouring properties, so he couldn’t understand how taller buildings were being allowed.

Pam Soper said she didn’t understand how the government could suggest that trees were helpful in shading the glow from homes in Bargara.

“Mon Repos has a problem with glare from Bargara anyway,” she said.

Karen Tulk hit out at the councillors who changed their vote and didn’t explain why as they raised their hands to agree to increased building heights.

“They’re determined to get this through no matter what,” she said.

Jennifer Taylor had lived in Bargara for 22 years and said the increase in traffic had been massive over the years with no additional solutions for parking.

Shelley McDonald said the current glow at Bargara was “crazy” and felt it wasn’t being addressed.

“If you build a building, there must be sufficient parking within that building or on that road, there should be at least two car parks for every unit at least,” Andrew Kulibab said.

The decision is set to be ratified at the next ordinary council meeting in December.

The State Government says turtle conservation had been taken into account. Picture: Nigel Hallett

Council decision ‘appropriate’: State Government

A Department of State Development, Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning spokesperson told this publication the combination of five and six storey zones in parts of Bargara was “appropriate”.

“In April 2019, the former Planning Minister set a maximum height limit of five and six storeys for Bargara’s high density residential zone and in May 2019 put in place a temporary local planning instrument while Bundaberg Regional Council made the necessary planning amendments,” the spokesperson said.

“The building heights were underpinned by technical assessments, including by the Department of Environment and Science, that considered the impacts of development on the local sea turtle population.

“These building heights work in conjunction with planning amendments already made in 2020, including the introduction of a Sea Turtle Sensitive Area Code, which requires development to minimise the impacts of artificial lighting on sea turtles.”

The spokesperson said the council had followed proper process with a public consultation period in June and July.

“... The maximum building height of five and six storeys for the Bargara high density residential zone is appropriate and carefully balances the state interests of biodiversity, the protection of coastal environment and tourism,” they said.

Originally published as Bundaberg Regional Council votes to increase building heights at Bargara