Australia and Japan have much in common with respect to the sea, the sea coast and waterfront areas.
There are also a number of variables between Australia and Japan which should be taken into account when comparing or evaluating waterfront developments in the two nations.
The major revelation concerning the ports visited was their role as a significant participant in the provision of regional infrastructure beyond day to day commercial operations.
This is contrary to the Australian experience where port authorities are increasingly directed solely toward the commercial operation of the various ports. Any land redundant for port activities is transferred to other government authorities for rehabilitation/redevelopment.
Major issues in common with Japanese developments visited and Australian waterfront developments are:
(i)the financial feasibility of waterfront developments;
(ii)master plans; and
(iii)land use mixes and the role of retail in particular.
Most waterfront developments would fail financial feasibility tests because they equire too much money to be spent on infrastructure development too early in the life of the project - seawalls, breakwaters etc; this expenditure becomes a lead weight around the project's neck.
There is, however, no doubt that waterfront developments have provided additional and significant colour and culture to many places in both Japan and Australia.
It is important that the need for some form of subsidy for such projects is identified at the outset. This appears to be recognised by the port authorities in Japan and is applauded. The recognition factor in Australia is only occasional and several waterfront developments have failed or are in difficulty.
Another issue detrimental to a number of waterfront developments is the desire to provide too much within too short a timeframe. Far more effort should be put into the feasibility and desirability of staging projects - again, this should be identified at the outset of projects rather than becoming a fall-back position. There should also be contingencies within strategy programs for unforeseen impacts, such as changes in economic circumstance.
