Planning for unlimited development without a community voice

With the introduction of the State Government’s new Planning and Design Code our planning system is being replaced by a development free-for-all, where rules are being ignored and the community is excluded from planning policy and development decisions. The consequences of these policies to encourage development at any cost are becoming more and more apparent with oversized, substandard and inappropriate developments being pushed across Adelaide.

No. 1 North Terrace

The former Newmarket Hotel at 1 North Terrace has been a city landmark since it was built at the height of Adelaide’s 1880s boom. Since closing as a hotel in 2017, the site has been the subject of a number of redevelopment proposals. The latest, from a Singapore-backed developer, proposes a 32-storey tower behind the 1883 structure, requiring partial demolition of the original structure to create apartments and a range of commercial uses. An earlier proposal for two 23-storey towers was questioned for failing to meet minimum standards in terms of the floor areas of the apartments, and for being almost double the permitted height for the area. The new proposal is larger still. Whilst the developers continue to grow their proposal for the site, the original Newmarket Hotel has been the subject of vandalism, including serious damage to the original magnificent cedar and pine staircase. Neglect of the site’s heritage, and disregard of planning standards and constraints, do not augur well for the quality of this development.

become 13? The oversized apartment building proposed to replace a local heritage place in Glenelg.

Seawall apartments, Glenelg

On the South Esplanade at Glenelg, another massive development is being proposed in clear contravention of planning policies that restrict the height of developments to five storeys. A 13-storey building with 96 apartments is being proposed to the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP). The local council and community are questioning how such a proposal can be contemplated in clear contravention of the building heights policy, and including the demolition of a local heritage place — the Seawall apartments. Under the new planning rules, with reduced rights for community input and appeal of development approvals, the only recourse for objecting to an approval of this development by the SCAP would be a hugely expensive judicial review. The loss of appeal rights and the willingness of bodies such as SCAP (a body neither elected by nor accountable to the public) to approve developments in breach of existing policies, means we can expect many more cases like this.

From bad to worse? Burnside Council concludes it is better to approve a strongly-opposed service station development in Kensington Park than risk the possibility of something worse under the new Planning and Design Code.

Service station, Kensington Park by within residential areas as the lax standards set by the code take effect.

Residents of Kensington Park have fought a prolonged battle against the establishment of a 24-hour service station abutting residential areas on Kensington Road. After protracted legal appeals against the proposed development going as far as the Supreme Court, the Burnside Council has finally approved a modified proposal, despite major community concerns about traffic, safety and noise impacts. One of the factors in the council’s decision was a recognition that the proponent could most likely pursue “an even lesser desired development, shaped by the policies in the incoming Planning and Design Code”.