Are there ways you think the proposed process for assessing development can be improved?

Please let us know your thoughts by leaving a comment in the box below.

Comments closed

Government Agency

Planning Reform Team

18 Oct 2018

Thank you for your comments, Janet. The new Planning and Design Code, and the associated development legislation, seek to enhance clarity, transparency and consistency about what types of development require approval, and if they do, which category of development (and therefore which pathway) they fall within.

Planning and Design Code will replace individual Council Development Plans with 1 state-wide Code. This will ensure that policies are consistent with one another, so there is less scope for individual authorities to interpret certain policies in certain ways.

“Council” is no longer the relevant authority for planning consent – however, the authority could be an assessment panel, assessment manager or accredited professional, each of which may be employed/constituted by a council. Each of these 3 authorities will need to meet minimum qualifications, experience and ongoing professional development standards to act as a relevant authority.

It is intended that current Local and State Heritage Items will maintain their heritage listing in the new planning system.
We note your concerns around the importance of notification to neighbours and viewing plans free of charge.

Janet Scott

17 Oct 2018

Opaque - decision making behind whether a plan requires assessment or not. Need transparency in the decision making - not just for the applicant but for the people who live in and own property in the area.

Performance Assessed - formerly known as Merit - where it isn't required to follow the plan exactly but in our area this is much abused - where something that doesn't quite comply but has less impact on the neighbours - would be expected but in fact it is used to allow anything to be built.

I would like a lot more transparency. Currently Mitcham Council has a fee for viewing plans of $63 approximately which makes holding them accountable for following the development plan in Colonel Light Gardens (State Heritage Listed) or anywhere else very difficult and expensive. And many developments that do not comply with the plans as written are being built and there is no way to find out why.

Council is no longer the authority for planning consent. But may include council staff. Is this right? What is the transition arrangement for Heritage places local and state?

Existing landholders and residents do not like surprise development - especially development that devalues their property.

Need to prevent this.

A physical sign on the development site is an awesome thing but the plans should be available for viewing for free at local council or on a website.

Using "copyright" as an excuse to prevent transparency - is akin to having a library full of books and then refusing to loan any of them out because they're all "copyright".

Difficult to appeal an assessment if someone who is not the applicant has not been allowed to view the plans and is not allowed to appeal. This leaves the system open to abuse by developers and planning assessors.

Government Agency

Planning Reform Team

16 Oct 2018

Thankyou for explaining your concerns Elizabeth. Considerations about Adelaide’s built character and heritage is a very important topic that lies at the heart of planning, and is something we know many people are passionate about preserving. You are correct in noting that the Assessment Pathways Discussion Paper does not discuss heritage issues – the reason is because ‘Assessment Pathways’ relates to the legislative procedures around how development applications are processed, whereas conservation and heritage policies will be contained in the Planning and Design Code. There will be an opportunity to review and comment on the specific planning policies in your area when the Planning and Design Code is consulted prior to its implementation in July 2020. We hope you can be part of that conversation, however please rest assured that your concerns and comments online now are also being captured and noted.

Elizabeth Ho

15 Oct 2018

I am very concerned to find nowhere in these very complex papers any solid headings, or pointers to discussion dealing with heritage issues including current historic zones set by a number of councils after very detailed development assessments involving many levels of expertise. What is happening re historic zoning ? Those of us who live in these zones have very often chosen to invest because of the character of the area. How are we going to be protected from development that is out of character with our currently zoned suburbs ? I do not want an eight storey poorly designed modern building going up next to the 1860s bluestone building that I have spent years protecting at my expense. If I have missed that discussion in this maze please advise. And by the way the only other source of our bluestone type is Antartica. That's how rare this stone is and many of us want to see a lot more protection of this very special SA heritage. Thank you.

Paul Maraun

09 Oct 2018

The current system is a disaster. Recently a developer bought 2 blocks of land in our street and has built a 6 house ghetto. No one was informed about it and we only found out about it by accident.
Upon enquiringly at the Mitcham council we were told only the immediate neighbours were told and were the only ones allowed to comment.
So this ghetto has now changed the character of the street because it was a 'conforming residential' development.
What a load of cods wallop. Planning rules were brought in to stop the old yellow brick rows of flats in residential areas but now like Freddie 'they're back'.
There must be some form of consultation when a development is totally out of character in a residential area.

Government Agency

Planning Reform Team > Paul Maraun

09 Oct 2018

Thank you for your thoughts on public notification, Paul.
The new planning system establishes a new practice for public notification - development applications requiring public notification will be notified not only by letters to adjacent land owners/occupiers, but also by a physical sign placed on the development site. This means that any affected person in the street who sees the site, and therefore the sign, could submit a representation to the relevant authority during the notification period.
Look out for future consultation on the Planning and Design Code to provide further input on the policies that guide development. The Code will also detail what types of development should be notified in different areas.

Peter Holmes

09 Oct 2018

The timelines for residents to be able to digest, get advice and respond to a notification of a nearby development appears too short - residents are at a disadvantage in terms of knowledge of the planning system ,their rights, and their ability to influence inappropriate development.

Government Agency

Planning Reform Team > Peter Holmes

09 Oct 2018

Thank you for your comments Peter. The timeframe for residents to respond to a notification of a nearby development is currently under review. Please let us know how long you believe should be provided for neighbours to respond to notified developments and why (consider the potential for different timeframes depending on the category and scale of development).

Peter Holmes > Peter Holmes

09 Oct 2018

There are two issues:-
1. who should be consulted, ie the number of residents affected; and
2. the timing of all responses - in recent my experience 60 days, given residents are not usually provided with any detail of a development (eg traffic, sightlines, shadowing, scale/built form), and time to understand what is planned and what are the ramifications and get advice and consider their options - developers clearly have had much more time to assemble their case

Government Agency

Planning Reform Team > Peter Holmes

09 Oct 2018

Hi again Peter. You make very valid points about the 'who' and also 'how long' of the process. 60 days may be a good place to start for most development , but if, as you suggest, not enough information is being provided to neighbours, this may be something authorities should consider. And perhaps more complex developments should have even more timeframes in which local residents can voice their concerns/objections.

Geoff Johnston

08 Oct 2018

Much effort has been put in via the WMAA SA branch to DA's recognising waste issues (collection/disposal/diversion) through ZWSA and now GISA.
Past mistakes can be easily avoided in the future if there is real and verifiable recognition and application of approved waste management strategies developed and approved at the earliest stages of a DA.
This is a 'must have' in any proposed system revamping the development application/assessment system in South Australia.
The PIA is across this issue as well.
Regards
Geoff J

Government Agency

Planning Reform Team > Geoff Johnston

09 Oct 2018

Thank you for your comments Geoff. We agree that waste management is an important consideration in the development assessment process and vital for healthy, sustainable streets, suburbs and communities.

Government Agency

Planning Reform Team

04 Oct 2018

Hi Janelle – thanks for your thoughts, it is certainly something that’s a real concern when planning new developments and an issue that all planners want to avoid, because we all want to be involved in building or contributing to spaces where people want to reside and are happy to live. The planning system’s new assessment pathways allow for certain developments to be assessed based on their impact – and social impacts will always be an important consideration.

It’s been shown in many parts of the world that higher density development (provided they are in the right areas with good design outcomes) can positively contribute toward genuine social inclusion in connected communities and increased physical health and mental wellbeing, due to increased mobility and improved access to public transport and services.

The data shows there is a need and demand for higher density in Adelaide metro areas because we all want to live centrally these days, which means with a growing population (albeit a fairly slow growth) we must work to find ways to accommodate what people are wanting, with increased community densities, in balance with great recreational spaces and other facilities.

We also need to have different options for people because it’s not a case of one size fits all. Some residents want gardens and outdoor living space, others want secure apartments where they don’t have to look after lawns and greenery, for example. Everyone’s needs are different and we want to support and cater for all of those different choices in how we live, now and in the future.

Janelle Brown

03 Oct 2018

Assessments seem to be monetary based rather than based on what is best for the welfare and health of the community. Overcrowding in certain areas leads to anger, depression, and a fractured community.