Where we are with DPA 2

Further to my post on this website today about Council’s program of Development Plan Amendments I can comment more specifically on where we are with DPA 2.


After the strong contribution to DPA 2 by you, particularity those residing in Back Forest and Clarence Park, we conducted a preliminary review prior to the Council caretaker period for the November 2014 elections. The elections unfortunately delayed further progress until a complete review was presented to the new Development, Strategy & Policy Committee and then to Council in April 2015.

The review took on board your contribution and in respect of Black Forest and Clarence Park has all but recommended we maintain the status quo. In other words the proposed changes have been withdrawn almost in their entirety. Higher Density is still contemplated for the aged accommodation precinct at the South Road end of Norman Terrace, Everard Park.

Council also agreed with a suggestion from DPTI to split the Residential DPA into two parts:

Part 1 – east of a line along Goodwood Road, tram-line and East Avenue for final approval by the Minister for Planning

Part 2 – west of a line along Goodwood Road, tram-line and East Avenue for approval to release for re-consultation.

Part 1 was submitted in June 2015 for approval by the Minister for Planning. Approval is anticipated later in August 2015.

The necessary preparation of a revised DPA Part 2 (for the western areas – excluding Anzac Highway and Leader Street as these areas are now part of the Corridors Ministerial DPA) is being prepared.

Conclusion and submission of a revised draft DPA Part 2 to the Minister for approval to release for public consultation should occur by August 2015. The timing and coordination of the public release of the Residential DPA Part 2 will need to be considered in the context of the Minister’s Corridors DPA, and also with the Council’s General DPA, to avoid confusion and convergence of resource demands.

Where we are with DPA 2 right now. Watch this space as time marches on.

Where are we with our Development Plan Amendments

With the recent announcement by the Minister that he plans a wide reaching Development Plan Amendment (DPA) focused on Activity Centres it is timely for me to report how we are going with our Development Plan Amendments.


The three current DPAs being pursued by the Development, Strategy & Policy Committee I chair are progressing as follows:

1   DPA 2

This has been split into 2 parts as you may remember from previous posts on this website.

– Part 1 (EAST) submitted for Approval of the Minister – June 2015. We await his rubber stamp on this.

– Part 2 (WEST) is being prepared for submission for approval to release for further public consultation, probably in August 2015. I will comment further on this DPA in a separate blog post. If you live in Goodwood or Clarence Park Wards this should be compulsory reading.

2   General DPA

The draft proposal was examined during this committees workshop in May 2015. We are now refining some of the proposals and the final draft being prepared subject to resolution of Minister’s DPAs on Activity Centres and Corridors.

The recently announced Activity Centres and Corridors Ministerial DPA’s will however affect the General DPA non-residential zones proposed revisions. It may slow this one down. This in turn may slow down DPA 2 as well as we had planned to take both out together to the community for your input.

3   Unley Central Precinct DPA

Our statement of Intent submitted in January 2015 was approved by the Minister on 31 May last. A tender is currently being processed to appoint a consultant team by August 2015 to engage stakeholders and the community and to prepare a draft DPA. We would expect to see this being completed by say March 2016. This is presuming that the Ministerial DPA I spoke of back on the 26th May does not require us to redirect resources to contribute to the Ministerial DPA.

The committee is poised ready to work through the next stages of each of these Development Plan Amendments.

When is DPA 2 coming back for public input

DPA 2 has, like a number of issues we were dealing with at Council and in the community last year, taken a back seat due to the November elections.


Due to be considered by the Development, Strategy & Policy (DSP) Committee before going to Council means it is unlikely to get back out for the next round of public consultation until May or June in my best guess. This is because we have yet to formalize our Section 41 committees including the DSP committee.

As I have recently posted we have appointed the elected members to the committee. We have yet to finalize the appointment of independent members to the committee. This will be ratified at this month’s full council meeting.

Council’s planning staff have been negotiating with DPTI on the feedback we received during the last round of public consultation.

DPTI and our staff are still working on the last few areas of differing opinions. I understand this will not be far away. Even though Council is not ready to deal with the amended plan it is therefore not ready for us to consider.

I understand also that they (DPTI) may be favourable to a number of our observations.

As soon as I can update you on this I will.




So You think DPA2 is bad

Many residents in the old Goodwood South Ward, now Clarence Park Ward were justifiably upset at the suggestions being mooted in the recent DPA 2 consultation.

If you think that was bad are you prepared to stand up and be counted in what could be a way more devastating blow to development in your street and therefore the amenity of your street?

You would also be aware that your voice WAS heard by council and we are making changes to the plan. We will (as previously reported on this blog site) be going back out to you with those changes earl next year after the new council has had a chance to settle in.

Of course convincing council may be irrelevant with a State Government hovering above us and doing all they can to make local government irrelevant in planning matters. While they have the Expert Panel going through their motions the Minister for Planning keeps pushing through legislation that preempts the panel’s findings.

This minister and his government are hell bent on removing councils from the planning process. Why? One of his claims is that elected members acting on development assessment panels take too much notice of the neighbours and that this is stifling development in this state. Surely that means removing councils from having an influence removes your chance of having any influence.

So he is setting up yet another layer of bureaucracy at cost to you the tax payer so that developments in excess now of $ 3m can simply circumvent the local government development assessment boards.

Is this what you want. How many of you will protest this as you did the recent DPA2. I am. I have signed the petition being put together by Greens MLC Mark Parnell. Will you? It can be found on Mark’s website

And don’t forget that as much as Council may listen to you on DPA2 don’t expect that the minister will be as sympathetic. This government’s track record of announce and defend has not changed as evidenced by their current actions.

Just for the record the following is what I wrote in the general comments in the petition:

This is another kick local government opportunity and blame them for inadequacies within the planning system of the governments own making. It does not address the true inadequacy meaning nothing will change except another layer of bureaucracy will be created along with its cost. And shame on the liberals for their back flip.

Help protect your street from the potential we know what is best that this government has a history of doing. I don’t know what chance we have of stopping this but I do know you will have next to no say in future development proposals if the State Government are in charge via a centralised rather than a local system.

Sign the petition. It may be your last and only chance.

The minutes of the Development, Strategy & Policy Committee have been loaded onto our web site here.

For a detailed assessment of what was passed check the link and check item 2. The motion, moved by the Deputy Mayor and seconded by myself, notes all the variations we determined were necessary on the report presented by our administration. It lists the recommendations at the end of the motion

Item 3 identifies that a followup public consultation will be put to the new council for endorsement in February of next year.

Item 4 is merely procedural. We have to keep the Minister informed.

DPA2 committee sends recommendation to council

Last night the Development, Strategy & Policy Committee reviewed our administration’s recommendations for DPA 2 and has made its own revised recommendation to Council.

The committee last night debated each individual recommendation presented by our administration and made a number of variations to those recommendations. Once the minutes of the meeting are available I will cut and past them to a new blog.

At the end of the day people power, in making reasoned argument. has won the day.

What was a flawed plan now has some merit. I will not pretend it is perfect; nothing of this nature is. What I can say however is that the arguments put by the residents of Black Forest and Clarence have been viewed as having credibility and therefore pretty much accepted.

The end result is that Clarence Park has returned to it’s current zoning parameters and Black Forest has seen the regeneration in the south limited to Emerson Drive and even that at only 2 storey. Black Forest north east has reverted back to its original zoning too.

The committee has had its say and now it is up to council.

The motion is to the effect that these changes be incorporated into a new document for public consultation, set for February next year in all likelihood and then subject to what happens then onto the Minister, Mr Rau.

Revised DPA2 goes to Committee next Tuesday

For those in my neighbourhood I believe to have an interest in DPA2 I give you the following heads up:

A very comprehensive report has been complied for the committee to assess on Tuesday night. This report can be found on the council’swebsite.
As you will see the committee has been prompted to consider one of four options. Once considered it will then go to Council, I presume on August 25. Either group could consider drafting their own motion , or modifying one of the 4 offered.
Our administration have done a lot of work since the consultation, and clearly have listened to the consultation. Whilst they express concern within the body of the report that DPTI and the Minister may reject what changes are mooted they appear at first glance to have taken on board what the community has told them. In particular it would seem that streetscape landscape may not survive, which may mean those areas may revert back to R350. That is for the future though.
There is much for me to absorb, noting I must look at the whole package and not just that concerning my neighbourhood, my Ward. Focusing unashamedly however on Goodwood South here is my initial read of the proposed changes (option 1).
It appears that Clarence Park (west) and Black Forest (south) are now mooted to stay as they once were, 350m2 and 2 storey, but it appears that the yield will not change. Have to get my head around that one.
Black Forest (north) I need to study a lot more closely before working out what if anything it achieves, particularly in the eastern region.
Have a read yourself and make your own judgement please. You may see it differently to my analysis above and if you do I would appreciate your letting me know. I have an awesome responsibility here and I want to make sure I have not missed anything. Before the committee meeting would be good, but certainly before Council meets.
Having said that you will find from the report that whatever is decided will only be for the purpose of going back out to consultation. So you will get a say on whatever will become the revised proposal.
If anyone wants to talk about the changes you know how to get to me.
And please let others know what is happening.

DPA2 Goes to Development Strategy & Policy Committee meeting

The DPA 2 post consultation key issues review carried out by our Administration will be presented to the next meeting of the Development Strategy and Policy committee on Tuesday week, August 12.

This meeting is but one month ahead of the start of the caretaker period so I expect that all the current council would have time to do is to receive the report that results from the committee meeting. That means it would be up to the next council to determine what submit to the minister.
This is a public meeting allowing you to attend and observe if you wish. As the public consultation has closed you will not be able to contribute however.
The agenda for the meeting should be available to all, including the public, on our web site next Thursday. It can be found under the Agenda & Minutes available in the drop down list at the top left hand side of the home page.
Whilst I will keep you up to date as news comes to hand I encourage you to attend the meeting so you can get a feel for what is likely to happen.

Concentrate Intensification in the heart of Unley

A random comment I heard on Monday night about high rise, medium rise (whatever you want to call it) is the most saleable properties that such development provides that are those properties with “open space at their doorstep”.

Yes open space at their door step. The opportunity for their kids, their dogs, their cats to step outside and be in open space immediately.

This is probably the most salient comment I have heard that goes to the heart of ensuring our zoning policies are correct for the given area. It reinforces my oft stated belief that DPA2, at least for the Goodwood South Ward is flawed. Not only is there no green space at their door step occupants of homes in this area would have to go out of their way to find the green space.

Such densification is possible having said that in Unley but the locations are few and far between. As I have been saying to a few people I have conversed with recently there is opportunity in the centre of the City of Unley.

There are opportunities in and around the Unley Shopping Centre and the Civic Centre that can provide significantly to the State Governments population projections. 
There are properties in these areas large enough already to provide the height of 5, 7, maybe even 10 storeys without significantly impacting on the surrounding residential properties. Properties large enough to provide or adjacent already established green open space to make them attractive to developers.
And these locations are within walking distance to the shops, the community centre, the library, to the Unley Oval, the memorial gardens.
The impediment as we speak is our planning regulations do not encourage residential in these locations. 
So let us as a Council look at a development plan amendment that facilitates achievable and sustainable growth in this area rather than focus on trying to cram more people into areas that do not provide this amenity, and have little or no chance of providing this amenity.
And as we are doing this what if we can encourage the growth of entertainment into this same area, making multi storey living an attractive proposition because all you need is at your “door step”. That means the green space for your kids and dogs, entertainment (whether a cinema, or indoor pool, gym, basketball etc or all or the above), retail ad grocery shopping, medical services etc etc etc
I am currently pushing for and will do so if still on Council come November for us to prepare a development plan amendment (DPA) for the “Unley Central” area. This is in lieu of making the mistake of creating ghettos in the 4 corners of the Cities area, areas already of comparative high population without open space or ready access to services as is possible in “Unley Central”.

Council has been working on concepts for this area for some years now and we should therefore have the necessary information on hand to easily produce a DPA that can accommodate the concepts. This will allow provide an ideal opportunity for the community to see what we have been looking at and contribute to the process. It should also demonstrate to the Minister for Planning that we are serious about achieving the goals he has set for us but with reasoned solutions.

What about the aged institutions scattered around Unley?

Whilst I have been questioning if we should be going back to the drawing board or even rejecting DPA2 there is a component that deserves to remain open for consideration. That is providing for growth of aged care facilities within Unley.

Scattered through our fair city are a number of aged care facilities, on different land sizes and in different surroundings.

As I read through the community feedback to the DPA I gleaned that there was sympathy from most for these institutions to be able to expand by growing upwards. This is something I agree with.
Some of the institutions are located where the impact of increasing the building height would not greatly impact the surrounding homes. Some have built out their sites to the maximum, some of these to the detriment of private open space.
The DPA has included all but I think one of these facilities and the one it has missed has made a submission for inclusion. That is the one on Victoria Street, Millswood. In my ward.
As I assess their site it may just work if they were allowed extra height in redeveloping their site. This is one site that desperately needs more open space and that would have to be trade off.
That applies to the rest. The trade off has to be improving open space, preferably green open space.
We need also in my opinion to assess the value, as we did with DPA3, to keep al development within a 30 degree envelope.
Love to know what others think? Let me know what you think.