DPA2 Galvanises Community

The community of Clarence Park and Black Forest has been inundated with Government & Council intrusions that have tested many recently but also galvanised us and help to build a stronger community than the one we believe we had before the train corridor upgrade.

Never before has this one small community had to deal with so much over a prolonged period and its still happening. I trust this is not my ding because it has coincided with my time on Council. Maybe this is why I was lured into taking on the role, to be there with my community to get the best deal we can from all being thrown at us.

This time it is Councils DPA2 that is galvanising the community. When I say Council’s DPA I really should say the State Government’s DPA via the Minister for Planning.

Anyhow, we (Council, acting on behalf of the Government to achieve accommodation for the expected population growth in the 30 year plan) have received numerous submissions. There have been many resident meetings and Jennie & I have met with many.

As a member of the committee that will receive these submissions I am expecting a lot of reading. I expect too a long night on the 16th June at the Unley Civic Centre when we hear verbal submissions in support of the written submissions received.

I have seen one or two submissions already be having been copied into them. And what i can say tho those who prepared them, well done. They have been well researched and they have been constructive and helpful to finding solutions.

There is one thing that I am keen to find out as we move toward that public hearing and that is what population numbers will this plan provide the Government. During this whole period of public consultation I have not seen what the numbers are that we are trying to accommodate.

I will be looking to find out how many the new R zone in our Ward will generate. Separately I will be looking to find out what numbers the RR zones might generate.

I don’t know about you but I quite frankly suspect this DPA will make very little contribution to the Governments targets . The more I look at the R zone the more I wonder how much the DPA is different enough to create the numbers, particularly when the reverse has occurred in part of Black Forest where property ratios have actually increased.

Interesting times ahead as this one moves forward to maybe a conclusion before Council goes into Care taker mode before the next election.

A better Public Transport System

There has been much debate recently about the 30 year plan for Adelaide and high (sorry higher) rise development not being accompanied by a commensurate public transport plan.

How man of you out there can remember the trams. Well head off to the following web site.


It even has a picture of a tram under the Goodwood Road underpass.

One of my colleagues has been championing trams back on Unley Road and even King William Road.


Granny Flats as part of 30 year plan?

The article below is worth reading as the writer questions the pros and cons of granny flats as investment opportunities.


Certainly it re-raises a question I have put previously of the value of families in the inner suburbs staying together rather than the kids head off to the outer suburban reaches of metropolitan Adelaide.

It also expands on the suggestion of Unley’s Parkside Ward Councillor John Koumi and widely accepted in planning circles and that is the concept of lane way housing.

DPA 3A submission to Minister closer

In my post of a few minutes ago I talked of the working s of our new Development, Strategy & Policy committee meeting as they dealt with DPA 3A.

Two months ago this committee heard submissions from members of our residents and businesses. I posted on this at the time.

The committee sat to review these responses this week and to contribute their own thoughts. It was an active meeting with all members contributing, both elected and independent. Even absent independent member Tim Horton (not allowed to attend as he had to attend his surprise birthday party) contributed .

We heard also from Cr John Koumi the presiding member of another of our committees, UBED, about their concerns regarding the economic impacts of the development.

In the end all the input from this meeting will be forwarded onto Council for them to make their decision as to what to put to the Minister for Planning to consider. We then await his blessing on what I believe to be the best result we could have hoped for.

The mood of this committee I believe will be matched by council. In other words we remain on the same page we have always been on in respect of issues DPTI have previously indicated were non-negotiables. Issues such as having a 30 degree envelope not 45 degrees and that public notification be permitted I am sure will be endorsed by Council.

We also have rejected the concept of providing incentives that might allow the overall height to be increased.

30 Year’s plan is for an increase in density in the inner rim council areas

Following on from my post this morning regarding the truth in the population projections here is the other side of the story.

Also gained from the Census is a study conducted by the daily electronic news media of Adelaide, In Daily. It can be seen at this link http://www.indaily.com.au/?iid=76361&sr=0#
This makes interesting reading as the Government expects the council area with the highest density to grow by some 20%. That is 7,000 more people than the current population of 37,500. Mind you the target population is still lower than the 47,000 people we had back in 1947, albeit in approximately the same housing stock as now.

30 Year Plan population figures still being questioned.

I still get people arguing that the State Governments projections for population growth are unfounded, notwithstanding the growth of the last 40 years, as depicted in my recent post on this blog site dated 28 March.

And while this is happening I hear on the radio this morning that (would you believe) at 9.27 pm tonight we are expected to reach our new milestone. We will pass the 23 million mark at this time, just 3 years after reaching the previous milestone. 1,000,000 more people in Australia in just 3 years, the same as the previous 3 years after taking 4 years for the previous 1,000,000.

By my calculations that is (on a liner scale) 10,000,000 increase in 30 years.

What would be South Australia (or Adelaide’s share of that)?

A quick look at the Census web site and we see that Adelaide had a population at the last Census of 1,225,235. that is 5.6% of the then Australian population. In the previous 5 years Australia’s population grew 8.3% according to the Census website, and South Australia by only 5.4%.

So if we have just 5% of the population in 30 years, by my calculation, we will have to house 500,000.

There is that figure again.

What about Unley? …… watch this space for another slant on this question of population growth.

Unley and the South Parklands

As the City of Unley grapples with the limited open and green space within it’s borders (the least by a mile of any local council area in the greater metropolitan area). As the City of Unley grapples with addressing the State Governments 30 year plan to increase the density of housing stock.

I have long pondered the relationship Unley has with the adjacent parklands to its north, the other side of Greenhill Road.

There has been much talk during public consultation of our DPA 3A that how are we going to find extra open space which will become more precious than it is now as our density inevitably increases.

Enter the South Parklands.

And enter this article by David Penberthy n Adelaide Now this morning. Yours to read and love to hear your thoughts on the observations he has raised and how Unley might better utilise the Parklands (in partnership of course with the City of Adelaide).


Is the 30 year plan necessary update

I revealed in a post on this blog site back on the 4th of this month evidence that would support the projections of population growth in this great city of ours.

Today I read a summary on the Federal Governments 3rd Annual State of Australian Cities report of December 2012. It made once again for interesting reading.

Some highlights from this include:

Ø  Australia’s population in 2011 was 22,485,300, having increased by 2.95m between 2001 and 2011, an increase of well in excess of 10% in just 10 years. The majority of this increase was albeit in Sydney & Melbourne, with many areas noted as having grown by 2% and more in the same time.

Ø  There was a sharp increase in the proportion of the population living in the capital cities of most states and territories between 2001 and 2001

Ø  The gap between population and housing supply is now the largest and most sustained in a century.

Ø  Housing occupancy rates, on the decline over the previous decades has now stabilised at around 2.57 people per dwelling (an increase from 2006).

Ø  New houses in Australia, as has been the case in my time on the planet, have become the largest in the world, although there has been little or no growth for a decade and unit size has fallen.

There is clearly an issue moving forward that does need addressing.

Talking Corridors and Envelopes rather than Place to create a new generation of White Elephants

Borrowing two statements from residents at tonight’s public meeting namely we have started taking a new language of corridors and envelopes and forgotten about creating place from one resident, and the current push by the Government for higher density will create this generations White Elephants.


That sums up tonight’s first ever meeting of the new City of Unley Development Strategy and Policy Committee.

As promised a few days ago I am now reporting on the first meeting of the new Development Strategy and Policy Committe, of which I am a member. And our first meeting was a public meeting, called to hear from those who have provided representations for the Boulevard and High Streets Development Plan amendment (otherwise known as DPA 3A).

This was a productive meeting and was well chaired by Cr Michael Hewitson. We have been charged with the responsibility to decipher the public response to DPA 3A and make recommendation for Council to consider in our submission to the Planning Minister in response to the Government’s 30 year plan.

Those who took the trouble to make representations I congratulate. They presented well thought out presentations and by and large I believe they back up many of the arguments that Council has already put to the minister.

Some of the detail I will post in the next day or two.

Suffice it to say that if we don’t get this right we will create this generations white elephants to go with previous generations stand alone developments like the ETSA building just down the road from us and the old Highways Department in Walkerville.

Is the 30 year plan necessary?

Many people believe that the 30 year plan is the Governments way to pay back large developers who have contributed to their election funds.  A number of people are also sceptical of the projections of an additional 500,000 people living in this lovely city in the next 30 years

Is the 30 year plan is a question being asked many of these people, who doubt the need for the plan. Let’s face it a half a million people is a mind blowing number. And let us not forget that Adelaide has not grown that much in the last 30 years.

Being aware that Unley had 47,000 people in 1947 and we now only have 35,000 I have done some research to see if I can justify this.

This research has revealed that Adelaide in 1970 had a population of 792,000. This is close to my memory of our population when I started work in December of 1969. The population in 2010, just 2 years ago was 1,125,000. I must admit I thought it was closer to 1.3 million.

At 1.125m this is an increase in population of 42% by my calculation. Wow! 42%. Does not seem feasible.

Here is the bottom line, if our population grows in the next 30 years, or 40 years, that equals 473,000. This is close to what Deputy Premier John  Rau was saying the demographers have predicted last Friday at the AIUS monthly luncheon.

Back to the real question then, how do we accommodate these people, many of whom will be our sons and daughters, grandchildren or great grandchildren.

Let’s hope we get it right.