A sitting of Unley’s Council Assessment panel last night saw how Planning Process Pains Perpetuate. This was in evidence with the approval of a 2-storey development on the corner of Culross Avenue and Fullarton Road.
Approved Development for Culross Avenue and Fullarton Road.
Neighbouring residents turned up on mass to protest a development proposed for that site. They left disillusioned by the Planning Process.
Several neighbours made verbal representations, backing up their written submissions. Unley MP David Pisoni, likely to be the planning minister in the new Government, also made representation.
The Panel approved the development. They did so because the application because it was not significantly at variance to the development plan. This was much to the dismay of the gallery.
Much of their dismay centred on understanding that development plans are not prescriptive, but a guideline. They felt that a minimum in the plan should be just that, a minimum.
Planning is not an exact science. This can even confuse those in the industry.
Opportunity missed in the Planning Process
Most of their dismay centred however in an arena they had control over a few years back. Last year this section of Fullarton Road was rezoned. The then Planning Minister signed off, as part of the planning process, on a development plan amendment.
Residents had an opportunity some 4 to 5 years ago to make representation at this stage of the planning process. Back then there was a proposal to alter our development plan to contribute to the Governments 30-year plan.
Not many did, unlike those in the west. The people in the west turned up in force to protest the changes. More to the point they were successful.
Back then, Jennie & I doorknocked all affected residents in Black Forest. We did so to ensure they received and understood the advice provided them by Council. We found many had not bothered to check the mail. Many also did not understand the potential impact on their neighbourhood. Our mentoring helped them, obviously with contrasting results to what happened in Fullarton.
Ultimately the DPA was split into two. The east was approved by the minister with the west left to be argued later (indefinitely).
This has resulted in a development approved that may not have been contemplated had the east been as informed and proactive as the west obviously was. One of many to come, one suspects.
Hi Don, could you please clarify what ‘east’ and ‘west’ refer to in this post?
Sorry for the confusion Cathy.
This DPA covered all suburbs of the City of Unley, excluding those areas where we already achieved the Minister’s approval to retain our heritage and streetscape zones. Unley Road and Greenhill Roads were dealt with separately too, as was Unley Central.
So what happened with the split was suburbs like Myrtle Bank, Highgate and Fullarton etc (the eastern suburbs were approved for various levels of densification.Suburbs in the west, as a result of the involvement of the residents, were not approved for densification. This includes the suburbs of Clarence Park and Black Forest.