News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

[Wayno]

a few questions: How does someone get a job within the ACC's development approval team? who does the recruiting? and who decides on the profile of team members to help ensure a balanced perspective? and do the Councillors (or the SA Govt) have any say in this matter?

[Clr Yarwood]

Re 200 North Tce – the answer is I have no information – I do not follow developments in the city because I am focussed on planning the future – we are right in the middle of the next $180 million budget. I asked that Sensational Adelaide be formally put on the consultation list so you are now a formally recognised stakeholder!

Re the jobs matter – the way government (state or local) works is that politicians employ the CEO and the CEO employs all the other staff.

The reality is we are meant to focus on the strategy and policy issues and then the CEO has a team to implement it. We also do not get paid enough to deal with such matters – I get $15k and the CEO gets $300k!!!

As a planner it is also worth mentioning that they are appointed for their professional skills- the independent advice they can offer. Appointments like this MUST NEVER become political as they are there to provide frank a fearless advice. Politicians do the politics – planners do the planning.

The head of the planning area is Debra Just – General Manager City Strategy.

[Ben]

a few questions: How does someone get a job within the ACC's development approval team? who does the recruiting? and who decides on the profile of team members to help ensure a balanced perspective? and do the Councillors (or the SA Govt) have any say in this matter?

the planners are not the issue as this is the 3rd time they have recommended this one be approved, it is the DAP themselves which consists of councilors and members of the public such as architects ect

[AtD]

Re 200 North Tce – the answer is I have no information – I do not follow developments in the city because I am focussed on planning the future – we are right in the middle of the next $180 million budget. I asked that Sensational Adelaide be formally put on the consultation list so you are now a formally recognised stakeholder!

Thanks Clr.

[Wayno]

maybe a phone call to Debra Just will give insight to the 199 Nth Terrace situation - any takers?

[Norman]

maybe a phone call to Debra Just will give insight to the 199 Nth Terrace situation - any takers?

You're the more professional one out of us.

[Wayno]

maybe a phone call to Debra Just will give insight to the 199 Nth Terrace situation - any takers?

You're the more professional one out of us.

maybe, but i was thinking someone with good knowledge of the builder (and knowhow of the ACC approval process) might be able to have a more informed discussion with Debra.

[UrbanSG]

There is no point speaking to Debra. As has been stated previously the planners recommended approval, end of story.

It is a few Councilors on the DAP that delayed this decision that need to be asked questions. A number are damaging our city with their pathetic micro arguements that if were challenged in the ERD Court would almost be laughed at.

They forget they are there to assess the proposals against the Development Plan not their own micro agendas. I witnessed a recent incident where an Adelaide City Council councilor raised a hypothetical situation which was technically not under assessment and delayed a decision costing the applicant money and time.

If it went to the ERD Court it would probably be apporved at a conference hearing as it had nothing to do with the proposal which satisfied the Development Plan.

The problem is applicants often don't want to go down the legal path because obviously it is more costly.

At least there are hardly anymore substanital proposals going to the ACC DAP anymore, a move in the right direction.

[Wayno]

hey urbansg, what's the ERD Court, and how does it work? (excuse my ignorance)

I'm also confused about the delineation of responsibilites and the hand-over process from the ACC DAP to the Govt DAC. A detailed explanation of how this works would be appreciated.

[UrbanSG]

I'll try to keep it simple. The ERD Court is the 'Environment Resources and Development Court' basically certain type of proposals can appeal decisions made by Councils in this court and sometimes people who made representations against a proposal can also appeal a decision.

Some examples include the Aurora and CCT8 developments which both appealed against ACC decisions to the ERD Court. In both cases both held conferences before any actual court appearances and both parties came to an agreement on both proposals before it had to procede to Court.

If it goes further into a proper appeal then obviously it gets very expensive for all involved as lawyer and court costs etc start to mount.

Not sure what you mean re: DAP and DAC? There are a few proposals still in the system that were lodged before the $10 million rule came in. These proposals are working their way through and once decisions have been made the ACC will have no control over any development over $10 million anymore.

As we have seen so far the $10 million proposals that have gone to the DAC (lodged after the $10 million rule came in) have been approved by DAC without fuss.

The Council still gets its planners to write reports for these (DAC decision) proposals but this is a complete waste of time and money imo. If I was a rate payer I would be asking questions. The DAC write their own reports and do their own assessments and they get the fees so I believe the ACC is wasting money and time here.

[Wayno]

thanks urbansg. So was 199 Nth Terrace a "pre-DAC" application?

[joshzxzx]

well then is it possible for 199 Nth Terrace to apply again but through DAC instead???

[Clr Yarwood]

Bashing the Adelaide DAP as being anti development and council centric when it is a majority of independent planning and architectural experts is inaccurate. A majority of experts on the DAP alone means it is impossible for a few councillors to stop any development.

This suggestion that DAC is pro-development and that DAP is anti development is the biggest load of rubbish - I should know as I know most of the people on both. Both panels are about ensuring developers, whos primary interest is maximizing profit, is balanced with sound design, social and environmental principles that are spelt out in the Development Plan.

The final Tower 8 approval was resolved in an ERD court conference hearing – the result of a $50 fee paid by the developers and a redesign of the building that met the development plan requirements (reflecting good design), just as the Council DAP had suggested – this is standard process and nothing to write home about.

As for council having a comment on development applications over $10 million being a waste of time – council has information regarding services, footpath levels, infrastructure plans etc etc etc that are of great value in ensuring a building functions within its locality – all relevant information when finalising a building approval in detail. I assume you want development that has expert input from people that know the immediate locality and can ensure the building maximises opportunities to function effectively within its locality?

This is the very reason development approval and the planning system exists – with the current financial crisis played out surely its obvious that markets need to be regulated in the interests of the greater good. You should be pleased there are professionals out there ensuring that we get quality outcomes in the communities interest, rather than being keen to bypass them because they don't say yes to everything.

[UrbanSG]

Firstly, I believe using the work bashing in that context is insulting to those people who have actually been bashed, just like the Lord Mayor of Melbourne saying he had been abused by Rann. I think it is a healthy debate rather than a bashing.

The whole independent planning and architectural expert issue really hasn't worked to date. These experts clearly get sucked into the politics of a DAP meeting. I have seen it occur on many occasions.

When comparing the two, I believe the DAC is more pro-development than a Council DAP. The DAP often gets caught up on very small issues that don't even correspond to the requirements of their own Development Plan.

The planning reports prepared by Council for applications over $10 million hardly go into detail regarding footpath levels and the like, that comes at a later stage in the process. Plus there have been examples where the planners at Planning SA have gone totally against what has been discussed by a planner at the Council in their report. What is the point when the DAC places more weight on what is discussed by the government planner?

I don't want development for development's sake, I trust many planners to sort out the real issues. I just believe that Council DAP's have proved on many occasions that they focus on small scale issues that have nothing to do with a Development Plan and are too politcally focused despite expert panel members.

Also in the current economic climate we should realise that without a clear planning system, developers will bypass Adelaide all together and Councils won't be able to brag about how many development applications have been lodged over the past however many months totalling however many million dollars. I already know of one developer who is close to giving up on Adelaide because of the system we have here, a developer who proposes decent buildings. Too much money and risk for a developer when it can all be reduced to nothing thanks to a DAP decision.

[Will]

From the Messenger:

Rundle St market faces fight

news Local News 15 Apr 09 @ 11:30am by Adam Todd

BATTLE: The Rundle St market is struggling to survive, amid poor attendances and a waning budget.
THE beleaguered Rundle St Market might be revamped, privatised or scrapped as it struggles to attract bigger crowds on a shoestring budget.

The City Council is reviewing its $300,000 annual commitment to the Sunday market as it prepares to cut costs in its 2009/10 budget.

Among Town Hall’s main concerns are the market’s lacklustre attendances and the whole-day closure of Rundle St to road traffic negatively impacting some East End traders.

The council asked for a report outlining how it could privatise the market at its meeting on Tuesday night, April 14. The report will be brought back to the council before it finalises its budget.

The market has been a talking point along the strip, with some traders believing it brings business to precinct and others saying the road closure drives customers away.

The council slashed its commitment to the market last year, cutting its budget in half from $600,000. At the time, staff warned the market could not survive on funding less than $400,000.

Cr Anne Moran said after three years, she did not think the market was working.

``I think markets are fantastic but there’s just something wrong with this one and you can’t keep throwing good money after bad,’’ she said.

Cr Moran said the council was considering finding a private operator to run the market beyond June 30.

``I think the move will be to privatise, but if that doesn’t work, and if it’s not budgeted, then there’s no money to keep it going and it will stop.’’

East End Co-ordination Group president David Williams said the market’s format needed a rethink.

``We still think there is a place for the market in the East End but I think it’s worth looking at trying something a little bit different,’’ he said.

Mr Williams said he favoured smaller markets on sidestreets, such as Vaughan Pl and Ebenezer Pl, so Rundle St could remain open to road traffic.

``The cafes generally have done very well out of it, but some of the high-end clothing retailers say that they’ve been suffering because of it.’’ Mr Williams said the number of people attending the market had plateaued in recent months. ``I would have thought they consistently get 3000 or so.

``I think the council was hoping to get numbers built up to 5000-7000 every week and I don’t think that they’re getting those numbers.’’

Lord Mayor Michael Harbison, who pushed for the market in September 2006, said he would like to see it continue and opposed re-opening Rundle St to traffic on Sundays.

``I don’t think we should be slaves to the motor car. There are real benefits in pedstrianising streets on weekends.’’