News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

[crawf]

The ACC is starting to show their true colours again, despite having the youngest mayor in the council's history.

I'm pretty disappointed.

[Waewick]

hardly suprising.

I hope that with additional people moving into the city it means councillors have to work for their votes and not just tie up votes through various self interest groups.

personally I think they should redifine the ACC to include all houses within a couple of streets of the parklands.

[Wayno]

I hope that with additional people moving into the city it means councillors have to work for their votes and not just tie up votes through various self interest groups.

Additional people moving into the city *may* actually increase demand for the 3am-7am lock out.

[omada]

I would like to see concrete figures from SAPOL regarding the "problem" on Hindley Street, ie number of arrests, incidents etc.

Apart from media beat ups, what really justifies this position by the State Government and ACC? Could it be that these bodies are full of baby boomers who have had their fill of fun? God knows what the boomers got up to when they were young. But at the end of the day they are on easy street and could not give a tinkers cuss about gen X or Y, they are happy with their cheap houses, free education and are now looking forward to generous tax concessions.. my god what a nanny state this is becoming..oh but I digress

[Waewick]

I hope that with additional people moving into the city it means councillors have to work for their votes and not just tie up votes through various self interest groups.

Additional people moving into the city *may* actually increase demand for the 3am-7am lock out.

not in a well planned city

[Wayno]

I would like to see concrete figures from SAPOL regarding the "problem" on Hindley Street, ie number of arrests, incidents etc.

i think this is the report here. The report David refers to above is dated 2009. This report is dated 2010.

[cruel_world00]

Glad to see commonsense prevailed.

http://city-messenger.whereilive.com.au ... and-clubs/

CITY pubs and clubs will be allowed to trade through the night after a State Government plan to impose a mandatory three-hour shutdown was defeated.

Upper House Opposition MPs last night (Tuesday, July 27) voted against a pub lock-down from 4am to 7am - a key reform included in proposed changes to the Liquor Licensing Bill.

The government does not hold a majority of seats in the Upper House.

The government last July revealed plans to ban licensed venues from round-the-clock trading, as part of a raft of strategies to curb alcohol-fuelled violence.

While the ban was not supported, other changes to the Liquor Licensing Bill were passed by Parliament following last night’s debate.

They included:

- Introducing $160 on-the-spot fines for revellers behaving in a disorderly or offensive manner in or near licensed premises;

- Granting Police Commissioner Mal Hyde powers to clear or close licensed premises where it is deemed unsafe for patrons; and

- Doubling the penalties for repeat offenders, such as a licensed premises caught serving alcohol to a minor.

Consumer Affairs Minister Gail Gago said a code of practice would be developed to introduce tougher requirements for venues which traded between 4am and 7am.

The vote coincided with a Town Hall decision to spend $35,000 to push for a four-hour mandatory break in trade.

The City Council last night voted to ramp up its campaign for a 3am to 7am shutdown by sending letters to ratepayers and paying for ads in the City Messenger, City North Messenger and The Advertiser.

Council CEO Peter Smith told the meeting the council would need to budget between $10,000 and $15,000 to letterbox ratepayers and $20,000 to take out ads in newspapers.

The council also voted to lobby the State Government, the Opposition, minor parties and independents in the Upper House to amend the Liquor Licensing Bill to match its position.

Under the proposal, Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood will write to ratepayers and Police Commissioner Mal Hyde to reinforce the council’s stance.

The City Messenger reported this month the council had backed a 3am to 7am shutdown for city pubs and clubs - an hour longer than the government’s proposed 4am to 7am break.

Debate on further clauses is expected to continue this week before the Bill is finalised and passed.

With that being said, I'm glad there have been changes to the Liquor licensing that include more power to shut down unsafe venues etc. I think this is a better approach than a blanket ban.

More onus and responsibility should be on these venues to enforce responsible service of alcohol, and if that's not the case, penalties should apply.

[Will]

Excellent news!

I am particualrly happy that instead of punishing everyone collectively, those misbehaving will now be the ones targetted.

Such a move places a greater onus on individual responsibility, which is what I think was sorely lacking in the ACC's stance.


However, I am dissapointed that the ACC will still spend $35 000 to continue their backwards campaign to shut down the CBD. Such money should be used instead to make the CBD more lively, not less lively.

[Waewick]

gee the ACC is becoming more and more irrelevant

why don't they just start asking for people to only use horse and carts in the CBD as well?

instead of blowing the $35k on advertising something people don't want, why don't they spend it upgrading the amenity of Hindley street to make it less condusive to late night violence?

all too hard I would gather, easy to lay blame and make rules in an attempt to be relevant!

[iTouch]

I thought Stephen and the ACC election would be one that would rejuvenate Adelaide but instead, I was wrong, it was just a typically political one.

[Matt]

Phew.

[david]

Councillor David Plumridge's Notes - Issue 67

- Commentary on local media reporting
- Carbon Pricing and your Rates
- Recent DAP and Council Meeting decisions.

Notes from Councillor Issue 67.pdf

(110.93 KiB) Downloaded 173 times

David Plumridge
Deputy Lord Mayor

Note: the SAPOL Report on Alcohol and Crime was commissioned in 2009 and released in 2010

[UrbanSG]

Can someone from Council provide an update regarding the Bus Station/Balfours redevelopment?

This was meant to cater for a significant portion of Council's residential population targets. Height limits were even increased to advantage Council and the developer. Basically we have ended up shifting the bus station and leaving the old site in a complete mess, vandalised etc. The new bus station still doesn't have a retail premises facing Grote Street.

The site of the new Loft apartments is another vandalised mess. I understand the GFC hasn't helped this project and Urban Construct has obviously been stung badly by the GFC by building at the height of the boom with highly inflated price expectations and they're now having to mark down apartments at Port Adelaide and their new office on Pirie Street.

I wonder what agreement Council signed with the developer regarding the staged construction of the development? It's all very secret and difficult to find any information?

Another issue ... why is it that new lighting has been installed along North Terrace in association with the tram extension yet the old light poles still remain ie corner of West Terrace/North Terrace and along North Terrace to Railway Station? Is it that difficult for the government and Council to coordinate the removal of these poles? Why go to the effort of undergrounding and then leave the old poles/lights in? Might seem like a small issue but all these small things add up.

[mshagg]

Id be surprised if the precinct was contributing much to the population of the CBD. I live here and im one of the very few people who do, from what i can tell ~75% of the apartments between the buildings are simply managed as serviced apartments by Oaks (i.e. they're vacant). I've heard that a lot of people who were supposed to buy-in bailed on account of the GFC, leaving UC/Multiplex the proud owner of a lot of serviced apartments (the majority of which are vacant most of the time). I have an entire floor of Altitude to myself Mon-Fri lol.

That being the case i'd be very very surprised if they were keen to keep pouring concrete into the development. I recall the DAC's approval for 'the loft' cited that substantial work must begin within x months of the approval being granted? They came in and tided up the site a few weeks ago and havent been back since.

I would be interested to hear more, because no one ive spoken to has any idea what's going on.

[UrbanSG]

Agreed mshagg. Urban Construct base their developments on a large proportion being Oaks serviced apartments, which has led to a lot of issues with other buyers.

Oaks recently went through some financial issues too which probably hasn't helped.

The problem is Council talked up this development saying up to 1,400 new apartments would be developed and I believe these expectations were included in population forecasts for the city.

At the same time Council entered into some sort of contract with the developers re: timing etc. The details of which are not well known to the public.

Meanwhile we are left with a number of sites that look just as bad, if not worse than before this development commenced. Given Council is involved in this development, they should set an example on how to manage the sites before construction instead of letting them turn into rubbish dumps and vandalised messes.

Developers can apply to extend Development Plan Consents. However this development also includes agreements with Council. So far the agreement with Council appears to mean nothing regarding timing?