Sensational-Adelaide.com

david wrote:
I must admit that I had scant knowledge of the good work that PPS do. I an sure that had we known they were in Australia we would have tried to get them across to Adelaide. I'm sorry about that.

ACC staff have been talking to David Sim of Jan Gehl's office and I am hoping that I might be able to persuade my council colleagues to bring Gehl back to review his report of 2002 which has largely gathrered dust on a Town Hall bookshelf, at least until the present Council was elected in 2007.

I have managed to put $200k on the draft Busines Plan and Budget for 'Gehl Initiatives' - lets hope it survives the final budget process on 15 June.

David

david wrote:A message to Omricon, thanks for your offer of help but don't bank on it being accepted!
David

david wrote:I have to say that you make a good point which I will have to think about and discuss with my colleagues.

how_good_is_he wrote:Hi David on the the 30 May you wrote

david wrote:I have to say that you make a good point which I will have to think about and discuss with my colleagues.

I wonder if you/your collegues have had time to respond?

Can you and fellow councillors see the hypocrisy of council carpaking policy for new developments actually forcing developments towards smaller apartments [ie student accom.] and then councillors like Sandy Wilkinson complaining about the proliferation or quality or size of them.

If you are serious about improving the situation are you willing to relax and/or change the carpaking policy now ie over rule or be flexible with the demands of carparking requirements in the current 2006 development plan?

Also, the demo tonight of the 3D city model was very impressive (its a pity that none of you was able to be there). It will be in use on a proving basis by Council staff almost immediately and it is our hope that basic version will be made available on the Council website later in the year. Its potential for carrying numerous layers of information ranging from projected height limis, city policy zones, cadastral information and even underground services is almost limitless. And of course the main value will be to test all kind of 'what if ' scenarios.

Minister Paul Holloway has announced that the Government will provide funds to assist the Council to proceed
with North Tce Stage 3 (Prince Henry Gardens) total $2.06m

City planning panel goes all hush-hush

by Adam Todd

ALL major development applications in the city will be discussed behind closed doors from now on, in a bid by the City Council Development Assessment Panel (DAP) to avoid public criticism.

The DAP took the extraordinary move at Monday night’s, July 6, meeting, just a fortnight after it came under fire for criticising a 13-storey proposal at Light Square as “too tall”.

The public were asked to leave the gallery, before the panel spent 50 minutes discussing a proposed four-storey retail and accommodation complex on Rundle St in confidence.

When the public were allowed back in, the panel announced it had recommended the proposal not be approved, but did not provide any reasons.

The panel ignored its own expert planners, who recommended that the project be supported.

The project’s developer, Theo Maras, described this week’s events as a “joke”.

“It just goes to show the appalling attitude that’s coming from the Adelaide City Council towards any development,” he said.

Since last July, all development applications worth more than $10 million have been assessed by the State Government’s Development Assessment Commission (DAC). However, the City Council’s DAP still offers its advice to the DAC before the application is assessed.

Before going into confidence, DAP member Cr Michael Henningsen justified the move by pointing out the DAC held its deliberations behind closed doors.

Cr Anne Moran, normally an outspoken advocate for council transparency, supported his motion. “Unusually, I’m happy to second this, because we’re not the decision maker in this process,” she said. “We are feeding our advice into the state DAC which handles all its discussions behind closed doors, I would never agree with doing it behind closed doors if we were the decision maker.”

“We are now part of the state’s planning, I am reasonably comfortable that we discuss these in camera.”

Property Council of Australia state manager Nathan Paine labelled the move “bizarre and strange”. “Obviously it’s in response to the overwhelming criticism they’ve received from people across SA as a consequence of their advice on the Light Square development,” he said.

“It seems to be in character with a lot of the decisions the DAP have come to, but if they’ve got nothing to hide, they should be doing it in public, if they’ve got something to hide, then they can operate in a shadowy context behind closed doors.”

Lord Mayor Michael Harbison said he had become “concerned” about the panel’s behaviour in recent months. “If they’re going to be rude about people, I’d rather they do so behind closed doors, but I struggle with the logic that our panel should be secret because the DAC is secret,” he said. “I’d prefer they conducted their proceedings in a manner that’s open to public scrutiny and that they behave themselves with probity and decorum.”

“Their task is not to pass comment on anything and everything but to simply judge applications according to the law.”

Planning Minster Paul Holloway said it was the council’s choice how it deliberated on major developments.

The Light Square controversy came just a month after the DAP criticised a $50 million student apartment complex on the Freedom site as “hopeless” and “absolute rubbish”.

Those comments prompted a formal complaint from the developer and a subsequent letter to panel members from Council CEO Peter Smith, reminding them of the need to act with “integrity and professionalism”.