Thursday, 22 October 2015
Wednesday, 21 October 2015
Spring 2015
Spring 2015
Our parks and gardens in Unley are great. Our Unley Council staff deserve our thanks and congratulations.
We have planted a wide range of trees including fruit and nut trees. In
Spring these have flowered and show promise of a good harvest this year.
Spring these have flowered and show promise of a good harvest this year.
Thursday, 14 May 2015
Newsletter May 2105
Unley in Rapid change
Unley Central has no height restrictions
I am after a cool green and light city but the State Government is in control of the rules.There are no height restrictions....I am after a 30 degree envelope so the surrounding area is light,
not overshadowed.... cool means trees and gardens.....
We need a centre with community resources for all, entertainment, fitness, medical, shopping, ....
watch this space...
Unley Oval
Plans are continuing.... email me to be kept up to date.
Thursday, 26 March 2015
High Rise Rules Tested
The Result Suburban sprawl Governance and Corruption.
Result FAIL
244 Unley Road is in a five storey zone. A seven storey development
was approved by the State Development Commission in a five storey zone. This is not close! See blog below. Our rules are blown apart.
Seven is the new five for the whole of Unley Road.
The Commission discussed the
application.
RESOLVED
1) RESOLVE
that the proposed development is NOT seriously at variance with the relevant
provisions of the Unley (City) Development Plan”
Result 40% Wrong
Adelaide’s sprawl
The SA Government should undertake
planning for the state and should stop the bituminising of our food growing
land around Adelaide. Unley should be given the population targets by the State
to plan for. Unley should develop the
rules within this to gain State Approval.
An Unley DAP should consider applications in Unley. The developer should
have a right of appeal to a State Development Commission.
Governance
Good governance would separate the approval process from the
appeal. The umpire should not be the player. The inner suburbs Development Assessment
Commission is beholden to the STATE Government
for its creation. The Appeal process is also beholden to the STATE.
Corruption
In the long term a separation of powers will inhibit
corruption. Councils should make the
rules for approval within state objectives. Councils should consider
development applications. If refused the developer should have the right of
appeal to the State.
The SA Government has taken over planning for Unley.
Thursday, 5 February 2015
Rates Stop Press
Rates Stop Press
For the first time Council has agreed to set a target rate first and to cut our cloth to fit. It was Unanimously passed when a division was called.
"
ITEM 54
MOTION ON NOTICE – COUNCILLOR HEWITSON RE RATES
MOVED Councillor Hewitson
SECONDED Councillor Hughes
That:
in framing the 2015/16 Budget, council requests the Administration to provide
options and their implications within the target rate of up to the average LGPI for the
past five years average plus one %.
If followed through a rate increase will be half of the amount above inflation over the past 10 years.
Dear Colleagues,
Celeste from the Eastern Messenger gave me a call to say that another Councillor has
claimed that motion 54 about rate rises would make no difference as the staff
have now a long termed plan for LGPI plus 1%.
In response I sent the attached data to Celeste to show the
difference it would make if we as elected members stick with a rate rise of up
to LGPI plus 1%.
I explained to Celeste that our council without a target rate
rise can approve projects and then set the rate afterwards. Money is unlimited?
Without the motion being followed through by the Council, the rate could be way
above the 3.92% maximum.
This years rate rise would be up to 3.92% if set now because
from the first attachment the LGPI average over the past five years is 2.92%.
This already 1% below the increase of 4.95% last year.
Over the years covered in the attached graph the increase in
rate rise would have been 30% less. If we follow through over the next four
years with a target rate to approve new projects we will need to review our
prior expenditure. Money is limited and our expenditure valued and focused.
Much more with just little more.
With my good wishes
Michael
Michael
Unley High Rise planning Rules Challanged
Unley High Rise Rules Challenged
7 Storeys High? Rules are challenged!
Submission to Development Assessment Commission
244-248 Unley Road, Hyde Park
Cr
Michael Hewitson AM
South Australian DEVELOPMENT
ACT, 1993
REPRESENTATION ON APPLICATION – CATEGORY 2
Applicant: Xinyu International Group C/- Trice Project and
Development Managers
Development Number: 090/M003/15
Dear Alex,
I
am asking the DAC to reject this application in its current form because it is
at significant variance to the Unley Development Plan covering 244-248 Unley
Road.
The Urban Corridor Zone – High Street (Unley
Road) Policy Area, allowing for mixed use development up to five (5) storeys,
was introduced into the Development Plan on the 31 October 2013 via the
Corridors Development Plan Amendment.
1.
This plan allows for a 2 metre boundary and a 30 degree building
envelope. This plan is (30
degrees from 3 metres above ground level at the rear/zone boundary). This
is 50% above the rule and is significant for the following reasons
a.
It will set a precedent for every future submission making a mockery of
the years our community has spent in negotiating a 2 metre rule with the State
Minister of Planning. (See attached
newsletter history from Cr Michael Hewitson demonstrating the sincerity and
good faith of our negotiations. I was the Presiding officer for the Unley
Strategy and Development committee and argued against expanding our
metropolitan footprint obliterating our most productive agricultural land but
also for a set of rules the Community of Unley could live with given the State
Government's overall control.)
b.
For the residential zones abutting Unley Road including heritage Zones
setting a 3 metre rule by precedent reduces the sunlight hours in
mid-winter significantly as well as the residence next door feeling they are
living with overshadowing for light, sound and vision.
c.
Restriction of views from rear two storey townhouses but no overt
treatment of main apartment building given substantial separation distance.
d.
Retaining wall and fence above (3.2 metres above adjacent ground level)
for majority of rear site boundary.
e.
Unley has a vision for “green space, trees and sunlight. The removal of
a number of regulated and significant trees exist upon the site, most notably
on the south eastern corner accentuates the need to enforce the 2 metre 30
degree rule.
2.
A Seven storey building is breaking the Unley Development plan for a
maximum of five storeys. A 40% overbuild is again a precedent setting a
significant variation to the plan and zone.
I share with my co councillor for
Unley Ward the following concerns.
3.
Traffic management with particular reference to impacts on residents of
Hart Avenue and Opey Avenue, and access to Unley Road.
4.
Separation of private and commercial vehicle movements on site. The
developer should be responsible for any local traffic mitigation costs for work
required to control traffic during and after construction directly due to the
project.
5.
Lack of a Construction Statement detailing how building work,
including the excavation of the deep underground carpark and removal of spoil
will be managed while maintaining access for residents and the adjoining Metro
carpark to the south. Issues
that need to be resolved as part of a construction management plan need to
include heavy vehicles routes/queuing/standing areas (this will be a
significant issue given the extent of excavation) car parking for
tradespersons and construction hours
6.
Failure to commit to a dilapidation survey by an independent consultant
of all existing properties adjacent to the site, say within 60 metres,
including public infrastructure.
Conclusion
You are addressing the first plan under
the new planning rules for Unley Road. If this development is rejected in its
current form you will ensure the planning rules agreed to after much
discussion, consultation and compromise become real and enforceable. Our Unley
community would feel cheated with less.
With my good wishes
Michael
Michael Hewitson AM
Councillor City of Unley
08 82719731
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)