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
