Port Adelaide Enfield Council Adelaide Enfield Council Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment The Amendment - for Approval Approved by the Minister responsible

Port Adelaide Enfield Council

Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment

The Amendment - for Approval

Approved by the Minister responsible for the administration of the

Development Act 1993 pursuant to Section 25 (18), of the Development

Act 1993.

………………………………….... Minister’s Signature

Date………………………………

Light Industry Zone, Northfield Port Adelaide Enfield

Amendment Instructions Table

AMENDMENT INSTRUCTIONS TABLE

Name of Local Government Area: Port Adelaide Enfield

Name of Development Plan: Port Adelaide Enfield Council

Name of DPA: Light Industry Zone, Northfield

The following amendment instructions (at the time of drafting) relate to the Port Adelaide Enfield Development Plan consolidated on 26 September 2017.

Where amendments to this Development Plan have been authorised after the aforementioned consolidation date, consequential changes to the following amendment instructions will be made as necessary to give effect to this amendment.

Am

endm

ent I

nstru

ctio

n N

umbe

r Method of Change

Replace Delete Insert

Detail what is to be replaced or deleted or detail where new policy is to be inserted.

Objective (Obj) Principle of

Development Control (PDC) Desired

Character Statement (DCS) Map/Table No. Other (Specify)

Detail what material is to be inserted (if applicable, i.e., use for Insert or Replace methods of change only).

Is R

enum

berin

g re

quire

d (Y

/N)

Sub

sequ

ent P

olic

y cr

oss-

re

fere

nces

requ

iring

upd

ate

(Y/N

) if y

es p

leas

e sp

ecify

.

COUNCIL WIDE / GENERAL SECTION PROVISIONS (including figures and illustrations contained in the text)

Amendments required (Yes/No): Yes

General Section – Orderly and Sustainable Development

Insert within Principle of Development Control 8, a new dot point (xx) after dot point (ww) as follows:

(xx) Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access.

N N

General Section - Residential Development

Replace Principle of Development Control 48 with the contents of Attachment A

N N

Delete Principle of Development Control 49 Y N

ZONE AND/OR POLICY AREA AND/OR PRECINCT PROVISIONS (including figures and illustrations contained in the text)

Amendments required (Yes/No): Yes

Suburban Neighbourhood Zone

Insert Two new objectives, immediately after the existing Objective 5, which state:

6 Sensitive development designed to provide its occupants with acceptable levels of amenity and health protection when exposed to existing and future potential sources of noise and air emissions.

Y Renumber existing Objective 6 to Objective 8

N

Light Industry Zone, Northfield Port Adelaide Enfield Amendment Instructions Table

7 Sensitive development that does not unreasonably interfere with the operation of existing lawful commercial activity.

Replace Desired Character Statement with contents of Attachment B

N N

Insert The following new PDC immediately after existing PDC 2 3 The following additional types of development, or

combination thereof, are envisaged within the designated Neighbourhood Activity Centre identified on Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 – Northfield Land Use and Access

▪ advertisement ▪ bulky goods outlet ▪ child care centre ▪ consulting room ▪ office ▪ petrol filling station ▪ place of worship ▪ tourist accommodation.

Y Renumber all following PDC’s

Insert references to relevant concept figures in existing PDC 3 following clause (b) (c) Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access.

N N

Replace Existing PDC 10 with the following: 10 Development should be 3 storeys or less except

where: (a) in Northgate and located in a designated

activity centre or adjacent to public open space, where development should be 6 storeys or less

(b) in Northfield and located adjoining a zone for residential development, where development should be no more than 2 storeys.

N

Insert At end of existing PDC 12 clause (a) the following text: ‘or where adjacent to existing dwellings in an adjacent Residential Zone be no more than an additional storey (a total of 2 storeys)’

N N

Insert Immediately following existing PDC 12 (which will be renumbered), the following two PDC’s 14 Residential development should be designed and/or

sited such that existing noise levels associated with the lawful operation of existing land uses in adjacent zones, precincts, policy areas and the like, achieve the relevant requirements of the Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007 (the Policy) for an existing noise source. Achieving the internal goal noise levels of the Policy through the use of acoustic treatments in the façade of the dwelling/s is consistent with the Policy and this provision.

Y Renumber all following PDC’s

N



15 Any commercial development should be designed and/or sited such that noise from its operation achieves the relevant requirements of the Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007 (the Policy) at all existing dwellings, and at land in an area set aside for residential land use as its primary purpose within the Zone. When considering land in an area set aside for residential land use as its primary purpose within the Zone, achieving the internal goal noise levels of the Policy through the use of acoustic treatments in the façade of the future dwelling/s is consistent with the Policy and this provision, subject to a suitable mechanism for the inclusion of that treatment.

Replace At the start of existing PDC 13, word "Vehicle" with the the text: "In Northgate, vehicle"

N

Replace Existing PDC 19 with the contents of Attachment C Y

Replace existing PDC 27 with the following: Development within designated activity centres identified on Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access should have a zero or minimal setback to the primary road frontage.

N N

Insert At the end of PDC 29(b) the following new PDC XX Land division in the area identified on Concept Plan

Map PAdE/51 – Northfield Land Use and Access should result in an allotment pattern that includes a well-planned and connected road network, that encourages pedestrian and cycle movement and includes measures to discourage through traffic, such as limiting the continuous length of access streets.

Y Renumber following PDC from 29 to 30

Light Industry Zone, Northfield Port Adelaide Enfield Amendment Instructions Table

Insert At the end of PDC 30(b) the following new subheading and PDC Infrastructure Co-ordination - Northfield XX Retail or commercial development or significant

residential development should only occur once the following road and access infrastructure improvements are either provided, or a legally binding agreement has been executed for the provision of those infrastructure improvements, (or alternative infrastructure improvements that achieve the same outcome have been provided or a legally binding agreement has been executed for the provision of these alternative infrastructure improvements) for the construction of the following infrastructure:

(a) upgrade to the Grand Junction Road/Briens

Road intersection (b) new accesses to and from Briens Road and

Grand Junction Road as shown in Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access

(c) new signalised pedestrian crossing for Briens Road as shown in Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access

(d) new public road as shown in Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access.

N

Replace Procedural Matters with Contents of Attachment D

TABLES

Amendments required (Yes/No): No

MAPPING (Structure Plans, Overlays, Enlargements, Zone Maps, Policy Area & Precinct Maps)

Amendments required (Yes/No): YES

Map Reference Table – Zone Maps Sub-Table

Delete PAdE/23 from Light Industry Zone N N

Insert PAdE/23 in Suburban Neighbourhood Zone N N

Map Reference Table – Concept Plan Maps Sub Table

Insert After the last row: Northfield Land Use and Access PadE/51

N N

Map(s)

Replace The following Zone map and Policy Area map with the corresponding figures in Attachment E:

• Zone Map PAdE/23

N N



• Policy Area Map PAdE/23

Insert The Overlay figures in Attachment F, following Overlay Map PAdE/23 Hertiage, detailed as:

• Overlay Map PAdE/23 Noise and Air Emissions; and

• Overlay Map PAdE/23 Affordable Housing.

N N

Insert • The Concept Plan figure in Attachment G, following Concept Plan Map PAdE/49 Residential East, detailed as:

• Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 Northfield Land Use and Access

N N

Light Industry Zone, Northfield DPA Port Adelaide Enfield Council

Attachment A

Attachment A

48 Development should be designed and sited to meet ambient and internal noise levels required by the current Environment Protection (Noise) Policy.


Attachment B

Attachment B

This mixed use zone will be developed to provide a wide variety of dwelling types, at a range of densities, established around local and neighbourhood scale activity centres. The average net residential density will be in the order of 45-70 dwellings per hectare across the zone with pockets of development that may be lesser or greater than this target in order to achieve an overall average. Higher residential densities are contemplated adjacent Hampstead Road, Grand Junction Road and along public transport routes, adjacent larger areas of public open space or in mixed use development within the designated activity centres. The layout of the area will be developed in accordance with Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access or Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access in order to provide equitable access to public open space, shops, education facilities and a range of community services. The site occupied by the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre represents a significant land holding within the zone. The Centre currently provides regional level health care services. Opportunities to improve the integration between the centre and surrounding land uses is supported through the development of improved pedestrian, cycling and vehicular linkages to adjacent land parcels. Form and Character The built form will have a strong contemporary urban character where buildings will address the street or adjacent civic or open space and will have minimal setbacks which will contribute to passive surveillance. Private open space may be provided at the front of dwellings where the design of front fencing and landscaping will encourage surveillance of public spaces but also provide privacy for residents. A variety of materials, colours and façade articulation will be used to provide interest and amenity. Street trees will provide shade as well as soften the built form. The dominant character of the zone is expected to be low and medium density built forms of up to 3 storeys. Within Northgate taller buildings (up to 6 storeys), are envisaged either as part of or directly adjacent to mixed use activity centres which are to be located along public transport routes and adjacent open space. Within Northgate, the development will take advantage of scenic views of the city in the arrangement of streets, open spaces, linear space and the orientation of buildings. The historical values of the previous agricultural and research uses will be reflected in the arrangement of open space to protect natural features and reflected in public art. The heritage building associated with the site currently occupied by the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre, will be adapted to maintain its heritage qualities and development will be encouraged to locate to the rear and behind the front facade of this building. Buildings adjacent to the heritage building will be sympathetic to the heritage nature in their design. Within Northfield, residential amenity will be protected from overlooking and overshadowing. Future development will protect existing dwellings in adjoining zones from potential noise and air quality impacts. Where the activity centre interfaces with existing dwellings acoustic and air quality treatment will be provided to ensure that the amenity of these dwellings accords with the relevant criteria. Good building design will assist in reducing potential noise and air quality impacts. Impacts on the adjoining zones will also be addressed through the use of appropriate building envelopes, transition of building heights, design and location of windows and balconies, and the use of physical barriers and landscaping. Stormwater management measures within Northfield, including potential construction of detention basins throughout the subject land will ensure that stormwater flows to downstream areas do not result in inundation. Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) techniques will be used to improve the quality of stormwater leaving the site. Along Grand Junction Road, the division of land for residential purposes will provide for a landscaping strip of at least 1.5 metres wide to allow for landscaping between residential allotments and the road. Residential development will be designed to be visually attractive from Grand Junction Road. The upper storey levels of development greater than single storey will ensure that form, massing, articulation, fenestration and materials are designed such that Grand Junction Road is addressed as a primary street


Attachment B

frontage. All vehicular access will occur internally within the site for the dwellings fronting onto Grand Junction Road. Along Briens Road, landscaping will include taller canopied trees of a height that does not screen the commercial tenancies within the activity centre. A landscape buffer of at least 1.5 metres wide will be sited between the Briens Road interface and car parking areas. A landscape buffer will also be provided to the Laing Street interface, and between existing residential development and future residential development on the former Heavymech site. Housing The zone will offer an alternative form of lifestyle and a range of dwelling types to provide greater choice and variety in the regional context including:

(a) a minimum of 15 per cent of residential dwellings for affordable housin

(b) a greater proportion and range of smaller dwelling types on smaller allotments that have access to open space, local and community services and public transport

(c) a range of densities, including higher density near centres, public transport routes and open space

(d) dwellings designed to cater for different household sizes, life cycle stages and housing preferences.

Housing diversity, particularly the provision of smaller housing types, is a priority for the zone and a range of housing types will be delivered through innovative land division, allotment sizes, layout, design, access and parking arrangements. A variety of setbacks are envisaged to create a range of streetscape types, although some small pockets may have minimum setbacks where the public and private realm is carefully pre- planned. Activity Centres and Non-residential Uses

A neighbourhood activity centre and four local activity centres are envisaged within the zone in accordance with Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access and Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 - Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre . A neighbourhood activity centre is also envisaged within the zone in accordance with Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access. These activity centres will provide the greatest intensity of land use and will generally comprise multi-storey, mixed use buildings where the street level uses are primarily non-residential. Upper floor land uses will primarily be residential with some complementary non-residential uses such as offices or consulting rooms. The only exception to this will be single storey non-residential uses (eg kiosk) that may be integrated within open space settings, within the local activity centres on public transport routes as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access, where the intention is to create active use and appreciation of high quality open space areas. Neighbourhood Activity Centre – Envisaged Uses

Development within the neighbourhood activity centre will be in keeping with that of a larger neighbourhood activity centre providing a mix of:

▪ retail (including an expansion of the existing supermarket north of Folland Avenue) ▪ weekly convenience shopping ▪ local services (eg. hair dresser, post office, chemist) ▪ small offices and businesses ▪ restaurants ▪ hotel (except in the Neighbourhood Activity Centre - Northfield) ▪ retail showroom ▪ civic uses that meet the needs of the local community.

The neighbourhood activity centre will have the greatest level of non-residential activity and will continue to cater for the needs of surrounding areas as well as the needs of the community within the zone.


Attachment B

Neighbourhood Activity Centre – Northgate The centre will have a contemporary main street focus along Folland Avenue with shared parking located between the existing shopping centre and new buildings fronting Folland Ave. Larger retail uses such as a supermarket will be located north of Folland Avenue allowing for predominantly convenience shops and services to establish south of Folland Avenue. Development within the neighbourhood activity centre orientated toward Folland Avenue should be set back a sufficient distance to provide allowance for shady walkways with verandas and outdoor seating areas. Shared car parking areas including cycle parking and short-term parking areas will be located in the area between buildings. Attractive walkways should be developed along Fosters and Folland Ave frontages and connected to parking areas via pedestrian arcades and plazas. The public realm of the neighbourhood activity centre will include landscaping comprising of established upper canopy trees consistent with the scale and height of buildings. The public realm will also feature a civic plaza highlighting an iconic civic feature or monument. A landscaped buffer is located along Fosters Road and at the interface of the centre and Greengate Close screening the activities of the centre and the built form from adjoining residential development. Neighbourhood Activity Centre – Northfield The centre will be designed so that buildings associated with a range of land uses such as consulting rooms, offices, petrol filling station, retail showrooms and service trade premises are located within the footprint sites shown in Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access in close proximity to the site boundary along Briens Road. Large retail uses such as a supermarket and its ancillary specialty shops will be located away from Briens Road in the large footprint site shown in Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access. A shared car parking area will be provided with convenient access to service these uses. The gross floor area associated with the retail component of the centre will be in the order of 6000 square metres. Fast food outlets incorporating a drive-through facility, gaming venues and hotels will not be developed in this centre given the proximity of the adjacent school on the opposite side of Briens Road. Fast food outlets should be limited to ‘walk-in’ or ‘dine-in’ facilities situated within a group of shops. Development will facilitate pedestrian movement through the site with the incorporation of an attractively landscaped pedestrian link from Briens Road to the residential areas along Grand Junction Road. Shared parking areas will service all non-residential land uses. An attractive public realm along Briens Road will be created through the use of landscaping. The centre will protect the amenity of surrounding residential dwellings through the careful placement and screening of mechanical plant equipment, acoustic fencing along residential interfaces and restriction of activities relating to loading between the “night-time” hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am. The public realm of the neighbourhood activity centre will include landscaping comprising of established upper canopy trees consistent with the scale and height of buildings. A landscaped buffer is envisaged at the interface with the adjoining Residential Zone on the northern boundary of the zone as depicted within Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access. Local Activity Centres – Envisaged Uses Development within a local activity centre will be integrated with surrounding residential uses and areas of open space providing a mix of:

▪ daily convenience shopping

▪ small offices and business

▪ coffee shops and cafes (providing outdoor eating places).

Each local activity centre may provide in the order of 500 to 1000 square metres of total retail floor space and comprise smaller tenancies that cater for a mix of uses which establish the activity centre as a day to day focal point for the local community and local employees. Local activity centres may also be developed for mixed use and residential purposes. These local activity centres are located to encourage access via a network of pedestrian and bicycle linkages as well as being


Attachment B

adjacent public transit stops and will be integrated with public open space to provide a high amenity setting and support active public open spaces. Active frontages within activity centres will be achieved by a variety of design solutions including ground floor uses that have a clear street presence through setbacks that enable buildings to connect to public areas and spaces. Features and activities that attract people to activity centres are encouraged, such as frequent doors and display windows, retail shopfronts and outdoor eating or dining areas spilling out onto footpaths and public spaces. A distinctive urban form, adjacent to and within activity centres, will frame squares and courtyards and reinforce the main-street theme. Where possible, development will provide shade and shelter to footpaths by providing verandas, awnings and overhanging building design. Allied health services, community facilities and recreation and cultural activities are also contemplated within the zone, to complement and expand on services currently provided on the site occupied by the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre. These uses are envisaged on land in and around the current Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre. The establishment of these uses will support the integration of activity and mix of uses desired along the Hampstead Road end of the zone. Access The zone will provide a high level of internal and external connectivity giving residents in the zone and those from surrounding areas access to local and neighbourhood services and facilities, key destinations, local activity centres and open space. A priority will be given to walking, cycling and public transport connections and integrated into the layout of the zone based on Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles and Healthy by Design principles to achieve improved outcomes in relation to healthy lifestyles, social equity and affordable lifestyles. Street patterns and walkways will be integral to subdivision and neighbourhood design with the aim to minimise the need for local vehicle trips, reduce travel distances and promote low vehicle speeds in local streets. These networks will encourage active travel such as walking and cycling to local services and facilities. Design for pedestrian and cyclist safety, convenience and amenity will take priority over design for cars and car parking including reduced speeds and reduced on-street car parking locations. Visitor parking may be provided on-street within 50 metres of the relevant residence and up to 50 per cent of customer car parking may be provided on-street within 100 metres of the relevant non-residential use. The balance of non- residential parking will be sited behind buildings, where possible, to reinforce the pedestrian feel. Access – Northgate The major collector road identified on Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access. will be established as the pre-eminent movement corridor through the zone and will be identifiable as a landscaped boulevard. The minor local access road network will connect the key features of the zone including centres, schools, key open space areas and recreation and community hubs. Local roads will have a more intimate feel and support walking and cycling with lower traffic volumes and speeds, smaller street setbacks, consistent street tree planting, architectural variety, a pedestrian scale of development and street lighting that meets relevant Australian Standards. Hampstead Road is a strategic route where the function of the road as a major heavy vehicle transport corridor will be protected through minimal on-street vehicle parking and access points. Where appropriate access will be provided via secondary road frontages and rear access ways as identified on Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access. Controlled pedestrian crossing points will be focussed and consolidated at key locations. Access – Northfield Grand Junction Road is a strategic route that functions as a major heavy vehicle transport corridor. The Grand Junction Road/Briens Road intersection is strategically important, and as such, any future development upon the land must ensure it functions efficiently. This intersection will be augmented through a range of infrastructure works prior to any significant residential development or centre becoming operational upon the land. A new signalised intersection and public road will be provided adjacent to Laing


Attachment B

Street, which will provide a dedicated left turn and signalised right turn onto Briens Road and a signalised pedestrian crossing. Access to Briens Road will be limited to this new signalised access and an unsignalised access at the southern end of the site. There will be no other direct vehicle access to Briens Road. James Avenue will be extended to the south-west and Laing Street closed to Briens Road. A roundabout will guide traffic at the new intersection of James Street and the new public road adjacent to Laing Street. Access arrangements will be established as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access. A thoroughfare through the area will facilitate direct vehicle access for both commercial and residential vehicles from Briens Road. Grand Junction Road will provide a secondary access into the land, however, no direct vehicle access will be provided from individual dwellings. The future road network and retail and commercial development will be designed to prevent 'rat running' between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road. Whilst there will be connections into the existing local roads of Holt Street and Wicklow Street, the primary purpose of these connections will be to connect into the existing and future residential community. Connections from Holt Steet and Wicklow Street will be designed to restrict direct vehicular access into the Activity Centre. Local roads will have a more intimate feel and support walking and cycling with lower traffic volumes and speeds, smaller street setbacks, consistent street tree planting, architectural variety and a pedestrian scale of development. For Wicklow Street, the local road network and allotment layout will be designed to establish an eastward aligned road extension that will provide convenient access to residential development and restrict direct access to retail and commercial uses. Open Space - Northgate A wide variety of public open spaces will be included in the 12.5 per cent provision and will range in size from intimate pocket parks of 200 square metres, to 2500 square metres as well as larger areas of up to 2 hectares and including linear connections that facilitate community interaction, exercise and active access between destinations. Pocket parks will be established and linked by walkways and paths, providing connectivity and access between them. The number of smaller pocket parks should be consistent with that indicated on the Concept Plan and each park should be in close proximity to residential allotments and provide a high standard of design and amenity. An open space area will be located within a reasonable walking distance of approximately 300 metres of all residences and will be designed to a high standard of quality, safety and amenity. Collectively, the public open spaces in the zone will contain a variety of facilities that encourage active use, passive use, fitness activity, play and social activity. Larger open spaces will support Water Sensitive Urban Design principles and dual use for stormwater water management as identified on Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access. Water Sensitive Urban Design systems will be integrated throughout the area at the neighbourhood, street, site and building level. Storage of stormwater will improve the aesthetic and functional value of public open spaces, including public access ways and greenways. These open spaces which incorporate stormwater will be appear in a number of forms including green reserves, spaces with permanent water bodies and areas where temporary inundation associated with high rainfall events will create informal temporary watercourses. For those larger areas of open space, endeavours to manage stormwater impacts should ideally result in useable active areas where permanent stormwater infrastructure (detention basins) are limited in number or preferably not required. Stormwater management in open space will be designed to address issues of access and safety and include facilities that enable some level of use or appreciation during wet periods. Stormwater management will be planned at a catchment rather than stage level with open space and stormwater generally distributed in accordance with Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access. Site Contamination Site Contamination - Northfield Development of land with a known history of a potentially contaminating activity, from former industrial uses, will occur once the site has been assessed and remediated to the standard necessary to ensure it is safe and suitable for the proposed uses, including sensitive uses such as residential development.


Attachment B

Land Division - Northfield Land division will result in an area designed to provide pedestrian access to public open spaces, recreation areas, shops and community services. Residential land division will be developed in a north-south / east-west grid design to facilitate allotments and dwellings that primarily orientate north-south to allow for passive solar orientation. Where allotments are orientated east-west, passive solar orientation for living areas should be considered through innovative dwelling design. Land division and building orientation will minimise the impact of garaging and driveway crossovers on the streetscape.


Attachment B

Attachment C

19 The walls of detached, semi-detached and row dwellings should be setback from rear boundaries, except where the rear boundary adjoins an accessway, or where within Northfield, adjoins a zone for residential development, in accordance with the following parameters:

Allotment size (square metres)

Ground floor minimum setback (metres)

Second storey minimum setback (metres)

Third storey or more minimum setback (metres)

≤ 300 0 0 0 plus any increase in height over 6 metres

> 300 3 3 3 plus any increase in height over 6 metres

20 The walls of dwellings and residential flat buildings within Northfield where adjoining a zone for

residential development should be setback from rear boundaries in accordance with the following parameters:

Allotment size (square metres)

Ground floor minimum setback (metres)

Second storey minimum setback (metres)

≤ 300 4 8

> 300 4 8

Light Industry Zone, Northfield Port Adelaide Enfield Council

Attachment D

Attachment D

PROCEDURAL MATTERS Complying Development

Complying developments are prescribed in Schedule 4 of the Development Regulations 2008. In addition, the following forms of development (except where the development is non-complying) are complying:

A change of use to a shop, office, consulting room or any combination of these uses where all of the following are achieved:

(a) the area to be occupied by the proposed development is located in an existing building and is

currently used as a shop, office, consulting room or any combination of these uses

(b) the development is located inside any of the following area(s):

- Neighbourhood Activity Centre Concept Boundary shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 – Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre

(c) the building is not a State heritage place

(d) it will not involve any alterations or additions to the external appearance of a local heritage place as viewed from a public road or public space

(e) if the proposed change of use is for a shop that primarily involves the handling and sale of foodstuffs, it achieves either (i) or (ii):

(i) all of the following:

(A) areas used for the storage and collection of refuse are sited at least 10 metres from any Residential Zone boundary or a dwelling (other than a dwelling directly associated with the proposed shop)

(B) if the shop involves the heating and cooking of foodstuffs in a commercial kitchen and is within 30 metres of any Residential Zone boundary or a dwelling (other than a dwelling directly associated with the proposed shop), an exhaust duct and stack (chimney) exists or is capable of being installed for discharging exhaust emissions

(ii) the development is the same or substantially the same as a development, which has previously been granted development approval under the Development Act 1993 or any subsequent Act and Regulations, and the development is to be undertaken and operated in accordance with the conditions attached to the previously approved development

(f) if the change in use is for a shop with a gross leasable floor area greater than 250 square metres and has direct frontage to an arterial road, it achieves either (i) or (ii):

(i) the primary vehicle access (being the access where the majority of vehicles access / egress the site of the proposed development) is from a road that is not an arterial road

(ii) the development is located on a site that operates as an integrated complex containing two or more tenancies (and which may comprise more than one building) where facilities for off-street vehicle parking, vehicle loading and unloading, and the storage and collection of refuse are shared

(g) off-street vehicular parking is provided in accordance with the rate(s) specified in Table PAdE/5 – Off Street Vehicle Parking Requirements or the desired minimum rate in Table PAdE/5A – Off


Attachment D

Street Vehicle Parking Requirements for Designated Areas (whichever table applies) to the nearest whole number, except in any one or more of the following circumstances:

(i) the building is a local heritage place

(ii) the development is the same or substantially the same as a development, which has previously been granted development approval under the Development Act 1993 or any subsequent Act and Regulations, and the number and location of parking spaces is the same or substantially the same as that which was previously approved

(iii) the development is located on a site that operates as an integrated complex containing two or more tenancies (and which may comprise more than one building) where facilities for off-street vehicle parking, vehicle loading and unloading, and the storage and collection of refuse are shared.

Non-complying Development

Development (including building work, a change in the use of land or division of an allotment) for the following is non-complying:

Form of Development Exceptions

Bulky goods outlet Except within the Concept Boundary as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 - Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre or Neighbourhood Activity Centre as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access.

Crematorium

Dairy

Farming

Fuel depot

Horse keeping

Horticulture

Hotel Except within the Concept Boundary as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 - Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre.

Industry

Intensive animal keeping

Licensed gaming venue Except within the Concept Boundary as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 - Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre.

Public service depot

Road transport terminal

Service trade premises

Shop in the form of a restaurant or take-away food store with drive-through facility

Except within the Concept Boundary as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 - Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre.

Light Industry Zone, Northfield Port Adelaide Enfield Council

Attachment D

Form of Development Exceptions

Stock slaughter works

Warehouse

Waste reception, storage, treatment or disposal

Public Notification

Categories of public notification are prescribed in Schedule 9 of the Development Regulations 2008. Further, the following forms of development (except where the development is classified as non-complying) are designated:

Category 1 Category 2

Advertisement All forms of development not listed as Category 1, except for a shop or group of shops where it is located outside the Concept Boundary as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 - Neighbourhood Activity Centre or outside the Neighbourhood Activity Centre as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access and it has a maximum gross lease able floor area of more than 500 square metres.

Aged persons accommodation

All forms of development that are ancillary and in association with residential development

Community centre

Consulting room

Dwelling

Educational establishment

Nursing home

Office

Place of worship

Personal service establishment

Pre-school

Primary School

Residential flat building

Retirement village


Attachment D

Category 1 Category 2

Shop or group of shops where it is located within the Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre Concept Boundary as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/47 - Northgate Land Use and Access or within the Neighbourhood Activity Centre as shown on Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access and it has a maximum gross lease able floor area of no more than 500 square metres.

Supported accommodation


Attachment E

Attachment E

Zone Map PAdE/23 Policy Area Map PAdE/23

BH

R

LCe

SN

MOSSMOSS

C

CO

C

O

C

C

O

OO

O

C

O

O C

O

C

O

C

O

O

O

C

OO

O

O

O

OC

OO

C

O

OO

O O

O

O

O

O

C

CO

CO

COC

C

O

C

CO

O

C

O

O

OO

C C

C

O

O

C

C

O

OCO

O

C

O C

C

C

C O

SalisburyCouncil

PORT ADELAIDE ENFIELD COUNCIL

Zone Map PAdE/23

0 500

MAP PAdE/1 Adjoins

MAP PAdE/32 Adjoins

sniojdA 22/Ed

AP PA

M sni o

j dA

42/ E

dAP

PA

M

Zones

C

S5813

A8

A73

A10

Q10

A75

A25

A74

A12

A91

A4001

A282

A21

A211

Q9

A12

A96

A1

Q14

A72

Q11

A87

A34

A20

A545

A53

A25

A17A102

S5812

A4

A1

Q15

MAGAZIN E

D

R

GUNY A CR

TWIN

ST

CO

XTC

EE

AS

TA V

HARVE Y AV

NORTH AV

STI

RL I

NG

ST

JUSTIN AV

GAR

NAU T

AV

SWANBOURN E DR

CULBA

ARAV

BR

OW

N S

T

HOOD SRD

BINDER

I CR

MORNIN

GTON TCE

ROYAL AV

TOW

ER

CT

PRISCILL A RD

ALF

R D

ES

T

ELING A AV

SOUTH TCE

BOTT

RELL A

V

KALU

NG A

AV

YUTAR AAV

MALBARU AV

HOL T ST

MELROS E AV

JEAN

ST

FAIRVIEW TCE

NEVILLS ET

MO

NTR

OS

EAV

WALTON AV

AUSTRAL AV

RA

DFO

RD

AV

GU

ILD

FOR

D S

T AR

THU

R S

T

ETON C

MN

SE

VE

NH

ILL WY

WE

ST B

RO

O K

T C

E

LANG ST

HOWARD RD

REAGAL ST

NORTON ST

LEOPOLD AV

DESM

OND AV

SANDSTON E AV

SOUT A H V

STRA

WSO

N RD

ELV A AV

KH

AN A CT

LIN K ST

GR

A YAV

CONRAD ST

MERYL AV

ELAI

N EAV

WIC

KLO

W S

T

MALKAR A

AV

HANC

OC K

AV

DRU

C E

AV

JAM

E SAV

BRIC

KWO

R KPL

BLACKSMITH AV

H EATHCOT E AV

HARRISON GR

DAVID

ST

WIRUND A CT

NA

RA

MB VA I

JOLL YAV

BARNE S AV

LOW

AN DR

MYAR A AV

BR

OO

KF IE

L D CCT

RAIL

WA Y CT

RO

W E

A V

THELM

AAV

PE

T R

EB

RO

WN

DR

CLEA

VER

AV

CH ELLAS

TON

AV

STOCKAD ED

R

DORO

TH Y

ST

TALLE RING A

V

VIC

KE

R S

VIM

YP

DE

STONEWELL CMN

CAN

N A

RD

WE

ST AV

P R A T T

A

V

WR I G H T

R DB

RI E

NS

RD

G R A N D J U N C T I O N R D

BR

I DG

E

RD

HA

MP

ST

EA

D

RD

SalisburyCouncil

64

1818

55


Policy Area Map PAdE/23

0 500m

Lamberts Conformal Conic Projection, GDA94

Policy Area Boundary

Development Plan Boundary

Policy Area185564

RecreationComprehensive DevelopmentResidential East

MAP PAdE/1 Adjoins

MAP PAdE/32 Adjoins

sniojdA 22/Ed

AP PA

M sni o

j dA

42/ E

dAP

PA

M


Attachment F

Attachment F

Overlay Map PAdE/23 Noise and Air Emissions Overlay Map PAdE/23 Affordable Housing.

C

CO

C

O

C

C

OO

O

O

C

C

O

O

O

O

C

O

OC

O

O

O

O

O

OO

O O

O

O

O

CO

O

C

C O

O

OO

C

CO

OO

C

COC

C

C

CO

C

CO

O

C OC

O

O

OO

C

C

C

O

C

C

O

OC

O

OC

C

C

CO

C

C O

SalisburyCouncil


Overlay Map PAdE/23

0 500

MAP PAdE/1 Adjoins

MAP PAdE/32 Adjoins

sniojdA 22/Ed

AP PA

M sni o

j dA

42/ E

dAP

PA

M

NOISE AND AIR EMISSIONS

C

CO

C

O

C

C

OO

O

O

C

C

O

O

O

O

C

O

OC

O

O

O

O

O

OO

O O

O

O

O

CO

O

C

C O

O

OO

C

CO

OO

C

COC

C

C

CO

C

CO

O

C OC

O

O

OO

C

C

C

O

C

C

O

OC

O

OC

C

C

CO

C

C O

SalisburyCouncil


Overlay Map PAdE/23

0 500

MAP PAdE/1 Adjoins

MAP PAdE/32 Adjoins

sniojdA 22/Ed

AP PA

M sni o

j dA

42/ E

dAP

PA

M

AFFORDABLE HOUSING


Attachment G

Attachment G

Concept Plan Map PAdE/51 - Northfield Land Use and Access


Concept Plan Map PAdE/51

0 120

NORTHFIELDLAND USE AND ACCESS

CO

O

O

C O

Residential Development

Proposed Roundabout

Proposed Road Closure

Retail and Commercial Footprint

Vegetative Buffer

New Signalised Intersection and Signalised Pedestrian Crossing

Primary Vehicle Access

Acoustic Treatment

Neighbourhood Activity Centre

Vehicle Access from individual allotments excluded

New public roadOpen Space / Reserve

Port Adelaide Enfield

Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment

Summary of Consultation and Proposed Amendments (SCPA) Report

Port Adelaide Enfield Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1

Consultation ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Consultation Process ....................................................................................................................... 1 Public Notification ........................................................................................................................... 1

Public and Agency Submissions .......................................................................................................... 1 Public Submissions .......................................................................................................................... 2 Agency Submissions ....................................................................................................................... 2 Review of Submissions and Public Meeting ................................................................................... 2

Additional Matters and Investigations ................................................................................................. 3

Timeframe Report ................................................................................................................................ 3

CEO’s Certification .............................................................................................................................. 3

Summary of Recommended Changes to the Amendment following Consultation ............................. 3

Attachment A – Summary and Response to Public and Agency Submissions ........................ 5

Attachment B – Summary and Response to Public Meeting Submissions ............................. 67

Attachment C – Timeframe Report ............................................................................................. 78

Attachment D – Schedule 4A Certificate .................................................................................... 81

Attachment E – Schedule 4B Certificate .................................................................................... 83

Attachment F – Additional Matters and Investigations ............................................................. 84

iii


SCPA Report

Introduction This report is provided in accordance with Section 25(13) of the Development Act 1993 to identify matters raised during the consultation period and any recommended alterations to the amendment. The report also provides details of the consultation process undertaken by Council. The SCPA Report should be read in conjunction with the consultation version of the DPA. Where relevant, any new matters arising from the consultation process are contained in this Report. The Amendment reflects the recommendations of Council contained in this Report.

Consultation Consultation Process

Statutory consultation with agencies and the public was undertaken in accordance with DPA process B (consultation approval not required) and in accordance with Section 25(6) of the Development Act 1993; Regulations 10 and 11 of the Development Regulations 2008; and the agreed Statement of Intent. The following Local Member(s) of Parliament were consulted on the DPA:

• Hon. John Rau; • Hon. Tony Piccolo; • Hon. Stephen Campbell Mulligan; • Hon. Jennifer Rankine; and • Hon. Tom Koutsantonis.

No comments were received. The consultation period ran from 22 September 2016 to 18 November 2016. Public Notification

Notices were published in the ‘The Advertiser’ on 22 September 2016, the Government Gazette on 22 September 2016 and the City North Messenger, Weekly Times Messenger and Portside Messenger on 21 September 2016. The DPA documents were also on display at Council’s service centres and libraries. A copy of the DPA was forwarded to the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure on 23 September 2016. Property owners and occupants in the vicinity of the subject land were also written to directly.

Public and Agency Submissions

1

Port Adelaide Enfield Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment SCPA Report

Public Submissions

37 public submissions, including two from adjoining Councils, were received. Key issues raised in the submissions are summarised as follows:

(a) Traffic and the opening/closure of particular roads

(b) Site contamination

(c) Retail and commercial space:

• no need for rezoning • catchment area adopted is improperly defined • insufficient need for development • centre trading levels are under-estimated • DPA would generate detrimental trading impacts on existing businesses and centres • centre size is excessive • centre size not supported by policy • inappropriate land uses opposite school • inappropriate amenity impacts • inappropriate public notification categories

(d) Residential interface

(e) School interface and student and pedestrian safety A report on each submission (summary, comments, and action taken in response to each submission) is included in Attachment A. Agency Submissions

Six responses were received from agencies. Key issues raised in the responses are summarised as follows:

(a) Interface between land uses;

(b) Site contamination;

(c) Stormwater management and Water Sensitive Urban Design;

(d) Traffic management, parking and location of vehicle access;

(e) Student and pedestrian safety and wellbeing;

(f) Alterations to wording within the Desired Character Statement.

Review of Submissions and Public Meeting

Copies of all submissions were made available for public review from 24 November 2016 on the Council website and at the Council offices.

2


SCPA Report

Twelve written submissions requested to be heard, and a public meeting was held on 6 December 2016. A copy of the proceedings and a summary of verbal submissions made at the public meeting are included in Attachment B

Additional Matters and Investigations The following additional matters were identified and the following investigations conducted after the consultation process:

(a) response to the submissions with a focus on retail by Deep End Services;

(b) the extent of retail development (gross floor area, measured via aerial survey) located within Neighbourhood, District or Regional Centre and Suburban Neighbourhood developments within the Port Adelaide Enfield Council;

(c) response to the submissions with a focus on traffic by Wallbridge and Gilbert.

(d) response to concerns about issues associated with proximity of adjacent school A copy of additional investigations and documents is provided in Attachment F

Timeframe Report A summary of the timeframe of the DPA process relative to the agreed Statement of Intent timetable is located at Attachment C. Delay(s) occurred because:

(a) the settling of commercial agreements between the DPA proponents for the funding of the technical studies and draft document production took longer than expected. This, in turn, delayed the ratification of the Deed of Agreement between the DPA proponents and Council for the private funding of the DPA; and

(b) the preparation of the technical reports to inform the required investigations took longer to prepare than anticipated and were provided to Council by the proponents later than expected.

CEO’s Certification The consultation process has been conducted and the final amendment prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Act and Regulations as confirmed by the CEO’s Certifications provided in Attachment D (Schedule 4A Certificate) and Attachment E (Schedule 4B Certificate).

Summary of Recommended Changes to the Amendment following Consultation The following is a summary of the changes recommended to the Amendment following consultation and in response to public submissions and/or agency comments:

3

Port Adelaide Enfield Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment SCPA Report

(a) amendments to the Concept Plan that include: • confirmation of a new public road adjacent to Laing St; • designation of an area for public open space; • relocation of access to Stirling Street further to the south; and • designation of additional areas for acoustic treatment.

(b) changes to the Desired Character Statement that provide additional guidance with respect to: • envisaged uses for the footprint / pad sites closest to Briens Rd, including clarifying that

these sites are not intended for drive-through fast food outlets; • indicating that hotels and licensed gaming venues are not intended uses; • reinforcing that key road infrastructure should be in place before significant land use

proposals are established; • discouraging 'rat-running' between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road; • strengthening landscaping along Briens Road and Grand Junction Road; • land division design; • air quality; and • water sensitive urban design.

(c) revision to new Principle of Development Control (PDC) 3 to remove "hotel" from the type of development envisaged in the Northfield Neighbourhood Activity Centre;

(d) amendment to existing PDC 10 of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone regarding building heights to help manage the interface with existing residential development;

(e) amendment to PDC 13 of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone to confirm that the zone specific car parking rates only apply to Northgate and not Northfield;

(f) amendment to PDC 19 of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone and introduction of an additional PDC regarding rear set-backs for new residential development where adjacent to residential development in an adjoining zone;

(g) Introduction of a new PDC regarding infrastructure co-ordination with respect to intersection and access upgrades;

(h) amendment to the list of non-complying development in the Procedural Matters section of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone to include hotel, licensed gaming venue and shop in the form of a restaurant or take-away food store with drive-through facility (except where in the Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre);

(i) Changes to the public notification list to remove the previously listed uses Bulky Goods, Child Care Centre, Hotel and Petrol filling station from the list of Category 1 development;

(j) Removal of PDC 49 (DPTI request); and

(k) alteration of text within the DPA document to ensure it complies with DEWNR recommendations regarding stormwater and water sensitive urban design.

4


Attachment A — Summary and Response to Public and Agency Submissions

Attachment A – Summary and Response to Public and Agency Submissions

Report on each public submission received (including summary, comments and action taken in response) Sub No. Name Issue Response Suggested Policy Change

1 Hale No land for affordable housing

State Government policy requires that new development provide 15% affordable housing.

No change

No fast food outlets It is noted that the proximity of such facilities to schools is a matter of public policy interest in South Australia, other states and also in other countries. A number of educators, health professionals and community members are concerned about potential negative impacts on young people that may be linked to such proximity and accessibility. It is noted that there is no other school in the Council area with a major fast food outlet directly opposite it. Research indicates that the closest distance is 165 metres and without direct line of sight. Roma Mitchell School and the Department for Education and Child Development have also lodged submissions expressing concern about the potential for such outlets to be established. Aside from concerns about health impacts on young people, these submissions also express concerns about the potential for related difficulties with respect to student behaviour and safety. Recognising that seeking to control the location of such facilities is not without contention and that there are limitations in the SA planning system with respect to regulating specific types of shops, the Desired Character Statement and the Non-complying Development list have been amended to discourage these uses in the form of drive through restaurants or take-away food stores.

Desired Character Statement amended to: • encourage use of pad sites

fronting Briens Road for more commercially orientated uses and

• require that shops not be in the form of restaurants or take-away food stores with a drive-through facility.

Non-complying Development list amended to include shop in the form of a restaurant or take-away food store with drive-through facility.

5

Port Adelaide Enfield Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment Attachment A — Summary and Response to Public and Agency Submissions

No access from Briens Rd

Access to the site from Briens Road is required. Extensive traffic modelling undertaken in conjunction with the Transport Services Division of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) has demonstrated the appropriateness of the access arrangements proposed for Briens Road. These arrangements will be augmented by infrastructure works including an upgrade to the Grand Junction Rd/ Briens Rd / Hampstead Rd intersection. DPTI is separately negotiating this with the owners of the subject land. The traffic assessment for the site indicates that Briens Road is a suitable location for access and, with the proposed associated upgrades, will ensure that traffic conditions are appropriate.

No change

Develop the site as a garden nursery

There are a range of land uses which are envisaged and while a garden nursery is not specifically listed, any application for such would be assessed on its merits.

No change

Do not allow development like Lightsview

The density of development upon the residential land has been proposed to support the objectives of the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide which promotes infill development at higher densities. A major source of complaints at Lightsview relates to the combination of small allotments, narrow streets and inadequate off street parking. Council has consistently argued in its submissions on recent Ministerial DPAs aimed at promoting more intense residential development, that the reduced on-site parking rate for dwellings, whilst in theory desirable, in practise, causes significant difficulties for residents and service and emergency vehicles. With this in mind, the reduced rate that currently applies to the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Northgate (ie Lightsview) is not considered suitable for Northfield especially given its closer relationship and connection to existing residential development.

Table PAdE/10 amended so that it only applies to the existing Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Northgate (Lightsview). (ie Car parking rates in the Northfield part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone will be as per the existing Development Plan provisions.) Desired Character Statement amended to incorporate similar references to land division used in the Desired Character Statement for the Medium Density Policy Area

6



It is noted that the Minister's recent Parks Redevelopment DPA introduced a Desired Character Statement for the Medium Density Policy Area that contained useful guidance on land division and that this would also help to address some of the issues that underlie concerns about aspects of the Lightsview development.

in the Port Adelaide Enfield Development Plan.

2 G Morrison Turn vacant land into nature park

It is not intended that the subject area be converted into a nature park. There are significant areas of public open space adjacent to and in close proximity to the subject area.

No change

3 B and S James The site is contaminated and it is not suitable for intended use

The DPA acknowledges the site contamination which is within the subject area, and preliminary soil and groundwater investigations were provided as part of the supporting technical documentation for the DPA. The Desired Character Statement and existing Development Plan provisions will require site contamination to be remediated prior to the development of the site.

No change

Locate retail and commercial areas on Heavymech site and locate housing where the shopping area is proposed

Commercial considerations, retail analysis and traffic and access analysis have indicated the suitability of a Briens Rd rather than a Grand Junction Rd orientation.

No change

Closure of Laing Street

While Laing Street is intended to be closed, there appears to have been a misunderstanding of the Concept Plan. Access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new signalised access on Briens Road and a new public road located adjacent to the closed Laing Street. This will be linked to the existing and new development road network.

Concept Plan amended to show new public road.

Concern about access on to Briens Rd

While Laing Street will be closed, access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new signalised access and public road running next to the closed Laing Street This will facilitate signalised right hand turn movements that do not currently exist.


7


Concerns about local traffic and parking

The Desired Character Statement is written to ensure the future road layout discourages through movement from the Activity Centre to the surrounding residential areas and vice versa. No solid yellow line is proposed along Stirling Street. This is a matter that would need to be investigated outside of the DPA process. A hypothetical retail design was developed to model the impacts on traffic and access and relationships with the existing development that surrounds the site. This represented the largest possible centre for the area. With a centre this size, there is sufficient car parking space for the retail components in accordance with the Zone criteria. With respect to future residential development, Council's experience with traffic and parking at Lightsview is that a combination of smaller housing lots, narrow streets and inadequate off street parking creates problems for residents and service and emergency vehicles. The reduced off-street car parking rate that currently applies to the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Northgate is a significant contributor to this problem and is not considered suitable for Northfield.

Table PAdE/10 amended so that it only applies to the existing Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Lightsview. (ie car parking rates in the Northfield part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone will be as per the existing Development Plan provisions.)

Opposed to access from Holt St / Brown St to shopping centre

While a link will be provided between Holt Street and the new development road network, the link will primarily service the residential component. This link will not be promoted as an access to the retail development and all residential roadways will be designed to discourage ‘rat running’ movements between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road.

No change

Solid Yellow Line along Stirling Street

No solid yellow line is proposed along Stirling Street. This is a matter that would need to be investigated outside of the DPA process.

No change

Create an appropriate buffer for residents on

The Desired Character Statement requires this interface to be carefully addressed and includes references to physical barriers

New PDC introduced to increase rear setbacks for

8



the south side of Holt St

and landscaping. The existing provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone allow zero rear setbacks and while appropriate for the unique characteristics of the Lightsview development, are not considered appropriate for the subject land where new development will abut existing residential development. A new PDC is considered appropriate to modify the rear setback requirements for residential development so that minimum rear setbacks are greater than in that part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Lightsview.

residential development in that part of the zone in Northfield.

4 K and C Hollitt

Concerned about the impacts of residential development in the Heavymech portion of the site. Future residential development should be restricted in height, single storey indicated

The Desired Character Statement calls for the protection of the residential amenity of existing properties by amongst other things providing a transition of building heights. The provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone generally allow for development of three storeys. To reinforce the need to deal with the transition of building heights where new development is adjacent to existing residential development, it is proposed to add a new Principle of Development Control (PDC) to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in an adjoining zone. It is also considered appropriate to amend PDC 10 to confirm per the Desired Character Statement that building heights should not be greater than three storeys. PDC 10 allows development of up to six storeys in certain circumstances in Northgate and it needs to be made explicit that these circumstances are limited to that part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone. The existing provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone allow zero rear setbacks and while appropriate for the unique

New Principle of Development Control introduced to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in a Residential Zone. PDC 10 amended to specifically refer to Northgate. New PDC introduced to increase rear setbacks for

9


characteristics of the Lightsview development, would exacerbate the concerns raised. A new PDC is considered appropriate to modify the rear setback requirements for residential development so that minimum rear setbacks are greater than in that part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Northgate.

residential development in that part of the zone in Northfield.

Concerned about traffic noise and security from access road on rear boundary of Holt St - relocate road further to the south

A detailed design for the residential subdivision has not yet been developed. What is depicted within the technical reports has been prepared for technical and commercial analysis purposes only. Prior to any development occurring on the site it will be subject to a Development Application and Land Division application and considered against relevant provisions in the Development Plan that address the issues raised.

Concept Plan amended to move road access further to the south.

Opposed to 3 storey buildings being built on the fence line

The provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone generally allow for development of three storeys. To reinforce the need to deal with the transition of building heights where new development is adjacent to existing development, it is proposed to add a new PDC to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in a Residential Zone. The existing provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone allow zero rear setbacks and while appropriate for the unique characteristics of the Lightsview development, would exacerbate the concerns raised. A new PDC is considered appropriate to modify the rear setback requirements for residential development so that minimum rear setbacks are greater than in that part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Lightsview.

PDC 10 amended to specifically refer to Northgate. New PDC introduced to increase rear setbacks for residential development in that part of the zone in Northfield.

Concerned about higher ground level of Heavymech land and propose that ground level lowered within subject area

A detailed design for the residential subdivision has not yet been prepared. Site levels will need to be determined at this stage following appropriate reconciliation of site remediation, infrastructure, access and interface considerations.

No change

10



Rear setbacks Setbacks are governed by the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone, which argues for rear setbacks to be a minimum of 0m where the allotment is less than 300sqm or 3m or greater where the allotment is greater than 300sqm. A new PDC is considered appropriate to modify the rear setback requirements for residential development so that minimum rear setbacks are greater than in that part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Lightsview.

New PDC introduced to increase rear setbacks.

Rear boundary not correct

This will be reviewed and addressed when future land divisions and development applications are considered.

No change

No access to retail from Holt Street

While a road link will be possible between Holt Street and the new development road network, the link is intended to service the residential component. This link will not be promoted as an access to the retail development and all residential roadways will be designed to discourage ‘rat running’ movements between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road.

No change

The site is contaminated and it is not suitable for intended use

The Draft DPA acknowledges the site contamination which is within the subject area, and preliminary soil and groundwater investigations were provided as part of the supporting technical documentation for the Draft DPA. The Desired Character Statement and existing Development Plan provisions will require site contamination to be remediated prior to the development of the site.

No change

If an access road along the rear fence of properties facing Holt St is proposed, a new fence of at least 2 metres in height should be erected and the verge between this road and the new

A detailed design for a residential subdivision has not yet been proposed. A future application on this site will be subject to a range of technical assessments which would include consideration of boundary conditions and interfaces and acoustic impacts.

Concept Plan amended to move road access further to the south.

11


fence should be as wide as possible.

5 W Charles Opposed to closure of Laing Street

Access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new signalised access on Briens Road and a new public road located adjacent to the closed Laing Street. This will be linked to the existing and new development road network.


6 M and G Hardwick

Opposed to closure of Laing Street



Opposed to reopening of Neville Street

The reopening of Neville Street is not proposed.

No change

7 D French New shopping area supported

Noted No change

Contaminated land needs to be cleaned up

The DPA acknowledges the site contamination which is within the subject area, and preliminary soil and groundwater investigations were provided as part of the supporting technical documentation for the Draft DPA. The Desired Character Statement and existing Development Plan provisions will require site contamination to be remediated prior to the development of the site.

No change




8 D Le Shopping Centre is considered essential

Noted No change

Traffic access from Briens Road and Hoods Road

Access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new signalised access on Briens Road and a new public road located adjacent to the closed Laing Street.

No change

12



This will be linked to the existing and new development road network.

Contaminated land needs to be cleaned up

The Draft DPA acknowledges the site contamination which is within the subject area, and preliminary soil and groundwater investigations were provided as part of the supporting technical documentation for the Draft DPA. The Desired Character Statement and existing Development Plan provisions will require site contamination to be remediated prior to the development of the site.

No change

9 R Traeger Opposed to reopening of Neville Street


No change




Concerned about increase in traffic in Neville St

Neville Street will not be altered as part of the proposal and will not be required to be opened given the proposed new public road that is intended to replace the closed Laing St.

No change

10 P and A Lee Shopping centre supported

Noted No change

No access via Holt St While a road link will be possible between Holt Street and the new development road network, the link is intended to service the residential component. This link will not be promoted as an access to the retail development and all residential roadways will be designed to discourage ‘rat running’ movements between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road.

No change

Concerned about traffic and parking

The Desired Character Statement is written to ensure the future road layout discourages through movement from the Activity Centre to the surrounding residential areas and vice versa. Holt Street is particularly discussed within the Desired Character Statement.

No change

13


A retail design has been conceived which represents the largest centre for the area. With a centre this size, there are sufficient car parking spaces in accordance with the Zone criteria.

Opposed to removal of existing trees along back fence of Holt St properties

Whether these trees will remain or not will need to be determined at future land division and land development stages following consideration of site levels, interface requirements, infrastructure requirements and road layout. A landscape buffer is identified within the concept plan along this boundary in recognition that retention of the existing trees may not be possible.

No change

Concerned about multi storeyed buildings impacting on privacy and sunlight

The provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone generically allow for development of three storeys. To reinforce the need to deal with the transition of building heights where new development is adjacent to existing development, it is proposed to add a new PDC to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in a Residential Zone. The existing provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone allow zero rear setbacks and while appropriate for the unique characteristics of the Lightsview development, would exacerbate the concerns raised. A new PDC is considered appropriate to modify the rear setback requirements for residential development so that minimum rear setbacks are greater than in that part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Northgate. Concerns regarding privacy are covered by the General Provisions within the Development Plan and the Desired Character Statement where upper level windows must not cause adjoining properties to be overlooked and a range of screening mechanisms are envisaged. As the properties on the southern side of Holt Street are located to the north of the future residential development on the land,

PDC 10 amended to specifically refer to Northgate/Lightsview. New PDC introduced to increase rear setbacks for residential development in that part of the zone in Northfield.

14



there will be no overshadowing of existing residences. Contaminated land

needs to be cleaned up The Draft DPA acknowledges the site contamination which is within the subject area, and preliminary soil and groundwater investigations were provided as part of the supporting technical documentation for the Draft DPA. The Desired Character Statement and existing Development Plan provisions will require site contamination to be remediated prior to the development of the site.

No change

Asbestos Removal At the time of demolition, asbestos removal will occur pursuant to legislative requirements.

No change

11 C Dos Santos No need for the rezoning, land should be retained as Light Industry Zone

The land is underdeveloped, constrained and the majority of existing industrial premises have been unoccupied for some time. The rezoning of the subject area was forecasted within Council’s Strategic Directions Report in 2012. The subject area is specifically identified as being suitable for rezoning. Given the location of the site and surrounding uses, the state of the manufacturing industry in SA and alternative industrial areas in the Council and northern areas more generally, the site is considered better suited to other uses. The Port Adelaide Enfield Industrial Land Study (JLL, April 2013) indicated that there are opportunities to ensure sufficient industrial land supply in the region by helping to bring the Gillman industrial land to market and by more intensive development of under-utilised land stocks. The major industrial precincts in Port Adelaide Enfield are within around 2-3km in Gepps Cross and further west and are easily accessible for business owners and operators serving the surrounding region. New broad hectare industrial development will help free up other sites for smaller occupants through redevelopment. In the context

No change

15


of a total industrial land stock of 513ha, the subject site represents a minor amount of total supply.

Council and State Government should work with the landowner to promote new industry to locate to the subject land and provide temporary rate remissions and payroll tax concessions

This is not able to be dealt with within the ambit of the DPA No change

Proposal will assist corporate supermarkets

The DPA proposes a land use policy framework to support particular types of uses and does not discriminate for or against specific supermarket retailers or tenants. Whilst the DPA proposes a Concept Plan that depicts a retail footprint that is sufficient to accommodate a full-line supermarket (over 3,000sqm), it does not set a minimum size and can just as readily accommodate a supermarket of less than 3,000sqm. In other words, the DPA provides an opportunity for either larger or smaller supermarkets and provides an opportunity for a full gamut of retail operators.

No change

Improper use of the planning process

Council's Strategic Directions Report of 2012 identified the suitability of the land for rezoning. The Development Act, 1993 enables the Minister for Planning or a Council to undertake a DPA. The DPA process is explicitly a proper planning process and has been followed.

No change

Catchment area adopted in the RIA is improperly defined and includes over optimistic estimates

A detailed explanation of the catchment area definition is included in the Retail Need an Impact Analysis (RNIA) at section 5.1. The catchment has been drawn to examine the area likely to be

No change

16



served by a supermarket trading at the subject site, and is based on the typical trading characteristics of full-line supermarkets. The retail consultancy that undertook the primary retail analysis, Deep End Services has advised that it has a good understanding of how such stores operate, having undertaken work for both Coles and Woolworths (as well as ALDI and Costco) and employing several people who were previously within the Coles research team. The catchment does not extend beyond existing centres such as Ingle Farm because people living further away – eg in Para Vista or Modbury North – would need to travel past other alternative supermarkets to visit the subject site, and so the likelihood of them shopping at Northfield is lower. Nonetheless, there will be situations in which some people to the north-east of Ingle Farm (and in other areas beyond the defined catchment) may well choose to visit the Northfield centre – examples include:

• Parents of students at Roma Mitchell Secondary College may undertake supermarket shopping when dropping off/picking up their children from school.

• Commuters who regularly travel past on their way to/from work may choose to shop during those trips.

• People may choose to shop at Northfield because of a specific brand preference – for example, if a large Foodland were to be built at the site, shoppers may choose to bypass other options to visit Northfield as the closest full-line Foodland store.

• Patients at the proposed medical centre may undertake shopping in combination with those trips.

17


For these and other reasons, all supermarkets serve catchments that overlap with others in their vicinity, reflecting the often-complex decisions that we all make when choosing where to undertake grocery shopping. The subsequent analysis of population and retail spending is based on the latest information available at the time that the RNIA was prepared. No detailed dispute of this information or expert retail analysis challenging this work has been provided. Council's Policy on privately funded DPAs required this DPA to be independently peer reviewed. As part of the Peer Review process, retail and commercial consultancy Property and Advisory independently reviewed the Deep End Services report before the DPA was placed on consultation and advised that: "The Report adopts a recognised approach in identifying competition, estimating trade areas and calculating catchment populations, followed by estimating centre turnover and impacts on competitive centres. Although the procedure adopted follows a logical path, it is underpinned by a wide range of assumptions and estimates, the variation of which may have a material effect on outcomes. These matters of professional judgement include:

• the boundaries of the Primary and various Secondary Trade Areas;

• the estimated retail spend within those boundaries; • the percentage of that retail spend that is forecast to be

captured by the subject centre; • the turnover that will be derived from outside the identified

Trade Areas; and • the degree to which turnover will be redirected to the centre,

thereby impacting competitive Centres.

18



Whilst we generally regard the judgements made in the Report as reasonable and logical, the above list nonetheless highlights the uncertain nature of the outcome."

There is insufficient need for the development

The City of Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010 provided a comprehensive review of retailing and centres provision throughout the Council area and identified that residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the subject land were relatively poorly provided with access to supermarkets. This supported a subsequent Council view that inclusion of a retail component in any rezoning of the subject land was a reasonable proposition. It is noted that a number of submissions on this DPA from existing residents in the area (as opposed to existing retailers) are supportive of a shopping centre in this location and that this seems to corroborate the findings of Council's 2010 review. The issue of whether the supply and choice of supermarkets in the area surrounding the subject land is already high is examined in the response to submissions provided by Deep End Services. (see Attachment F) In that response, Figure 1 shows the amount of supermarket floorspace available within regions describing a 5 minutes’ drive from the centroid of each Statistical Area 1 geographic unit, measured per 1,000 residents living within the same regions. The map shows that the area near the southern end of Briens Road, and extending north into Pooraka, has relatively low average supermarket provision within 5 minutes’ drive. Figure 2 shows the time it takes to travel by car to the nearest full-line supermarket (defined as 3,000sqm or more), and indicates that residents near the subject site have relatively poorer access to full-line grocery shopping services.

No change

19


The conclusion is that, there are areas of slightly poorer supermarket access and choice around the site. This seems to resonate with the findings of the City of Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010. There has been considerable population growth in the area since the 2010 study and whilst there has been expansion at some existing centres to capture associated new demand, further population growth will continue with recent releases of significant land holdings for development, ongoing infill development and the promotion of the nearby suburbs of Kilburn and Blair Athol for significant urban regeneration and densification via the Minister for Planning's Kilburn and Blair Athol Urban Renewal DPA. This DPA will improve access to local supermarket shopping for an area that past and current studies show is relatively underprovided and will support ongoing infill development in the surrounding area and new residential development. It is also noted that the SA Government’s planning policies with respect to centres has evolved. For example, in The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide – draft for consultation 2016, Policy P8 is to “Provide retail and other services outside designated activity centres where development will contribute to the principles of accessibility, a transit-focused and connected city, high quality urban design, economic growth and competitiveness.”

Estimates of trade impact on other centres are inaccurate - the proposed DPA would generate

In the absence of freely-available data on sales performance for centres throughout the region, Deep End Services have relied on secondary sources (including the Property Council of Australia) or made their own professional estimates where necessary. The distribution of trading impacts is based on these estimates of

No change

20



detrimental trading impacts on existing businesses and centres

performance and the derived ‘competitive importance’ of each centre. That is, centres that are important destinations for supermarket shopping for catchment residents account for a greater share of the competitive impact arising from the Northfield centre. To the extent that these sales estimates are too high compared to actual trading data, this would imply that the centre in question has less competitive relevance and therefore should account for a lower share of the trading impact. Any new retail development invariably affects other retail business because it attracts spending that would otherwise flow elsewhere. The SA planning system is that such business-on-business impacts are not a relevant consideration when making planning decisions, except in circumstances where retail development has an adverse effect on the operation and viability of centres as a whole, and therefore could lead to a diminution in the range of retail services available to the community. The redistribution of retail spending generated by the proposed DPA would lead to reductions in sales at other centres in the region, but these impacts would not alter the range of services available to people living near these centres and will dissipate due to ongoing population growth. The Deep End analysis indicates that the largest impacts on other centres (assuming a full line supermarket were to be developed on the site) would be on Northgate Village (-8.0%) and Pooraka (-7.5%). These figures are based on the first year of operation of the new centre. The Deep End analysis advises that “competitive trading impacts are acceptable and within the bounds of normal retail competition, and will not impede the viability of other

21


centres in the region.” The independent peer review undertaken by Property and Advisory considered this and advised that "The Report’s conclusion is that in percentage terms the largest impacts are on Northgate Village (-8.0%), located in the Secondary south-east sector, and on the smaller centre of Pooraka (-7.5%), located in the Primary sector. It is noted that the centre is also expected to have an initial -6.1% effect at Walkley Heights and -6.0% at Montague Road Centre on food turnover only. It is generally accepted in retail analysis that a negative effect on other centres of less than 5% is not significant, whereas effects between 5-10% would give rise for some concern, and effects above 10% might affect the viability and functioning of existing retail centres. It is thus considered that proposed retail development will have a notable adverse effect on food turnover/sqm in the above centres, but an insignificant effect on the other centres in its region. The Report does not model effects in subsequent years, however given the positive population trends in the catchment, it is reasonable to expect these initial effects would dissipate in reasonably short order."

Impacts on other taverns in the area need to be investigated

Within the planning system, competitive impacts are relevant insofar as they may have an adverse effect on the operation and performance of centres as a whole. This is to ensure that there is not an overall reduction in the range of facilities available to residents in a region. However, it is not the purpose of the planning system to address individual business-on business impacts that are a normal consequence of a competitive business market.

No change with respect to competitive impact but in response to other submissions: Desired Character Statement amended to: • promote use of pad sites

fronting Briens Road for more commercially

22



orientated uses and

Non- complying Development list amended to include hotel and licensed gaming venue.

12 Rahimi Shopping centre supported

Noted No change

13 L Whiteman Rezoning and shopping centre supported

Noted No change




14 S Brown Opposed to closure of Laing Street



15 S Schneider Opposed to reopening of Neville St


No change

Concerned about traffic taking shortcuts from Briens Rd to Grand Junction Rd

While a road link will be possible between Holt Street and the new development road network, the link is intended to service the residential component. This link will not be promoted as an access to the retail development and all residential roadways will be designed to discourage ‘rat running’ movements between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road.

No change

16 G Edwards (NAFC)

Opposed to inclusion of Tavern

The basis of this submission is the inclusion of a tavern within the envisaged development list and its proximity to the existing Tavern at the North Adelaide Football Club (NAFC). Within the

23


planning system, competitive impacts are relevant insofar as they may have an adverse effect on the operation and performance of centres as a whole. This is to ensure that there is not an overall reduction in the range of facilities available to residents in a region. However, it is not the purpose of the planning system to address individual business-on business impacts that are a normal consequence of a competitive business market. Whilst noting that a hotel is listed as an envisaged use in the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone, it is noted that this was initially established for Northgate, which has an activity centre significantly larger than that proposed for Northfield and which is not located directly adjacent to an established major school. Noting these differences and submissions from the school, the Department for Education and Child Development and others expressing concerns about the desirability of such a use so close to an established school, it is considered appropriate to seek to exclude a hotel (tavern) in this particular part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone. It is noted that the pad sites with frontage to Briens would be the most likely sites for any future tavern or hotel that may be proposed but that these sites would also be attractive to a wide range of other types of uses. As such, restricting the opportunity for a tavern or hotel is not expected to significantly affect the ability to attract alternative businesses nor impair the function of the proposed centre.

Desired Character Statement amended to: • promote use of pad sites


Non-complying Development list amended to include hotel and licensed gaming venue.

17 M Khan & M Arsalan

Support shopping and commercial area

Noted No change


Access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new signalised access on Briens Road and a new public road located adjacent to the closed Laing Street.


24



This will be linked to the existing and new development road network.



No change

18 F Seaton Support new shopping centre

Noted No change

Concerns regarding traffic

The road network and intersections have been developed by an expert engineering consultancy in conjunction with the Transport Division of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure to ensure that the new centre does not inappropriately impact on the road network. The new access arrangements will be augmented by infrastructure works including an upgrade to the Grand Junction Rd/ Briens Rd / Hampstead Rd intersection, which DPTI is separately negotiating with the owners of the subject land. The need for and timing of these works is addressed in the Desired Character Statement and a new PDC for infrastructure co-ordination.

New PDC introduced to address infrastructure coordination.

Concern about crossing of Briens Rd as a pedestrian

The retail access will incorporate a signalised pedestrian phase for pedestrians crossing Briens Road, facilitating crossings. The pedestrian refuge on Briens Road adjacent to the Zebra crossing on school grounds will be retained.

No change

19 J Brodie (Enfield SES)

Concerned about closure of Laing Street



Concerned about reopening of Neville Street


No change

20 T Heath (Foodworks)

Site is bounded on three sides by

The Concept Plan, Zone and Council Wide provisions of the Development Plan provide appropriate planning provisions to

Concept Plan amended to show additional acoustic

25


residential activity - creating numerous conflicting interests

adequately address interface issues. It is considered that the depiction of an additional area for acoustic treatment in the Concept Plan for the southern boundary of the south most commercial pad site, akin to the acoustic treatment shown at the rear interface with residential properties fronting Brown Street, would further support the need for interfaces with existing residential development to be carefully considered.

treatment.

The area around the site is not densely populated, with limited people living within walking distance

The centre incorporates a residential component for medium density residential development that may accommodate up to 100 new dwellings. There is infill development occurring in the immediately surrounding residential area and there is considerable ongoing and new infill in the general location. The proposed Neighbourhood Activity Centre is sited to provide convenience for existing and future local residents. Its location along an arterial road provides opportunities for convenience shopping.

No change

It is not an already established centre of activity, other than its proximity to a school

The Suburban Neighbourhood Zone provides for a range of land uses to be established. The proximity to an existing school provides an opportunity to establish a node of community activity. The proposed rezoning seeks to establish this as a Suburban Neighbourhood Activity Centre and is based on consideration of the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide and a wide range of site specific analyses.

No change

It is not a transport interchange

The site is serviced by existing public transport on Briens Road and Grand Junction Road. The majority of local centre and neighbourhood centres zones are typically not serviced by a transport interchange and this scale of public transport facility is more appropriate for higher order and larger centres such as district and regional centres.

No change

26



The area is already well supplied with supermarket facilities

The Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010 provided a comprehensive review of retailing and centres provision throughout the Council area and identified that residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the subject land were relatively poorly provided with access to supermarkets. This supported a subsequent view that inclusion of a retail component in any rezoning of the subject land was a reasonable proposition. It is noted that a number of submissions on this DPA from existing residents in the area (as opposed to existing retailers) are supportive of a shopping centre in this location and that this seems to align with the findings of Council's 2010 review. The issue of whether the supply and choice of supermarkets in the area surrounding the subject land is already high is examined in Figures 1 and 2 of Deep End Services' response to the submissions. Figure 1 shows the amount of supermarket floorspace available within regions describing a 5 minutes’ drive from the centroid of each Statistical Area 1 geographic unit, measured per 1,000 residents living within the same regions. The map shows that the area near the southern end of Briens Road, and extending north into Pooraka, has relatively low average supermarket provision within 5 minutes’ drive. Figure 2 shows the time it takes to travel by car to the nearest full-line supermarket (defined as 3,000sqm or more), and indicates that residents near the subject site have relatively poorer access to full-line grocery shopping services. This indicates that there are areas of slightly poorer supermarket access and choice around the site and seems to align with the

No change

27


findings of the City of Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010. The Northfield DPA is expected to improve access to local supermarket shopping for an area that is relatively undersupplied. There has been considerable population growth in the area since the 2010 study and whilst there has been expansion at some existing centres to capture associated new demand, further population growth will continue with recent releases of significant land holdings for development, ongoing infill development and the promotion of the nearby suburbs of Kilburn and Blair Athol for significant urban regeneration and densification via the Minister for Planning's Kilburn and Blair Athol Urban Renewal DPA. This DPA will improve access to local supermarket shopping for an area that past and current studies have shown is relatively underprovided. It will support ongoing infill development in the surrounding area and new residential development on the subject land facilitated by the proposed rezoning.

Not every site within a transit corridor is suitable or should be developed for commercial or retail purposes

Agreed. However, the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide and the various investigations undertaken to inform this DPA indicate that this site along the Briens Rd corridor is well suited for appropriate retail and commercial land uses.

No change

Housing and Employment Lands Supply Program concludes that Adelaide is well provided with retail floorspace

The Housing and Employment Lands Supply Program provides broad level analysis and conclusions. The retail studies and analyses undertaken in association with this DPA looked more specifically at this locality and found that there is a reasonable case to provide retail facilities in this area.

No change

With growth of Noted. However, there will still be demand for bricks and mortar No change

28



internet shopping, demand for retail floorspace in the future may reduce

stores and retail floorspace, particularly as the population grows.

The proposed shopping centre fails to meet the objectives of the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

The proposed rezoning to allow for retailing facilities is consistent with the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide for infill and mixed use development. It is also noted that Policy P8 in The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide – draft for consultation 2016, seeks to “Provide retail and other services outside designated activity centres where development will contribute to the principles of accessibility, a transit-focused and connected city, high quality urban design, economic growth and competitiveness.”

No change

Concerned that economic analysis of escape expenditure is misleading

This comment has not been accompanied by professional retail analysis supporting the claim. The economic analysis used to inform the DPA was undertaken by retail consultancy Deep End Services and was then independently peer reviewed by another recognised retail consultancy, Property and Advisory. The Peer Reviewer noted that in economic analyses such as these there are matters that require professional judgement and that the judgements made may affect the outcomes of such analysis. Escape expenditure was identified as one of these matters. The peer reviewer considered Deep End's finding that "the introduction of a new full-line supermarket can be supported in market terms, and has potential to reduce escape spending by providing a more convenient location at which to undertake weekly grocery shopping" and concluded that: "we broadly concur on the rates and multiples employed, however have not independently modelled the proposal."

No change

29


Concerned that economic analysis of viability is misleading

This comment has not been accompanied by professional retail analysis supporting the claim. An economic assessment by an industry expert has been provided which supports the establishment of a centre and has been independently peer reviewed.

No change

Concerned that economic analysis of traffic and kilometre travelled by resident is misleading


No change

Concerned that economic analysis of population growth is misleading

This comment has not been accompanied by professional retail analysis supporting the claim. An economic assessment by an industry expert has been provided which supports the establishment of a centre and has been independently peer reviewed. Deep End Services was modest in its appraisal of potential population growth and did not factor the possible future development of major nearby Government land holdings into its considerations (eg Oakden and Gilles Plains). Similarly, it did not consider the increase in residential densities and future population growth in the suburbs of Kilburn and Blair Athol envisaged in the Minister for Planning's recent Kilburn and Blair Athol Urban Renewal DPA in its analysis.

No change

insufficient need for the development given high rates of supermarket provision 5km from site

The issue of whether the supply and choice of supermarkets in the area surrounding the subject land is already high is examined in Figures 1 and 2 in the Deep End Services response to submissions included in Attachment F. Figure 1 shows the amount of supermarket floorspace available

No change

30



within regions describing a 5 minutes’ drive from the centroid of each Statistical Area 1 geographic unit, measured per 1,000 residents living within the same regions. The map shows that the area near the southern end of Briens Road, and extending north into Pooraka, has relatively low average supermarket provision within 5 minutes’ drive. Figure 2 shows the time it takes to travel by car to the nearest full-line supermarket (defined as 3,000sqm or more), and indicates that residents near the subject site have relatively poorer access to full-line grocery shopping services. This indicates that there are pockets of slightly poorer supermarket access and choice around the site; the Northfield DPA will therefore improve access to local supermarket shopping for an area that is relatively undersupplied.

Centre trading levels are under-estimated

This comment has not been accompanied by professional retail analysis supporting the claim. The sales forecast is based on a detailed analysis of the size of the spending market within each catchment sector, the likely market share performance having regard to existing competition, and the extent of traffic from beyond the catchment due to its position on a major arterial road. A first year sales result in excess of $30m would normally attract interest from most operators, particularly if the centre was strategically positioned on a major road. Measured on an average per sqm basis ($7,632/sqm) this sales level is below the typical average for a Woolworths or Coles store, but to some extent this reflects the larger store size modelled (4,010sqm compared with a more typical 3,200-3,500sqm for most full-line supermarkets).

No change

31


It is important to understand that, while the major operators achieve average store sales in the order of $10,000-11,000/sqm, there is still wide variability around this figure. Some stores achieve sales in excess of $15,000/sqm while others are still profitable while achieving sales of less than $8,000/sqm.

DPA would generate detrimental trading impacts on existing businesses and centres

In the absence of freely-available data on sales performance for centres throughout the region, the Deep End Services analysis has relied on secondary sources (including the Property Council of Australia) or made their own professional estimates where necessary. The distribution of trading impacts is based on these estimates of performance and the derived ‘competitive importance’ of each centre. That is, centres that are important destinations for supermarket shopping for catchment residents account for a greater share of the competitive impact arising from the Northfield centre. To the extent that these sales estimates are too high compared to actual trading data, this would imply that the centre in question has less competitive relevance and therefore should account for a lower share of the trading impact. Any new retail development invariably affects other retail business because it attracts spending that would otherwise flow elsewhere. The SA planning system is that such business-on-business impacts are not a relevant consideration when making planning decisions, except in circumstances where retail development has an adverse effect on the operation and viability of centres as a whole, and therefore could lead to a diminution in the range of retail services available to the community. The redistribution of retail spending generated by the proposed DPA would lead to reductions in sales at other centres in the region, but these impacts would not alter the range of services

No change

32



available to people living near these centres. The independent peer review undertaken by Property and Advisory's considered this matter and advised that "The Report’s conclusion is that in percentage terms the largest impacts are on Northgate Village (-8.0%), located in the Secondary south-east sector, and on the smaller centre of Pooraka (-7.5%), located in the Primary sector. It is noted that the centre is also expected to have an initial -6.1% effect at Walkley Heights and -6.0% at Montague Road Centre on food turnover only. It is generally accepted in retail analysis that a negative effect on other centres of less than 5% is not significant, whereas effects between 5-10% would give rise for some concern, and effects above 10% might affect the viability and functioning of existing retail centres. It is thus considered that proposed retail development will have a notable adverse effect on food turnover/sqm in the above centres, but an insignificant effect on the other centres in its region. The Report does not model effects in subsequent years, however given the positive population trends in the catchment, it is reasonable to expect these initial effects would dissipate in reasonably short order."

Entire site should be zoned for residential development

The Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010 provided a comprehensive review of retailing and centres provision throughout the Council area and identified that residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the subject land were relatively poorly provided with access to supermarkets. This supported a subsequent view that inclusion of a retail component in any rezoning of the subject land was a reasonable proposition. It is noted that a number of submissions on this DPA from

No change

33


existing residents in the area (as opposed to existing retailers) are supportive of a shopping centre in this location and that this seems to align with the findings of Council's 2010 review. The proposed activity centre will provide services and facilities to existing and future residents and not unreasonably impact on existing centres beyond the realms of normal competition.

21 C Circelli No access via Wicklow St

While a link will be provided between Wicklow Street and the new development road network, the link will primarily service the residential component. This link will not be promoted as an access to the retail development and all residential roadways will be designed to discourage ‘rat running’ movements between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road.

No change

A yellow line (parking restriction) would be ineffective in controlling parking and traffic

No solid yellow line is proposed along Stirling Street. This is a matter that would need to be investigated outside of the DPA process.

No change

22 M Alam Concerned about regarding traffic

The road network and intersections have been developed by an expert engineering consultancy in conjunction with the Transport Division of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure to ensure that the new centre does not inappropriately impact on the road network. The new access arrangements will be augmented by infrastructure works including an upgrade to the Grand Junction Rd/ Briens Rd / Hampstead Rd intersection, which DPTI is separately negotiating with the owners of the subject land. The need for and timing of these works is addressed in the Desired Character Statement and a new PDC for infrastructure co-ordination.


No access via While a link will be provided between Wicklow Street and the No change

34



Wicklow St new development road network, the link will primarily service the residential component. This link will not be promoted as an access to the retail development and all residential roadways will be designed to discourage ‘rat running’ movements between Briens Road and Grand Junction Road.

Support more residential development but only very limited retail and commercial development

The retail analysis and it subsequent peer review supports the establishment of retail facilities on the land at the scale proposed. The Suburban Neighbourhood Zone supports the establishment of such uses.

No change

23 Z Diamanti (Metcash)

A new activity Centre in this location at this point in time cannot be justified


No change

There are no procedural elements to the DPA that limit the size of the activity centre in any way

The Minister for Planning has recently removed the potential to use floorspace caps as procedural triggers as part of his recent review of planning provisions for existing centres throughout the metropolitan area. However, while no floorspace cap is proposed via this DPA, there are a range of other quantitative and qualitative provisions which effectively serve to limit the size of a future centre upon the land. This includes text in the proposed Desired Character Statement that envisages retail floorspace in the order of 6,000sqm and a dedicated Concept Plan that nominates the footprint of the retail and commercial areas. These provide more guidance for retail floorspace than most centres throughout the Council area and establish that the centre will have a retailing component in line with the smaller

No change

35


neighbourhood centres in the Council area. Concerned that

rezoning facilitates unfair competition and favours major supermarket chains over independents

The DPA can only be used to establish that a particular type of land use is suitable and not discriminate against a specific supermarket retailer or tenant. Whilst the DPA proposes a Concept Plan that depicts a retail footprint that is sufficient to accommodate a full-line supermarket (over 3,000sqm), it does not set a minimum size and can therefore accommodate a supermarket of less than 3,000sqm. The DPA provides an opportunity for either larger or smaller supermarkets and provides an opportunity for a full gamut of retail operators.

No change

An audit and analysis of current turnover and tenancy occupancy rates for all existing centres in the broader locality should be undertaken

An economic assessment by an industry expert has been provided which supports the establishment of a centre and has been independently peer reviewed.

No change

insufficient need for the development, new development should only occur where existing centres are fully developed and adjacent land cannot be acquired

The Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010 provided a comprehensive review of retailing and centres provision throughout the Council area and identified that residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the subject land were relatively poorly provided with access to supermarkets. This supported a subsequent view that inclusion of a retail component in any rezoning of the subject land was a reasonable proposition. It is noted that a number of submissions on this DPA from existing residents in the area (as opposed to existing retailers) are supportive of a shopping centre in this location and that this seems to be consistent with the findings of Council's 2010 review. It is also noted that the SA Government’s planning policies have evolved, with greater weight placed on the economic benefits of

No change

36



competition and development. For example, in The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide – draft for consultation 2016, Policy P8 is to “Provide retail and other services outside designated activity centres where development will contribute to the principles of accessibility, a transit-focused and connected city, high quality urban design, economic growth and competitiveness.”

24 K Hack Concerned about how James Ave will be accessed?

While Laing Street will be closed, access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new public road and signalised access on Briens Road. Laing Street will be linked to the new development road network.

No change



No change

Uncertain what will happen to existing factories?

The policy framework will allow for a diverse range of land uses within the Subject Area. This will allow for the replacement of existing factories with new land uses.

No change

25 K Tothill Opposed to closure of Laing Street





No change

26 Brammer A recreational activity centre should be established on the site

An indoor recreational centre is a potential use in the Suburban Neighbourhood zone as detailed in the zone's envisaged use list. However, the subject land is close to a range of local areas for passive and active recreation and the State Sports park. Further, as a major indoor recreational activity centre is planned at Lightsview the likelihood of the subject land being a viable proposition for the subject land is considered remote.

No change

Concerned about traffic

The road network and intersections have been developed by an expert engineering consultancy in conjunction with the Transport Division of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure to ensure that the new centre does not


37


inappropriately impact on the road network. The new access arrangements will be augmented by infrastructure works including an upgrade to the Grand Junction Rd/ Briens Rd / Hampstead Rd intersection, which DPTI is separately negotiating with the owners of the subject land. The need for and timing of these works is addressed in the Desired Character Statement and a new PDC for infrastructure co-ordination.

Existing traffic lights between South Tce, Briens Rd and Grand Junction Rd are not sequenced and make it impossible to turn right into Briens Rd

The DPA will result in a range of changes to the traffic network. Upgrades to intersections will be undertaken and sequencing will form part of this.

No change

Further signalling on Briens Rd will worsen traffic flow due to 3 lots of signalling within 500 metres of each other

The road network and intersections have been developed by an expert engineering consultancy in conjunction with the Transport Division of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure to ensure that the new centre does not inappropriately impact on the road network. The new access arrangements will be augmented by infrastructure works including an upgrade to the Grand Junction Rd/ Briens Rd / Hampstead Rd intersection, which DPTI is separately negotiating with the owners of the subject land. Upgrades to intersections will be undertaken and sequencing will form part of this.

No change

27 Roma Mitchell Secondary College

Opposes retail and commercial development opposite

The subject land presents an opportunity to satisfy a number of key planning goals and objectives of the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide. These include mixed use development, co-location of

No change

38



Governing Council

school uses that support each other and clustering of activities to reduce vehicle trips. A generic opposition to retail development per se proximate to schools is not considered consistent with such planning goals. However, concerns about the proximity and nature of some potential retail uses are understood and are addressed by amendments to the Desired Character Statement and Concept Plan.

Concern about child safety, crossing Briens Rd

The retail access will incorporate a signalised pedestrian phase for pedestrians crossing Briens Road, facilitating crossings. The pedestrian refuge on Briens Road adjacent to the Zebra crossing on the school's grounds will be retained.

No change

Concerned that parents will encourage their children to meet them in the shopping centre car park which will increase the risk to children and the need for the school to provide additional supervision

It is not considered possible to determine the likely extent of this occurring nor for planning policy to govern where students will be picked up. It is also uncertain whether parents would generally arrange to meet their children in a car park or in a more easily identified place such as a shop. However, safe pedestrian movement is encouraged through the provision of a dedicated crossing and if this matter were to become an issue, a range of student and parent policy management measures outside of planning policy could be considered.

No change

Concern about shoppers using school car park

Future retail development will have to meet car parking rates required by the Development Plan in order to provide sufficient on-site parking. Based on a hypothetical retail development used to inform the DPA investigations, the amount of land available for retail car parking is expected to exceed the Development Plan requirements. It is also considered that use of the school car parking area for users of the future shopping facilities would be unlikely to be seen as particularly convenient by those users.

No change

Some students do not use traffic lights to

The DPA proposes to encourage safe pedestrian movement through an additional set of traffic lights and improve the

No change

39


cross roads and development envisaged by the rezoning would escalate the problem

opportunity to cross the road safely. It is not possible for planning policy to address behaviour that disregards safety, where a safe and convenient crossing option is provided.

Retail directly opposite the school will encourage truancy

It is not considered possible to determine the likely extent of this occurring and no evidence has been provided to support the assertion. It is unknown to what extent truants would choose a location close to their school, where they may be easily identified by future shopkeepers and shoppers, compared to more distant options accessible via existing public transport or simple non-attendance at school. It is not uncommon for schools to be located near shops and other facilities and it is not possible for planning policy to control errant behaviour.

No change

Concerned about retail in the form of fast food outlets, tavern and gambling facilities

It is noted that the proximity of fast food outlets to schools is a matter of public policy interest in South Australia, other states and also in other countries. A number of educators, health professionals and community members are concerned about potential negative impacts on young people that may be linked to such proximity and accessibility. It is noted that there is no other school in the Council area with a major fast food outlet directly opposite it. Research indicates that the closest distance is 165 metres and without direct line of sight. Recognising that seeking to control the location of such facilities is not without contention and that there are limitations in the SA planning system with respect to regulating specific types of shops, the Desired Character Statement and the Non- complying Development list have been amended to discourage these uses in the form of drive through restaurants or take-away food stores.





40



Whilst noting that a hotel (ie tavern) is listed as an envisaged use in the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone, it is noted that this was initially established for Northgate, which has an activity centre significantly larger than that proposed for Northfield and which is not located directly adjacent to an established major school. Noting these differences and submissions from the school, the Education Department and others expressing concerns about the desirability of such a use so close to an established school, it is considered appropriate to seek to exclude a hotel (tavern) in this particular part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone. It is noted that the pad sites with frontage to Briens would be the most likely sites for any future tavern or hotel that may be proposed but that these sites would also be attractive to a wide range of other types of uses.

Non-complying Development list amended to include hotel and licensed gaming venue.

Concerned about retail access location opposite school access

Whilst the existing southern access to the school and the proposed priority controlled access in the southwest portion of the DPA subject land are opposite each other, a design for the latter has been developed by traffic engineers in consultation with DPTI and is to be limited to left in and left out movements. This is to ensure that there is no conflict between these accesses. The detailed design for this will be addressed in a separate infrastructure agreement and will be the subject of specific consideration during subsequent development application assessment.

No change

Concerned about validity of 2011 traffic volumes

Traffic surveys were also undertaken in 2013 to record queue lengths and validate the modelling (MASTEM count data) used for the assessment. Traffic conditions used to model the impact of the development were based on the 2013 surveys.

No change

Concerned about 4pm-6pm peak period

4pm-6pm is the anticipated peak period for the proposed retail and residential development. The school peak was not assessed

No change

41


not matching the school peak

as this does not coincide with the development peak.

Concerned about child safety on eastern side of Briens Rd

The retail access will incorporate a signalised pedestrian phase for pedestrians walking north-south on Briens Road.

No change

Confusion about purpose of signals on Briens Rd

The signals are for an access point to the development and existing residential development. Pedestrian phases will be included in the signal's design.

No change

28 T Tran New shopping centre supported

Noted No change

Concerned about closure of Laing Street



29 Ben Rollo on behalf of Armada Funds Management

Concerned that the proposed retail activity centre will result in an adverse retail and commercial impact on the Ingle Farm District Centre

Any new retail development invariably affects other retail business because it attracts spending that would otherwise flow elsewhere. The SA planning system is that such business-on-business impacts are not a relevant consideration when making planning decisions, except in circumstances where retail development has an adverse effect on the operation and viability of centres as a whole, and therefore could lead to a diminution in the range of retail services available to the community. While the redistribution of retail spending generated by the proposed DPA would lead to reductions in sales at other centres in the region, these impacts would not alter the range of services available to people living near these centres and are expected to dissipate due to ongoing population growth. The Deep End analysis indicates that the largest impacts on other centres (assuming a full line supermarket were to be developed on the site would be on Northgate Village (-8.0%) and Pooraka (-

No change

42



7.5%). These figures are based on the first year of operation of the new centre. The Deep End analysis advises that “competitive trading impacts are acceptable and within the bounds of normal retail competition, and will not impede the viability of other centres in the region.” An independent peer review undertaken by Property and Advisory considered the Deep End analysis and advised that "The Report’s conclusion is that in percentage terms the largest impacts are on Northgate Village (-8.0%), located in the Secondary south-east sector, and on the smaller centre of Pooraka (-7.5%), located in the Primary sector. It is noted that the centre is also expected to have an initial -6.1% effect at Walkley Heights and -6.0% at Montague Road Centre on food turnover only……. …….It is generally accepted in retail analysis that a negative effect on other centres of less than 5% is not significant, whereas effects between 5-10% would give rise for some concern, and effects above 10% might affect the viability and functioning of existing retail centres. It is thus considered that proposed retail development will have a notable adverse effect on food turnover/sqm in the above centres, but an insignificant effect on the other centres in its region. The Report does not model effects in subsequent years, however given the positive population trends in the catchment, it is reasonable to expect these initial effects would dissipate in reasonably short order." No alternative expert retail analysis challenging the Deep End analysis has been provided.

The DPA will facilitate uses consisting of:

It is unclear where the cited figures, particularly the notion of a minimum 10,000 sqm large format bulky retail component, have been sourced from.

No change

43


Bulky goods (eg a home improvement superstore) Outlet retail comprising premium outlet shops with a minimum floor area of 200 square metres 'Bulky retail' component providing a large format (minimum 10,000 square metre floor area) warehouse style shop providing bulk purchasing of a limited number of brand products for small and medium businesses and individuals (with a limit of no more than 45% of products being foodstuff) Large retail land uses such as a supermarket and ancillary speciality shops

The proposed Desired Character Statement specifically refers to total retail floorspace in the order of 6,000 sqm and the Concept Plan shows retail and commercial footprints that are broadly consistent with this scale of development. The combination of a floorspace guide and a Concept Plan with retail and commercial footprints provide a greater level of control on retail floorspace than most other centres in the Council area. It is also noted that the Minister for Planning's recent policy amendments to remove procedural floorspace caps and reduce car parking rates for many centres have opened up the potential for significant redevelopment of existing centres and floorspace increases. Most of these centres do not provide the type of floorspace guidance proposed by this DPA.

Catchment area adopted in the RIA is improperly defined and includes over optimistic estimates

A detailed explanation of the catchment area definition is included in the RNIA at section 5.1. The catchment has been drawn to examine the area likely to be served by a supermarket trading at the subject site, and is based

No change

44



on the typical trading characteristics of full-line supermarkets. Deep End Services has advised that it has a good understanding of how such stores operate, having undertaken work for both Coles and Woolworths (as well as ALDI and Costco) and employing several people who were previously within the Coles research team. The catchment does not extend beyond existing centre such as Ingle Farm because people living further away – eg in Para Vista or Modbury north – would need to travel past other alternative supermarkets to visit the subject site, and so the likelihood of them shopping at Northfield is lower. Nonetheless, there will be situations in which some people to the north-east of Ingle Farm (and in other areas beyond the defined catchment) may well choose to visit the Northfield centre – examples include:





For these and other reasons, all supermarkets serve catchments

45


that overlap with others in their vicinity, reflecting the often-complex decisions that we all make when choosing where to undertake grocery shopping. The subsequent analysis of population and retail spending is based on the latest information available at the time that the RNIA was prepared.


The City of Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010 provided a comprehensive review of retailing and centres provision throughout the Council area and identified that residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the subject land were relatively poorly provided with access to supermarkets. This supported a subsequent view that inclusion of a retail component in any rezoning of the subject land was a reasonable proposition. It is noted that a number of submissions on this DPA from existing residents in the area (as opposed to existing retailers) are supportive of a shopping centre in this location and that this seems to be consistent with the findings of Council's 2010 review. Figure 1 in the Deep End Services response to submissions included in Attachment F shows the amount of supermarket floorspace available within regions describing a 5 minutes’ drive from the centroid of each Statistical Area 1 geographic unit, measured per 1,000 residents living within the same regions. The map shows that the area near the southern end of Briens Road, and extending north into Pooraka, has relatively low average supermarket provision within 5 minutes’ drive. Figure 2 shows the time it takes to travel by car to the nearest full-line supermarket (defined as 3,000sqm or more), and indicates that residents near the subject site have relatively

No change

46



poorer access to full-line grocery shopping services. These figures indicate that there are areas of slightly poorer supermarket access and choice around the site. This also seems to be consistent with the findings of Council's City of Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010. There has been considerable population growth in the area since the 2010 study and whilst there has been expansion at some existing centres to capture associated new demand, further population growth will continue with recent releases of significant land holdings for development, ongoing infill development and the promotion of the nearby suburbs of Kilburn and Blair Athol for significant urban regeneration and densification via the Minister for Planning's Kilburn and Blair Athol Urban Renewal DPA. This DPA will improve access to local supermarket shopping for an area that past and current studies show is relatively underprovided and will support ongoing infill development in the surrounding area and new residential development.

The proposed DPA would generate detrimental trading impacts on existing businesses and centres

In the absence of freely-available data on sales performance for centres throughout the region, Deep End Services have relied on secondary sources (including the Property Council of Australia) or made their own professional estimates where necessary. The distribution of trading impacts is based on these estimates of performance and the derived ‘competitive importance’ of each centre. That is, centres that are important destinations for supermarket shopping for catchment residents account for a greater share of the competitive impact arising from the Northfield centre. To the extent that these sales estimates are too high compared to

No change

47


actual trading data, this would imply that the centre in question has less competitive relevance and therefore should account for a lower share of the trading impact. Any new retail development invariably affects other retail business because it attracts spending that would otherwise flow elsewhere. The SA planning system is that such business-on-business impacts are not a relevant consideration when making planning decisions, except in circumstances where retail development has an adverse effect on the operation and viability of centres as a whole, and therefore could lead to a diminution in the range of retail services available to the community. The redistribution of retail spending generated by the proposed DPA would lead to reductions in sales at other centres in the region, but these impacts would not alter the range of services available to people living near these centres.

Further justification is required for the proposal from a planning and retail assessment perspective

Additional justification has been provided by way of the independent peer review undertaken by Property and Advisory, Deep End's response to the issues raised in the submission (see attached) and the commentary provided in this SCPA report.

No change

30 Botten Levinson Lawyers on behalf of Whatevertoo Holdings Pty Ltd

The DPA advocates for excessive retail and commercial floor area cognisant of Suburban Neighbourhood Zone designation

An economic assessment by an industry expert has been provided which supports the establishment of a centre (and its indicative floorspace) and has been independently peer reviewed. The Suburban Neighbourhood Zone module in the Planning Policy Library was developed before the Minister for Planning introduced the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone to the now Lightsview area. Comparing the module against the actual Suburban Neighbourhood Zone, it is clear that the module was used as a guide rather than as a rigid recipe. More particularly,

No change

48



The Suburban Neighbourhood Activity Centre at Northgate (where Whatevertoo Holdings own the Northgate Village Shopping Centre) also allows for significantly more retail and commercial floorspace than that envisaged by the module. There is no specific floorspace reference, unlike what is proposed via this DPA for Northfield, and floor space is effectively controlled via the designated footprints and land uses shown in the Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre Concept Plan (Concept Plan Map PAdE/21). Analysis of the footprints shown in Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 show opportunities for significantly greater retail and commercial floor space than indicated in the module and possible via this DPA for Northfield.

Unacceptable impact on existing centres

In the absence of freely-available data on sales performance for centres throughout the region, Deep End Services have relied on secondary sources (including the Property Council of Australia) or made their own professional estimates where necessary. The distribution of trading impacts is based on these estimates of performance and the derived ‘competitive importance’ of each centre. That is, centres that are important destinations for supermarket shopping for catchment residents account for a greater share of the competitive impact arising from the Northfield centre. To the extent that these sales estimates are too high compared to actual trading data, this would imply that the centre in question has less competitive relevance and therefore should account for a lower share of the trading impact. Any new retail development invariably affects other retail business because it attracts spending that would otherwise flow elsewhere. The SA planning system is that such business-on-business impacts are not a relevant consideration when making planning decisions, except in circumstances where retail

No change

49


development has an adverse effect on the operation and viability of centres as a whole, and therefore could lead to a diminution in the range of retail services available to the community. The redistribution of retail spending generated by the proposed DPA would lead to reductions in sales at other centres in the region, but these impacts would not alter the range of services available to people living near these centres and will dissipate due to ongoing population growth. The Deep End analysis indicates that the largest impacts on other centres (assuming a full line supermarket were to be developed on the site would be on Northgate Village (-8.0%) and Pooraka (-7.5%). These figures are based on the first year of operation of the new centre. The Deep End analysis advises that “competitive trading impacts are acceptable and within the bounds of normal retail competition, and will not impede the viability of other centres in the region.”- The independent peer review undertaken by Property and Advisory considered this and advised that "The Report’s conclusion is that in percentage terms the largest impacts are on Northgate Village (-8.0%), located in the Secondary south-east sector, and on the smaller centre of Pooraka (-7.5%), located in the Primary sector. It is noted that the centre is also expected to have an initial -6.1% effect at Walkley Heights and -6.0% at Montague Road Centre on food turnover only. It is generally accepted in retail analysis that a negative effect on other centres of less than 5% is not significant, whereas effects between 5-10% would give rise for some concern, and effects above 10% might affect the viability and functioning of existing retail centres. It is thus considered that proposed retail

50



development will have a notable adverse effect on food turnover/sqm in the above centres, but an insignificant effect on the other centres in its region. The Report does not model effects in subsequent years, however given the positive population trends in the catchment, it is reasonable to expect these initial effects would dissipate in reasonably short order."

Assertions and conclusions reach in the economic analysis prepared by Deep End are strongly refuted by the agent's client

An economic assessment by an industry expert has been provided which supports the establishment of a centre and has been independently peer reviewed. This comment has not been accompanied by professional retail analysis supporting the claim.

No change

Unacceptable Impact on existing centres hierarchy

The issue of whether the supply and choice of supermarkets in the area surrounding the subject land is already high is examined in Figures 1 and 2 in the Deep End Services' response to submission included in Attachment F. Figure 1 shows the amount of supermarket floorspace available within regions describing a 5 minutes’ drive from the centroid of each Statistical Area 1 geographic unit, measured per 1,000 residents living within the same regions. The map shows that the area near the southern end of Briens Road, and extending north into Pooraka, has relatively low average supermarket provision within 5 minutes’ drive. Figure 2 shows the time it takes to travel by car to the nearest full-line supermarket (defined as 3,000sqm or more), and indicates that residents near the subject site have relatively poorer access to full-line grocery shopping services. These figures indicate that there are pockets of slightly poorer supermarket access and choice around the site. The Northfield DPA will improve access to local supermarket shopping for an

No change

51


area that is relatively undersupplied. There is no need for

the rezoning, the land should be retained in the Light Industry Zone

The land is underdeveloped, constrained and existing industrial premises have been unoccupied for some time. The subject land is a small pocket of industrial land situated within an area generally accommodating residential and other suburban activities. The need for the subject land to be rezoned has been considered during Council's strategic policy investigations , with the conclusion that non-industrial activities would be better suited given the location of the site and surrounding uses, the state of manufacturing in SA and other alternative locations in the Council and northern areas more generally. The Port Adelaide Enfield Industrial Land Study (JLL, April 2013) indicated that there are opportunities to ensure sufficient industrial land supply in the region by helping to bring the Gillman industrial land to market and by more intensive development of under-utilised land stocks. The major industrial precincts in Port Adelaide Enfield are within around 2-3km in Gepps Cross and further west and are easily accessible for business owners and operators serving the surrounding region. In the context of a total industrial land stock of some 513ha, the subject site represents a minor portion of total supply.

No change

Amenity and interface issues

The Desired Character Statement specifically requires appropriate consideration of interface issues. The Concept Plan envisages a range of design solutions to ensure that residential amenity is not affected. Existing Development Plan provisions are in place to deal with interface issues.

52



The existing provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone generally allow for development of three storeys. To reinforce the need to deal with the transition of building heights where new development is adjacent to existing residential development, it is proposed to add a new PDC to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in a Residential Zone. The existing provisions of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone allow zero rear setbacks and while appropriate for the unique characteristics of the Lightsview development, would exacerbate the concerns raised. A new PDC is considered appropriate to modify the rear setback requirements for residential development so that minimum rear setbacks are greater than in that part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone at Northgate. The Concept Plan shows an acoustic treatment along the eastern boundary of the proposed Suburban Activity Centre where it abuts the rear of Brown St properties. It is proposed to add a further acoustic treatment area along the southwest portion of the activity centre area where it is adjacent to an existing residential property.

New PDC introduced to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in the Residential Zone. New PDC introduced to increase rear setbacks for residential development in that part of the zone in Northfield. Concept Plan amended to designate additional acoustic treatment.

Concerned that certain public notification categories are inappropriate, particularly, bulky goods outlet, child care, hotel, petrol filling station which should be removed from the Category 1

The public notification categories have been reviewed and the identified land uses have been removed from the Category 1 list.

Public notification list amended.

53


list 31 David

Hutchinson representing 701 Grand Junction Road

Scope of DPA is too narrow

The scope of the DPA was identified and agreed upon by Council and the Minister for Planning.

No change

Requests that additional land should be included in the rezoning and be zoned for retail and commercial development

Inclusion of the requested area would materially affect a wide range of issues including retail expansion and economic impact on other centres. This would require an extensive set of new investigations that have not been provided or funded and would substantially and unreasonably delay the progress of the DPA

No change

32 Phillip Johncheff (McGees Property) on behalf of Selpan Two Nominees Pty Ltd.


The City of Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010 provided a comprehensive review of retailing and centres provision throughout the Council area and identified that residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the subject land were relatively poorly provided with access to supermarkets. This supported a subsequent view that inclusion of a retail component in any rezoning of the subject land was a reasonable proposition. It is noted that a number of submissions on this DPA from existing residents in the area (as opposed to existing retailers) are supportive of a shopping centre in this location and that this seems to align with the findings of Council's 2010 review. The issue of whether the supply and choice of supermarkets in the area surrounding the subject land is already high is examined in Figures 1 and 2 of Deep End Services' response to submission included in Attachment F. Figure 1 shows the amount of supermarket floorspace available within regions describing a 5 minutes’ drive from the centroid of

No change

54



each Statistical Area 1 geographic unit, measured per 1,000 residents living within the same regions. The map shows that the area near the southern end of Briens Road, and extending north into Pooraka, has relatively low average supermarket provision within 5 minutes’ drive. Figure 2 shows the time it takes to travel by car to the nearest full-line supermarket (defined as 3,000sqm or more), and indicates that residents near the subject site have relatively poorer access to full-line grocery shopping services. The figures indicate that there are areas of slightly poorer supermarket access and choice around the site. This also seems to be consistent with the findings of the City of Port Adelaide Enfield Centres Review 2010. Population growth in the area will continue with recent releases of significant land holdings for development, ongoing infill development and the promotion of the nearby suburbs of Kilburn and Blair Athol for significant urban regeneration and densification via the Minister for Planning's Kilburn and Blair Athol Urban Renewal DPA. The DPA will improve access to local supermarket shopping for an area that past and current studies show is relatively underprovided and will support ongoing infill development in the surrounding area and new residential development.

Catchment area adopted in the RIA is improperly defined

A detailed explanation of the catchment area definition is included in the RNIA at section 5.1. The catchment has been drawn to examine the area likely to be served by a supermarket trading at the subject site, and is based on the typical trading characteristics of full-line supermarkets.

No change

55


The retail consultancy that undertook the primary retail analysis, Deep End Services has advised that it has a good understanding of how such stores operate, having undertaken work for both Coles and Woolworths (as well as ALDI and Costco) and employing several people who were previously within the Coles research team. The catchment does not extend beyond existing centres such as Ingle Farm because people living further away – eg in Para Vista or Modbury north – would need to travel past other alternative supermarkets to visit the subject site, and so the likelihood of them shopping at Northfield is lower. Nonetheless, there will be situations in which some people to the north-east of Ingle Farm (and in other areas beyond the defined catchment) may well choose to visit the Northfield centre – examples include:





For these and other reasons, all supermarkets serve catchments 56



that overlap with others in their vicinity, reflecting the often-complex decisions that we all make when choosing where to undertake grocery shopping. The subsequent analysis of population and retail spending is based on the latest information available at the time that the RNIA was prepared. No alternative expert retail analysis challenging this work has been provided. As part of the Peer Review process, retail and commercial consultancy Property and Advisory independently reviewed the Deep End Services report before the DPA was placed on consultation and advised that: "The Report adopts a recognised approach in identifying competition, estimating trade areas and calculating catchment populations, followed by estimating centre turnover and impacts on competitive centres. Although the procedure adopted follows a logical path, it is underpinned by a wide range of assumptions and estimates, the variation of which may have a material effect on outcomes. These matters of professional judgement include:

• the boundaries of the Primary and various Secondary Trade Areas;

• the estimated retail spend within those boundaries; • the percentage of that retail spend that is forecast to be

captured by the subject centre; • the turnover that will be derived from outside the

identified Trade Areas; and • the degree to which turnover will be redirected to the

centre, thereby impacting competitive Centres.

Whilst we generally regard the judgements made in the Report as reasonable and logical, the above list nonetheless highlights the

57


uncertain nature of the outcome." Concerned about fast

food outlets close to school

It is noted that the proximity of such facilities to schools is a matter of public policy interest in South Australia, other states and also in other countries. A number of educators, health professionals and community members are concerned about potential negative impacts on young people that may be linked to such proximity and accessibility. It is noted that there is no other school in the Council area with a major fast food outlet directly opposite it. Research indicates that the closest distance is 165 metres and without direct line of sight. Roma Mitchell School and the Department for Education and Child Development have also lodged submissions expressing concern about the potential for such outlets to be established. Aside from concerns about health impacts on young people, these submissions also express concerns about the potential for related difficulties with respect to student behaviour and safety. Recognising that seeking to control the location of such facilities is not without contention and that there are limitations in the SA planning system with respect to regulating specific types of shops, the Desired Character Statement and the Non- complying Development list have been amended to discourage these uses in the form of drive through restaurants or take-away food stores.





33 P Majumdar & M Li

Expansion of existing public park supported

There are significant areas of public open space adjacent to the site to the east and west. However, there is an opportunity to slightly enlarge the public park that runs between Laing St and Brown Street to ensure the retention of a significant tree (Tree 23 in the Preliminary Tree Assessment) and assist with the management of the interface between retail and existing residential development.

Concept Plan amended to show an open space area adjacent to the existing reserve between Laing St and Brown St.

Operation of The hours of operation for the proposed centre will be resolved No change

58



Shopping Centre restricted to ‘Business Hours’ and avoid use of noisy equipment

in a future development application. The detail provided at the development application stage will be considered and assessed against the Development Plan to ensure that residential amenity is protected.

No high rise structures The Desired Character Statement provides that development in Northfield should be no more than three storeys in height. It is considered appropriate to further confirm this intent by amending PDC 10 to confirm the Desired Character Statement's intent that in Northfield should not be greater than three storeys. To reinforce the need to deal with the transition of building heights where new development is adjacent to existing residential development, it is proposed to add a new PDC to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in a Residential Zone.

PDC 10 amended to specifically refer to Lightsview New PDC introduced to ensure that building heights are a maximum of two storeys where located adjacent to existing dwellings in the Residential Zone.

No road or car park along back fence

To ensure the retention of a significant tree (Tree 23 in the Preliminary Tree Assessment), assist with the management of the interface between future retail and the residential property to which this submission relates, there is an opportunity to slightly enlarge the public park that runs between Laing St and Brown Street.

Concept Plan amended to show an open space area adjacent to the existing reserve between Laing St and Brown St.

34 R Brigland Closer retailing option supported

Noted No change

Houses instead of industrial development supported

Noted No change

Concerned about increased traffic flow on Brown St

While a link will be provided between Holt Street and the new development road network, the link will primarily service the residential component. The Desired Character Statement proposes that this link will not be promoted as an access to the retail development and that residential roadways will need to be

No change

59


designed to discourage ‘rat running’ movements. Due to the creation of a new signalised access and the design of the existing road network, it is anticipated that any increase in traffic volumes on Brown Street will be small.

35 S and V Foskett

Concerned about vehicle speed on Stirling St

It is anticipated that increase in traffic volumes on Stirling Street as a result of future development will be minor and mainly confined to the southern end of Stirling Street. A minor increase in traffic volumes is not expected to correlate with an increase in vehicle speeds.

No change

Proposes additional turning lane on Stirling St at Grand Junction Rd and channelized right turn on Grand Junction Rd at Stirling St junction

It is anticipated that any increase in traffic volumes on Stirling Street as a result of the development will be minor. The expert traffic analysis undertaken in conjunction with DPTI considered the Stirling St intersection with Grand Junction Rd and identified that the current full movement priority controlled access will continue to be appropriate with anticipated future development.

No change

Agency Submissions Sub No. Agency Issue Response Suggested Policy Change

1 Environment Protection Authority

Changes to Residential Development (General Provisions) modules

The Objectives which the EPA is requesting be changed were introduced as part of a Ministerial DPA. These Objectives will not be altered as part of this DPA.

No change

Changes to the Desired Character Statement

Desired Character Statement to update and reflect air quality treatment changes.

DCS updated in accordance with comments.

Depth of Buffer Zone insufficient for amelioration of noise and air quality

The buffer is provided for landscaping for aesthetic reasons.

DCS amended to increase width of buffer.

Recommendation to include additional acoustic treatment on southern boundary between

The concept plan is updated to reflect this. Concept plan updated to show acoustic treatment between future residential

60



Neighbourhood Activity Centre and future residential component

and future commercial areas.

Recommendation to include Water Sensitive Urban Design

The proposed policy is updated to encourage the application of WSUD within the broader development.

DCS amended in accordance with comments.

Recommendation to include detention basin locations on Concept Plan

Detention basins were originally incorporated within the Concept Plan document. However, this level of detail could be counterproductive for a site of this scale, as there is no Development Application for the site. This level of detail will be provided as part of a development application which must satisfy the policy direction and Council's stormwater requirements per its Statement of Requirements.

No change

2 Department for Education and Child Development

Parents likely to drop off and collect students in retail area, presenting risk to student safety

It is not considered possible to determine the likely extent of this occurring nor for planning policy to govern where students will be picked up. It is also uncertain whether parents would generally arrange to meet their children at the school, or in a shopping centre car park or in a more easily identified place such as a shop. However, safe pedestrian movement is encouraged through the provision of a dedicated crossing and if this matter were to become an issue, a range of behaviour management measures outside of planning policy could be considered.

No change

Retail will encourage truancy It is not considered possible to determine the likely extent of this occurring and no evidence has been provided to support the assertion. It is unknown to what extent truants would choose a location close to their school, where they may be easily identified by future shopkeepers and shoppers, compared to more distant options accessible via existing public transport or simple non-attendance at school.

No change

61


It is not uncommon for schools to be located near shops and it is not possible for planning policy to control errant behaviour.

Potential adverse impacts of land use (fast food and gambling) on health of students

It is noted that the proximity of fast food to schools is a matter of public policy interest in South Australia, other states and also in other countries. A number of educators, health professionals and community members are concerned about potential negative impacts on young people that may be linked to such proximity and accessibility. Recognising that seeking to control the location of such facilities is not without contention and that there are limitations in the SA planning system with respect to regulating specific types of shops, the Concept Plan, Desired Character Statement and Non- complying Development list have been amended to discourage these uses in the form of drive through restaurants or take-away food stores. Whilst noting that a hotel (where a gambling venue could be proposed) is listed as an envisaged use in the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone, it is noted that this listing was initially established for Northgate, which has an activity centre significantly larger than that proposed for Northfield and which is not located directly adjacent to an established major school. Noting these differences and submissions from the school, about the desirability of such a use so close to an established school, it is considered appropriate to seek to exclude a hotel and licensed gaming venue from this

Desired Character Statement amended to: • encourage use of pad

sites fronting Briens Road for more commercially orientated uses and


Non-complying Development list amended to include shop in the form of a restaurant or take-away food store with drive-through facility. Non-complying Development list amended to include hotel and licensed gaming venue.

62



particular part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone. It is noted that the pad sites with frontage to Briens would be the most likely sites for any such facility that may be proposed but that these sites would also be attractive to a wide range of other types of uses. As such, restricting the opportunity for a hotel would not affect the ability to attract alternative businesses.

Location of egress point conflicts with school access

Whilst the existing southern access to the school and the proposed priority controlled access in the southwest portion of the DPA subject land are opposite each other, a design for the latter has been developed by expert traffic engineers in consultation with DPTI and is to be limited to a left in and left out movements. This is to ensure that there is no conflict between these accesses. New traffic signals are approximately 130m south of school signals. It is expected that as part of a separate infrastructure agreement between the eventual developers of the land and the SA Government, signals will be synchronised to minimise the impact on traffic operation.

No change

Increase risk to pedestrians on eastern side of Briens Road

The retail access will incorporate a signalised pedestrian phase for pedestrians walking north-south on Briens Road.

No change

3 Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure

Deletion of PDC 49 in Attachment A

This conflicts with advice from the EPA that indicates the proposed provision is acceptable.

PDC 49 deleted

Various changes throughout the DCS

The suggested changes will be incorporated. It is noted that the paragraph pertaining to site contamination within the DCS was a suggestion of the EPA.

DCS amended

Department of Planning,

DPA supported in principle Noted No change

63


Transport and Infrastructure - Transport Services Division (late submission received 28/3/17)

Reference should be made Functional Hierarchy for South Australia’s Land Transport Network, which can be found at www.sa.gov.au/transport/corridors

The references used in the DPA are considered appropriate in the context of a Desired Character Statement.

No change

Supports Desired Character Statement content regarding strategic importance of Grand Junction Road / Briens Road intersection

Noted No change

Amend Access - Northfield component of Desired Character Statement regarding access to Briens Rd.

Additional commentary has been added. DCS amended

Amend Concept Plan to show a buffer restricting access to Briens Rd other than from the two access points shown on the Concept Plan

The Desired Character Statement has been amended to address this issue and together with the existing Concept Plan, adequately clarify the intent for access to Briens Rd

No change

Notes that DPA is based on the Traffic and Access report prepared in December 2015 that identifies specific transport interventions as part of future development

Noted No change

Advises that infrastructure deed Council has been previously advised that the Minister Additional PDC added to

64



not yet been prepared. DPTI to require commitment by developer to fund identified interventions and any other requirements identified in the Development Application stage

for Planning will not approve the DPA until an appropriate infrastructure agreement is in place.

address need for infrastructure provision and coordination.

Concept to cater for bus stops This is relevant for consideration at a future development application stage.

No change

4 Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources and the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board

The DPA must reference and be consistent with North East Arm Stormwater Management Plan, discharge should not exceed the rate of pre-development conditions

The DPA is updated to state that discharge should not exceed the rate of pre-development conditions

Desired Character Statement amended.

Specific targets for water quality improvements should be included

Specific targets do not belong in a specific Zone setting. The inclusion of specific water quality targets should be applied at the council wide level. Typically water quality targets are established at the land division stage in consultation with Council’s technical department.

No change

Transfer small rainfall events through swales and rain gardens

The proposed policy will be update to encourage the application of WSUD within the broader development.

Desired Character Statement updated

Provide greater opportunities for landscaping and green space

The DPA currently facilitates a range of opportunities for landscaping pertaining to site boundaries, within the envisaged shopping centre car park, and surrounding backyards. The Desired Character Statement seeks that a landscape

Desired Character

65


buffer of 750mm minimum width be provided along Grand Junction Rd and of 1.0m minimum width along Briens Rd. On review, this width is considered inadequate and a minimum width of 1.5 m is proposed. To ensure the retention of a significant tree (Tree 23 in the Preliminary Tree Assessment), assist with the management of the interface between future retail and the residential property to which this submission relates, there is an opportunity to slightly enlarge the public park that runs between Laing St and Brown Street by designating a small open space area in the Concept Plan.

Statement amended Concept Plan amended

5 Department of State Development

No comment Noted No change

6 Department of Health and Ageing

No comment Noted No change

66


Attachment B – Summary and Response to Public Meeting Submissions


12 submitters requested to be heard, and therefore a public meeting was held on 6 December 2016. Sub No.

Name of Respondent Summary of Verbal Submission/Issues Raised

Council Response

1. Helen De Graff Opening of Neville Street The reopening of Neville Street is not proposed.

Closure of Laing Street While Laing Street will be closed, access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new signalised access on Briens Road. Laing Street will be linked to the new development road network via a new roundabout.

Congestion on Neville Street and James Street

It is unlikely that traffic will utilise Neville Street and James Street to access the broader metropolitan network. Access and egress points have been provided to the site to facilitate convenient manoeuvring onto Grand Junction Road and Briens Road.

2. Chris Dos Santos representing Foodland Opposed to rezoning The rezoning of the subject area is forecasted within Council’s Strategic Direction Report. The subject area is specifically identified as being suitable for rezoning.

Opposed to the devaluation of existing centres

Please see written response 11.4

Enough retail competition within area Please see written response 11.3

67

Port Adelaide Enfield Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment Attachment B – Summary and Response to public Meeting Submissions

More Traffic The proponent of a future development, through an infrastructure agreement, will fund an upgrade to the Briens Road and Grand Junction Road intersection to ensure that the establishment of an activity centre does not cause adverse impacts.

Hours of operation of the centre No application is proposed. The hours of operation of the activity centre will be subject to the Development Application process which must accord with the EPA Noise Policy 2007.

Private Open Space not available for future residents

The allotments are suitably sized to accommodate residential development. The Zone will accommodate infill development to achieve the intent of the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

3. Shirley Brown Briens Road Traffic is excessive The proponent, through an infrastructure agreement, will fund an upgrade to the Briens Road and Grand Junction Road intersection to ensure that the establishment of an activity centre does not cause adverse impacts.

Laing Street Closure While Laing Street will be closed, access to Briens Road for Laing Street / James Avenue traffic will be provided via a new signalised access on Briens Road. Laing Street will be linked to the new development road network.

Traffic Lights at Laing Street will be inconvenient

The traffic lights at the Laing Street intersection will provide a dedicated green turn arrow which will facilitate convenient vehicular movement and increase safety.

68



4. Tim Heath representing Foodworks Impacts on business Please see written response 20.3

No need for additional retail floorspace Please see written response 20.1

Floor space per capita in excess of Adelaide average in 5km radius


Queries viability of the centre and low sales figures applied within the Economic Assessment


Centre will be car based and increase traffic The DPA incorporates a car parking area of a sufficient size to accommodate a centre designed to the maximum size. The developer will fund upgrades to the surrounding road network to ensure that additional traffic does not cause detrimental impacts.

Site should be used entirely for residential development

The rezoning of the subject area is forecasted within Council’s Strategic Direction Report. The subject area is specifically identified as being suitable for rezoning. The Strategic Directions report does not stipulate the types of land uses which are appropriate.

Interface conflict issues between commercial and residential land uses

The Concept Plan advocates for a range of design measure to mitigate offsite impacts. An application for an activity centre on the site will be subject to the rigours of the Development Application process and will need to demonstrate that any offsite impacts can be managed.

5. Amanda Price representing Metcash Excessive floor area proposed No application has been proposed. A hypothetical centre has been modelled to

69


understand the maximum capacity of the site and how to mitigate potential impacts on the surrounding area. See written response 21

No procedural elements to limit the size of the centre

In determining the size of the centre, a range of factors have been taken into account. The largest centre that would fit on the land has been modelled to ensure that the worst case scenario has been accounted for. All off site impacts have been designed to accommodate this. The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide – draft for consultation 2016, Policy P8 is to “Provide retail and other services outside designated activity centres where development will contribute to the principles of accessibility, a transit-focused and connected city, high quality urban design, economic growth and competitiveness.”

Deep End Services report does not address existing supermarkets within catchment


Primary trade area is sufficiently supplied by retail supermarkets


Size of Centre at odds with SA Planning Policy Library

The Suburban Neighbourhood Zone module in the Planning Policy Library was developed before the Minister for Planning introduced the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone to the now Lightsview area. Comparing the module

70



against the actual Suburban Neighbourhood Zone, it is clear that the module was used as a guide rather than as a rigid recipe. More particularly, The Suburban Neighbourhood Activity Centre at Northgate (where Whatevertoo Holdings own the Northgate Village Shopping Centre) allows for significantly more retail and commercial floorspace than that envisaged by the module. There is no specific floorspace reference, unlike what is proposed via this DPA. Floor space is effectively controlled via the designated footprints and land uses shown in the Northgate Neighbourhood Activity Centre Concept Plan (Concept Plan Map PAdE/21). Analysis of the footprints shown in Concept Plan Map PAdE/21 show opportunities for retail and commercial floor space well beyond that indicated in the module and opportunity for considerably greater floorspace than that possible via this DPA. Comparative analysis against retail floorspace potential within other centres in the Council area confirms that the proposal is modest and at the lower end of Neighbourhood Centre size.

A range of studies on existing centres need to occur and demand should be demonstrated prior to rezoning occurring

Please see written response 20.2 and 20.3

6. Pepe Bouzalas and Rachel Wieland representing Roma Mitchell Secondary

Oppose the proposed retail development Please see written response 27

71


School Governing Council

Student Safety Student Safety will be improved by incorporating a dedicated and signalised crossing facility, dedicated right turn movements out of the centre.

Increase in Traffic The increase in traffic will be mitigated by the upgrades to Briens Road and the incorporation of dedicated turning facilities.

Students absconding to retail facilities The planning system can only address certain issues. The planning system cannot account for all potentialities in human behaviour.

Patrons of super market using school as thoroughfare

The use of the school as a thoroughfare is counterintuitive as there will be no access from the school car park into the centre.

Timing of traffic survey does not reflect peak school hours

The peak time of the Supermarket occurs between 4pm and 6pm which does not coincide with the school peak hours.

Parents will use shopping centre car park to pick up children

It is not considered possible to determine the likely extent of this occurring nor for planning policy to govern where students will be picked up. It is also uncertain whether parents would generally arrange to meet their children in a car park or in a more easily identified place such as a shop. However, safe pedestrian movement is encouraged through the provision of a dedicated crossing and if this matter were to become an issue, a range of behaviour

72



management measures outside of planning policy could be considered.

7. Ben Rollo representing Armada Funds Management

Opposed to rezoning to Commercial and Retail, should be residential only

The rezoning of the subject area is forecasted within Council’s Strategic Direction Report. The subject area is specifically identified as being suitable for rezoning and the investigations have confirmed the suitability of the site for a combination of uses that include retail and commercial.

Market is at oversupply of retail floor area Please see written response 29.2

No need for retail as stipulated within the needs assessment


8. James Levinson representing Northgate Village

Excessive retail and commercial floor area is proposed

No application has been proposed. A centre has been modelled to understand the maximum capacity of the site and how to mitigate potential impacts on the surrounding area.

Size of the subject area has not been taken into account when reviewing size of retail and commercial floor space

In determining the size of the centre, a range of factors have been taken into account. The largest centre that would fit on the land has been modelled to ensure that the worst case scenario has been accounted for. All off site impacts have been designed to accommodate this.

Unacceptable impact on other centres Please see written response 30.2

Retail demand has been overstated Please see written response 20.2

There is a difference between light industrial land and industrial land which the DPA does not account for

The existing Industry Zone within the Port Adelaide Enfield Development Plan accommodates land uses which are advocated

73


for by the Light Industry Zone.

Light Industrial land is not sufficiently provided for within other areas


An activity centre will worsen amenity impacts

Offsite impacts have been accounted for within the DPA. The Concept Plan envisages a range of design solutions to ensure that residential amenity is not affected.

Inappropriate public notification categories Public notification categories have been reviewed and amended.

9. David Hutchinson representing 701 Grand Junction Road

Scope of DPA is too narrow The scope of the DPA was agreed to with the Minister for Planning.

10. Sue James Shops are in wrong place The dimensions of the Heavymech site do not provide for an efficient retail footprint. The activity centre is best suited as proposed.

Site contamination Site contamination is addressed in the DCS and existing Development Plan provisions and will be dealt in more detail as part of the assessment of future Development Applications.

Allotments are too small The allotments are suitably sized to accommodate residential development. The Zone will accommodate infill development to achieve the intent of the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

11. Karen Hack Increase in Traffic on James Street It is unlikely that traffic will utilise James Street to access the broader metropolitan network. Access and egress points have been provided to the site to facilitate convenient

74



manoeuvring onto Grand Junction Road and Briens Road.

12. Jacob Brodie representing State Emergency Service

Does not support retail The subject area was identified in Council's Strategic Directions Report as being suitable for rezoning and the investigations have confirmed the suitability of the site for a combination of uses that include retail and commercial.

Additional lights not supported The additional lights will be synchronised to ensure a minimal disruption to traffic flow.

Briens Road traffic and Grand Junction Road and Hampstead Road intersection does not function correctly

A future development proponent, through an infrastructure agreement, will fund an upgrade to the Briens Road and Grand Junction Road intersection to ensure that the establishment of an activity centre does not cause adverse impacts.

Increase of Traffic on Hoods Road and Stirling Road

The DPA incorporates text within the Desired Character Statement to ensure that traffic from the super market is focussed towards Briens Road and Grand Junction Road. The policy will be strengthened.

Dwelling designs such as Lightsview are not appropriate

Individual dwelling designs are not contemplated within a rezoning. The 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide specifically seeks more infill development, greater choice in housing options and more affordable housing.

Increase in traffic along Stirling Street will impact on Emergency Vehicle movement

The current policy framework does not encourage traffic access from the retail development to Stirling Street. Any increase in

75


traffic along Stirling Street will likely result from an increase in residential development. The residential development will also have access to Grand Junction Road through a new dedicated vehicular access point.

Development may increase amount of people parking on private land

The concept plan has been designed with a neighbourhood level activity centre in mind. The activity centre is provided with the required quantum of vehicular parks at this size.

13. Karen Cameron representing Parents Carers and Friends of Roma Mitchell

Design of schools is based on separating students from traffic

A signalised pedestrian crossing will be constructed to facilitate safe pedestrian movement.

Tavern opposite school crossing Pad sites are provided along the Briens Road frontage to support a range of uses. Whilst noting that a hotel (ie tavern) is listed as an envisaged use in the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone, it is noted that this was initially established for Northgate, which has an activity centre significantly larger than that proposed for Northfield and which is not located directly adjacent to an established major school. Noting these differences and submissions from the school, the Department for Education and Child Development and others expressing concerns about the desirability of such a use so close to an established school, it is considered appropriate to seek to exclude a hotel and

76



licensed gaming venue from this particular part of the Suburban Neighbourhood Zone. It is noted that the pad sites with frontage to Briens would be the most likely sites for any future tavern or hotel that may be proposed but that these sites would also be attractive to a wide range of other types of uses.

14. Helen De Graff Increase of Traffic on Briens Road A future developer, through a separate infrastructure agreement with the SA Government, will fund an upgrade to the Briens Road and Grand Junction Road intersection to ensure that the establishment of an activity centre does not cause adverse impacts.

Retail and Commercial areas too large An economic assessment by an industry expert has been provided which supports the establishment of a centre (and its indicative floorspace) and has been independently peer reviewed.

Student Safety crossing road Student Safety will be improved by incorporating a dedicated and signalised crossing facility, dedicated right turn movements out of the centre.

77

Council Name Title Development Plan Amendment Attachment D — SCPA Timeframe Report: Process B – without consultation approval / 1 Step

Attachment C – Timeframe Report

SCPA Timeframe Report: Process B – without consultation approval / 1 Step

The SOI was agreed by the Minister and Council on 9 June 2015 Key steps Period agreed to in SOI Actual time taken Reason for

difference (if applicable)

Investigations conducted and DPA prepared

16 weeks 60 weeks The settling of commercial agreements between the DPA proponents for the funding of the technical studies and draft document production took longer than expected. Consequently, the ratification of the Deed of Agreement between the DPA proponents and Council for the private funding of the DPA was delayed. The preparation of the technical reports to inform the required investigations took longer to prepare than anticipated and were provided to Council by the proponents later than expected.

Agency and public consultation period (report on any delays incurred by agencies

8 weeks 8 weeks A late response from the Transport Services Division of the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure was provided on 28 March 2017

Public Hearing held, submissions summarised and DPA amended in accordance with Council’s assessment of submissions. Summary of Consultations and Proposed Amendments submitted to Minister for approval.

12 weeks 20 weeks Given the issues raised in the consultation process, it was necessary to convene a dedicated workshop for

78


Attachment C — SCPA Timeframe Report: Process B – without consultation approval / 1 Step

discussion with Elected Members before Council formally considered the SCPA report and revised DPA. The draft SCPA report and approval version of the DPA required more extensive drafting and peer review than expected.

79

Port Adelaide Enfield Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment Attachment C — SCPA Timeframe Report: Process C

80


Attachment D — Schedule 4A Certificate

Attachment D – Schedule 4A Certificate

81

Port Adelaide Enfield Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment Attachment F – Additional Matters and Investigations

Attachment F – Additional Matters and Investigations

Documents

Port Adelaide Enfield Council Adelaide Enfield Council Light Industry Zone, Northfield Development Plan Amendment The Amendment - for Approval Approved by the Minister responsible