c - Alexandrina Council

Io\
-r -rfr.
CWQJ\-S
tc\ Ack\\
TO1lt(ckflcJ(wtO (oAt19(%
r,
1ks SkTOANA
QLV4
J4ç
It
kowiN Raw\ov
pt,pk
Tht
Qvd 4& ort\- VJ'4L
oevkOc&11tL (p'
Cl1Q.cl ¼JJv3
tçcuec o ci (O, 't
(p(
(J
3 -¼tW\tr
'- '°& k4rt (tSoU1tL to k4ft 15
uctk
k°kme tir4hQ& LS ro
skd( csu,
cctsOj4
uoywnflL
(w(L
1 Sth(9s(4 k pFk Atvcc
So kA (\CL)
(\cI%Jt zr SOW€Lt wct
\iYrtc o. Ie
ihfl rk(st S 6t4At
('U& o4 çiooi
ICL%Sc4tQs. oJ'2
ktcI 1
('Y\a Q(c(4v\. U KOW 4
eiQ4\
e ç'o\-cck( &o cvct.
"
Vt
Ar'4Mw %J(4( f(%tQ. 4'c& r
q,ç4y( Qrc \CtS Q(tw4-,
Oek (Avt as
WCLVMivl3 90-6
c
(o Or..
\\vc
AS ct MQr qruk uJQko3O 4V\
'4U. Q.'.1&.3 ¶MflQ ti,kke Qç 4c CO(JLç
)p
QC(&S0- PA( t\AL\v3
k%s&S%à.JL*QcI (A J('Q& axavm& 20 ttok. %Joka O\cy ujc
-1
(ou%j \icQ4 ws\- o4 YtS1d(rr
Qsr$
- c
-
.aLcev
jktsk pc
O(QO
ttQ
.S 544&
a
t'tov(
%
'.i4G
(9Qrk 0.c\c c\c
rnat
to\ Was
cQi'c O( ?rt\
4
c:# è(a O0((cttot'1
c JJQ 1A( is o c(ucco, cco (ar
(i
-0
S%oA \JO€.os - o 4i GASIv\J+ %
10
Ip
444
OOo OS
tdc
a\S
Qr (°t"woj- oc
vi *4 fçcvcct óp.
NJ
4rQ 1\ JQ( OiQ..oQ4\ dto0 cLc
uso
out
M1& -c0 Q'JCcOft'4v
baicç
ç ava
tCQOA t
c1v
4 I Adttk Rd.
Y¼ -M*.c çy tJiouh LQ5(
__
\o mct4
o k't
(V\ct t((QC cX;ZK
cç
v\k
cs VAC
(¼J0-o
r
L-
' (ça
w
ptsn).
is
- 1
wtctJ tJt' 0urf icLv\& Qnd &4ac csrcI
roId Q(on..ç JQ r\oItWa.ihs 'M\ 144
,k j Mk% t'(\OJL%t. ¼O(Jt m"\(T& ko cQC VoLs k (Ak1L1k ck%'((u(Ak to
AO\J( CcL fibm.
ottc-
4oot
r
.
\VQL' ok krQ. I\r'as kk s Qr cc Ok e*\br \4OA(WS CXIMWl k¼\L O A(J
tcWL - SQ (kY\cl&çQ.QA
MQc. ccc ctcw ccEO QAk(c
fl
-
cloL
c
° 4\QOU\(Yttc'
J(\JVQ\ tdc
n'.oc
-
(\QQAc c
&c
(
*'
Qoç tcjc.
(acoix Mot Wc \
% 0.
*jc Aw
ttscJt. \ua
¼JS32j *tccc \ar-*?
# Rubv At SQ((tt
RLct (oy
t4-ocI'ciA.. ç'\cs oko
&suc& sk o
'Mckc S\cc 1JJ'4N Ru
ek, Q*t — kc \ MQ OQA kD cOckas.c Vt.
qto19,1S
QLW(\ \ \S
OVsJt.
\k \ OL Z,w AVNQ- cLLk- *a
rQç c(cçççroc Of %
ov
QkYto
octoito.ct k&ctcc&c c4
\i..k 4j'coa.cl 'çWot vc &,
i
a.
c
' k4 CM*S V4 0 4
cc4
& \ &ejc
owtv.o4 a
Qc cftvA o\*to
oQscç o.M ?4QJL oQ QV cx(cL63r W'
i&1kk'O ~Q% , tvwlr-- vdN wakv, avcç M'OVi\& QJ
O(tt cQAtto,
Rec. ei\ ved
7LB Y
G 2014
OFFICE j
1hc(6ujw
S
% kow~
4-.cJ. +OQ4
--a. aQ kkNc CO. ernw'iso\S
Q.
k4
°t\v(&O)y
\
IGAV
?c
o\AJQe(
VNLL
\AJof\ce( coo\.
on
z:cç
tk
"
t\t
ClQkiylc~
oL:
C'
k
nak.ct
'duçTheatL4o uj
Gc Q
c(QL2c
-c
\1k.
v',tç
y
-
eomejc,
çç
vi
tkt\
c
o
t Ccn a c+h
mrart nch
cc
ss)
(crjç Qct
tot
a, C
C V4c\
t:vwk;ravNymv% V.
R
ILsC\
is tci-c€
vt
Qc'& \o ckja,
ThL
Ao %<u-'
W
cc
S\ec'Th'2i
d
vcc
ck
jLcc
'
(
cGuvcc tot,
ck ar
t
a
Q¼t ft(Y(Ct
a.
c
c
—
..c krc&\
co (t
I4 k
euid is
co
c 1kha
QQ Q
t
2
\
QV\c 'cc
A&d
c4(os
c
ktij
cccut
flcj
O'L cJOtdS c*PI(( Ij.Ot3 vqtio c
-4 tLQc3A • )v 4bA-JCcIMS
QCk
tt\ 1O\Id
cQ
\JQs U'
'c3
To
-
coft'wt
aâka
-
-
ocIr\or
QLA.tçc
.cwn 2OYtS (cAyto
4ia (rCkt
ThQQEfA(k. Cr.
(kc4 \
Th
\jcc% QY
0
4ie
ry\Ckktd
I
-
'Se
-
to
QSQ& Ot '4Y
OAI&
'''
c
#'Q
Q
sçiö"
a
I oca\
vj,
W~md
\
Q
&a
fl
Psk cxu\c1
kk
ot (ou( Planywvt
QAaL
•.
G
So
(r
(a\
oc
c
oc
4w
Reference Comment On The Draft Strathalbyn Town Plan 2014-2024
As an adjoining property owner to the proposed CLASS Sustainable Farm &
Community Garden I wish to comment on a number of aspects to this proposal on
pages 53 to 56 of the plan.
This initial proposed plan appears to have had a lot more work carried out on the plan
than the indication of the idea of a plan as put to the public meeting recently held in
Strathalbyn.
The plan as per the document is quite detailed in it’s allocated location, the ideas and
format detailed to the extent of allowing for future development.
The plan has a number of contentious elements in that the land allocated is
sandwiched between 2 parcels of the entire portion of this currently farming land.
The question that should be asked is this proposal conditional on undisclosed facts in
relation to the payment and purchase of this parcel of land, and what other
requirements will be forthcoming.
The Main Driveway and proposed entry and exit has been designed to be using
Hampden Way, which is a roadway designed for current and future residential
development access. This roadway has not been designed for semi commercial use as
laid out in this proposal.
As a walk way only is proposed from Adelaide Road, it would seem to me a very poor
town planning decision if the Adelaide roadway was not used as the Main Vehicle
Access and Hampden Way disregarded. The proposed Lavender Farm adjoining a
residential home is un satisfactory, particularly if the owner is allergic to Bee Stings,
aside from a very real loss of value to the adjoining property owners, and that
Lavender will not be a significant noise suppressor. A substantial all weather roadway
and bridge would be required for access to this development on this plan and that will
be expensive. Hampden Way is not suitable for any overflow parking, truck and bus
entry and exit, plus the considerable un necessary traffic entering Braemer Dve and
Hampden Way, including traversing 2 roundabouts on a residential access roadway,
and a considerable increase in traffic. It should also be noted that further residential
development traffic on both Breamer Dve and Hampton Way are to be expected. The
Class nature of business has a high degree of multiple daily in and outs.
The plan does not spell out or recommend what is to happen to the remaining split
farm land, the area adjacent to Braemer Dve and the North end of the original parcel.
The fact a sandwiched piece of land is proposed suggests that a subverted future
development for these parcels has already been considered, and after a period of time
a re submission of another proposal be forth coming.
I am not in principle against a soft use as an extension of a farming context in the
Class proposal, however I see on going conflict and un certainty if at this time prior to
the Class proposal being approved for Sub Division an overall plan and any Town
Planning Revision for this land be addressed at this time.
Don Greiveson
P.O. Box 184 Milang 5256
P 8537 0659
Land Owner with Meryl Greiveson
42 Hampton Way Strathalbyn
Comment On The Draft Strathalbyn Town Plan 2014-2024
I wish to make comment on the proposal of pages 14 & 15 and the One Way proposal
with additions on page 44 to Albyn Tce.
These ideas appeared to have been put forward by somebody sitting in an office who
does not frequent the town on a daily or weekly basis.
Changing Albyn Tce to one way I believe would cause problems to all the other
precinct streets, particularly the direction proposed, would require un necessary cost
for very little if any gain, and more likely create more problems than it solves.
Some business would be advantaged un fairly by this proposal, and perhaps more than
initially thought out perhaps diss advantaged. Other business in the town may also be
adversely diss advantaged.
The removal of parking spaces in the adjoining Dawson Street would affect the shops,
bank and particularly the post office for short term parking. It should be considered
that Post Office traffic will increase in future as home delivery of mail on a daily basis
is looking to go the same way as home delivered milk and bread. This would result in
more P.O. Boxes for daily mail pick up, and so a traffic increase will be expected and
some people will not appreciate the extra walking distance, let alone any
inconvenience. This would further complicate traffic movement in the adjoining
streets, Albyn Tce included. Raised Intersection Treatment at that location may balk
traffic, rather than the idea of controlled traffic flow.
The element of short term parking and areas for shop staff to park to ease parking
spaces is a priority that should be addressed prior to fiddling with any further short
term trials of the roadway. The long term parking for staff, and parking for visitors,
RV and Caravans included is an obvious priority.
Most of the suggestions in this section are expensive to implement and nearly as
expensive to un do if the plans fail.
Don Greiveson.
P.O.Box 184 Milang 5256
P 8537 0659
Linda & Ralph Byles
!
64 Shepherd Avenue
Goolwa SA 5214
PHONE
(08) 8555 5350
R: 0400 289 620
L: 0466 995 350
EMAIL
[email protected]
[email protected]
!
Monday, 25 August 2014
The Chief Executive Officer
Alexandrina Council
11 Cadell Street
Goolwa SA 5214
!
Dear Sir,
!
Flawed consultation process
!
I would like to point out what I believe to be a flaw in the
consultation process for the Strathalbyn Strategic Plan.
!
In the first call for submissions, I raised the need for a ring road
around Strathalbyn to cater for the expected rise in through
traffic resulting from the expected growth in Goolwa having
been identified as a growth area in the greater Adelaide Plan. !
Today I spoke with Tom Gregory who informed me that at the
recent public meeting, this suggestion was voted down as not
being desirable for the town and therefore would not be
incorporated in the strategic plan.
!
I believe this decision is far broader than should be made by a
parochial gathering. Surely you have planners who are
responsible for council wide matters and who would be fully
aware of projected traffic flows through Strathalbyn as a result
of the Goolwa growth. They would be the ones who would act
in the best interests of both Goolwa and Strathalbyn, the first in
terms of ease of traffic flow and the latter in terms of the
volume of through traffic in residential streets.
!
I recognise that the current Strathalbyn plan is only for the next
10 years and in that time the Goolwa growth may not warrant a
bypass road, however it will eventually come and rather than
exhibiting the SA characteristic of not showing foresight, the
plan should at least nominate a corridor for a future road.
!
Yours faithfully
!
Ralph D Byles
ANN BROOKFIELD
Response: draft plan,
Strathalbyn, 8/14
I respond to the CLASS garden, Action P. 54.
For Alexandrina Council as part of the public consultation process
8/28/2014
40 Hampden Way Strathalbyn 0487340777
40 Hampden Way Strathalbyn, 5255 June 2014
Mr. Mark Kulinski Chief Executive, Class
Dear Mr. Kulinski,
Your proposal for a community garden, June 5th, 2014, in The Southern Argus,
page 1 shows my home in the illustration, bottom left with no. 6 nursery bed on
the border of my garden: the division here is a wire fence. The illustrated
‘privacy’ border of natives along the community garden’s northern boundary
stops at the back, side corner of my property. My garden, my home and my
domestic life is completely exposed.
This means I am in full view of pedestrians who will be on the walking trail 34m from my compost area and shed. As well, I will be working side by side
with complete strangers at bed no.1: this could be most uncomfortable for
everyone.
With a massive area of land at your disposal this invasion of my privacy is
completely unnecessary and very distressing.
I recommend that the nursery bed no.6 (now no.1) be scrapped as there is
extensive bedding in the garden already which can be used in a variety of
ways- the bed to be replaced with a privacy screen of plantings which are an
extension of my garden, thereby creating a seamless and enticing garden
entrance which references the built environment. A feature like a low curving
wall in basket range stone would also facilitate this.
40 Hampden Way has an exquisite garden much admired in the community.
A site visit will make the situation clear and I invite you and a member of your
design team to visit my home.
Yours sincerely,
Ann Brookfield
[email protected]
This letter was ignored: I therefore submit my complete opposition to this
proposal at this site.
Firstly, - referring to site plan p.55- there is no buffer around my boundary at
all: the lavender garden is not high enough to be a buffer (p55). The boundary
between house and plot 1 is only 1 to 3m; both gardens are joined as one.
The walkway is about 8m.away. This means that all my private domestic
activities are in full public view and I am working with gardeners who are
complete strangers. The boundary to plot 1 which runs parallel to Hampden
Way should be screened as well because beyond it there is, in full view,
veggies, chook sheds, a car park, and three buildings - the back end of the
garden in fact - and positioned in this way to create ‘minimal visual impacts on
the entrance to the township’ (p55). What about the impacts on residents in
immediate proximity?
How does the garden relate and respond to the built environment to which it is
attached? The answer is, badly and not at all. The buffers required would block
light and vision around my home with a major loss of appeal. I would be living
in a fortress.
Is this okay? No, absolutely not.
The garden interrupts/intersects the sweeping, agricultural landscape; this land
is a rare heritage commodity. The proposal does not appear to support guiding
principle 7.
The visual contribution of the proposal to its residential/agricultural
surroundings is therefore zero: the need for natural screening, the reduction in
size of the project and its removal from a key tourist entry point tell us that the
project is not a suitable option here.
In addition, the garden compromises my property in the following ways:
According to the Encumbrance, my wire fence on the above boundary should
be replaced by color bond. My washing line should be removed and possibly my
sheds. I will not modify my property in any way.
There is no public parking permitted in the estate, or caravans, trucks, etc to
be in view, nor small commerce or business conducted here. The garden, which
seeks to join the estate, ignores all this- it is a flagrant disregard of a specific
urban setting.
Recently, I started an idea called Strath Garden Tours to promote goodwill and
local business. I am assisted by the Strath Garden Club. Tourists visit my home
and garden (and others) as part of a day trip and spend time in the CBD.
This supports Guiding Principle no.2
Results so far:
WEA heritage tours: May4 2014, Eureka Tours November7 2014, Endeavour
Tours, who are very keen, are interested in a 2015 booking.
Number of visitors: about 100. There is no charge to visit 40 Hampden Way.
The proposal will destroy this initiative
Strath Garden Tours is an initiative which is just what the town needs.
Furthermore, the property’s value will decline as neither buyers nor visitors
would enjoy the prospect of foot traffic, gardeners busy chatting and working,
noisy car park activity, chooks clucking, shade cloth billowing- invasive,
intolerable, and ‘in your face’ activity right on the doorstep. Or the alternative
of extensive natural screening to hide this activity, as well as create a fortress
ambience.
Do I pay $2500 per annum in rates for this unsolicited intrusion?
Please do not accept this proposal.
It is rude, thoughtless and, in fact, an absolute outrage.
Yours Sincerely Ann Brookfield
Ann Brookfield
Response to Strathalbyn Town Plan with reference to a selected number of council proposals
Response no.2
marilyn
8/29/2014
40 Hampden Way Strathalbyn 0487340777
Guiding Principle 1
It is essential that representatives of the indigenous community are acknowledged in a visible
way. Reflected in Action 1, p23.
Population and housing
With expected population increasing by about 1000 and housing availability already meeting
demand, the release of more land and a trend to smaller subdivision- hammerhead blocks for
example, is unnecessary. Please don’t allow this. Visitors do not come here to look at housing
estates, servo’s, shopping malls. Hampden Park should be capped and finished. Color bond
hillsides do not support the sentiments of Guiding Principle 2.
Finally, the data here deflects the aggressive demands of State Government’s relentless
population policy and those of local developers. Strathalbyn is on target.
Connection and consistency 5.1
This section greatly concerns me. We are dealing with a town where for over 100 years before
cars, residents have created tracks to their haphazard destinations. That is part of the town’s
charm. Do not sanitize the authenticity of this legacy. Certainly signage, indicators and safety is
required but please do not, for example, bituminize the track along the river to North Parade
from the Memorial Park or hack into river bank area to create cycle tracks or install art works
and picnic tables in gentle areas; the park bench in Jeff Street is an example of a sufficient
indicator. Work with trails rather than with a sense of finding fault: ‘Strathalbyn’s ‘sense of
place needs to be enhanced’ p.12. This is a rare heritage asset. Do not tamper with essence of
place. In addition, do not gentrify the railway idea.
Actions p.23 no.4
Installations are ephemeral or have a set duration, even in galleries and permanent collections.
Delete ‘permanent’. Replace ‘this’ with ‘it’. I think you mean ‘into the public realm with
beyond gallery experiences like site specific works, installations, collaborative community
works, residencies, art events etc. Consider re wording.
Actions p.51 no.2
This idea promotes tourism unique to the region and supports the strong local interest in
equestrian matters.
Actionsp.53 no 1
Here is an opportunity to utilize under used buildings, and historic homes as general medical
practice can be delivered successfully with modifications to these assets.
Action p54 no 1
This garden requires massive public funding -$400,000-$1 million? plus an ongoing operation
budget, exclusive to a small community group and is closed to the general public. It is not
commensurate with beneficial public outcomes. Do not accept current proposal.
Conclusion
The draft is thorough and useful working document.
30 August 2014
REF No.: 00043-001
Policy Planner
Alexandrina Council
PO Box 21
GOOLWA SA 5214
Attention: Mr Tom Gregory
Via email: [email protected]
Dear Sir,
RE:
RESPONSE TO THE STRATHALBYN TOWN PLAN
Following the recent release of the Draft Strathalbyn Town Plan for consultation, Ekistics Planning and
Design [“Ekistics”], have been engaged by Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd to review and respond to
the Town Plan.
First, we seek to put on record our deep concern regarding the timing of the Town Plan’s release, limited
consultation period in which to respond and subsequent intention to present the draft Town Plan to Council
on the 15th September 2014, the day prior to the Council moving into caretaker period before the November
2014 Local Government elections.
We note that the advertised release of the Town Plan was the 5th August however the Plan was in fact not
available to the public until the 11th August 2014. While we note the consultation period for the Plan was
extended from the 29th August until the 31st August 2014, this still only provides fifteen weekdays in which
to respond. Such a short timeframe in which to respond is hardly reasonable given that once adopted, the
Town Plan will guide the future of the Strathalbyn Township for at least the next ten years.
With feedback due on the 31st August 2014, Council staff will have roughly four to five business days in
which to collate, review and consider the submissions received, liaise with URPS and other consultants
engaged to prepare the Town Plan and to make any amendments to the Town Plan based on the ‘feedback’
received from the community. The Council agenda will presumably need to be finalised no later than the
9th September to enable the Council’s Chief Executive Officer to review the agenda and ‘signoff’ before
distribution to the Elected Members in time for the 15th September Council meeting.
It appears that the key factor influencing the consultation period and hasty completion of the Town Plan is
to enable Council to endorse the Plan prior to the ‘caretaker period’.
Rushing the completion of the Town Plan for political purpose and committing a newly elected Council to
a long-term strategic vision for Strathalbyn is highly inappropriate and inconsistent with the intent of
Council’s Public Consultation Policy which states that Council is ‘committed to open, accountable and
responsive decision making which is informed by effective communication and consultation between
Council and the community’.
On this basis, we are of the view that Council should not consider or endorse the Strathalbyn Town Plan
until such time as the public has been afforded additional consultation time, Council staff and the
consultant team are given sufficient time to thoroughly consider the consultation submissions received and
the final version of the Strathalbyn Town Plan is presented to the newly elected Council following the
November 2014 elections.
Notwithstanding the above comments, we provide the following preliminary comments on the Town Plan
document for the consideration of Council.
Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd have demonstrated significant interest in the future planning and
development of Strathalbyn through the preparation of a number of submissions to Council in the last
twelve months, including:
•
A submission in response to the Alexandrina BDP DPA, August 2013, prepared by Connor
Holmes;
•
The Strathalbyn Township Spatial Analysis and Re-Zoning Proposition, November 2013,
prepared by Connor Holmes;
•
A Strathalbyn Retail Needs Assessment, August 2013, prepared by Urbis P/L;
•
A Peer Review of Property & Advisory’s “Strathalbyn Retail Review”, October 2013,
prepared by Urbis P/L;
•
A submission in response to the Strathalbyn Town Plan Discussion Paper, June 2014,
prepared by Connor Holmes;
•
An Assessment of suitability of land for Primary Production - Strathalbyn Township, June
2014, prepared by Scholefield Robinson Horticultural Services (Charles Drew); and
•
Correspondence from Urbis in response to queries on their retail review findings, June
2014, prepared by Urbis P/L.
These documents, all previously submitted to Council, can be provided again on request.
This level of interest and commitment is generated through the direct connection Strath Property
Investments Pty Ltd has with the town as long term residents, business operators, land owners and active
members of the community who genuinely seek for Strathalbyn to prosper and remain a viable and desirable
place to live, visit and do business.
Of particular interest to Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd is the future of a 21 hectare parcel of land
(illustrated in the following figure) with frontage to Adelaide-Strathalbyn Road, Gransden Road, Braemar
Drive and Hampden Way.
00043-001⎹⎸30 August 2014
Page 2|6
Image care of ‘Strathalbyn Township Spatial Analysis and Re-Zoning Proposition’, Nov 2013, Connor Holmes
The Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd proposition presented to Council in November 2013 requested that
Alexandrina Council consider rezoning this land through a Development Plan Amendment (‘DPA’) which
supports and facilitates the future development of the land for a local retail/commercial centre integrated
with community, recreation and open space facilities.
We note that on 16 December 2013 Council resolved to “receive for information purposes” the Strath
Property Investments Pty Ltd rezoning proposition.
We note that the Town Plan makes reference to the rezoning proposition and states that “while a number
of retail studies have been reviewed during the preparation of this Plan… this Plan supports the modest
expansion of food, retail and non-food retail, commercial and health services proposed in the Property
and Advisory Report”.
00043-001⎹⎸30 August 2014
Page 3|6
This is despite the fact that Urbis, internationally recognised retail analysts, identified significant
shortcoming in the Property and Advisory Report methodology and recommendations resulting in a
significant under-estimation of demand (refer to Urbis ‘Peer Review – Property & Advisory, “Strathalbyn
Retail Review” report, October 2013’).
We note that this is not the first peer review undertaken on Property & Advisory work which raises concern
with the method and models used in their retail studies (refer to Deep End Services, ‘City of Holdfast Bay
– Retail analysis to inform planning policy’ [copy can be provided]).
The Town Plan suggests that all new shops and services should be located within the existing district Centre
Zone and that “a number of strategic land parcels that could facilitate additional retail activities within
the District Centre” have been identified. As outlined in previous submissions, the existing District Centre
is highly constrained due to site area limitations, unlikely displacement of existing uses, unsuitability of
certain locations and lack of retail continuity (i.e. High Street), the need to preserve the heritage character
of the township and fragmented land ownership. We note that the Connor Holmes investigations did not
identify any suitable land parcels for even a modest sized supermarket and that the Town Plan does not
mention any of the ‘strategic land parcels’ apparently identified.
The Town Plan goes on to advise that “Research, our professional experience and post-development
evidence from other country towns; cautious against ‘out of town’ shopping centre development due to
their adverse impacts on existing ‘main street’ traders.”
We note that the Town Plan (or the earlier Discussion Paper) does not present any case studies of ‘other
country towns’ which have been affected by new retail development. We have therefore not had the
opportunity to assess the relevance of these of examples to the Strathalbyn situation.
It appears there is a fundamental, unwavering opposition to any form of retail growth outside of the core
of the town centre. The Plan makes regular reference to ‘out of town’ retail. The land in question is located
approximately 250 metres north of the existing District Centre Zone boundary and surrounded on all sides
by residential development. This land can hardly be considered ‘out of town’!
Future development on this land will directly link with and form an extension of the existing town centre.
This is illustrated in the appended ‘Township Framework Plan’ map prepared by Connor Holmes which shows
the second iteration of the earlier November 2013 rezoning proposition (refer to Appendix 1).
The revised scheme incorporates:
•
An integrated service station complex on allotment 508;
•
Residential development for between 40-50 allotments off Hampden Way;
•
Commercial and community development presenting, but set well back from, Gransden Road
incorporating uses such as a:
o
supermarket;
o
hardware and garden centre store;
o
other speciality shops and a café;
o
enclosed community sports stadium (anchored by basketball facilities);
o
medical services;
o
public gym;
o
ambulance station;
o
park and ride and car parking facilities;
00043-001⎹⎸30 August 2014
Page 4|6
•
The CLASS community farm facility; and
•
A substantial twenty metre landscaped buffer around the entire site.
We understand all non-residential components of this scheme are fully costed and represent a local
investment of approximately $40 million (excluding the residential development). The scheme has fullyfunded operators ready to progress development on the land. Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd would
be pleased to meet with Council representatives to present and discuss the revised proposition.
The economic and employment benefits to Strathalbyn generated by commercial development (excluding
dwellings) of the land have been previously espoused and the current projections have been updated as
outlined in Table 1.0 below:
Table 1.0: Forecast Job Creation1
PERMANENT EMPLOYMENT
Employment Type
FTE Jobs
Direct
304.5 jobs
Indirect
456.8 jobs
Total
761.3 jobs
PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT (FTE)
(CONSTRUCTION RELATED EMPLOYMENT)
Employment Type
FTE Jobs
Direct
276 jobs
South Australia (direct and indirect)
1
Refer to assumptions provided in Appendix 2
560 jobs
Source: Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd and
‘The Property Development Industry Economic Impact Study’
prepared for the UDIA by Property Insights, March 2010
Clearly the proposed development would be a significant ongoing employment generator and would create
opportunities for younger people to have a career and employment in the area and also attract economic
investment in the region, including small business owners and independent retailers. The development will
result in the creation of employment opportunities, including of part time roles for younger and older
workers, management roles and new small business opportunities. Further details outlining the projected
employment creation can be found in Appendix 2.
While opinions on what should or should not be built on the Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd land is
obviously a point of discussion, we are disappointed that the Town Plan presents no other suggestions on
the future use of the land (other than supporting the CLASS proposal) despite URPS publically stating that
the current Primary Production Zone is unsuitable given the size and location of the land, and in particular,
its interface with existing residential development.
We agree with URPS’ public comments in this regard, which are also consistent with the report previously
presented to Council by Agricultural Economist and Principal Agribusiness Consultant, Charles Drew which
concludes that the subject land is unsuitable for primary production and is unlikely to ever support viable
agricultural enterprises (refer to previously issued report - Scholefield Robinson Horticultural Services
[Charles Drew], Assessment of suitability of land for Primary Production – Strathalbyn Township, 18 June
2014).
The Town Plan report refers to the need to rezone other land parcels (i.e. deferred urban to residential pg.
28) and the length of time this process can take but makes no reference to the need to reassess the zoning
00043-001⎹⎸30 August 2014
Page 5|6
of the Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd land notwithstanding a key function of the Town Plan is the
“identification of land to accommodate future needs for residential, recreation, open space, commercial
and industrial development” (pg. 5, Strathalbyn Town Plan Discussion Paper, URPS).
There is a sense that the land owned by Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd has been placed in the “toohard basket” notwithstanding:
•
The current zoning is unsuitable for its intended Development Plan use (i.e. agriculture and
the like);
•
The zoning is not reflective of the proposed function of land located within the 30 Year Plan’s
‘Planned Urban Land Boundary’;
•
The current District Centre is highly constrained and unable to provide the retail and
commercial outcomes necessary to sustain Strathalbyn into the future;
•
The subject land is well suited, in terms of its location, physical characteristics, infrastructure
and accessibility for a range of local uses and activities; and
•
The detailed retail review highlights that there is an existing and growing demand for
additional retail offerings within Strathalbyn in the short to medium term.
In light of the above, it is our view that Council should not be determining the future of Strathalbyn through
adoption of the Town Plan immediately prior to the election caretaker period and that there remains a
number of inconsistencies in the research behind the draft Town Plan which Council should investigate,
together with ensuring sufficient time is allocated to properly consider the feedback received on the Town
Plan and make any necessary amendments.
Yours sincerely
Richard Dwyer
Managing Director
Cc: Mr Phil Richards and Mr Bill Bullock, Strath Property Investments P/L
Encl: Strathalbyn Township Framework Plan, August 2014, prepared by Connor Holmes
00043-001⎹⎸30 August 2014
Page 6|6
APPENDIX 1
TOWNSHIP FRAMEWORK PLAN
(CONNOR HOLMES)
PROPOSED
RESIDENTIAL
SUBJECT SITE
VI
CT
OR
PROPOSED RETAIL
/ COMMUNITY
RECREATION / RESERVE
PROPOSED INTEGRATED
SERVICE STATION
WATER COURSE
NSE
MA
N
TO
ING
PLANNED URBAN LANDS TO 2038
LL
CA
D
ROA
E
D
RA
PA
MAIN ROAD NETWORK
ST
EA
TH
OR
AD
RO
N
RAIL NETWORK
E
AC
RR
TE
ST
WE
TH
U
SO
E
AC
RR
HERITAGE ITEM
TE
FUTURE RESIDENTIAL
TE
E
AC
RR
RETAIL
TOURIST / RETAIL
NE
R
OU
HB
AD
RO
COMMUNITY SERVICES
PA
R
KE
AS
R
AV
E
LAN
GHO
EK
ROA
D
ES
PRELIMINARY
AD
RO
DE
RG
RO
VE
KEY TOWNSHIP LINKS
CRE
LN
SA
N
RNE
E
MI
RO
AD
NU
0
250
500
m
1 : 20,000 @ A4
AD
RO
RO
AD
STRATH PROPERTY
INVESTMENTS PTY LTD
ILE
INA
CLIENT
EM
FOR
NIN
D
OA
T R
RES
WILLYAROO RO
AD
TITLE
STRATHALBYN TOWNSHIP
FRAMEWORK PLAN
PROJECT NO.
64458
DATE CREATED
21.08.14
64458_202_Township Framework.ai
REV 1 > 21.08.14
WEB: fyfe.com.au
HA
LEGEND
EMAIL: [email protected]
RB
OR
TO
UR
I
ST
RA
I
PROPOSED CLASS
COMMUNITY FARM
FAX: (08) 8232 9099
LW
AY
ABN: 57 008 116 130
AD
RO
PH: (08) 8232 9088
UE
EN
AV
LEVEL 3, 80 FLINDERS STREET, ADELAIDE SA 5000.
LONG VALLEY
ROAD
ROA
D
DR
EK
EX
AN
CRE
AL
PAR
IS
APPENDIX 2
PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT CREATION
PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT CREATION
The proposed development will create a number of direct and indirect permanent jobs, as well as the
generation of direct and indirect jobs during the construction of the centre.
1.0 FORECAST PERMANENT JOB CREATION
The number of permanent full time equivalent (FTE) jobs created by the development of a Neighbourhood
Centre of this nature are typically calculated on the basis of 2.2 FTE positions per 100m2 of proposed
supermarket floor space and 3.0 FTE positions per 100m2 of retail specialty shop floor space. This results
in a total of 70.1 FTE Jobs and 39.2 FTE jobs generated by the supermarket and specialty shops respectively.
In addition, Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd have estimated direct employment associated with the
broader complementary land uses as follows:
CLASS
Integrated Service Station
Gymnasium
Ambulance Station
Recreation (Basketball)
Hardware
Garden Centre
100 FTE jobs
33.6 FTE jobs
8.4 FTE jobs
14 FTE jobs
4.2 FTE jobs
28 FTE jobs
7 FTE jobs
On this basis, the proposed development will generate in the order of 304.5 FTE ‘direct’ employment
positions.
Typically, 1.5 FTE indirect jobs are created for every direct job created. On this basis, the proposed
development will generate in the order of 456.8 ‘indirect’ jobs in support of the overall
centre/development.
On this basis, the proposed development will generate in the order of 761.3 direct and indirect permanent
FTE jobs.
2.0 FORECAST JOB CREATION DURING CONSTRUCTION
The direct impact of the development on employment is further illustrated by ‘The Property Development
Industry Economic Impact Study’ prepared by the UDIA by Property Insights in March 2010. This study found
that a direct impact of $1 million invested in the South Australian property development industry results
in 6.9 FTE jobs generated in the property development industry. Further, this study reveals that the total
(direct and indirect) impacts of $1 million invested generates fourteen FTE jobs in South Australia.
On this basis, pursuant to this study, the proposed 40 million dollar development will generate 276 FTE jobs
in South Australian property development industry and 560 FTE jobs (direct and indirect) in South Australia
during the construction phase.
Employment forecasts associated with the proposed development are summarised in Table 1.0 below:
Table 1.0: Forecast Job Creation
PERMANENT EMPLOYMENT
Employment Type
FTE Jobs
Direct
304.5 jobs
Indirect
456.8 jobs
Total
761.3 jobs
PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT (FTE)
(CONSTRUCTION RELATED EMPLOYMENT)
Employment Type
FTE Jobs
Direct
276 jobs
South Australia (direct and indirect)
560 jobs
Source: Strath Property Investments Pty Ltd and
‘The Property Development Industry Economic Impact Study’
prepared for the UDIA by Property Insights, March 2010
ANGAS RIVER
CATCHMENT GROUP
Alexandrina Council
Peter Dinning, Chief Executive
PO Box 21,
Goolwa SA 5214
[email protected]
cc: Cr Keith Parkes, Trent Rusby, Anne Woolford, Barry Featherston, Kim McHugh, Katherine
Stanley-Murray, Shenn Mann, Lisa Kirwan
30st August 2014
Submission Re: Draft Alexandrina Council Strathalbyn Town Plan
The Angas River Catchment Group commends the Alexandrina Council for making a commitment
to consult with the community as part of the Strathalbyn Town Plan review. Members of our
group were involved in the Open house session at the Strathalbyn Library and are appreciative of
the opportunity to discuss our vision at the same time as viewing the expectations of others in the
community.
Our group has a strong focus on improving and protecting the natural environment to increase
biodiversity and wildlife habitat within the region, including the township of Strathalbyn. Together
with Council we aspire to meet the ideal future as summarised in the Alexandrina Council
Environmental Action Plan.
The EAP state these ideals as follows:
 The majority of remnant vegetation on Council land is being actively managed for
conservation.
 The extent, condition and connectivity of native vegetation within our region is improving.
 Our townships are greener, with urban biodiversity reserves and indigenous plantings in parks,
gardens and streetscapes a key feature of our urban landscapes.
 Our natural environment is valued by the community and we work together to improve our
knowledge and to preserve, protect and enhance the regions biodiversity.
It is important to maintain strong links between the EAP and the town plan. We suggest that
Strategy 2.2 in the EAP “protect and enhance remnant vegetation” also be highlighted in Section
5.5 of the Town Plan.
Angas River Catchment Group, PO Box 625, STRATHALBYN SA 5255
Public Consultation with the community has helped develop the goals and guiding principles in the
draft town plan. The ones relating to the natural environment are:
Goal
 We care for our natural environment and commit ourselves to conserving what remains intact
and restoring what is damaged.
Guiding Principles
 The natural environment, including our waterways and remnant vegetation will be protected
and restored to improve their health and to protect and expand habitat for wildlife.

Open space areas will be developed and maintained to meet the needs of a diverse community
providing for nature conservation, reflection, social interaction, play and physical activity.
We commend the Council for incorporating such responsible environmental objectives into the
Town Plan. The Angas River Catchment Group would like to ensure that the natural environment,
including the Angas River and it’s tributaries and the little remaining remnant vegetation within
the township is protected and enhanced to allow for the expansion of habitat for wildlife. These
areas of ecological significance and biodiversity within the town will be put under increasing
pressure as the town population expands. So it is imperative that significant effort is made to
ensure these areas are preserved for their intrinsic values and also for future generations.
The Angas River is home to the endangered Southern Pygmy Perch and the River Blackfish and we
would like to see these species highlighted in the Town Plan with the reassurance that any future
development along the Angas River will not adversely affect these and other significant native
plant and animal species.
The Angas River Catchment Group would also like to offer their assistance and expertise to
support Council to achieve this, including helping with identifying ecologically significant areas. We
are keen to be involved in any planning of infrastructure to minimise impacts on our precious
remnant biodiversity and also in restoring areas of significance according to Council’s guiding
principles for the natural environment.
This town plan along with the EAP are extremely important documents. We would like to work
with you to ensure they are successfully implemented.
Yours faithfully
Merri Tothill
Chair person Angas River Catchment Group
2
STRATHALBYN TOWN PLAN CONSULTATION SUBMISSION - MYSAY
Guiding Principle Three.
Actions to Increase Access.
Explore one way access for Albyn Terrace.
Albyn Terrace is part of the Connected Mainstreet Spine. Sunter Street and Albyn Terrace
is the direct connector between High Street and Dawson Street. Making Albyn Terrace
one way would destroy that connection with no benefit.
(6) Promote and enhance pedestrian laneway ( Swale Street) access.
Should Swale Street read Sunter Street.
(8) Introduce bike lanes and cycle links to Wilyaroo and neighbouring towns. Is this
suggesting bike lanes to Milang - Langhorne Creek - Woodchester. If so waste of
ratepayer money.
Actions on Enhancinci Place.
Consider relocation of some car parks in main street precincts to increase street
activation.
Car parks cannot be relocated. Strath is a working town. It needs car parks in the main
streets. What is street activation?. There is already outdoor dining outside most eating
places. Why remove car parks?. Hookers were recently forced to pay tens of thousands
into Councils car park fund for a development on Albyn Terrace and now there is
consideration to removing car parks from Albyn Terrace.
Public toilets.
Strath has more public toilets than any town I know. They are well spaced throughout
town. Waste of ratepayers money.
(6) Event Space - amphitheatre.
Already there in the Soldiers Memorial Garden. Rotunda was always used for concerts.
Look after and improve on what is already there.
Guiding Principle Four.
Heritage Assets.
(3) Encourage high quality contemporary building design that is sympathetic to the historic
context rather than poorly executed reproductions.
1)
28 AUG 201
BY ..................................
28 AUG 2014
2
I was not aware that poorly executed reproductions were encouraged. I don't know of any.
If high quality contemporary building design refers to things like the Council Library, the
community see that as a monstrosity.
Guiding Principle Five.
Natural Environment.
Maintain strong support for Community involvment in revegitation etc.
Only in relation to an overall plan and under strict supervision. Unfortunately some of the
sites created by community groups with their own agenda and misguided ideas are vermin
infested fire hazards.
Upstream land management.
The rivers condors upstream of Strathalbyn are in very good condition. The envonmental
disaster along the river and creeks within Strath and downstream is a result of Council
mismanagement and neglect. Unless Council acknowledge that nothing will change.
Guiding Principle Fourteen.
Actions to Support Disability Directions.
The process by which the CLASS proposal was incorporated into and endorsed by the
Town Plan is reprehensible.
The CLASS proposal for the Adelaide Road development was presented to Council
(Mayor and Cc to CEO) by letter dated 22 April 2014 accompanied by a Business Case
and concept drawings, now figures two and three. CLASS were seeking Council support
for re-zoning, Town Plan endorsement and community support.
No mention was made of the CLASS proposal in the Town Plan Discussion Paper released
as the key part of the Public Consultation in June. The proposal was not subject to the
public consultation in June.
The CLASS proposal appeared in the Public Consultation Report. The location, although
known, was not identified. It was left for the community to assume it was presented during
the consultation period.
On 30 July Council held what it described as a Strathalbyn Town Plan Community
Information Session in the Town Hall. Those attending were handed an agenda and a
document containing a number of propositions to be voted on. The CLASS development
was not mentioned on the agenda.
A number of propositions relating to CLASS were contained in various parts of the
propositions document and worded in different ways. It was not obvious until a question
was asked that some of the propositions related to the CLASS development on the
Adelaide Road.
2BAUG 2014
BY ............................
L
Figures two and three were not shown at the meeting despite the claim in the Draft Town
Plan that the concepts were provided by CLASS to assist the community to understand the
proposal. They were witheld.
When specific questions were asked about the scale and detail of the proposal those
questions were met with vague replies and claims of ignorance, despite the fact that all the
information sought was in the letter, business case and concept drawings supplied in April
and the Development Application lodged with Council on 14 July.
Council staff were at the meeting. They heard the questions being asked. They knew the
answers. They chose to remain silent.
The only people " consulted " about the CLASS proposal were those at the meeting and
they had information vital to making an informed decision witheld from them. They were
asked to vote without prior notice on a development proposal the details of which, though
known, were witheld from them despite specific questions being asked.
The only question in the proposal document regarding the preferred location of the CLASS
was not put to the meeting.
People attended the meeting on 30 July in good faith. They made it very clear they do not
support a development of the type proposed by CLASS on the Adelaide Road site. The
consultation process, as it related to the CLASS proposal was a sham and breaches
Alexandrina Councils Public Consultation Policy.
The Strathalbyn Town Plan must include that the community do not support a development
of the type proposed by CLASS in their Letter and Business Case on the Adelaide Road.
Re-zoning Proposal.
Letter from CLASS dated 22nd April acknowledges the need for an eventual change of use
(re-zoning) for the proposed Adelaide Road development site because of what they will
need there, as explained in the last para of page one of their letter to the Mayor and seeks
Council support for a Development Plan Amendment.
Proposed development endorsed by Town Plan despite community opposition.
Community have made it very clear they don't support the land being re-zoned.
No conclusion reached or Action given in Town Plan on re-zoning proposal. Why not?.
Comment on Plan.
Plans should be presented in clear concise plain english. This draft plan is a very good
example of gobbledygook.
//J.Z.
Peter Sem
1 Abbotts Lane,
Strathalbyn.
ceive
i2
3 0AUG
heponq lo m
FFICE
/ IHLI
brA'Sr C17U/J
is- c&d I9(g 2C/4 bul
f7jV
2J
LiiA' ii Jio
r±
=J
è
Cot2L/ 127Y? OfPQr7'Ut)i7z k t/eLn
id )
Wckec/ Oi
ac
712'Te
LccLiIyVech9
LhL,2LCJVLJ7J3ieii Ichi7cP - 1irif Of iLrc/d'1
__The 3cQJk !ILig- 7Fet/
_LMQ
..p/7
t2d
i2e qqW *5iIg zJei yc
TiLpcc /J
_ri/X'i-rifr h2d pfeicfcr?ai e'peri7sc;41-
kF /70
P dia'he ffh/ P/. 22J2Z 7!222&
er-flOK'S?
7dAr cl t Yr
P2
Ma
rhg
1101 (Ofl?L?2ti I42c/et)Js
L2d/0--p- wd,LQJ1e nc ref cex
1?c7 42r# *øi41crc4ti fr'r&evd- jjron
on&v8y
_i9ii J? iQ
r cxzc rf{ LQM8;inYccji_d,00itvher'
72 1k3I22
çJot,j (recLi
ec ccowce c/oe.cn
1..
P1
JL(LW. phL ctqf c k
Lf2
beer) kc,,-Yj-)cor"14q.(r~
/YL
'Ot?
_JJ47 /c (I- lvv ulol be
ic
i"
cIi
JFAe
chan@e.
.L LJig2cri
2
yL
____
be,
sqb
_L 12,,)k.jJ
alKfca_h, cr Jmer
e-(ho4~4t v
lb/eU7
72/c.
7QL-J" P/z'o & ddr
dbec&re eZt'r
Ji- cYecqrV6' f'V
/s nofor,
_2QX JL&ee
dd
/It"CI,9/fx9noIc/i?a
vr11
r1&#r'
61,
x&"o
Qt'.
/AIe.
Rc'j So that
_G 7he btr'c'(
m
ip
SO
di.
--ci
P/en N&pi9/e./7 P7toS('7/(
o,
Pj2
,9/eo
of d,v,
_, cscr,e
bv&kpmcvL Pir, ?/ /,cWf4 ,"me Scffl
____2O//Cgde7nes me ItO trr13,z)
'1W/&ri
________
of
/9* 1i £mrnuitq$ecs-im 3'oJu/2çj4 ,seemed
_ -Ao ,vie Aiat a mai!2iy (f7½ep4Q/e ,c/pd/oJ'e
-
h9(1ff/q9 I Vf//) €
7th2q tV/7 hc
1 /.
N- mcie- be riof'd i1-hà~ he commun#u hr no/ ??er'
option lo sy Ihej on L41nt gn t'th, n/g Mre.
'
PJ t2O ñc'7
- /.4.15 (r/oci/dcV 4c77r) /..4.4
6 4 vhF&) ckr)c,Ldec/&c Ae, Ii rtcice f Me
rit)ec co ddr. ae
ic/ir' balf
J?rK k'/
prTe12j3i-e(1Qb*3i -" '7 £A7C/ 1J17 t IF II)CJC1Qt'CI "7
he '9 7iiri P/&r)? / scu the
of the 4rr R1r? /(1-h r f4 /-hei scg.s , 6 ut
i duder,eo
_P7;~ frS 7'Uflc 7T- &cias ' 1e
- isn ji' We urba r
4a1b/r); I17 /cçJ75/J ' c/n
ave-
f
20/4 —oI
7ir P/&r-LLpec±*he 19; ,1C1 Oc 1JtOr? Cre/
fl/daVe, Alo&1',-r?tId/e Cr- eks1 /?e1r2cOfl c1/
-4/57
lk
9-
/
LiqJ
ui-" -1d'i
'/ -/T
I- cimn
1hh/4LtJ19'Lf'&2!/__
j0
zi
nJ&(271c)g,Wec1s w £edreedc ) rcibrh,
_________
g peLc/ ,}ie1ft
QbVc
.
Hhe CC /r7o
7eap€pp/e tjo/cl
Jerfri 1-hI& ae,tjh,cI-, is airrecHy
r,K/Qp&2
ccLPi'rn
'P'
PGxb
:.
52oIr7(
eve
Ji&cti/1
t±
r
Y?DtL9flC' ThAt
7
lot
o v'ecria hfr/cir
0i M aL±}/fxat2dnA OP2
-
I^dP/- TuoWn
M~~A%AtC flQLb ih c/u
re1eJr
: i (WiI P/ A(P&<i'9/e / t&of 76
7E
-k7Dt2LLüA4e1?247Q
rrouiivinq:
o(?
i7/c2('7/r
t'f 7)-
In w/v'cJ.i2ie
g4ottW rj/a7M
w//
AZ (/W ('efl'mbr jifrej-j
CoikOf4CA(C/&rc*
- fpprec/3e
4
4/OC176kIng 1VJV/??' A7
rt1,rnJL/
walol h
i P/ar diLrc &sicr ,cpec
bc/rd
3Q,frJ I X14 Sh2ibctij/Cou/7c//
would like ,h4ç cubm,&c,2f7ie ackiw ui/eo'geo' /Jvi*,ou