HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2010-11-10 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

KENT TOWN DEVELOPMENT

The Hon. B.V. FINNIGAN (14:36): My question is to the Leader of the Government, Minister for Urban Development and Planning. Having worked in Kent Town for nearly 11 years, I would be very interested if the minister could provide details of the recent major project declaration of a proposed six-star hotel, convention and retail complex at Kent Town.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (14:36): I recently declared a proposed $120 million six-star hotel, retail and convention complex at Kent Town as a major project under the relevant provisions of the Development Act. The development proposed by the Urban Construct group is located within the business zone of The City of Norwood, Payneham and St Peters on the north-eastern corner of the intersection of Dequetteville Terrace and Rundle Street at Kent Town.

The proposed development comprises a 15-storey landmark building focusing on green energy design and carbon reduction initiatives. If approved, this project is expected to create 200 new jobs during the construction phase and 350 permanent jobs within Adelaide's eastern suburbs. The site is near major transport corridors, close to the Parklands and within walking distance of the central business district, which really makes it an ideal candidate for infill development as part of the 30-year plan's objective of allowing our city to grow up rather than just grow out.

The proposed hotel development also seeks to preserve and improve the heritage listed Marshall House as a focal point of its design. The preservation of heritage listed buildings in Adelaide is an issue that is regularly raised with me in connection with development in the CBD and elsewhere. As members would be aware, there are a number of costs associated with the preservation of our heritage listed buildings, not just with ongoing maintenance. It is often the case that many of our heritage listed buildings require significant, ongoing and high cost renovations which act as a disincentive to ensuring the continued upkeep of our built heritage. These costs may relate to compliance with modern building codes such as disability access, fire safety, etc.

The challenge we face is to enlist developers who are willing to retain heritage listed buildings, including the integration of heritage listed buildings as part of proposed developments using complementary and good design. The proposed Kent Town development aims to complement and incorporate the Marshall House state heritage listed building on the site, which is located opposite to the Malthouse state heritage listed building and the Malthouse apartment tower. Careful design will be required to ensure that the proposal is a landmark building while respecting the heritage value of Marshall House.

The external design of the proposal seeks to integrate the state heritage listed Marshall House into the podium, utilising it as the entrance and front of house for the hotel complex whilst retaining the heritage qualities of the building. This site has previously attracted interest, but various projects have been constrained by height restrictions in the local development plan and the existing state heritage listed Marshall House building.

As I mentioned, the proposed hotel development is next to the Malthouse apartment complex which also incorporates and preserves historic elements of this site; thus the proposed development could preserve a heritage-listed building but also complement the Malthouse apartment complex opposite.

This proposal raises a number of important issues in terms of planning policies that will require the further detailed assessment afforded by the major project provisions in the Development Act. These include the interface with Marshall House, the impact on adjoining residences and businesses, ecological sustainable design elements, parking and traffic issues, and the capacity to deliver a unique gateway to the Kent Town and Norwood precinct.

I understand this proposed development will face its detractors, but the major project provisions allow the highest level of scrutiny taking in the views of the community, local councils and various agencies. The major project provisions allow for the concept to evolve in response to this consultation process and also include scope to impose conditions on any approval so as to ensure that issues raised during the assessment process are adequately addressed.

Similarly, the process carries the risk of an early no, with no appeal provisions, if the proposal is found to be unacceptable. Unlike those who find an excuse to oppose any development, I believe the best course of action is to embrace a process that allows us to weigh up the pros and cons and make a final assessment on the merits.

As many members would be aware, a major development declaration is not a fast track, and it most definitely does not signal the government's support or otherwise for a project. What it does is trigger the most rigorous assessment process available under South Australia's development laws. It also provides much greater scope for input from the community and government agencies than afforded by the council development assessment panel process.

For a proposal to be declared a major development, it must be considered of major economic, social or environmental importance and, secondly, it must be considered appropriate or necessary to use this section for the proper assessment of the proposal. Declaring this project a major development will ensure that every aspect of the proposal is rigorously assessed. Through my declaration that this project is a major development, the next step in the process is for the proponent to lodge a detailed application with the independent Development Assessment Commission. The commission then determines the issues the proponent is required to further investigate by providing clear guidelines, as well as setting the level of assessment.

In this regard, the commission can require the preparation by the proponent of a development report, a public environment report or an environmental impact statement. The next step would then be for the proponent to undertake the necessary investigations and preparation of the required documentation before submitting it to me for public release.

All submissions regarding the project, including any of the issues raised by local councils, will require a response before a final assessment by the minister. I look forward to progress on this assessment; allowing Adelaide to grow up rather than allowing it to keep growing out is a key objective of the 30-year plan. That is the proposition we took to the state election and, in the absence of an alternative planning policy presented to the people of South Australia, we can best assume that the opposition also supports the strategy.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT