Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-07-03 Daily Xml

Contents

CITY OF ADELAIDE PLANNING

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:07): I seek leave to give a brief explanation before asking a question of the Minister for State and Local Government Relations concerning reports about a 'conservative attitude in Adelaide to tall building projects'.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD:The Advertiser today, as members would be aware, features a report on page 4 about high-profile architects who proposed building a tower of some 108.5 metres tall in the CBD, which would make it the second tallest building in Adelaide. Asked whether such a large-scale project was likely to be approved, the proponent of the project said:

Probably not, because Adelaide is verging on conservatism and we've got to get it past the Government Architect, the Development Assessment Commission and council, so it's a daunting task.

He added:

Adelaide has been considered by other states like a circus tent—looking down from Westpac House and fanning out.

My questions to the government are:

1. What measures is the government taking to ensure that this and other significant investments are not strangled by red tape and lost to other Australian capital cities?

2. Given that the height of the building, at 108.5 metres, would only just put it in the top 50 building heights in Australia, why is there not a speedy passage for this development?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for State/Local Government Relations) (15:09): I thank the honourable member for his most important question. Indeed, it goes to some very challenging policy issues. Unfortunately most of those actually come under the purview of planning, so I am happy to refer those questions to the Minister for Planning in another place and bring back a response.

Although this is obviously not my ministerial area of responsibility, nevertheless I do just want to put on the record briefly that this government has indeed been very concerned about some of the matters that the Hon. Dennis Hood has raised today, in terms of issues of being able to expedite developments and to be able to reduce red tape and other regulations around developments and planning approvals. Already the Minister for Planning, the Hon. John Rau, has put in place a number of initiatives to assist with that, and I know that he continues to put his mind to these matters and to look at ways of improving access to developments without compromising, obviously, public amenity, safety and those sorts of things.

One initiative that was put in place some time ago that honourable members will be aware of is that large development projects—I just cannot remember whether it is over five million or 10 million—

An honourable member: Ten million.

The Hon. G.E. GAGO: Ten million—in the CBD were taken out of the hands of the Adelaide City Council and given to a specific planning authority. That was to address some of the issues of delays and some of the fairly conservative elements that had been in the Adelaide City Council at the time, that were very reluctant or very slow to approve large developments. That is one initiative.

I know the Hon. John Rau has also put in place significant measures around improving the heights of buildings as well, lining up with our 30-year plan, mapping our main transport corridors, and bringing about changes to the height regulation of buildings along those corridors so that we can develop higher density residential developments and other commercial activities along those corridors whilst leaving our green leafy suburbs basically unchanged.

They are a couple of things that we have looked at already. As I said, I know the Hon. John Rau has a particular passion for this area, and I know that he continues to work in this area to bring about improvements. However, as I said, I will refer those questions to the Hon. John Rau in another place and bring back a response.