Seacliff Park development update

Updates for the Seacliff Park Development

​Sept 2020 update 
Boral did announced that the Haul Road would commence in July 2020 and be completed in approximately 6 months. However there has been a further delay. No reason given but Boral are still positive it will happen this year. The developer is still engaged in the process and is understood to be in discussion with the department of mines on aspects of the development.  This is a critical part of the DPA sign off process,
 
Both Councils have been approached on the condition of the site, particularly the northern boundary on Scholefield Road . This is an ongoing concern regarding appearance and fire safety as we approach summer.

​Read on for more

​April 2020 update 
Our September 2019 forum was the culmination of our activities to raise awareness of this significant development. The findings of our community survey and forum were submitted to Councils.  Although not opposed to developing the site, we took on board community concerns, and with the help of several locals made a formal submission detailing a number of issues ( see below), and encouraged community members to do likewise. Many of you did. Thank you!

Despite all our efforts, including appearing at the Public Hearing, the Draft Seacliff Park Residential and Centre DPA, has been approved by both Marion and Holdfast Bay Councils with minor changes. We are going to formally express our disappointment to Councils and the Minister of Planning with the process and the fact that both the Association’s and individual’s concerns appear to have been ignored.   It will then be submitted to the Planning Minister in SA Govt for sign off under the current Planning legislation.

Even if this proposed DPA is approved by the Minister without changes, ​the final translation into the new Planning and Design Code still carries some risks as to how well the DPA will fit into the new framework..watch this space! 

The only opportunity to influence the final outcome is potentially to lobby the State Govt - House of Assembly & Legislative Council on the issues raised to see if they agree that there needs to be some enhanced requirements for this major development.

Meanwhile the developer is naturally feeling apprehensive over the time delays. We understand that Boral has put a moratorium on expenditure under COVID-19 measures and has put off any financial commitment to the new Haul road until September 2020, which is a critical part of the DPA sign off, along with an infrastructure deed - storm water agreement with City of Holdfast Bay. The developer certainly needs to be acknowledged for staying power.

23 October 2019 - The Association made a presentation to the Public Hearing on the DPA click here 
The presentation was attended by over 25 people and there were 8 presenters. Council had received over 30 submissions. The presentations were well received and we will monitor the progress from here as Councils sift through the submissions and rework the DPA for a final draft to go to State Planning. Check progress on their website. Overall they have a big task ahead of them as time is of the essence due to the current State Planning reforms.

17 October 2019 - The Association has made a submission on the propose DPA  click here 
This submission was based on community feedback from the Survey click here for details, and a detailed review of the proposed DPA by the committee, with input from local experts. Thank you for all your support and inputs.


We will be attending the Public Hearing on 24 October 7pm @ Brighton Civic Centre and making a presentation. Go to council website to see all the public submissions here

In summary our submission, on your behalf:

The key issues which are of concern and are not adequately addressed by this proposed DPA are as follows:
General

• Process of consultation – considered inadequate; time frame needs to be extended; more up to date and detailed evidence provided; published in a form which is more accessible to a lay person.
• New Planning Portal – Unclear how the DPA will fit into the new Planning Framework, as it appears to be inconsistent.
• Construction Activity – The impact and management is not covered in the DPA
• 5049 CC Survey – Highlights many of the issues covered in this submission Other than this survey, no empirical survey of residents has been conducted.

DPA 

• Desired character statement – not enough information provided for the community to determine if this will be a good fit?
• Zoning Plan Comparison – The proportion of commercial to residential development has increased from 2015, the increase is incompatible with the local character and it reduces the potential for more housing options and open space.
• The size of the commercial building upper limits is inconsistent with the 2012 vision, the character statement in the DPA and suggests a district rather than a local hub in the community. It is likely to prove unviable (see retail) and should be reduced.
• Residential Density – the minimum block sizes are significantly less than the Draft Housing Diversity DPA and also apparently smaller than the new Planning Design Code. Given the issues experience elsewhere in the City of Marion and the potential adverse impacts on the quality and configuration of green space; this aspect needs to be reviewed in more detail.
• The maximum height of 6 storeys –It is unclear from the DPA where the opportunity for the maximum height would occur and the likely impacts of this unique feature in this DPA. How will that be managed under the DPA?
• Environmental Performance – This DPA should incorporate high performance ESD standards for this development via stretch targets and incentives?
• Overall Design Outcomes - Councils should develop site specific design guidelines to reinforce the character envisaged in the DPA and ensure this is truly an exemplar development for the area and State?
• Stormwater management – The DPA should ensure that the final solution is retention on site rather than putting a higher load on the underground pipe network.
• Site Contamination – Can the DPA be approved based on an out of date report? Councils should insist on the review and monitoring of the critical groundwater and vapour conditions prior to the approval of the DPA?
• Traffic & transport infrastructure – Has the supporting study taken into account the findings of the City of Holdfast Bay’s Integrated Transport strategy and the future impacts of major upgrades eg Hove Crossing. Also has it considered the impacts of this development on the smaller surrounding road network, already suffering from “rat running”.
• Retail Development The retail reports are out of date and make some assumptions that are not valid eg “trade area”; current retail offers in the local area. Demographics, topography, local transport habits, barriers to access (Eg Brighton Rd) and recent shopping trends are all ignored.
• Social Impact – Given the scale and impact of this development and the minimal level of consultation/engagement conducted with the community, will council undertake more research into the long term impacts via detailed modeling and engagements to assess the true impacts of this significant change on the community before approving the DPA?

 

​The overall concern is that whilst the community is keen to see this land developed and acknowledge the commitment of the developer and councils to deliver the project. Due to the complexity and the sheer quantity of technical information (some out of date and incomplete), the ability to fully understand the scope is diminished. Further, the limited level of community engagement, concern that the outcome will not deliver on the promise and adversely impact on the level of amenity, all create a lack of confidence.
 
It is clear that there are still more questions than answers. Given how long this DPA has been in process, the community and the process is again under pressure, possibly due to the potential impacts of the new Planning Design Code roll out.
 
This is too important to rush. Please take our submission as a request for better, accessible information for the community and more active engagement in this important project.
 
Public Forum Report 19 Sept 2019
Introduction
Many of us have been waiting for 30-40 years for this moment. This opportunity to input into the most significant development within our area, since the original subdivision in the 1940’s. For Marino in particular, this proposal represents a doubling of its effective population and the long overdue provision of more varied housing and amenity options.

The Association has been following the often slow progress for many years and has shared in the collective frustrations.

We have established 10 task groups to manage and track the key community issues. The Cement Hill Development TASK Group lead by Fleur Lerwill and Dennis Southern, is one key group that has been working with both Councils to ensure the community voice is heard in this process. We prepared and submitted a position paper on the development, (see" Strategy Proposal "  below), which has been shared with you previously via the website, and forwarded to both Councils and the developer.  In essence we are supportive of the development for many reasons, not least of which is the fact that it is well overdue!!  Our support is of course conditional on the development achieving high quality sustainable development outcomes, with exemplary environmental and design credentials. 

• One that sets a new bench mark for medium density development with housing diversity and appropriate commercial content. 
• We also expect the major infrastructure impacts beyond the site to be addressed as part of this development. 
• Overall we are looking forward to a high quality development that enhances our community incorporating high quality and useable public spaces.
• We need to be confident that the process of remediation and construction also achieves an exemplary standard, in terms of impacts on the community. Especially as it is likely to be over 10-15 years in the making. 

Through both Councils and State Government we will continue to engage with the development’s progress on behalf of the community, to assure you that we will continue to advocate for a development that will meet and exceed our not unreasonable expectations, and  protect the interests of our community.
 
Forum report
Around 190 people attended the 5049 Coastal Community’s Public forum on the Cement Hill Development DPA (Development Plan Amendment) consultation process on 19th September. As a joint-venture, presenters from both local councils set out the process for the DPA and answered questions from the community on its impacts locally. Copy of presentation here

It is worth noting that this forum was not a statutory requirement. Council Staff accepted our invitation because our association is so actively engaged in the local community. Council were generous with their time and all 6 stayed on afterwards to continue the conversation with the community.

The forum was facilitated ably by Mike Rutherford, our Vice President. Questions were canvassed from the community before the event, and forwarded to the speakers ( see presentation for details), and additional questions (see here) came from the floor on the night. As usual for something this significant, there were more questions than answers.

We asked everyone attending to also make written responses to enable us to make our submission on the  DPA to the Councils on your behalf. Over 50 of these have already been submitted. A copy of that response sheet is available for those who did not attend. These must be with us by October 5th. Click here. These can be download, filled in, scanned and emailed it to us or hard copies placed in the Marino Community Hall post box.  You can also make your own submission to council based on your review of the DPA documentation. The deadline for this is 17 October. Please go to the website,  follow the links and have your say.   If you can please copy us in on your submission to Council.

Thank you again for your support of our forums It makes our efforts worthwhile and sends a strong message to Councils that the community values democracy and is serious about participation in decisions that affect us. Special thanks to all who submitted questions, asked questions on the night, and have subsequently offered to help with this campaign.

The presentation on 19 Sept by Councils focused on the process and addressed the pre-submitted community questions. Many of the technical questions were addressed; however there was a feeling of resignation in the room. A sense that whilst Councils were doing all they could to create a regulated framework for a development that would enhance our community, there was a feeling  that the developer would make their own decisions on the final content within the final DPA framework based on commercial considerations. This is, of course, the Developer’s right. So to a degree, the final outcome depends on the developer’s approach to the subdivision, and the detailed design and approvals process. This is our main opportunity to influence the outcome.

No detailed plans, diagrams or visualisations were referenced as part of the presentation, although copies of the zoning plans were displayed. We believe that the materials submitted at the 2012 presentation were much more accessible for the public as they included artist’s impressions and details on the types of development envisaged, including the concept for the 6 storey apartments.

The impression we were left with was that the community would have little influence beyond the DPA . Also it was unclear exactly what we could influence.  The approval of the subdivision is likely to be a State Planning matter. Once that has been approved the developer may sell off components of the land to other developers such as the retail, medical and residential precincts. Those developers in turn will go through the detailed approval processes required under the new State Planning Authority, informed and controlled as far as possible by the DPA. We believe that this process is due to be rolled out next year and is designed to centralise and standardise approvals of development with less reference to local Councils and communities.

DPA Summary
The DPA or Development Plan Amendment is a legal document that sets out to rezone the old cement hill site for a mixed use development and set some clear constraints for the developer(s) in designing and delivering a significant development at the gateway to our area. The DPA is a developer-lead initiative which means that although the local Councils facilitate the process as required by the State Planning legislation, the developer is the sponsor of the process based on their desire to get the best yield from the land they are invested in. The Councils engaged independent professional Planning consultants to undertake the task to ensure that the needs of the developer and the community are taken into account as well as adhering to State Planning Controls. The outcome will be a balance between all these constraints.

The DPA is a detailed document and does, as a legal document include “Planning Speak”. It is also supported by a suite of technical reports covering environmental issues and infrastructure (traffic, services). As such, accessibility to the DPA is limited unless you are well versed in Planning matters or have a good deal of time to review the details and reach a fully informed conclusion.

The draft document is out for consultation until 17 October followed by a public hearing on 24 October. This is a great opportunity for the community to input into the final document.

As a community we need to be confident that the DPA will provide adequate controls over the development to protect community interests.

Next steps:
5049 Resident’s Association

• Compile and collate the survey results, share them with the community and Councils
• Continue to lobby and collaborate with Councils for more accessible information for the community, so that we are able to have confidence that this development proposal will be a good fit and not unduly impact on our amenity
• Approach the developer to assist the community in understanding the intent
• Establish clearly what aspects of the DPA we can influence
• Gather local experts in the community to input into the review of the DPA to support the Task group in this complex task of review and submission
• Complete our review and make a submission to the on the DPA to Councils on the community’s behalf.
• Prepare a presentation to the DPA public hearing
• Continue to lobby both Councils, State Government and other agencies
• Continue to communicate our activities and findings with the community

The Community

• To be encouraged to make their own submissions
• Invited to attend the hearing to witness proceedings and a show solidarity

 
STRATEGY PROPOSAL - 16 AUGUST 2019Current Policy
5049 Coastal Community support the Development in principle as a potentially positive contribution. We will continue to monitor and seek opportunity for influence within our capacity; and reserve the right to support direct action by the community if the need arises.

The 5049 Community Group’s role is to represent the community in submitting their ideas/concerns by presenting submissions and recommendations to the State Planning Authority, City of Marion, City of Holdfast Bay and the Developer. We intend, with the support of the Councils and the Developer to conduct/participate in public meetings to gauge community support and ideas.

We also seek support from the local Member of Parliament particularly related to environmental issues.

It is our desire to work collaboratively and harmoniously in forming a consensus of decisions regarding the Development. We recognise that the final decisions rest with the State Planning Authority and hope that those decisions serve the best interest of all concerned.

Brief History
The site has experienced multiple uses over time

• Adelaide Brighton Cement used it as a site for the production and storage of cement
• Monier Tiles used the site for the making of coloured cement tiles
• Lorenzin used the site for the storage of heavy machinery and earth moving equipment
• Over the years, a portion of the site was used to dump rubbish
• The site was then sold to the Gasparin Group with the intent of developing it for housing

Broad Issues for the Community as understood by 5049 Coastal Community
Recognises the general support for a quality development and an understanding of what the community may influence.

5049 CC would like to ensure the DPA will set the standards and requirements of the development to meet the community’s expectation of a 21st C major urban development.

• Supports diverse and active communities
• Provides for high qualitative public open spaces for all
• Environmentally sustainable
• High quality urban design
• Major emphasis on WSUD(water sensitive urban design)
• Exceeds expectations on integrated transport strategies and accessibility
• Effectively manages all of the infrastructure impacts including roads and services
• Works closely with Boral on resolution of the mutual impacts on amenity environment
• Effective communications regarding the timeframes and stages, including impacts
• Effective site management and presentation
• Opportunities for community participation and engagement during the process
• Opportunities for direct community collaboration in an integrated community project

As an example, the following site specific suggestions should be considered:

• The extent of water run-off generated by the development is likely to be very high. Consideration should be given for the extensive application of WSUD (water sensitive urban design) practices to be employed. This should apply to site wide urban design as well as individual dwellings. There is an opportunity to create a mini-wetland as part of the public open space. The installation of substantial rain water tanks to each dwelling should go beyond the current BCA standard to better manage the precious resource and reduce the load on the wider infrastructure. The site should set a new benchmark for WSUD including seeking Grant support.
• Another possibility is to utilise the area of the development which was once subject to land fill and seepage of methane. This area could be excavated and developed into a small water wetland where the water from it may be controlled.
• Within the Development there will be a requirement to provide for public open space. It is suggested that this open space could be aligned with the City of Holdfast Bay open space initiative. Adjacent land could be allocated for a reserve which we understand will be required for the Development. The City of Marion could provide a swap releasing its reserve south of the site to the Development for housing and the developer providing substitution land of equivalent size as open space near the wetlands. The size of the reserve could be quite substantial for the whole community.
• Passive Solar Design to be a feature of the Development.
• Opportunities for integrated artworks interpreting the local history could be incorporated.
• Internal Road Network and car parking provisions to reflect current trends and lifestyle choices regarding number of cars, boats and caravans. Emphasis should be given to reducing the impact of on street parking to ensure the streets are activated shared spaces for all.
• The impact of this development on access and egress from the existing road network is significant. The design solution will need to address all of the needs of the new development and the existing road and footpath users. There is already a good deal of pressure on the local road network west of Brighton Road so the community will want to see this development addressing its needs sensitively and that the approving authority ensures that it does not overload the existing infrastructure. If wider improvements are required as a result, that these are included in the strategy and implemented in an integrated way.
• Seek a commitment from Boral of when the access road to Majors Road will be completed and what effects from dust and blasting will affect the new Development on the proposed extension of their quarrying operations.
• Seek an indication of time lines for the whole Development

Strategies

This position will be tested with our community in the near future but reflects the 5049 Coastal Committee’s views taking into account previous engagements, surveys and interactions.

The vehicle for engagement in the development approval process will be predominantly via statutory public consultation and engagement with Marion and Holdfast Bay Councils.

Where practical, direct interactions with the Developer will be encouraged- where it is in the community interest and is considered beneficial to the Development Outcomes.

Our activities will include potential campaigns to promote and challenge any aspects of the Development that are not in the community interest.
We intend sharing this Submission with our Community, our elected Councillors and State and Federal MP’s and seek constructive feed-back accordingly.

Please refer to the attached .pdf for this strategy and Appendix 1 with further thoughts for consideration.