The State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP) in March rejected developers Citify’s plans to build 193 homes on the site of the local heritage listed Buckingham Arms Hotel on the North Adelaide fringe.

The V-shaped, 6219 square-metre site was slated for a 10-storey apartment building, a row of 11 three-storey townhouses and a four-storey office building.

The vacant Buckingham Arms Hotel was also to be retained, refurbished and reused – potentially as a wine bar or tapas offering – under the proposal.

A diagram of the original development plans. The four-storey commercial building and the three-storey row of townhouses were intended to fit with the low-rise character of the surrounding suburbs. Image: Future Urban/Citify supplied

But the SCAP found Citify’s plans constituted “over-development of the site” and that it was not designed to “minimise impacts to adjacent residential land uses”.

The planning panel also deemed the development had not “demonstrated high-quality design”.

In response, Citify managing director Joel Wilkinson said his firm has engaged local architects SMFA to do a “complete redesign” of their plans.

The new proposal will still be 10-storeys tall but “scaled back in visual bulk and massing”, Wilkinson said.

“We are developing a significantly improved design response that addresses the concerns previously raised and delivers an outstanding outcome for the site, focusing on heritage, amenity and design excellence,” he told InDaily.

“We are excited to share this new proposal in the coming weeks.”

An image of the rejected 10-storey block for the former Buckingham Arms site. Image: Forum/Citify supplied

Citify has also lodged an appeal in the Environment Resources and Development Court against the SCAP’s rejection of its original proposal.

The matter is set down for a conference today, with the developers set to ask the Planning Commission for extra time to submit amended designs.

Wilkinson said Citify is looking to reach a “compromise proposal” with the SCAP responding to the design concerns raised in the March ruling.

“Obviously, any settlement has to respond to the reasons of rejection in the first time, the majority of them being design based,” he said.

“The redesign with SMFA is based on improving design quality and the context of the area.”

Wilkinson said the materials and design specifications have changed in the new proposal.

This includes greater setbacks from the land boundary and a “greater transition away from the heritage”.

A two-level podium will also be included, setting back the upper levels of the 10-storey building further from the adjacent roads.

“It’s not scaled back in height, but it’s scaled back in it doesn’t go all the way to the boundaries,” Wilkinson said.

“It’s a lot different. It’s a lot better too.”

The new plans will be completed in around four weeks, Wilkinson said.

An aerial view of the previously proposed development. Image: Future Urban/Citify

Citify’s negotiations with the Planning Commission could be delayed if nearby residents opposed to the development apply to be a party to the court proceedings.

This has happened with several recent development court appeals, including Pelligra Group’s 21-storey Rundle Street tower, the teachers union’s Greenhill Road development, and Chasecrown’s Seawall Apartment proposal.

The SCAP rejection of Citify’s proposal came after significant community opposition to the original 10-storey plans due to concerns around height and potential traffic impacts.

The development site fronts a five-way intersection between Northcote Terrace, Walkerville Terrace and Robe Terrace along the city ring route.

Around 188 am and 207 pm peak hour trips would have been generated by Citify’s development, according to a traffic management report prepared for the developers by consultants CIRQA.

The consultants found the extra traffic could be “readily accommodate[d] on the adjacent road network”.

Of the 344 submissions made to PlanSA about the proposal, 207 were opposed.

Labor Member for Adelaide Lucy Hood was among those to submit against the development, arguing that 10 storeys represents “excessive scale”.

The site was rezoned in May 2022 for six-storey development. However it qualifies for extra height under the planning code because the development is located on a “significant development site”.

A total of 193 new homes were planned in the original proposal, including 26 classed as affordable housing ($417,000 to $479,550) and 14 for NDIS-occupants.

The Buckingham Arms Hotel, which dates back to the 1840s and became famous for its smorgasbord, was local heritage listed in 2007. It closed in 2022.