The fundamentals of South Australia’s planning system are sound, but it does need improving.

The system is currently in the early stages of a profound shake-up, with a review panel initiated by the State Government and led by Brian Hayes reassessing its entire structure. There is political mood for change, and it is in that context that I offer some suggestions for improvement.

The Planning Institute of Australia says core elements of good planning include high-quality, transparent and efficient planning practices and systems. To achieve this, political will and legislative systems need to deliver positive environmental and social outcomes. Evidence-based strategic planning must be a given at all levels of government, and there must be a demonstrated commitment to implement plans aligned with infrastructure funding and delivery.

Such information should be publicly accessible and debated widely in order to have a robust structure that can resist the pressure to amend the legislative and procedural aspects of planning in an ad hoc, rushed or reactive manner. Of course, no planning system operates well without strong leadership from both the industry and elected members who value and respect the need and benefits of effective planning over the longer term.

The system must ensure opportunities for the community and key stakeholders to actively contribute to the planning process in a manner that is effective, inclusive, respectful of community values and genuinely administered.

To work well in the strategic policy area, we need inclusive dialogue, including advice and support from a range of disciplines such as urban design, engineering, transport planning, social planning, ecology and a range of others that inform and add value to the planning efforts.

A major area for improvement is the need to ensure the active participation of all stakeholders. Good planning is guided by community values, driven at all levels of government, and delivered through the experience of the planning profession with the investment of the private sector and government.

I believe improvements to the planning system could include:

• Policy review and development managed by regional bodies.
• Local heritage identified and managed by local councils through surveys, public consultation and support at the state level.
• State heritage identified and managed by the state.
• A return to a city-state planning body with equal representation of specialist, state and local members.
• Notification of development proposals to include large visible notices on the site informing people of significant developments proposed for the land, such as advice on where to view more information and rights of representation and appeal.
• Broadening the range of minor developments that don’t need formal planning approval.
• Reducing planning instruments such as overlays and codes in favour of core legislation.
• Greater accountability regarding ministerial powers of intervention.
• Fundamental reform and re-commitment to an integrated system and process for all development proposals.
• Eliminating piecemeal, time-consuming and expensive amendments to the development plan in preference for comprehensive five-year development plan reviews.
• Making development plans attractive and readable, with clear guides to what can happen and where.

Iris Iwanicki is an urban planner and the president of the South Australian chapter of the Planning Institute of Australia.