InDaily InDaily

Support independent Journalism Donate Subscribe
Support independent journalism

Your views: on planning, city council, Centrelink and bushfires

Reader contributions

Today, readers comment on a new electronic planning system, council misconduct, income reporting and bushfire research and management.

Print article

Commenting on the story: Govt flags delaying reforms after e-Planning guru quits

Unfortunately I have only 350 words to comment on 100,000 page plus comprehensive planning changes that were released for comment, closing on 28 February.

My major concern was most of Adelaide especially the west, north and south has been rezoned as general neighbourhood zone, which would allow dwellings down to 200 m².

I have taken an interest in this because I have seen the destruction of Warradale where I grew up, which is now full of micro homes with constricted parking.

I wanted to prevent my current suburb being Seacombe Heights saved from this, as it is critical in my view to preserve family friendly homes in an accessible belt around the city.

We have already lost 30% of Adelaide’s urban vegetation apparently in the last 10 years, with Marion alone having lost over 1500 family homes since 2012.

I have spent some time examining the proposed changes in the documents, and my comments are that they are almost incomprehensible to the layman.

When printed they do not have an index or page numbers, and much of the material is cross-referenced to other sections without providing page numbers. This makes trying to understand exactly what is being proposed extremely difficult and opaque.

On a broader topic the entire project lacks strategy – it is all technology with no substance. There is no overriding strategic vision such as every dwelling will be within 500 m of a park or rapid transit node.

It simply allows unfettered urban infill to the saturation of current infrastructure which will require state investment to upgrade, where the developers pay no contribution to the upgrading of the infrastructure.

What would be useful would be to see a planning strategy that allowed for high density dwellings, with shared amenities, including pooled transport, linked by rapid transit networks, and bike paths.

These should be close to shopping centres to allow residents to reduce their car dependence.

We see examples of this at Tonsley, Bowden, Walkerville (with shared cars.)

We have a wonderful city with a green canopy that still has significant character in the areas that have not been decimated by unplanned urban infill.

If I wanted to live in a dog box and spend 2 to 3 hours a day in the traffic I would have moved to Sydney because at least it pays better.

I have been to many cities around the world who do this well and I’m not a planning person; surely the experts understand that we have to live here.

This whole process needs to be rebooted to take into account the wishes of the broader population and not the speculative development lobby to build it and leave, some of which who may not even be resident.

I’m also amazed that none of the major political parties have taken a position on this as both of them have been pushing this urban infill agenda.

I don’t know anyone, and I speak to hundreds of people on a regular basis, that is in favour of the type of infill that is happening.

This is what this planning change really covers and it is largely ignored. – Robert Lloyd

No one seems to be able to crack the code.

Knoll has to take charge of this planning incompetence. Rural area economies are being stifled and housing is slowing, as potential buyers can’t get the land they want to build on. – Janet Williams

Commenting on the story: Calls for tougher Ombudsman powers over Moran misconduct

It appears the volume of statements from some in our Calamitous City Council is inversely proportional to the utility of content.

The honourable office of Ombudsman ought not become the ‘policer, enforcer & punisher’ of elected local elected representatives, as opposed to assessing and correcting administrative shortcomings to the detriment of citizens.  

Local government should bear the cost of its own governance.

So, spare us from the shouts of the inexperienced and unimaginative, for none so ignorant or devoid of knowledge and consideration as those possessed of loud voices and empty cans that echo and rattle.

Give us instead a governance of rationale, contribution and thinking, or even one that meets often enough to discuss or impart a modicum of wisdom or wit.

Anyway, at least we can look forward to the Mad March Meeting during the Fringe for more theatre without substance from amongst this Comedic City Council. – Elbert Brooks

Commenting on the story: New Centrelink income rules after illegal robo-debt debacle

I have worked for Centrelink prior to this new income reporting system.

I now find myself looking for work and reporting my income. 

Luckily I picked up their error in the first fortnight. I had to call them to tell them. Imagine if I just let it go for weeks.

Having said that your letters…work it out…you must have some sort of idea to what you are entitled to. – June Mullen

Yes, good and well for young persons, but what about over 60?

Governments encourage the elderly to continue working, but when you do, the government here deduct from your pension, no where else does this happen.

Let the elderly support themselves and still receive their entitlement. They worked for it.

Parliamentary personnel really need to have a really good look at themselves. Feel like running myself, at least I care. – Narelle Williams

Commenting on the story: Keelty to lead inquiry into SA bushfire response

“Mick Ayres (InDaily, Jan 29) is quite correct to stress the importance of improving community awareness about bushfires.

I share his view that people should take note of the excellent work of the Bushfire CRC. However, he doesn’t mention the good research also being done on this topic here in Adelaide at both the University of Adelaide and at the University of South Australia in conjunction with the SA Department for Environment and Water and local natural resource management boards.

A collaborative project funded by the Australian Research Council involving researchers at both institutions on ‘Bushfires and Biodiversity’ has raised various issues about bushfire management and the environment, including limitations of community education programs.

This research has focused on the Adelaide Hills and the area around Port Lincoln.

Anyone interested in finding out more about the project should contact myself or Doug Bardsley at the University of Adelaide and Delene Weber at the University of South Australia. – Guy Robinson

Want to comment?

Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.

We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.

InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Go here for an explanation.

Help our journalists uncover the facts

In times like these InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to donate to InDaily.

Donate here
Powered by PressPatron

More Reader contributions stories

Loading next article