Commenting on the story: SA ‘compromised’: Premier warns unis over lack of planning degrees

What would be the point with studying urban planning in South Australia when the new Planning and Design Code is heavily biased in favour of developers?

It’s all about cramming as much development as possible on the smallest spaces in order to maximise profits. Now that houses take up entire blocks, trees and landscaping are practically irrelevant and most new houses just look like boxes, urban planning would be an anathema to developers.

Also, who would these newly qualified urban planners actually work for, now that councils have had their planning powers emasculated?Before asking the universities to teach urban planning at the undergraduate level, Premier, you should get the Planning and Design Code into some sort of balance so that urban planning becomes part of it and community and environmental concerns form part of the planning framework.

Here’s a tip – if you want to see a good example of citywide planning and development, have a look at Chicago’s CMAP: “The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) is our region’s comprehensive planning organization. The agency and its partners developed and are now implementing ON TO 2050, a new long-range plan to help the seven counties and 284 communities of northeastern Illinois implement strategies that address transportation, housing, economic development, open space, the environment, and other quality-of-life issues.” Perhaps our State Planning Commission could learn something from this. – Geoff Sauer

My son completed his Masters in Planning at Adelaide Uni about two years ago. I would have to say that I think it was an absolute waste of three years of his life.

I feel he was severely shortchanged because when he enrolled in the course, the elective on offer that he wanted to do at the end of the course,  being Rural & Regional Planning as he is from a regional area, was pulled from the curriculum in the final year due to a lack of numbers. He only had a choice of two other electives, which were to do with Urbanisation and Climate.

It was also clear that nobody teaching the course had much of a grasp on the new Planning Code and the new Planning Act. My son was in the first year of graduates that would have come into the industry under the new Planning Code. He was never taught anything to do with the new Planning Code.

At the start of his course, I was involved in a two year planning case before the Environment & Development Court. My son sat in on a lot of the hearings and said that he was never taught anything about what we were involved with.

He has since left the profession and doesn’t feel as though he wants to return to it. He started with a great interest in Town Planning but had to get a Degree in Architecture first before going on and then doing several years of the Masters in Planning. He accrued a large HECS debt and really has little knowledge of actual Town Planning and definitely no knowledge of Rural & Regional Planning. – Name supplied

What exactly is the Premier’s supposedly “bold vision” for Adelaide’s future planning? Thus far it seems mostly like increased urban sprawl, billions spent on highways, no serious investment on public transport infrastructure and speaking out against much needed infill development like Bowden (because apparently, we need more footy ovals, rather than urban density). Truly “bold” thinking! – Louis Rankin

The main issue of planner supply seems to be lack of interest from students. Are the (urban) Planning job prospects that bleak? Are the SA planning graduates heading interstate because of pay?

Are planners respected? The high rise on the east end of Rundle Street trampled all over planning rules such as heritage, bulk, and provided zero affordable housing. – Andrew Robertson

It’s all very well for Premier Malinauskas to call for more planning education in SA. He is wilfully blind to the politics.

There may be many reasons why young people don’t pursue planning qualifications in Adelaide, but one of them stands out. The profession is practised under enduring state political interference and manipulation, and that includes four terms of Labor (2002–2018) and one term of the Liberals (2018–2022). Each administration over those 20 years has treated planners’ expertise and advice with barely concealed contempt if it did not reflect the political imperative at the time.

My observation is informed by an expert in City of Adelaide planning, former Adelaide city planner and administrator, Dr Michael Llewellyn Smith. In his seminal 2012 South Australian planning study and recollections, Behind the scenes, The politics of planning Adelaide (University of Adelaide) he wrote: “Planning is primarily a political not a technical process.”

Anyone seeking realpolitik contemporary evidence of this need only look at the abysmal record laid down by the State Planning Assessment Commission, which rarely finds reason to reject some of the most non-conforming development applications. And as for the bureaucrats pursuing state infrastructure projects, any planner tempted to give frank and fearless advice would know that the dole queue is a likely outcome.

Who’d want to invest years studying for qualifications to work in Peter Malinauskas’s planning agencies, the same ones that control local government’s planning departments with a not-negotiable, iron grip? Career satisfaction? Bah humbug. – John Bridgland

Commenting on the story: ‘Excessive’ Rundle St tower plan refused planning approval

At last! Commonsense in a planning decision. – Katrina Lister

Congratulations to the State Commission Assessment Panel on its decision to not approve the 21-storey monstrosity proposed for the eastern end of Rundle Street.

Already opposed by Heritage SA for its inappropriate and dominating bulk and scale, it was a totally inappropriate idea for that area, and actually a very arrogant application, out of kilter with the surrounding buildings and cultural precinct.

Rundle Street East can breathe easy again. May the same fate befall the proposed ugliness planned for the Festival Plaza. – Jane Bleby

Phew! is all I can say. That excessive tower would not contribute  anything to Adelaide as a city that invites some serenity and sanity. Surely the tower buildings can be confined to the west end of the city that has already begun the process.

I acknowledge that developers will continue to look for opportunities. I have only viewed the concept images but I see nothing that indicates that the building was conceived in any sustainable or innovative way. So it’s phew – an overblown overbuild dodged and thank you to the planning body. – Maurene McEwen

Good. – Colin Campbell