URPS - URPS Urban & Regional Planning Solutions |...
4
Welcome to edition No.13 of ‘Planning Matters’, the newsletter produced by URPS twice a year. We hope you enjoy some highlights of the work we’ve been doing with many of you over recent months. You can also access electronic copies of this and all our past newsletters on our website at www.urps.com.au Sharing the costs of infrastructure Planning for the provision/funding of infrastructure associated with the release of new urban land is a complex process. The complexity exists, in part, because there is no legislative or endorsed ‘whole of government’ procedure in South Australia to guide landowners, local councils and State Government agencies. At the same time, URPS’ involvement with Intro Design facilitating the rezoning of land at Angle Vale and negotiating infrastructure agreements with the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure and the City of Playford provides some important lessons. For example, designated teams at Renewal SA and within the City of Playford to coordinate negotiations were extremely valuable. Similarly, the identification of several ‘local champions’ to coordinate information to and from the broader landowner’s group helped to ensure ongoing commitment – these processes can take several months. Determining the physical and social infrastructure required, and at what cost, is complex and often requires government agencies and councils to complete a number of studies in a robust and timely manner. Councils also need to fulfill all necessary prudential requirements, including balancing increased service costs with uplift of capital values/rates. In March 2014, the Productivity Commission released its draft report into “Public Infrastructure”. While the role of the development industry in the provision of infrastructure is important, it is also worth noting that the Productivity Commission’s draft report states: “In principle, developer contributions should only be made to the extent that infrastructure is attributable to the properties being developed. This is straightforward for infrastructure that is clearly related to a developed property, such as that linking a property to a local network. It is less straightforward for networked infrastructure shared with other developments, such as water mains. Ideally, the incremental cost attributable to each property would be reflected in developer charges. For social infrastructure that provides broad-based benefits to the community, such as a library, government funding from a broad-based revenue source can be more appropriate than developer contributions.” Significantly, the Productivity Commission’s draft report also states that: “Governments will have to continue to at least partly fund some infrastructure: This can be warranted when it is impractical to exclude users who do not pay direct charges, the wider beneficiaries are difficult to identify or very diffused, and/or infrastructure is provided to meet equity goals... A mix of government funding and direct charging appears likely to remain appropriate for some roads, public transport and social infrastructure. Government funding should generally be sourced from broad-based taxes on income, consumption or land because such taxes have lower efficiency costs. The Australian Government levies the greater part of these more efficient taxes, requiring it to play a major role in funding infrastructure spending by the States and Territories.” We eagerly await the finalisation of the Productivity Commission’s report. Building community confidence in SA’s renewable energy future When a zoo becomes something more The Ozone Cinema back at Glenelg Clearance at what cost? A win for the environment and the economy On the couch Fresh faces at URPS inside Planning Matters AUTUMN WINTER 2014 1 Image courtesy of JPE Design Studio
Transcript of URPS - URPS Urban & Regional Planning Solutions |...
Welcome to edition No.13 of ‘Planning Matters’, the newsletter produced by URPS twice a year. We hope you enjoy some highlights of the work we’ve been doing with many of you over recent months. You can also access electronic copies of this and all our past newsletters on our website at www.urps.com.au
Sharing the costs of infrastructure
Planning for the provision/funding of infrastructure associated with the release of new urban land is a complex process. The complexity exists, in part, because there is no legislative or endorsed ‘whole of government’ procedure in South Australia to guide landowners, local councils and State Government agencies.
At the same time, URPS’ involvement with Intro Design facilitating the rezoning of land at Angle Vale and negotiating infrastructure agreements with the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure and the City of Playford provides some important lessons. For example, designated teams at Renewal SA and within the City of Playford to coordinate negotiations were extremely valuable. Similarly, the identification of several ‘local champions’ to coordinate information to and from the broader landowner’s group helped to ensure ongoing commitment – these processes can take several months.
Determining the physical and social infrastructure required, and at what cost, is complex and often requires government agencies and councils to complete a number of studies in a robust and timely manner. Councils also need to fulfill all necessary prudential requirements, including balancing increased service costs with uplift of capital values/rates.
In March 2014, the Productivity Commission released its draft report into “Public Infrastructure”. While the role of the development industry in the provision of infrastructure is important, it is also worth noting that the Productivity Commission’s draft report states:
“In principle, developer contributions should only be made to the extent that infrastructure is attributable to the properties being developed. This is straightforward for infrastructure that is clearly related to a developed property, such as that linking a property to a local network. It is less straightforward for networked infrastructure shared with other developments, such as water mains. Ideally, the incremental cost attributable to each property would be reflected in developer charges. For social infrastructure that provides broad-based benefits to the community, such as a library, government funding from a broad-based revenue source can be more appropriate than developer contributions.”
Significantly, the Productivity Commission’s draft report also states that:
“Governments will have to continue to at least partly fund some infrastructure:This can be warranted when it is impractical to exclude users who do not pay direct charges, the wider beneficiaries are difficult to identify or very diffused, and/or infrastructure is provided to meet equity goals...A mix of government funding and direct charging appears likely to remain appropriate for some roads, public transport and social infrastructure.
Government funding should generally be sourced from broad-based taxes on income, consumption or land because such taxes have lower efficiency costs. The Australian Government levies the greater part of these more efficient taxes, requiring it to play a major role in funding infrastructure spending by the States and Territories.”
We eagerly await the finalisation of the Productivity Commission’s report.
Building community confidence in SA’s renewable energy future
When a zoo becomes something more
The Ozone Cinema back at Glenelg
Clearance at what cost?
A win for the environment and the economy
On the couch
Fresh faces at URPS
inside
Planning Matters
AU
TUM
N
WIN
TER
2014
1
Image courtesy of JPE Design Studio
Building community confidence in SA’s renewable energy future
The South Australian Government has committed to reaching a target of 33% renewable energy by 2020. Working towards this target, URPS provided planning support for two significant wind farm proposals in South Australia recently granted Ministerial approval - the 42 turbine Keyneton Wind Farm in the Eastern Mount Lofty Ranges and the 197 turbine Ceres Wind Farm on the Yorke Peninsula. To give you a sense of scale, the Ceres project will generate enough electricity to power the equivalent of 225,000 South Australian homes a year, avoiding the creation of up to 2.5 million tonnes of carbon pollution each year.
Despite advice from acoustic engineers confirming that the Keyneton and Ceres Wind Farms satisfied the EPA’s Wind Farm Guidelines, noise impact remained a significant issue of concern for some neighbours during the assessment process.
The EPA has been proactive in examining noise impacts from wind farms over a number of years, most recently releasing the Waterloo Wind Farm Environmental Noise Study in November 2013 (available at www.epa.sa.gov.au).
This study determined that noise from the already operational Waterloo Wind Farm was audible periodically, but at low levels which do not dominate the noise environment and, in any event, complied with the EPA’s Wind Farm Environmental Noise Guidelines. In addition, low frequency sound could be attributed to the wind farm, but at levels significantly below the accepted perception threshold and comparable to, or less than that, generated by background noise.
The ongoing independent work of key Government agencies such as the EPA gives the community confidence that issues such as noise associated with large scale development satisfy robust and contemporary standards.
When a zoo becomes something more
In preparing the Cleland Wildlife Park Master Plan with our project partners WAX Design, Phillips Pilkington Architects, Graham Morris (cultural attractions), Lorraine Edmunds (interpretation), Peter Stroud (wildlife animal management) and EBS Ecology, we have been exploring the concept of the “unzoo”.
As described by collaborators John Coe, Ray Mendez and Tony Koterski, unzoos place people and animals in a more equitable relationship than the traditional zoo experience of looking at/ down on the animals through glass or bars.
Unzoos are underpinned by immersion design theory based on the belief that learning is initiated through emotional responses such as awe, fear, love, surprise and delight. These strong emotional reactions trigger a desire for understanding and motivation to learn more about the subject.
Cleland Wildlife Park can play an integral role in increasing people’s sense of emotional connection to the natural environment. In particular, we have fostered the concept of the “unzoo” in a number of exhibits in the Master Plan, such as the wombats and echidnas.
The Master Plan has recently been endorsed by the DEWNR Executive as the basis for seeking funding for ongoing implementation.
2Planning Matters
www.urps.com.au
Image source www.bksv.com
The Ozone Cinema back at Glenelg
We were pleased to provide planning support for the Taplin Group’s $17 million Ozone Cinema and deck car park at Glenelg. Recently granted approval, this transformational project will see the return of a cinema complex to the iconic Jetty Road precinct.
The City of Holdfast Bay played an important role in the realisation of this development proposal, allowing the Taplin Group to establish the cinema’s main building plate over an existing Council-owned car park. A new deck car park will also be constructed over an existing at-grade car park sitting opposite the cinema, as anticipated by the Development Plan. Council will also retain ownership and operating control of all the car parking.
With clarity provided via a formal heads of agreement between the Council and the Taplin Group, this is a great example of a public/private partnership helping to realise development opportunities within an established precinct hungry for revitalization.
The development assessment process also remained robust and transparent, with the Development Assessment Commission agreeing to Council’s request that it be the determining authority given the potential conflict of interest. The Council also engaged an independent planning expert to review the application, including URPS’ supporting documentation, to assist DAC’s assessment.
We look forward to the movies coming back to Jetty Road, as well as the people and vibrancy that will accompany them.
Clearance at what cost?
Facilitated workshops are an effective way to engage stakeholders in understanding and responding to complex challenges. The Native Vegetation Council (NVC) recognized URPS’ expertise in designing and running successful workshops, using our services to help elicit stakeholder responses regarding new models for off-sets when native vegetation is cleared.
Under the Native Vegetation Act, authorised clearance of native vegetation must be off-set by a Significant Environmental Benefit (SEB) in most instances. The NVC has found in recent years that:methods for assessing the clearance of native vegetation are inconsistent, leading to higher SEB requirements for clearing isolated paddock trees than for clearing patches of native vegetation;off-sets are generally not providing a significant biodiversity gain; andpayments to the Native Vegetation Fund in lieu of an on-ground off-set are not reflecting the true cost of establishing, managing and maintaining an off-set.
What has become clear during these workshops is just how challenging it is to create a system that satisfies all stakeholders completely. Some consider SEBs to be a substantial impediment to development in regional areas, while others are concerned that mechanisms such as payments to the Native Vegetation Fund make it too easy/cheap for clearance to occur and responsibility to be passed-on.
At the same time, the workshops have been excellent forums for the NVC to test some new models for off-sets and hear ideas about how such models could be improved.
3
AU
TUM
N
WIN
TER
20
14
Images courtesy of Alexander Brown Architects
Carefully integrated cinema complex and public carparking with dual street frontage.
4Planning Matters
AU
TUM
N
WIN
TER
20
14
www.urps.com.au
Our people
Marcus Rolfe [email protected] Grazio Maiorano [email protected] Angela Hazebroek [email protected] Nicole Halsey [email protected] Rumsby [email protected] Lewis [email protected] Butler [email protected] Pannell [email protected] Haupt [email protected] King [email protected] Arman [email protected] Channon [email protected] Dodd [email protected] Palumbo [email protected] Russo [email protected] Haren [email protected]
Our place
Suite 12154 Fullarton RoadRose Park South Australia 5067(Corner of Alexandra Avenue)
Phone 08 8333 7999 Email [email protected] Web www.urps.com.au
The content of this newsletter is for general information only. It should not be relied on and action which could affect your organisation should not be taken without appropriate professional advice.
Prin
ted
on 1
00%
rec
ycle
d A
ustr
alia
n M
ade
pape
r (IS
O14
001
Envi
ronm
ent
Man
agem
ent
Cer
tifica
tion:
FSC
rec
ycle
d); P
rinte
d us
ing
soy
base
d in
ks a
nd m
ater
ials
rec
ycle
d
More information
Copies of this and our previous newsletters are available on our website at www.urps.com.au If you would like to discuss the information contained in any of our newsletters in further detail please don’t hesitate to contact us on 8333 7999 or drop into our offices at Suite 12/154 Fullarton Road, Rose Park.
Jodie Dodd and Andrea Haren
Images courtesy of Nyrstar
A win for the environment and the economy
Smelting company Nyrstar was given development approval for the $514 million upgrade of its Port Pirie operations in December 2013. URPS assisted in the preparation of the Public Environment Report that accompanied this Major Project. In particular, we undertook a land use analysis, visual amenity assessment and broad social impact assessment (i.e. employment, education). We also liaised closely with the acoustic consultants and the EPA to establish the appropriate baseline acoustic guidelines for operation of the new smelter.
The redevelopment of the Port Pirie Smelter to an advanced poly-metallic processing and recovery centre has a range of environmental benefits including ‘step change’ reduction in airborne metal, dust and sulphur dioxide emissions. There will also be significant reduction in community blood lead levels and improved hygiene conditions for smelter workers.
The significant improvement in blast furnace performance will also help improve the efficiency of Nyrstar’s operations, which is the major employer in Port Pirie. In this context, we see the upgrade of the Port Pirie smelter as being positive for the environment and positive for the South Australian economy. The new plant is expected to be commissioned by the end of 2016.
On the couch
URPS was again a proud sponsor of PIA’s “On The Couch” seminar held in early June. Managing Director, Marcus Rolfe, interviewed the Minister for Planning, the Honourable John Rau MP, and the Shadow Minister, the Honourable Steven Griffiths MP.
This relaxed forum has proven to be a great success, providing ample opportunity for politicians to discuss the challenges we face as a community and their objectives for South Australian planning. It was encouraging to hear how aligned both the Minister and Shadow Minister are on many key planning issues. If you haven’t had an opportunity to join us “On The Couch”, we strongly recommend that you do next year.
Fresh faces at URPS
We are excited to welcome Jodie Dodd and Andrea Haren to URPS. Jodie is an experienced planning consultant with dual qualifications in Environmental Studies and Urban & Regional Planning. Andrea has extensive administrative experience in the planning and development field, having previously worked at Colliers International. Jodie and Andrea help to broaden and deepen the skills of the URPS team and bring some fresh perspectives to our work.
