New planning laws would rewrite history “with a bulldozer”, NP&SP Mayor Robert Bria warns
The Norwood Mayor has come out swinging against planned changes to heritage laws in front of a parliamentary committee, warning of “chilling” new rules.
East & Hills
Don't miss out on the headlines from East & Hills. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Call to protect contributory heritage items from being razed
- For subscribers: Win a VIP corporate box experience at OzAsia
Proposed changes to planning laws that would remove a level of heritage protection have been condemned as “madness” at a parliamentary committee hearing.
Norwood, Payneham & St Peters Mayor Robert Bria told the Environment Resources and Development Committee on Monday that the State Planning Commission had taken a “chilling and inaccurate” approach to heritage reforms that would result in contributory items being scrapped.
Contributory properties – of which there are about 12,000 – are recognised as adding to the character of an area without being given full local or state heritage status.
Mr Bria argued that while contributory items had no formal legal protection from demolition, councils had developed policies which advocated the retention of designated properties.
It came after comments made on radio by State Planning Commission chairman Michael Lennon that contributory items had no protection.
Mr Bria said the “collective opposition” to the planning reforms from councils and community groups should not be dismissed as “some sort of rose-coloured walk down memory lane, but rather a call to arms and a call to conscience for all South Australians”.
“This is a cynical attempt by the (State Planning) Commission to rewrite South Australia’s history, not with a pen, but with a bulldozer – slowly, incrementally but methodically erasing the most valued and richest elements of the story of our state and, in particular, Adelaide,” Mr Bria told the committee.
He said the commission had failed to justify its belief that contributory items should be delisted with “any evidence or rationale” and denounced it as “a lazy argument of convenience”.
MORE NEWS
Westfield jacks up West Lakes parking cost
Marion mayor hits back over ‘councillor in disgrace’
Council may sell part of Modbury reserve for $1.76m
“It is easy for the commission to make public statements about the shortcomings of the current system – we can all do that – but such statements and assertions need to be supported with cold facts and data,” he said.
Mr Lennon said Mr Bria’s comments created “unfounded and unnecessary alarm”.
“Heritage is, in fact, being strengthened by the proposal we’re putting forward,” Mr Lennon said.
“The issue here being argued about in very extreme terms is about neighbourhood character, it’s not about heritage as defined by parliament.
“The point I would put to councils in the interest of the public is not whether protection should be given, but how protection is to be given.”
He said “inflammatory and alarmist comments don’t really help the conversation” around heritage and character.
Councils have been encouraged by the State Government to recommend current contributory items for state or local heritage listing before they are extinguished.
The State Planning Commission in May confirmed that contributory items – many of which are in St Peters, Norwood, Kensington and Tusmore – would “no longer exist” under a new planning and design code to take full effect from July next year.
The code will replace all 68 council and development plans with a single set of planning rules to provide consistency when assessing development across the state.