Michael McGuire: John Rau’s planning legacy was about getting more lives into smaller living areas

Infill was one of the buzzwords that came to define retiring MP John Rau’s time as planning minister. It now defines a legacy that stripped our power so we could be crammed into ever tighter confines, writes Michael McGuire.

If all politics is personal then I’m not sad to wave off former deputy premier John Rau.

As he packs up his desk on North Tce, I am left fighting against some of the planning rules Rau introduced to help the developer and construction industries.

As he said in a media release in 2012, changes to the Development Act were made because: “We sat down with industry representatives and we are now delivering a reform they have told us will unlock further development in our state.”

Which is no doubt good for them, if not for the poor sods who have to fight against wildly inappropriate developments on their doorstop with the capacity to have a material detrimental effect on quality of life, as well as markedly change the character of Adelaide’s suburbs. All in the name of the latest development buzzword — infill.

Which in reality is about squeezing as many people as possible into smaller and smaller living areas.

I suspect this is a tale that will become more common across Adelaide as the ramifications of Labor’s 30-year-plan, first released in 2010, become more fully realised.

The planners at the council were professional and helpful but their hands are tied. Reports on our concerns (fire, stormwater) must be met at our own expense. It feels as if all the odds are stacked against us, against the clock.

My own version involves Campbelltown City Council. Next to my family’s house is an empty block. It’s large, about 1100 sqm, and clearly, something will be built there. Which is fine.

For context, our house is one of a row of 10 on a moderately busy road. All are traditional family-style homes, mostly single-storey and all set well back from the road.

Last month, a letter arrived from the council, telling us plans had been lodged for next door. It told us we had until December 7 to respond if we wanted to object. That was 10 business days.

It was a one-page letter. It directed us to the council chambers or the website for more detail. Nothing about the process is made easy for the resident. All power appears to reside with the developer.

And this is the biggest gripe. Residents have an extremely limited ability to influence these decisions. The proposed development is classified as category three, meaning neighbours will be “significantly affected’’.

Yet, in recent years, we understand from speaking with councillors, 100 per cent of category-three developments have been approved. It does make you wonder if registering an objection is more than shouting into a hurricane.

So what do we do?

We inspect the plans. They are mostly indecipherable, apart from discovering there will be one big two-storey building containing three units, plus another battle-axe two-storey house at the back.

Senator Arthur Sinodinos, executive chairman of the GFG Alliance Sanjeev Gupta and John Rau when he was acting premier. Picture: Bianca De Marchi

The plans are all in black and white. We can’t tell how the bulk compares with neighbouring houses, or how to decipher survey marks. We can tell there will be three backyards along our fence line as well as the capacity to park about a dozen cars. It is hideous. It’s urban blight on the very fringes of the metropolitan area.

More context. Across the road is a 30ha bush park, which adjoins Black Hill Conversation Park. There are no developments, no buildings, there. The view to the Hill is one of the reasons we are there. It is also a high-bushfire-risk zone. The bushfire-risk zone extends to the top of our driveway. Below that, it’s classified as “excluded’’. Hopefully, the bushfire knows that because the proposed units begin 3m from the footpath and have a single driveway.

The planners at the council were professional and helpful but their hands are tied. Reports on our concerns (fire, stormwater) must be met at our own expense. It feels as if all the odds are stacked against us, against the clock.

The planning rules laid down by the 30-year-plan are only recommendations, they are not legislation, but they are the yardstick in every conversation.

Many councils seem to have become slave to them. The results we can see. Suburbs across Adelaide are being reshaped by constructions that are often out of step with their surrounds. The objection was lodged. Next year we will find out whether the process works for us, for the developer or the council. Rau’s contribution can be debated, but to me, his legacy is daunting and stressful.