Norwood Council launches appeal against decision to dismiss their lawsuit over the intersection of The Parade and George Street

A council’s legal battle over a right-hand turn on “Adelaide’s premier main street” is now going to be settled by the state’s highest court.

The fate of a contested right-hand turn on a popular suburban shopping strip will be decided by the full sitting of the state’s highest court after Norwood Council’s lawsuit to halt the construction was dismissed.

But questions have been asked how much the Supreme Court battle between council and State Government is costing rate payers, with some estimates putting the cost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Norwood Payneham and St Peters Council lodged paperwork this week appealing Justice Greg Parker’s dismissal of their application for review of the government decision they say would have a “devastating impact” on the shopping precinct.

The council has accused the local traders of lobbying the State Government and offering to make up the “shortfall” in any construction costs to get the right-had turn over the line.

A petition supporting the right-hand turn with 126 signatures was presented to the Council before the lawsuit was launched.

In 2019, the Council and the State Government begun a 12-month trial at the intersection of the George St and The Parade which would introduce a scramble crossing and ban right-hand turns during peak periods.

Norwood Parade. Picture: Tricia Watkinson

When the trial was completed and works were approved by the State Government, two local businesses sought a court injunction to halt the works.

The Council has accused the State Government of entering into a funding arrangement with the two local businesses, bypassing the council and tainting the decision making process.

On July 2, Justice Parker dismissed the council’s case in a judgment which has yet to be published.

The Council’s general manager of governance and community affairs Lisa Mara said they disappointed by the decision which had the potential to “seriously impact the future quality and identity of Adelaide’s premier main street”

“The Council went to court to fight for the Norwood community, the majority of The Parade traders and the wider community, to ensure that Adelaide’s premier main street is preserved as a street for people and does not become a main arterial road,” she said.

“This legal decision leaves many questions unanswered about the process surrounding the change of position by Department of Infrastructure and Transport and the agreement entered into between DIT and private property owners.”

Norwood resident and former Education Minister Greg Crafter asked how the Council could justify the expense of the first lawsuit and the appeal, which he estimated would be stretching into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

“At a time when ratepayers are being hit with a massive rate rise, the Council appears to be acting in direct contrast to the wishes of those it supposedly represents,” he said.

“The issues associated with that intersection are longstanding and the solution backed by the

Department of Transport and Infrastructure will not only address safety and access issues but will also avoid forcing more cars down residential streets.”

Lawyer and former Labor politician Greg Crafter has questioned the need for the Norwood Council’s law suit against the State Government. Picture: Brenton Edwards

In March 2021 as the lawsuit went to trial before Justice Parker Council chief executive Mario Barone said the decision made by the State Government without the approval of council would result in the removal of protected trees and four flag poles.

Additionally, he said the changes would restrict the council’s ability to display Christmas trees.

Lawyers acting for the two retailers, Parkade Py Ltd and 166 The Parade, said they did not believe the council had been transparent about the cost of the legal action.

“The Council’s own expert advice is that there are traffic safety benefits from installing right turn lanes, including improved sight lines and reducing the risk of rear end collisions,” says Botten Levinson principal Tom Game.

“We don’t believe the Council’s opposition to the right turn lanes, and its decision to pursue legal action, aligns with community views on the issue.”

Equally, allegations of misconduct have been alleged by the Council against the DIT.

“The very serious question to be answered is why private trader interests have been given preferential consideration, while the voices of 400 other Parade traders and property owners were not heard and the Council’s community representation appears to have been ignored by DIT,” Ms Mara said.

“We now know that about two weeks after former Minister Knoll approved the Council proposal for a 12-month trial of the scramble crossing, lobbying occurred for right-hand turns with an offer to pay for the ‘shortfall’ of any cost.

“That lobbying appears to have produced the result that we are now faced with.”