Development Act 1993 Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan ...
Transcript of Development Act 1993 Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan ...
Development Act 1993
Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan Highbury Residential and Open Space Development Plan Amendment By the Minister For Consultation
Have Your Say This Development Plan Amendment (DPA) will be available for inspection by the public at the Department of Planning and Development’s offices, Level 5, 136 North Terrace, Adelaide or at the City of Tea Tree Gully’s offices, 571 Montague Road, Modbury from Thursday 9 April 2009 until Thurday 11 June 2009. During this time anyone may make a written submission about any of the changes the DPA is proposing. Submissions should be sent to the Presiding Member, Development Policy Advisory Committee, c/- the Department of Planning and Local Government, GPO Box 1815, Adelaide SA 5001, or emailed to [email protected] Submissions should indicate whether the author wishes to speak at a public meeting about the DPA. If no-one requests to be heard, no public meeting will be held. If requested, the meeting will be held on Wednesday 1 July 2009at Sfera's on the Park, 191 Reservoir Road, Modbury.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Need for the amendment Legal requirements Consultation 1 ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................1 1.2 The Strategic Context and Policy Directions...............................................................2
1 2.1 Consistency with South Australia’s Strategic Plan .......................................2 1.2.2 Consistency with the Planning Strategy .......................................................4 1.2.3 Consistency with other key policy documents ..............................................5 1.2.4 BDP Policy Library........................................................................................6 1.2.5 Understanding Residential Densities............................................................6
1.3 Investigations Undertaken...........................................................................................6 2. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED POLICY CHANGES.................................18 2.1 Current planning policy .............................................................................................18
2.1.1 Zoning of affected area...............................................................................18 2.1.2 Adjoining Zones and Policy Areas..............................................................19
2.2 Recommended planning policy .................................................................................19 3. STATEMENT OF STATUTORY COMPLIANCE.......................................................22 3.1 Accords with the Planning Strategy........................................................................22 3.2 Accords with other parts of the Development Plan ................................................22 3.3 Complements the policies in the Development Plan for adjoining areas ...............22 3.4 Satisfies the requirements prescribed by the Regulations .....................................22 REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES THE AMENDMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Development Act 1993 (the Act) provides the legislative framework for undertaking amendments to a Development Plan. The Act allows either the relevant council or, under prescribed circumstances, the Minister for Urban Development and Planning (the Minister) to amend a Development Plan. In this case, the Minister is undertaking the amendment because he is of the opinion that the matter is of significant social, economic or environmental importance (section 24(1)(g) of the Act). A Development Plan Amendment (DPA) (this document) explains what policy changes are being proposed and why, and how the amendment process will be conducted. A DPA consists of: • Executive Summary (this section) • Analysis • Conclusions and Recommended Policy Changes • Statement of Statutory Compliance • References/Bibliography • Appendices • The Amendment. NEED FOR THE AMENDMENT In December 2007 the Minister for Urban Development and Planning approved an amendment to the Urban Boundary, which controls the extent of the Metropolitan Area of Adelaide. The amended boundary includes a 76 hectare parcel of land at Highbury. This land forms the eastern half of the affected area in this DPA and contains the CEMEX Australia Pty Ltd sand extraction site, which is nearly at the end of its viable operating life. The rest of the affected area (40 hectares) is comprised of the Highbury Landfill (East Waste) site, which is soon to be capped with a vegetative cover; the capped SITA Landfill site; and a number of underdeveloped parcels of land north and south of the landfill sites, which are potentially suitable for residential development. An amendment to the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan is now being proposed to enable the creation of low and medium density residential development in these areas. Land not suitable at this time for residential development would be held as deferred urban land until it has been remediated to the extent suitable for urban development. The DPA also provides for community and open areas to meet the needs of the expanding population in this locality. AFFECTED AREA The affected area is located approximately 14kms north-east of the Adelaide CBD in Highbury, see Figure 1. It is bounded by Casemate Road to the north; Lower North East Road and Torrens Road to the west; the Hills Face Zone to the east; and the River Torrens Linear Park to the south. It covers approximately 116 hectares and contains a range of land uses including residences, open space, rural living, extractive industry infrastructure and former landfill activities.
Minister of Environment& Land Management
CEMEX AustraliaPty LtdEast Waste (Highbury
Landfill Authority)
SA Water
SITA
Boylan
Domain Project Development Pty Ltd
Hallan Nominees
GORGE RD
LOW
ERN
OR
THEA
STR
D
GRAND JUNCTION RD
HA
NC
OC
KR
D
LOW
ERNO
RTHEAST
RD
Legend
Ownership Boundaries
Affected Area
Highbury Residential and Open SpaceDevelopment Plan Ammendment
Figure 1: Affected Area
1:7,500@ A3 ¹18 June 2008
Projection: MGA94 Zone 54Datum: GDA94Source: PlanningSA, DTEI DEH, QED pty ltd
The land within the affected area is located in a number of zones: an Extractive Industry Zone, a Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone, a Rural B Zone and a Special Uses Zone. It is noted that no land within the Hills Face Zone or the Linear Park (River Torrens) Zone is directly affected by the DPA. PROPOSED POLICY CHANGES The DPA proposes the following changes to the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan: • Rezoning the majority of the Highbury Landfill site and all of the SITA Landfill
site from an Extractive Industry Zone into a Deferred Urban Zone and using the existing Deferred Urban Zone Objectives and Principles of Development Control with minor amendments to identify the landfill sites as part of the zone provisions and provide for their ongoing management as a landfill site
• Rezoning a portion of the Highbury Landfill site, presently in the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone and adjacent to Lower North East Road, into a Local Centre Zone and using the existing Local Centre Objectives and Principles of Development Control
• Incorporating land immediately west of Majestic Grove into the existing Open Space Zone and using the existing Open Space Zone Objectives and Principles of Development Control.
• Incorporating six existing dwellings located at the eastern end of Old Sheoak Court, on the western side of the affected area, near Lower North East Road and currently in the Extractive Industry Zone within the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone
• Extending the existing Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone, over the CEMEX site, Hallan, Domain and other smaller properties, north and south of the landfill sites within the affected area with a Policy Area designation including Objectives, Desired Character Statement and site specific Principles of Development Control that facilitate an increased housing density having regard to topographic features and connectivity of watercourses and open space networks and provide for the incorporation of appropriately sized areas of public open space. This open space will serve a variety of functions, including watercourses and stormwater detention; passive recreation; pedestrian and cycling linkages to surrounding linear park networks; biodiversity and habitat areas; and buffers to adjoining activities and the Hills Face Zone through a Concept Plan
• Introducing a Concept Plan (Fig R(TTG)/3) to provide guidance in relation to: - the provision and location of open space, watercourses and flood protection
areas - the appropriate location of vehicular access points - the location of pedestrian and cycle links
• Making consequential changes to the existing Zone Maps TTG/2, 30, 31, 35, 36 and 39 and introducing new Policy Area Maps 43, 44 and 45 to effect the above changes.
The policy approach described above is consistent with the existing Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan and does not affect planning policies or zones in adjoining council areas. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS Prior to the preparation of this DPA, the Minister received advice from a person or persons holding prescribed qualifications pursuant to section 101 of the Development Act 1993. The DPA has assessed the extent to which the proposed amendment: • accords with the Planning Strategy • accords with other parts of the Development Plan • complements the policies in Development Plans for adjoining areas • satisfies the requirements prescribed by the Regulations under the
Development Act 1993. CONSULTATION This document is now released for government agency and council consultation, concurrent with public consultation, for a period of eight weeks. The following organisations, agencies and individuals are to be consulted: • Environment Protection Authority • Department of Trade and Economic Development • Department for Environment and Heritage • Department of Primary Industries and Resources of South Australia • SA Water • ETSA Utilities • ElectraNet • Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure • Country Fire Service • Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation • Department for Families and Communities • Department of the Premier and Cabinet, Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation
Division • Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board • The City of Tea Tree Gully • Mr Tom Kenyon MP, Member for Newland • All land owners within the affected area.
All written council, agency and public submissions made during the consultation phase will be recorded and considered by the Development Policy Advisory Committee (DPAC), which is an independent body responsible for conducting the consultation stage of Ministerial DPAs. Changes to the DPA may occur as a result of this consultation process. (See also the ‘Have your say’ information box at the front of this DPA.)
THE FINAL STAGE When the DPAC has considered the comments received, and heard any persons who lodged a submission and requested to be heard at the public meeting, it will provide the Minister for Urban Development and Planning with a report on its findings. The Minister will then either approve (with or without changes) or refuse the DPA. Note: This Executive Summary is for information only and does not form part of the Amendment to the Development
Plan.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 1
1 ANALYSIS 1.1 BACKGROUND In December 2007, the Minister for Urban Development and Planning approved an amendment to the Urban Boundary, which controls the extent of the Metropolitan Area of Adelaide. The amendment included 76 hectares of land at Highbury, which is nearly at the end of its viable operating life as a quarry for sand extraction. Incorporation of this parcel of land into the Urban Boundary, coupled with the exhaustion of its supply of sand minerals, presents an opportunity to facilitate the site’s rehabilitation. This parcel of land forms the eastern half of the area which is affected by this DPA. The remaining parts of the affected area are comprised of:
• the ‘Highbury Landfill’, which is soon to be capped with a vegetative cover, and the capped ‘SITA Landfill’, both of which are located central and west of the quarry site respectively
• a number of underdeveloped parcels of land located west of the quarry and north and south of the landfill sites.
Currently there is limited opportunity for broadacre residential development in the City of Tea Tree Gully and so the affected area provides an excellent opportunity to provide additional and mixed housing to facilitate the council’s population and growth targets.
The land uses being proposed for the affected area include low to medium density housing ranging from single to multiple storey detached, semi-detached and row dwellings on small allotments; group dwellings and residential apartments; supplementary community services/facilities; and the protection of flora and fauna through the incorporation of biodiversity/open space linkages.
The proposed rezoning could generate up to 800-1000 dwellings and has the potential to increase Highbury’s population by approximately 2000-2500 people. This was calculated by applying density ratios taken from Government of South Australia’s ‘Understanding Residential Densities’. This is in addition to current residential development off Majestic Grove, Highbury and infill development in the area. The proposed residential development will also increase the demand for local retail and community services.
If the DPA is approved, the redeveloped site would form the urban edge of residential development located at the interface of the Hills Face Zone in Adelaide’s metropolitan east.
Parts of the landscape of the affected area have been significantly altered by mining activities resulting in very deep pits with steep gradients. This has exposed large sections of land and led to the removal of vegetation over large areas of the site. However clusters of vegetation and forest areas are still prominent. Existing improvements on the quarry site include infrastructure and processing facilities such as the crushing plant. The site also includes offices, a truck wash, an old farm house, laboratories and monitoring stations.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 2
The quarry site will require substantial rehabilitation and remediation work to ensure significant parcels of land are available for residential pursuits. The site is located adjacent to a number of key physical land features including the Mount Lofty Ranges and Hills Face to the east, and the River Torrens and the River Torrens Linear Park to the south. SA Water’s former aqueduct to Hope Valley Reservoir and Thorndon Reserve forms the southern edge of the affected area. The surrounding development includes mainly residential land uses to the north and west of the quarry site. There are potential interface issues arising between the affected area and surrounding land uses such as the Hills Face Zone, residential land uses and the River Torrens Linear Park. These can best be addressed by the placement of public roads and/or public open space along the interface as proposed in the DPA.
1.2 THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND POLICY DIRECTIONS 1.2.1 Consistency with South Australia’s Strategic Plan South Australia’s Strategic Plan contains the following objectives and targets that are relevant to this DPA:
Objective 1 - Growing Prosperity ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT T1.2 Competitive business climate: maintain Adelaide’s rating as the least costly place to set up and do business in Australia and continue to improve our position internationally. POPULATION T1.22 Total population: increase South Australia’s population to 2 million by 2050, with an interim target of 1.64 million by 2014. Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these targets by: • introducing policies that will facilitate a range of housing types to meet
the demands of a changing age structure and household profile, thereby increasing the residential population within the area and providing for a diverse and sustainable community
• locating housing close to employment, which will assist in providing South Australian businesses with a competitive edge through access to needed workforce.
Objective 2 - Improving Wellbeing PREVENTATIVE HEALTH T2.3 Sport and recreation: exceed the Australian average for participation in sport and physical activity by 2014.
HEALTHY LIFE EXPECTANCY T2.4 Healthy South Australians: increase the healthy life expectancy of South Australians by 5per cent for males and 3per cent for females by 2014.
PUBLIC SAFETY T2.8 Statewide crime rates: reduce victim reported crime by 12per cent by 2014.
WORK-LIFE BALANCE T2.12 Work-life balance: improve the quality of life of all South Australians through maintenance of a healthy work-life balance.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 3
Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these targets by: • facilitating development that integrates housing with open space and
encourages pedestrian and cycling activity • providing for attractive, diverse and accessible public places • improving community safety through design of public spaces and
facilitating an increase in pedestrian activity, surveillance and interaction. Objective 3 - Attaining Sustainability CLIMATE CHANGE T3.6 Use of public transport: increase the use of public transport to 10 per cent of metropolitan weekday passenger vehicle kilometres travelled by 2018. ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT T3.7 Ecological footprint: Reduce South Australia’s ecological footprint by 30 per cent by 2050. WATER T3.9 Sustainable water supply: South Australia’s water resources are managed within sustainable limits by 2018. ENERGY T3.14 Energy efficiency – dwellings: increase the energy efficiency of dwellings by 10 per cent by 2014. Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these targets by: • facilitating a development with pedestrian connections that will
encourage walking and cycling to nearby activity centres and public transport nodes
• ensuring that development achieves sustainable outcomes in relation to energy efficiency, stormwater management and water conservation techniques
• improving efficiency in the use of existing infrastructure and services within a more compact urban form
• providing housing within an established urban area thereby reducing the need for housing in fringe areas where access to services and infrastructure is often reduced.
Objective 6 - Expanding Opportunity HOUSING T6.7 Affordable housing: increase affordable home purchase and rental opportunities by 5 percentage points by 2014.
T6.8 Housing stress: halve the number of South Australians experiencing housing stress by 2014. Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these targets by: • introducing development policy that facilitates the development of a
diversity of housing types and opportunities, including medium density housing, compact development and affordable dwellings
• providing for housing diversity and affordable housing opportunities • providing housing choice close to a new local activity centre and public
transport nodes.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 4
1.2.2 Consistency with the Planning Strategy The Planning Strategy presents current State Government policy for development in South Australia and is based on key economic, social and environmental imperatives. In particular, it seeks to guide and coordinate State Government activity in the construction and provision of services and infrastructure that influence the development of South Australia. It also indicates directions for future development to the community, the private sector and local government. The most pertinent sections in the Planning Strategy for Metropolitan Adelaide (December 2007) addressed by these proposed policies are:
3.2 Biodiversity
Strategy 1 Integrate the protection of biodiversity and ecosystems processes into urban development and planning policies and processes.
Strategy 3 Increase the viability of areas of biological significance by identifying and protecting them and creating linkages between them.
3.3 Open Space, Recreation and Sport
Strategy 2. Ensure that biodiversity assets are protected within the overall open space framework with a focus of enhancing the MOSS.
3.8 Adelaide’s Hills Face
Strategy 1 Protect the physical and cultural importance of the Hills Face Zone.
Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these policies by protecting stands of remnant vegetation and reinstating water courses.
3.11 Health and Community Services
Strategy 1 Create living environments with services and facilities to support healthy lifestyles and active communities
Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these policies by providing open space and walk/cycle paths linking with the River Torrens.
3.12 Hazard Avoidance, Minimisation and Management
Strategy 6 Protect land and groundwater from site contamination and encourage the progressive remediation of contaminated land where a risk to human health or the environment exists.
Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these policies by site remediation.
3.15 Residential Neighbourhoods and Housing
Strategy 1 Ensure land is used appropriately within the Urban Boundary to meet projected housing demands and satisfy varied housing preferences and incomes
Strategy 3 Target growth to maximise use of existing infrastructure and ensure the provision of suitable infrastructure to support the function of neighbourhoods.
Strategy 9 Provide a network of parks and recreation areas within neighbourhoods which offer a variety of safe, useable, appropriate and attractive public open space.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 5
Comment: The DPA seeks to progress these policies by providing for a range of housing, utilising existing infrastructure and providing a network of parks and recreation areas.
1.2.3 Consistency with other key policy documents The Housing Plan for South Australia (2005) The Housing Plan for South Australia, which was developed under the strategic framework of South Australia’s Strategic Plan, aims to: • make affordable housing available to more people • provide quality housing for those in greatest need in our community • renew and reinvigorate neighbourhoods. Key objectives of the Housing Plan taken into account in this DPA are:
• Link planning and development policies and processes to housing targets (Objective 1.3 Planning links)
• Develop initiatives across the planning system, in partnership with the Minister for Urban Development and Planning, to ensure affordable housing forms part of all substantial new housing developments. The Government has targeted a minimum of 10 per cent affordable housing and 5 per cent high need housing in all significant new developments (Objective 1.3 Planning links)
• Renew and reinvigorate neighbourhoods (Objective 1.6 Urban regeneration) • Respond to the changing community demographic profile by promoting accessible and
adaptable housing design in residential development that accords with disability access principles (Objective 2.2 Accessible and flexible housing)
• Promote energy efficiency and environmental sustainability within the housing sector, including particular focus on improving the energy, water and waste management efficiency of social rental housing (Objective 5.1 Energy, water and waste management efficiency).
These objectives are reflected in the proposed policy provisions of this DPA.
Creating a Sustainable Future – An integrated natural resources management plan for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region (June 2008) The NRM Plan seeks to protect, manage and enhance natural resources in this region. The plan includes 20-year regional targets to focus action in the region towards the highest natural resource priorities. The following targets of the plan (Volume B) are relevant to this DPA:
• Surface water and groundwater quality–all water resources meet water quality guidelines to protect defined environmental values (T2)
• Water resources managed within sustainable limits (T3) • Improve the capacity of people in the community, institutions and regional organisations to
sustainably manage our natural resources (T13). The DPA has been prepared with regard to these targets. City of Tea Tree Gully Strategic Plan 2007 - 2011 A number of key objectives, strategies and targets within this plan are relevant to, and supported by, this DPA in particular:
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 6
1. Sustainable Environment
T1.6 Reduce our footprint to reduce the impact of human settlements and activities to 5 per cent by 2011.
2. Physical Infrastructure
T2.3 Increase the number of people using public transport by 5 per cent by 2011.
5. Land Use Planning
T5.1 Increase the population of the City to 110,000 by 2011 and to 150,000 by 2050.
T5.2 Increase affordable housing stock within the City by 2 per cent by 2011.
T5.3 Increase the number of medium to high density dwellings units within the City by 30 per cent by 2011.
T5.4 Tea Tree Gully to have 5 per cent apartment style housing by 2011.
Comment: The DPA will contribute to all these strategic targets. 1.2.4 Better Development Plan Policy Library The City of Tea Tree Gully initiated a Better Development Plan (BDP) DPA in June 2008. This DPA has therefore examined the BDP Policy Library with regard to developing the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone Policy Area 24 Highbury Policy Area and in particular the Residential Medium Density Policy Area Module. 1.2.5 Understanding Residential Densities In November 2006 the Government of South Australia released a document titled, Understanding Residential Densities: a Pictorial Handbook of Adelaide Examples. The document defines low density housing as approximately 11-22 dwellings per hectare (gross) and 17-33 dwellings per hectare (net); and medium density housing as approximately 23-45 dwellings per hectare (gross) and 34-67 dwellings per hectare (net). This DPA contemplates low to medium density housing in the form of single to multiple storey detached, semi-detached and row dwellings on small allotments, as well as group dwellings, residential flat building (apartments) as suggested within Understanding Residential Densities. 1.3 INVESTIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN
1.3.1 Population and Housing Trends
Population The most recent census (2006) recorded a total population of 95971 for the City of Tea Tree Gully and 6539 for Highbury1.
Compared to the 2001 Census, the city’s population at this time had grown by 0.9 per cent over the five year period and Highbury had grown by 1.6 per cent. The city’s population has grown due to the completion of the large scale urban development at Golden Grove but further population increases could be constrained by lack of opportunities for broadacre development.
1 ABS, Population and Housing Census, 2006
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 7
Age The age distribution for Highbury is similar to South Australia’s for most age groups. In 2006, a third of Highbury’s population was under the age of 25, 19 per cent were aged between 0 and 14, and 14 per cent were aged between 15 and 25. The majority of the population was aged between 25 and 54 (41 per cent) and 27 per cent were aged 55 years and over. This matches the state’s median age of 39, which is slightly higher than the Australian average of 37.
Compared to the state, there is a higher representation of Highbury residents aged 55 to 64 years, accounting for 16.1 per cent of the suburb’s population compared to 11.7 per cent for South Australia. This cohort will have a significant impact on future housing, infrastructure and services needed in the area.
Employment and Income Highbury has a strong level of employment with over 90 per cent of residents in work.
The median income generated by an individual resident over the age of 15 was $541 per week and the median income brought into an average household was $1212 per week. By contrast, the state’s median individual income and household income was lower - 25 per cent and 37 per cent respectively.
Higher income earnings for Highbury have a strong correlation to the occupations undertaken by its residents. In 2006, the most common occupations for Highbury residents were professionals, clerical and administrative workers, technicians and trades workers, as well as managers and sales workers. The most prevalent industries of employment for these occupations were education (school), health (hospitals), hospitality (cafes and restaurants and food services), State Government and administration.
Household sizes Family homes represent over 80 per cent of Highbury’s households while single person households represent far less at approximately 13 per cent. Highbury has a higher representation of family households and a lower number of lone person households compared to the South Australian average. Approximately half of these family households are couples with children, less than half (40.1 per cent) of the households are couples without children and less than 10 per cent are single parent families. A review of the 2001 and 2006 census figures shows a decrease in the number of family households and a slight rise in people living alone.
There is not a great variety of household types in Highbury as separate dwellings have been the main choice of residence in the past. Other types of dwellings such as semi-detached, terrace or townhouse units or apartments make up a considerably lower number: only 2 per cent of the total housing market.
The level of home ownership or homes being purchased is comparatively higher than that of the state. Over 85 per cent of Highbury residents own or are purchasing their homes while the state’s recorded level of aspiring home owners is approximately 20 per cent lower. The proportion of rentals and other tenure types is less than 15 per cent of the market with the rest of the suburb’s dwellings being fully owned or being purchased.
1.3.2 Retail and Community Services A wide range of services is available to the current and future residents of Highbury within a 5 kilometre radius. See Figure 2 over.
GORGE RD
NORTHEAST RD
MONTACUTE RD
LOWER
NORTHEAST RD
HA
NC
OC
KR
D
NELS
ON
RD
KELLY
RD
SMART RD
MC
INTYR
ER
D
GOLDEN
GROVERD
LYONS RD
GRAND JUNCTION RD
THE
GO
LDEN
WY
MILNE RD
MONTAGUE RD
MAGILL RD
PARACOMBE RD
WRIGHT RD
THEGROVE
WY
BRID
GERD
STBE
RN
AR
D'S
RD
STRA
DBR
OKE
RD
TOLLEY
RD
GEORGE ST
GLY
NBU
RN
RD
DARLEYRD
RES
ERV
OIR
RD
YATALA VALE RD
GREENWITH
RD
GRENFELL RD
NE
WTO
NR
D
MAR
YVA
LER
D
LAD
YW
OO
DR
D
AWO
ON
GA
RD
VALLEYR
D
JOHN RD
VINE
ST
MOULES RD
LOWER ATHELSTONE RD
SUD
HO
LZR
D
MORIALTA RD
CHURCH ST
GRENFELL RD
MILNE RD
Legend
Study Area
Generalised Landuse 2005
Retail Commercial
Public Institution
Education
Recreation
Highbury Residential and Open SpaceDevelopment Plan Amendment
Figure 2 - Community Services (within 5km)
1:40,000@ A3 ¹14 March 2008
Projection: MGA94 Zone 54Datum: GDA94Source: PlanningSA, DTEI DEH, QED pty ltd
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 9
1.3.3 Roads, traffic and public transport
Existing Road Network The road network in the vicinity of the affected area is primarily under the care and control of the City of Tea Tree Gully.
The road network adjacent to and within the subject site is comprised of:
• Lower North East Road, which is an arterial road under the care and control of the Department for Transport Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI) comprising two carriageways divided by a central median, with each carriageway having two lanes
• Torrens Road and Majestic Grove, which are minor collector roads comprising a single carriageway with one lane in each direction
• Halls Road, which is a minor collector road comprising a single carriageway with one lane in each direction. The middle section of Halls Road is closed road.
All the junctions in the local traffic area are unsignalised ‘T’ junctions.
Traffic Volume and Operation Traffic volumes for 2005 and 2006 for each of the roads surrounding the affected area are shown on Table 1. Table 1: Existing Traffic Volumes on the Adjacent Road Network
Road Existing Daily Traffic Volume
Lower North East Road, from Valley Road to Torrens Road 8900
Lower North East Road, from Torrens Road to Hancock Road 7500
Lower North East Road, from Hancock Road to Perseverance Road 2700
Lower North East Road, from Perseverance Road to the hills 2200
Hancock Road, from Grand Junction Road to Lower North East Road 4800
Torrens Road from Majestic Grove to Lower North East Road 1500 (estimated)
Halls Road near quarry entrance 350
Source: Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI) website and the City of Tea Tree Gully
The traffic surveys indicate that during peak periods the traffic volumes are about 10 per cent of the daily volumes.
Traffic operation on the road network in the vicinity of the affected area is considered satisfactory as assessed by QED Traffic Engineers, with minor queues and delays for vehicles exiting Torrens Road during peak periods. The road network operates with minimal delays to road users during off-peak periods.
1.3.4 Traffic An assessment of traffic and parking was undertaken by QED Traffic Engineers to consider the impact of the proposed residential and open space development on the adjacent road network and assess its operation in accordance with the relevant
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 10
Standards and Guidelines. The assessment found that if the proposed development were to consist of approximately 1000 dwellings:
• up to 9000 trips per day could be generated, with approximately 850 trips during peak hours in the surrounding road network
• the predicted volume of traffic on the adjacent road network would increase, with Halls Road requiring upgrading to collector road standard and Torrens Road needing to be assessed for possible upgrading
• the Lower North East Road/Torrens Road intersection could experience delays for traffic exiting Torrens Road. The Torrens Road approach could require modification to improve access and safety in peak operation
• the Lower North East Road/Halls Road intersection could experience a slight increase in delay for vehicles exiting Halls Road.
Further findings were that:
• the proposed development could provide access for refuse collection and other vehicles. Turning areas for HRVs would have to be provided where needed
• pedestrian access should be provided throughout the proposed development by footpaths adjacent to roads and streets, as well as along the open space network
• wide linear reserve areas should be provided through the proposed development. These areas would offer an opportunity to provide off-road shared pedestrian and bicycle paths with connections to the River Torrens Linear Reserve
• traffic management measures should be considered for straight lengths of roads that are more than 150 metres long.
Using the upper figure of 1000 dwellings (as mentioned in Section 1.1 of this Analysis) the traffic volumes anticipated on the immediately adjacent road network are shown in Table 2. Table 2: Predicted Traffic on the adjacent road network
Location
Existing Daily 2-way (vehicles per day)
Predicted Daily 2-way (vehicles per day)
Daily difference(vehicles per day)
Existing Peak 2-way (vehicles per hour)
Predicted Peak 2-way (vehicles per hour)
Peak difference(vehicles per hour)
Lower North East Road – north of development
7,500 12,400 + 4,900 750 1,210 + 460
Lower North East Road – south of development
8,900 13,000 + 4,100 1000 1,390 + 390
Torrens Road
Estimated 1,500 4,800 + 3,300 150 470 + 320
Halls Road 350 6,050 + 5,700 30 560 + 530
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 11
Access to the affected area is generally from Lower North East Road and via Halls Road and Torrens Road.
An analysis of the operation of critical turning movements was undertaken by QED Traffic Engineers in accordance with Guide to traffic engineering practice—part 5: intersections at grade (Austroads, 20052). The delays and queue lengths that were calculated are subject to actual traffic conditions and the effect of ‘platooning’ caused by adjacent traffic signals. This is not reflected in the Austroads methodology.
The analysis identified the following:
• traffic turning right from Halls Road to Lower North East Road during the morning peak period could experience average delays of less than 25 seconds with a 95th percentile queue length of fewer than nine vehicles. The delay expected at this intersection is not unusual for a suburban location during peak hour
• traffic turning right from Lower North East Road into Halls Road could experience minimal delays and queue lengths. The right turn lane in Lower North East Road should be able to accommodate the anticipated volumes of traffic
• traffic turning right from Torrens Road into Lower North East Road during the morning peak period could experience average delays of less than 60 seconds with a 95th percentile queue length of fewer than five vehicles. The queuing lane for right turning vehicles at this junction can accommodate approximately three vehicles. Traffic turning left from Torrens Road could be delayed by traffic waiting to turn right into Lower North East Road. The Torrens Road approach should be modified to improve access and safety of peak operation. To reduce the delay to left turning traffic the right turn lane could be extended in Torrens Road to accommodate five vehicles
• traffic turning right from Lower North East Road into Torrens Road could experience minimal delays and queue lengths. The right turn in Lower North East Road should be able to accommodate the anticipated volumes of traffic.
The predicted traffic generation of the affected area may also adversely affect the operation of the Lower North East Road/Hancock Road intersection and the Hancock Road/Grand Junction Road intersection. Further investigation should be carried out to ascertain the full impact of the traffic generated by the proposed development on these intersections.
Public Transport The ‘Adelaide Metro’ public transport system operates three bus routes adjacent to the subject site.
Discussions with the City of Tea Tree Gully and Public Transport Board are proposed to extend existing bus services and to provide a community transport bus. This would be subject to approval by the Public Transport Division of the Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure.
2 Austroads provides a methodology for assessing potential queuing and delays for vehicles performing turns across traffic
streams at intersections or access points.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 12
Car parking The anticipated parking requirements generated by the policies proposed in this DPA could comfortably meet the existing parking requirements of the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan.
1.3.5 Geology and Hydrology3
Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd (SKM) has provided the following information as part of the Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment:
The landscape within this region is dominated by steep gradients between ridges and valleys. The surface elevations surrounding the quarry range from 120m above the Australian Height Datum (AHD) at the sand pit on the western boundary of the site to 400m AHD along a ridge to the east of the quarry. The Riverview sandpit ranges in depth from approximately 120 to 160m AHD.
Dominant hydrological features near the quarry are the Hope Valley Reservoir, located approximately 2km west of the quarry, and the River Torrens and its tributaries (principally Jacobs Creek). Analysis of daily river flow data4 shows that the River Torrens has flow volumes ranging from no flow during summer months to 1900 ML/day during flood events. The surface water flow around the quarry is generally directed south west towards Jacobs Creek and the River Torrens.
The regional geology within the affected area is varied. The Highbury Sandpit has extracted sands associated with the North Maslin Sands formation, underlaid by weathered siltstones and discontinuous lenses of sands and gravels.
In the central/eastern portions of the site, groundwater can be found within the fractures of the Woolshed Flat Shale and Montacute Dolomite. The local aquifer system is likely to be part of a regional unconfined aquifer that extends across the western face of the Mount Lofty Ranges. It is likely that groundwater found within the dolomite and shale is in hydraulic connection with the Stonyfell Quartzite located west of the quarry.
Groundwater is likely within the North Maslin Sands, underlaid by the weathered siltstones of the Saddleworth formation.
Groundwater levels vary depending on the topography of the area and formation targeted, but range from 2.55m to 48.7m bgl. In the past a number of wells were installed on the CEMEX site and offsite, including the adjacent landfill facilities.
Groundwater discharge would occur in spring to nearby streams (e.g. the tributaries of the Torrens River), and through flow to the Adelaide Plains and from extraction of groundwater. Spring discharge was identified several hundred metres west of the quarry during a visit in June 2006.
3 Geological and groundwater data were collated for the region from the SA Geodata database, which contains information
collected at the time of well construction (lithology, groundwater level, groundwater quality, construction details and use).
Time series groundwater level and salinity data were sourced from Obswell, another online database accessible from the
Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation (DWLBC) website. Data was collated for over 70 bores located
within the affected area. Regional geology data were sourced from Primary Industries and Resources South Australia
(PIRSA) geology maps.
4 Measured at gauging station A5040529 located on Holbrooks Road
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 13
An assessment of the distribution of groundwater salinity measurements collected since 1990 (reported as total dissolved solids (TDS) mg/L) shows that groundwater salinity ranges from 397 mg/L to 3609 mg/L. Information regarding aquifer sampling and screen interval for the various bores is unknown and requires further analysis. It appears that groundwater in the region is used for irrigation, industry, domestic and stock purposes. In general, salinities observed within the North Maslin Sands would be lower than the Saddleworth formation. There may also be some stratification of the water column within the quarry which may result in the presence of more saline water at greater depths.
Overall there are no major issues subject to the establishment of watercourses as part of the rework of the area.
1.3.6 Stormwater and Flooding Discussions were held by Wallbridge and Gilbert Engineering as part of the infrastructure investigations with the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resource Board and the City of Tea Tree Gully to determine what requirements would have to be met to rehabilitate the quarry site. The Board has advised that the land would need rehabilitation. The Board further advised that:
• a land form that presents a water course collecting the flows from the hillside and directing them to the River Torrens would be a good outcome
• the water course could include some collection points for silt mobilised by overland flows
• a piped system to conduct the flows to the river would not be acceptable
• if the future land use included urban development the water bodies along the water course could incorporate a detention facility to limit peak flows, although the Torrens can cope with an event between 1 in 100 years (1% risk) and 1 in 200 years (0.5% risk)
• any natural spring flows should be preserved and allowed to find their way to the Torrens through the ‘created’ watercourse
• water sensitive urban design principles should be used.
The City of Tea Tree Gully supports this approach which is being incorporated in the Infrastructure Plan for this area.
1.3.7 Site Contamination5 There are some contaminated sites within the affected area. These include the two identified landfill sites; disposed building materials on the Domain property; and isolated fuel and oil spills on the CEMEX site. However, subject to the outcome of the review by the appointed Site Auditor and the completion of additional investigations and subsequent remedial measures as required, no significant environmental limitations have been identified that would prevent the development of the CEMEX, Domain and Hallan properties for future residential and open space use.
5 Sinclair Knight Mertz Pty Ltd (SKM) undertook a Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment of land comprising the
CEMEX site at Highbury, South Australia. In addition SKM was engaged to undertake a Phase I and II Environmental Site
Assessment at 10-14 and 16-20 Halls Road, Highbury (Hallan Nominees Land) and also Lot 715 Majestic Grove, Highbury
(Domain Project Development Land).
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 14
The Executive Summary of the Environmental Report is in Appendix A.
Control of the landfill gas migration, which was identified along the eastern perimeter of the two landfills, could be managed via the implementation of effective landfill gas extractions systems by the landfill operators and, if required, the implementation of more comprehensive landfill gas interception measures.
1.3.8 Biodiversity6 The biodiversity of the whole of the affected area has not been assessed because of site constraints however, the available data indicates that the ecological context of the site is complex, and that floral and faunal species that have conservation status and legislative protection are present.
Information about biodiversity that is known at this stage includes that:
• the steeper slopes bordering the eastern boundary of the affected area are predominantly vegetated with Eucalyptus fasciculosa (Pink gum) Low Woodland
• the CEMEX site has mature stands of Eucalyptus species (and associated ecological communities) that generate biodiversity corridors between the hill slopes and the residential areas to the south and west of the site. These corridors are comprised of a number of species, notably Pink gum (Ecalyptus fasciculosa), which is protected under state legislation (National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972).
The presence, location and extent of Pink gum will have ramifications for planning for and managing the CEMEX site. The site supports a representative and diverse biota, which has persisted because of the presence of relatively undisturbed resources.
As a result, it is recommended that:
• a detailed survey to determine the location and extent of Pink gum over the whole site be undertaken
• the location of other species with conservation status be determined
• the presence, extent and location of pest species be determined
• appropriately detailed species’ management plan(s) (whether for fauna or flora) based on the information obtained be developed
• a ‘protected areas’ plan for the site be developed (for protecting individual or multiple species)
• a management plan for managing and controlling pest species be developed
• rehabilitation or restoration strategies and plans for the site are initiated. This work would form part of any development applications for land division. The Biodiversity Report is in Appendix B. A detailed survey would also be necessary to ensure compliance with legislative requirements for some species as part of the land division development application.
6 Source of information South Australian Government biological databases, relevant spatial data and site visit in April 2008.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 15
1.3.9 Indigenous Heritage There are no known Aboriginal heritage sites within the affected area, which is located within the traditional lands of the Kaurna community7. An Aboriginal Heritage survey has therefore not been carried out.
Notwithstanding this, there is the potential that within the affected area which extends south to within 150-200m of the River Torrens, that there may be Aboriginal sites or objects. If an Aboriginal site is discovered during construction, works must be put on hold and advice sought from the Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation Division of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet.
1.3.10 Non-Indigenous Heritage There are no state or local heritage items listed in the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan for the affected area. However, a Heritage Item is listed at 1 Halls Road, which is situated about 40m north of the affected area.
The setting of this heritage site will be somewhat modified by the proposed DPA. However, the existing quarry and landfills already significantly affect the setting of the place and it is unlikely that this proposal will further detract from its heritage value. 1.3.11 Water supply The following advice has been provided by Wallbridge and Gilbert Engineers following discussions with infrastructure service agencies.8 Water mains exist in the adjoining road network and SA Water advises that the proposed development would most likely be serviced from the corner of Lower North East and Halls roads. Their preliminary advice indicates that the existing system should have sufficient capacity to accommodate the development. SA Water’s System Planning Group will provide a report containing the specific information on their requirements. It should also be noted that there are two major water trunk mains, a 1000mm and a 250mm diameter, which traverse the site from north to south along Halls Road. These mains must be accommodated either within Halls Road (minimum 20 metres wide) or within a council reserve. If they are located within a council reserve, a 20m wide easement will be required to protect them and no development will be permitted within or over this easement.
1.3.12 Sewer There are nine lots to the north of the site that are currently serviced by sewer mains adjacent to the intersection of Casemate Street, Lower North East Road and Halls Road. The new housing off Majestic Grove to the west of the affected area is also fully sewered.
7 A letter from the Aboriginal Heritage Branch of the Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation Division dated 14 August 2007
confirms that, ‘the Central Archive, which includes the Register of Aboriginal Sites and Objects…has no entries for Aboriginal
Sites in the proposed works location’.
8 Wallbridge and Gilbert letter dated 27 June 2008
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 16
SA Water have indicated that to accommodate the development of the affected area, a contribution will be required from the developer to provide a new pumping station (or stations) and upgrades to the existing ‘receiving’ stations, pumping mains and gravity mains. SA Water’s Systems Planning Group are currently compiling a more detailed report, which will outline SA Water’s requirements.
1.3.13 Telstra There are existing Telstra services in all adjoining road networks and the Network Development Manager has confirmed that Telstra would most likely provide the required infrastructure at no cost. Further investigations will be undertaken once a more detailed layout has been established.
1.3.14 Electricity ETSA Utilities estimates that a minimum augmentation cost of $172/kVA would be required from the developer, based on 8kVa per residential allotment. ETSA Utilities does however reserve the right to charge the actual costs, which may be higher but it is not in a position to determine this until an electrical design is provided. At this stage, it is expected that upgrades may be required to the substation on Grand Junction Road.
1.3.15 Gas The Australian Pipelines Trust Planning Group has confirmed that they are currently evaluating the existing infrastructure adjacent to the affected area to establish whether gas can be provided to the proposed development. If this can be done, the route of the proposed infrastructure and the cost of augmentation would then be confirmed. 1.3.16 Refuse Collection The layout of the street network shown on the Structure Plan includes both a ‘loop’ layout that would allow a large vehicle to perform a complete circuit without the need to reverse to exit, and a number of dead end streets which require a ‘hammerhead’ or similar turn-around area to be provided at the end of each dead end to allow a Heavy Rigid Vehicle (HRV) to turn around.
1.3.17 Future Housing The City of Tea Tree Gully recognises the need to allow a variety of housing types across its area to suit its changing demographic needs. At the time of the 2001 Census, the City of Tea Tree Gully forecast its population to increase by approximately 3000 between 2001 and 2021, reaching over 100 000 by 2013. Figure 3 shows the increase in the city’s population over a forecast period of 20 years and also highlights the diminishing size of households over that period. However, it is important to note that the city’s 2007-2011 Strategic Plan targets a population increase to 110 000 by 2011, well above the current population forecasts, requiring consideration of where to place these additional people and the type of housing required.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 17
Figure 3: Forecast Population and Average Household Size, City of Tea Tree Gully, 2001-2021
The council acknowledges the trend in declining household sizes by setting targets for the various types of housing, including increasing the number of medium to higher density dwelling units within the city by 30 per cent by 2011 and achieving 5 per cent apartment style housing by 2011.
Figure 4 below illustrates the change in household sizes for the City of Tea Tree Gully during the 2001-2006 period: a clear increase has occurred in lone person and couple households and a decrease in households larger than 3 persons. Figure 4: Change in Household Size, City of Tea Tree Gully, 2001-2006
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 18
Figure 5 shows the predicted future household types for the city with a visible increase in lone person and couple households without dependants and a decrease in couple families with dependants. Figure 5: Change in Household Type, City of Tea Tree Gully, 2001, 2011 and 2021
This DPA therefore seeks to accommodate both low and medium density residential development.
2. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED POLICY CHANGES 2.1 Current planning policy 2.1.1 Zoning of affected area The majority of the affected area is contained within the Extractive Industry Zone, however the south-western portion of the site traverses both the Special Use Zone and the Rural B Zone and a small part along the western edge of the area is contained within the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone. The principal objective for the Extractive Industry Zone is ‘a zone comprising land intended for the mining and quarrying of minerals’. This zoning is no longer relevant given the intended closure of the quarry and its inclusion in the urban area in 2007. The principal objective for the Special Use Zone is ‘a zone primarily accommodating special private and public activities of an institutional or open character, with agriculture or horticulture or recreation’. Adjustment to this zone is proposed to retain only the SA Water land containing the water connection line to Hope Valley Reservoir as Special Use Zone. The principal objective for the Rural B Zone is ‘a zone comprising land to be retained in use for primarily agricultural purposes’. This zone is no longer relevant given the changes that have already occurred in the area.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 19
A limited number of objectives seeking a range of residential development are provided in the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone. Building heights are generally limited to one storey and where appropriate two storeys, and development over two storeys is non-complying. It is considered that these provisions are not entirely applicable to the affected area due to the specific landscape qualities and the envisaged development of residences over two storeys. Accordingly it is proposed that a new Policy Area within the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone be introduced that provides for residential development up to three storeys. The development of the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone Policy Area 24 Highbury Policy Area has taken into account the Medium Density Policy Area module within the Better Development Plans Library, Version 3, released by Department of Planning and Local Government in November 2007. 2.1.2 Adjoining Zones and Policy Areas The Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan contains a number of qualitative and quantitative residential policies in the Council Wide section. These provisions address general issues associated with residential development, including site area, landscaping, car parking, access, privacy, overshadowing, neighbourhood character, energy efficiency, stormwater management, and the appearance of land and buildings. These provisions will be relevant to the development of the affected area. Policy Area 20 Golden Grove East The Policy Area provisions of this zone are additional to those set out within the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone and emphasise development that uses ecologically sustainable development practices, including integration with existing waterways, trees and topography. This policy area has interface and environmental issues that are similar to the affected area and therefore has been used as a reference point for the DPA. Policy Area 23 Golden Grove South The Policy Area provisions of this zone are additional to those set out within the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone and emphasises that residential development should comprise a diversity of dwelling types and sizes on allotments of varying sizes. 2.2 Recommended planning policy An appropriate development policy framework for the affected area should take into consideration the residential planning principles established within the broader area by the City of Tea Tree Gully and ratified by the Department of Planning and Local Government. The framework should also incorporate future urban housing trends to achieve an economical and efficient urban form, including medium density development delineated by a network of usable public open space corridors defined by remnant vegetation and re-established and natural watercourses. This will facilitate apartment terrace housing and medium density residential development.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 20
2.2.1 Objectives and Desired Character Taking into account the findings of the above investigations, coupled with state and local policy and planning directives, it is appropriate that the affected area should provide opportunities for a range of dwelling densities which are located having regard to watercourses and local open space networks. The development of the site should facilitate the integration of surrounding land uses through pedestrian connectivity, taking into account its proximity to the Hills Face Zone. The proposed Desired Character Statement for the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone Policy Area 24 consists of the following key elements:
• the encouragement of housing choice and affordability, enabled in part by a range of allotment sizes and dwelling types
• acknowledgement that dwellings with higher densities should occur in areas of highest amenity, including areas adjacent to open space
• sustainable development outcomes in relation to stormwater management, water conservation and energy efficiency
• the provision of usable open space networks to incorporate a range of passive recreation activities
• using the open space networks for stormwater management by incorporating wetlands and natural drainage swales
• achieving an attractive landscape character with a strong emphasis on native planting and treatments within the public realm
• facilitating future visual and physical links to adjacent sites and beyond, including the Torrens Linear Pathway, the proposed local centre and residential locations such as Majestic Grove.
2.2.2 Public Open Space The proposed Concept Plan contained within the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone Policy Area 24 provides general guidance about the location of the primary areas of open space. These areas are typified as green corridors that have formed around natural watercourses and drainage lines. It is eminently desirable that this open space network be contained in one single parcel of land dispersed throughout the affected area, which provides for a range of passive recreation activities, revegetation and stormwater management initiatives. This network would serve a number of functions, including:
• facilitating the creation of a network of pedestrian/cycle paths that connect the site to the Torrens Linear Pathway and Lower North East Road
• enabling the retention of significant stands of native vegetation
• providing useable open space to serve the day to day needs of the residents
• providing green corridors.
2.2.3 Density and Lot Size The affected area, in the main, does not have any established residential character with which it should conform with the exception of a few residential properties along its north and western edges.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 21
This provides a significant opportunity to provide for a range of dwelling densities (with minimum site areas per unit for residential flat buildings of 150 square metres and 300 square metres for single, detached dwellings) and dwelling types, including medium density and dwellings of 2 to 3 storeys.
2.2.4 Setbacks Table TTG/2 within the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan prescribes specific requirements for building setbacks in certain streets. More generic guidance is also provided within the Council Wide section of the Development Plan. However this DPA includes additions to these as Policy Area provisions to provide the opportunity for flexible design solutions adjacent to public open space areas. Minimum front setbacks of 4m are generally proposed throughout the affected area. This is considered sufficient to accommodate built form elements such as balconies and porticos, and provide some landscaping at the front of dwellings. Garaging would however be subject to a 5.5m setback from the principal frontage to accommodate the parking of a vehicle in the driveway. The provisions relating to minimum side boundary setbacks espoused within the Council Wide section are generally considered applicable for future residential development in the affected area. However, support for the construction of walls on side boundaries is provided for residential development in the form of row dwellings.
2.2.5 Building Height The proposed policy framework provides for buildings up to 3 storeys from finished ground levels, with policies encouraging two and three storey buildings within areas of high public amenity, including those adjacent to open space networks. This will assist in encouraging innovative design solutions and affordable housing options within the affected area.
2.2.6 Private Open Space The existing private open space requirements prescribed within the Council Wide section of the Development Plan are considered to be appropriate for the type of residential development envisaged within the affected area. Therefore no additional considerations for private open space are proposed.
2.2.7 Domestic Outbuildings and Other Structures There is sufficient guidance contained within the Council Wide section of the Development Plan for outbuildings so as to not require further revision.
2.2.8 Deferred Urban Policy Approach The existing Deferred Urban Zone provisions within the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan fit with the intended policy framework for land fill areas affected by this DPA. The current zoning requires works to be completed prior to any parcels of land being given over to urban use. There is a requirement to incorporate an additional objective within the current zone to enable recreational land uses on the affected area, as well as providing policy direction that facilitates future urban development on the ‘Highbury (East Waste) Landfill’ and ‘SITA Landfill’ sites, subject to appropriate remediation measures.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 22
2.2.9 Local Centre Policy Approach The existing Local Centre Zone provisions within the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan are similar to the intended policy framework required for this DPA and the proposed Local Centre Zone on Lower North East Road. There is a requirement for any development within the Highbury Local Centre Zone to be developed in accordance with Figure R(TTG)/3 to ensure connectivity between open space and the affected area is established.
3. STATEMENT OF STATUTORY COMPLIANCE Section 26 of the Development Act 1993 prescribes that a Development Plan Amendment must assess the extent to which the proposed amendment: a) accords with the Planning Strategy b) accords with other parts of the Development Plan c) complements the policies in the Development Plans for adjoining areas d) satisfies the requirements prescribed by the Regulations.
3.1 Accords with the Planning Strategy The DPA complies with the strategies set out in the Planning Strategy for Metropolitan Adelaide and it is the intent of the DPA to support the achievement of the Planning Strategy policies.
3.2 Accords with other parts of the Development Plan The policies in this DPA are consistent with the format, content and structure of the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan.
3.3 Complements the policies in the Development Plan for adjoining Council areas
The DPA has had regard to the objectives of the adjoining City of Salisbury, City of Playford, City of Port Adelaide Enfield, City of Campbelltown and the Adelaide Hills Development Plans. The amendment will not affect the Development Plan policies of these Council areas.
3.4 Satisfies the requirements prescribed by the Regulations The requirements for public consultation (Regulation 11) and the public meeting (Regulation 12) associated with this DPA will be met.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA 23
REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan (Consolidated – 4 December 2008), Government of South Australia
2. City of Tea Tree Gully Strategic Plan 2007-2011, City of Tea Tree Gully 3. Planning Strategy for Metropolitan Adelaide (December 2007), Government
of South Australia 4. South Australia’s Strategic Plan (2007), Government of South Australia 5. Housing Plan for South Australia (2005), Government of South Australia 6. The Strategic Infrastructure Plan for South Australia 2005/6 – 2014/15,
Government of South Australia 7. Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board,
Creating a Sustainable Future – An Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region (June 2008), Government of South Australia
8. Better Development Plan (BDP) Policy Library, Government of South Australia
9. ‘Understanding Residential Densities: A Pictorial Handbook of Adelaide Examples’ (2006), Government of South Australia
10. Australian Bureau of Statistics 11. Housing Industry Prospect Report (2005), Government of South Australia 12. Environmental Investigations Executive Summary – Highbury Residential
and Open Space (July 2008), Sinclair Knight Merz 13. Highbury DPA – Biodiversity Report (April 2008), QED Pty Ltd
APPENDIX A
Sinclair Knight Merz Level 5, 33 King William Street Adelaide SA 5000 Australia
Tel: +61 8 8424 3800 Fax: +61 8 8424 3810 Web: www.skmconsulting.com
Mr Damien Brown Dequetteville Pty Ltd Level 1, 22‐26 Vardon Avenue ADELAIDE SA, 5000
7 July 2008
Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Limited The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd.ABN 37 001 024 095 Offices across Australia, New Zealand, UK, South East Asia, Middle East, the Pacific and Americas
Re: Development Plan Amendment, Environmental Investigations Executive Summary –
Highbury Residential and Open Space Development
Dear Damien,
As requested below is draft Executive Summary for inclusion into the Development Plan Amendment document for the Highbury Residential and Open Space Development.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sinclair Knight Mertz Pty Ltd (SKM) was engaged by Dequetteville Pty Ltd on behalf of CEMEX Pty Ltd (CEMEX) to undertake a Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment of land comprising the CEMEX Readymix site at Highbury, South Australia. In addition SKM was engaged to undertake a Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments at 10-14 and 16-20 Halls Road, Highbury (Hallan Nominees Land) and also Lot 715 Majestic Grove, Highbury (Domain Project Development Land). All three sites are currently zoned extractive industry and are subject to a Ministerial Plan Amendment Report (PAR) to allow subsequent zoning change to proposed residential use.
The three sites are located with the ‘study area’ which is included in the Development Plan Amendment (DPA). The study area consists of:
• Existing residential land use in the north and north western portion with Lower North East Road located to the north west of the study boundary beyond the residential properties.
• Two former landfills, the Pacific Waste Management and the Highbury Landfill Authority, formerly the East Waste landfill which closed in 1996.
• Vacant parcel of land at 16-20 Halls Road, Highbury (Hallan Nominees Land) which was historically used for crushing of materials (brick and shell grit) and for storage and distribution of coal to a nearby water filtration plant.
• Vacant parcel of land at Lot 715 Majestic Grove, Highbury (Domain Project Development Land) which was historically used for farming/ agricultural practices.
• CEMEX Readymix Quarry which is currently operates as a quartzite products quarry.
SKM has undertaken environmental investigations at each of the three key sites (CEMEX Readymix site, Hallan Nominees and Domain Project Developments) to assist in assessing the suitability of these parcels of land for future residential development. Environmental
Mr Damien Brown
Dequetteville Pty Ltd 7 July 2008
The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. I:\VESA\Projects\VE23040\Technical\08-Highbury Delineation Works\PM\Letter-7July08-Dequetteville (Executive Summary).docx page 2
investigations undertaken at each site has included grid and targeted soil investigation programs, sediment sampling, groundwater quality assessments and landfill gas investigations.
A Victorian EPA Environmental Auditor (Contaminated Land) has been appointed to evaluate the environmental quality of each site and assess whether the sites are suitable for land uses comprising of medium/ high density residential development , open space and recreational use. The Site Auditor role is to review all background information and environmental reports to assess the condition of all relevant segments of the site, including land, groundwater, surface water and air. The Auditor will assess whether cleanup is required to that segment of the environment and make recommendations for the implementation of required cleanup works. If required the Auditor will review site remediation undertaken and will determine whether following remedial works the site is suitable for the intended land use/s.
South Australia adopts the Victorian Environmental Audit system, with modifications relating to specific South Australian requirements.
Environmental reports prepared for each of the three sites will be reviewed by the appointed Site Auditor who has also undertaken a review of the scope of proposed works prior to the implementation of the investigation program completed for each parcel of land. The appointed Site Audit has been regularly briefed during and following all investigations and has approved the scope of environmental works undertaken at each of the three sites.
A description of the outcomes of environmental works undertaken is provided below for each land parcel.
CEMEX Readymix Land
Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment and additional Phase II environmental programs have been undertaken at the CEMEX Readymix site. The Phase II environmental investigations comprised of a total of two hundred and seventeen grid based and targeted soil investigation location, fourteen groundwater monitoring wells, sediment sampling and landfill gas monitoring on the western site boundary.
These investigations have identified only a small number of locations where exceedences were reported for the NSW EPA (1994) Sensitive Land use guideline for TPH concentration in the C10-C36 fraction. In most instances where soil contamination exceeded the relevant guideline concentrations the lateral and vertical extent of contamination was limited. While further lateral delineation of impacted soils in these areas is required prior to design of any remedial actions it is estimated that remediation may only involve the excavation and appropriate disposal or management of a relatively small volume of soil.
A total of fourteen groundwater monitoring wells were installed into the watertable aquifer, at targeted locations where the likelihood of groundwater contamination associated with historical site activities was considered greatest. The results of the groundwater assessment program identified only minor exceedances of COD, manganese and TPH in the C10-C36 fraction above one or more of the SA EPA (2003) criteria and/ or Dutch Intervention Level (2000) for
Mr Damien Brown
Dequetteville Pty Ltd 7 July 2008
The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. I:\VESA\Projects\VE23040\Technical\08-Highbury Delineation Works\PM\Letter-7July08-Dequetteville (Executive Summary).docx page 3
sensitive land use. These concentrations are not considered to be significant and will not affect the future use of the site for the proposed residential land use scenario.
Landfill gas monitoring was undertaken on groundwater monitoring wells located on the western boundary of the site to assess whether migration of landfill gas is occurring from the adjacent historical landfills beneath the CEMEX Readymix site. Methane gas was reported in one of the six monitoring wells above the SA EPA (2007) criteria with a further two monitoring wells reporting methane gas above the detection limit but below the SA EPA (2007) criteria. Carbon dioxide concentrations were measured in all six western site boundary wells above the SA EPA (2007) criteria.
Results potentially suggest that migration of landfill gases maybe occurring beneath the western boundary of the northern portion of the CEMEX Readymix site adjacent to the Pacific Waste Management facility and the northern portion of the Highbury Landfill Authority. The Highbury Landfill Authority and SITA (owners of the Pacific Waste landfill) are both responsible for the ongoing management of their respective landfill sites.
Further assessment of landfill gas flow conditions under a range of barometric pressures will be undertaken to assess whether landfill gas is static or flowing. In addition, additional gas monitoring wells are proposed to further assess the extent of landfill gas migration beneath the site.
Measures are available to manage landfill gas emanating from the adjacent historical landfill facilities (particularly in the northern portion of the site), if required and include:
• SITA and the Highbury Landfill Authority implement expanded gas extraction and management programs to prevent the migration of landfill gas currently emanating from their respective sites and meet their respective environmental obligations. It is SKM’s understanding that this has been verbally agreed to in principle by SITA.
• Installation of an vapour interception trench along the eastern boundary of the two landfills to prevent further migration of gas towards the CEMEX Readymix site.
Final measures will be subject to Site Auditor approval.
Domain Project Development Land
A Phase I site investigation undertaken for the Domain Project Development land identified the potential for contamination of soil and/or groundwater associated with activities undertaken at the site. A range of potential on-site sources of soil and groundwater contamination were assessed to be predominantly related to previous agricultural practices and importation of fill, with no other significant sources of potential contamination identified during the Phase I assessment.
Off-site sources of potential contamination including landfill gas migration, surface water runoff and groundwater contamination associated with the former landfill located directly north of the site were investigated as part of Phase II investigations. The Phase II environmental
Mr Damien Brown
Dequetteville Pty Ltd 7 July 2008
The SKM logo trade mark is a registered trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. I:\VESA\Projects\VE23040\Technical\08-Highbury Delineation Works\PM\Letter-7July08-Dequetteville (Executive Summary).docx page 4
investigations comprised of a total of 88 grid based and targeted soil investigation locations, three groundwater monitoring wells and landfill gas monitoring across the site.
These investigation only identified lead at one location and benzo(a)pyrene at a separate location exceeding the NEPM (1999) standard residential setting HIL criteria. These two exceedences were minor and are not considered to impact the future development of the site for the proposed end land use scenario.
A total of three groundwater monitoring wells were installed into the water table aquifer across the site. The results of the groundwater assessment program identified lead, selenium, zinc, and ammonia concentrations in groundwater marginally exceeding one or more of the SA EPA (2003) criteria. Concentrations of lead, selenium and zinc are considered to be representative of the background concentrations in the natural aquifer bearing unit, rather than being due to site activities. Concentrations of ammonia identified in the three wells potentially indicate that groundwater quality has been impacted from the adjacent landfill facilities. Groundwater quality is therefore not considered to provide a limitation to the proposed future development of this site for residential use.
Landfill gas monitoring did not identify methane gas at concentrations exceeding the SA EPA (2007) criteria however carbon dioxide concentrations measured in all three wells was above the SA EPA (2007) criteria. The elevated carbon dioxide measurements can possibly be attributed to the natural biodegradation of organic matter across the site, present within re-worked fill and reducing sediments associated with the former Creek that runs through the site.
Hallan Nominees Land
The Phase I environmental site assessment identified a low to moderate potential for historical use of the site to cause contamination of soil and/or groundwater. The potential range of contamination sources investigated were predominantly related to the previous commercial practices associated with crushing and storage activities at the site.
The Phase II environmental investigations comprised of a total of 34 grid based and targeted soil investigation locations, three groundwater monitoring wells, and landfill gas monitoring. Of the thirty-four locations sampled, only one location reported a concentration of heavy metal marginally exceeding the NEPM (1999) standard residential HIL guideline and a statistical assessment of the data indicates no remedial action would be required. At five other locations the NEPM (1999) ecological investigation level was exceeded for one or more metals, although these exceedences were minor and are unlikely to warrant further assessment or remedial action.
The results of the groundwater assessment program identified ammonia concentrations marginally exceeding the SA EPA (2003) aquatic ecosystem, fresh water criteria. Selenium levels representative of background concentrations were also identified to exceed the same criteria. These exceedences are not considered to represent an impediment to the development of this site for future residential use.
APPENDIX B
QEDpty l td
CEMEX Australia Pty Ltd
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report
QED pty ltd 309 Angas Street Adelaide SA 5000 t 08 8227 0188 f 08 8227 0271 e [email protected] w www.qedecisions.com.au 10 April 2008 Job No: 1546 Report No: 08-055
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
i
QEDptyl td
Contents Page No.
1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................1 2 The Highbury Site ....................................................................................................................2
2.1 Physical conditions of the Highbury site...........................................................................2 2.2 Vegetation communities and habitat ................................................................................2 2.3 Highbury site ecological corridor network ........................................................................5 2.4 Biota recorded at the Highbury site..................................................................................6
2.4.1 Vegetation ..................................................................................................................6 2.4.2 Fauna .........................................................................................................................8 2.4.3 Fauna recorded off-site .............................................................................................8
3 Relevant Legislation, associated Regulations and other instruments ..................................10 4 Concluding comments and recommendations.....................................................................13 5 References ............................................................................................................................14
Figures
Page No.
Figure 1 The Highbury study site 3 Figure 2 Southern part of the quarry site, looking south-east 7 Figure 3 Northern part of the quarry site, looking east 7
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
1
QEDptyl td
1 Introduction The content of this section has been developed in the main by means of data extraction from South Australian Government biological databases and relevant spatial data.
A field-inspection was undertaken by walking the site in early April 2008 (see comments in relevant sections, below). The field-inspection was undertaken after an extended dry period and a period of high temperatures (>35OC) in March. The field inspection was undertaken in relatively cooler conditions, associated with some rain the day before, and on the day of the inspection.
The extent of the inspection was considerably restricted because of on-site access requirements; observations were opportunistic and collected from the vantage of existing tracks. The quarry area has appropriate safety restrictions for areas of the site, and the areas to the west of Halls Road (see figure 1) were not accessible at all. Consequently, the identification of some species (particularly where defining characteristics are concerned) is limited. It is highly recommended that detailed surveys that identify the extent and location of some species (native and introduced) be undertaken. A detailed survey will be necessary to ensure compliance with legislative requirements for some species.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
2
QEDptyl td
2 The Highbury Site The information supplied indicated, when mapped spatially, that the areal extent of the site is approximately 103ha. This area includes an area to the east, generated by a boundary re-alignment (approximately 18.5ha).
An additional, contiguous, area to the west, incorporating some of the urban residential area has been also been considered because of Planning SA’s assessment requirements (this additional area is approximately17ha). However, this area has only been subject to a desktop review.
The overall maximum length of the site (approximate north-south alignment) is 1800m approximately; the maximum width, excluding the urban residential area, is approximately 750m.
2.1 Physical conditions of the Highbury site The Highbury site (the ‘site’) is located on the western flank of the Mt Lofty Ranges, accordingly site aspect is predominately to the west; the site gradient is (generally) south to north, with the southern and northern boundaries at 95m and 210m asl, respectively (i.e. approximately 1 in 17 gradient). The eastern boundary of the site is flanked by steeper gradient change, dominated by the hill-form of the Ranges.
The site is subject to localised gradient changes; the natural terrain is largely defined by drainage affecting surface geology. The site has also been subject to other processes: quarrying at the site has created large pits, banks, steep “walls”, ponds and levelled areas. Natural processes have also acted on the quarrying; for example, erosion and gullying of quarry walls by runoff is a significant feature.
The site is located between the 600-700mm pa rainfall isohyetals (i.e. millimetres of rain per annum; long term average).
2.2 Vegetation communities and habitat The steeper slopes bordering the eastern boundary of the site are predominantly vegetated with Eucalyptus fasciculosa (Pink gum) Low Woodland. Localised conditions (e.g. soils, water availability, elevation, aspect etc) on the eastern boundary where co-dominant species (Pink gum1 and Drooping sheoak (Allocasuarina vertilllicata)) also form a Mixed Woodland community. The mapping of these two community associations indicate that they are in close proximity to, or are within, the Highbury site boundary. The Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board (2007a) has designated the Pink gum (and other relevant community associations) as Grassy Woodlands in some areas of its region.
The Pink gum Woodland associations were, in the past, considered to be of ‘frequent’ occurrence in the Mt Lofty Ranges (Boomsma & Lewis, 1980). However, the draft State of the Region Report for the Mt Lofty Ranges (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007a) states that there has been considerable clearance of Grassy
1 Common names of plants follow those used in Jessop & Toelken, 1986.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
3
QEDptyl td
Figure 1: The Highbury study site (delineated in red). The area to the west, bounded by Torrens and Halls Road was not accessible for field inspection. The eastern area (bounded in red) represents the area where a re-lignment of boundaries occurred previously. The green areas are the ecological “corridors” that are present within the site boundaries. The purple and pink shaded areas to the east (Pink gum woodland and Mixed woodland, respectively) represent the native vegetation communities that are broadly described in the text. The blue areas show the wet areas that are either permanently, or ephemerally inundated.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
4
QEDptyl td
Woodlands in the region, with only 5% of the original extent remaining. The degree of reduction in extent of Eucalyptus fasciculosa (Pink gum) woodlands has, in recent amendments of State legislation, afforded protection of the species under law (see NOTE, below).
The initial field inspection confirmed that Pink gum is present on the site; some trees being mature specimens of ≥10m height. In some areas, dependent on localised soil conditions, Pink gum is associated with Blue gum (E. leucoxylon) in some areas. Allocasuarina verticillata is also present, but not (co-)dominant. Acacia paradoxa and Acacia pycnantha (as mid-storey) are present in open woodland areas of the site, as is Myoporum insulare. The ground-storey is typically sparse and (generally) appears to comprise exotic species.
Some Blue gum specimens are ≥15m in height, with boles of up to 0.9cm diameter (breast height). There are hollows (as important structural elements of habitat) associated with some of the larger trees. Tree hollows are particularly important habitat for micro-bats, birds and marsupials such as Brush-tail possums2.
Other vegetation communities are mapped to the south and east of the site (i.e. between 150 to 1000m of site boundaries); these are communities that are – generally – dominated by Eucalyptus species Woodland (i.e. E. leucoxylon, E. porosa, E. camaldulensis etc); however, there is also tussock grassland area (dominated by Themeda triandra (Kangaroo grass)) mapped, in relatively close proximity to the south of the site, across the Torrens River.
The “ecological resources” of existing (previously described) vegetation communities is enhanced with the Torrens River and Black Hill Conservation Park to the south and south east. Both are directly linked (forming an ecological corridor/network) with the areas of Pink gum (E. fasciculosa) communities that border the boundaries of the Highbury site.
PLEASE NOTE: Eucalyptus fasciculosa (Pink gum) is a protected species under the provisions of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 (Rare species - Schedule 9). This protection (unless there are proclaimed exceptions) applies across South Australia. The unlawful ‘taking’ of the plant (removal etc) has strong sanctions under the legislation (i.e. fines and a term of imprisonment are potentially available to the Courts if convicted). This protection will have ramifications for the Highbury site if this species is present on-site.
These vegetation communities form a “matrix” of natural, ecological, assets for the Highbury site. The presence of relatively undisturbed and large areas of native vegetation is a source of genetic material, food, cover, shelter etc that form components of a flow of biologically important material through links (a network) from these sites into, and through, the Highbury site to the urban areas to the west (and of, course back where that is viable). It is the available biotic and abiotic functions and processes that generate habitat for biota; these functions and processes operate across spatial and temporal scales and thus support biota across a range of scales (e.g. bacteria, fungi, insects, birds, mammals etc). In many instances the structure of habitat is as important as the species composition (e.g. vegetation) of a habitat. For
2 Gibbons and Lindenmayer, 2002.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
5
QEDptyl td
example, there are patches within the Highbury site where disturbance has, or is, occurring. The degree and frequency of disturbance e.g. from noise, light and traffic or soil compaction caused by existing industrial activity will have a localised impact on the breeding capacity of some bird species and the occurrence of reptiles and small mammals at the site (e.g. see Reijnen & Foppen, 2006 and Garden et al., 2007). However, the site is structurally complex, and has, observably, a range of resources, which help to maintain a relatively diverse biota to persist on-site.
The Highbury site has a number of habitat resources, which comprise, for example, isolated trees and shrubs in the site, relatively continuous “corridors” of trees and shrubs, continuity with hill-slope habitats (i.e. external to the site), watercourses (whether ephemeral or otherwise); gullied quarry walls, wetland and ponded areas. These resources form a connected mosaic of interacting habitat types (both aquatic and terrestrial) that support a range of wildlife, both native and introduced.
2.3 Highbury site ecological corridor network The ecological corridor network described here is not defined by condition, density, representativeness, minimal area or similar parameters. The corridor network is defined by whether there is readily discernable continuous features of shrubs and trees, as shown on aerial images of the site (patches in relatively close proximity to one another are also considered as part of the on-site “corridor network”).
The structure of the corridor network will be, as a matter of natural conditions and habit, relatively open. For example, the projective cover of Euclyptus woodland on hill slopes in the Mt Lofty ranges is between 5 – 30% 3. The density of overstorey plants (i.e. numbers of plants per unit area) would be commensurately low. These characteristics were confirmed during the initial field inspection; however, the maturity of specimens, their density and degree of persistence and regrowth in these patches, indicate relatively low frequencies of disturbance (subsequent to the working of the quarry).
Corridor networks are one means by which habitat loss and fragmentation (processes that are identified as the significant threat to biological diversity and ecological sustainability (see Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005) are mitigated.
Ecological networks are a means for “dispersal” (or movement within an area of habitat), which is a fundamentally important aspect of the life-histories and behaviour of biota (i.e. the degree of habitat fragmentation relates, frequently, to the viability of biotic populations; see Soons & Ozinga, 2005). The maintenance of relatively undisturbed movement, or flow, of biological “materials” is an important concept for diversity, and ecological sustainability (e.g. see Pino et al., 2000).
The viability of dispersal, as a necessary biological mechanism, is allied to the extant resources of the habitat/corridor. The presence of particular species will be dependent on these resources (e.g. a lack of sufficient cover, or line of sight for fauna, can increase predation. See Savard et al., 2000).
3 “Projective cover”, in the simplest terms, is the extent to which the crown of a plant will cover a unit of (ground-) area, if viewed in Plan form. Typically, Pink Gum Woodland, in the Mt Lofty Ranges, has a projective cover of between 5-25% of unit area (Armstrong et al., 2003).
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
6
QEDptyl td
13 patches have been identified in a network within the Highbury site; these patches have an approximate areal range of 0.3 to 10.2 ha and represent approximately 24% of the site. Some of the patches/corridors are relatively narrow “strips” of vegetation (dominated by Eucalyptus species and comprising mature specimens) along roads or tracks, for example, Halls Road (which has been closed off). Some of the patches/corridors that border Halls Road are within the quarry site, but are “protected” by boundary fences and the worked terrain of the quarry. These areas support many species of birds.
No landscape metrics have been calculated at the time of writing.
2.4 Biota recorded at the Highbury site
2.4.1 Vegetation There are no detailed vegetation survey data available for flora at the site. However, species composition and associations assumed from the vegetation existing in the immediate area (see commentary, above) were broadly confirmed by the field inspection; however, any identifications should be considered as preliminary because of access and seasonal factors.
The northern areas of the site (and some areas that have been levelled) are (broadly) composed of Pinus species (which are spreading from stands outside, and elevated above, the quarry site) and Acacia pycnantha (Golden wattle). The areas to the southern area of the quarry site comprise Pink gum and Blue gum associations in mature patches. The structural integrity and condition, re the presence and composition of mid- and understorey layers, in the patches is variable.
Wet areas (including margins of ponded areas) are characterised by Pampas grass (Cortedaria selloana), Common reed (Phragmites australis) and Cumbungi (Typha sp). See Figure 3, below.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
7
QEDptyl td
Figure 2: This image was taken in the southern part of the quarry site, looking south-east. This area has been considerably modified. The variability in the continuity of native vegetation cover is indicated by the area to the left (middle-ground of the image) which is relatively larger in extent than the strip shown on the right. However, the trees shown to the right indicate the age of trees forming the “corridors”, and of isolated specimens.
Figure 3: This image is taken in the northern part of the site, looking east, into the existing native hill-slope vegetation (Pink gum (E. fasciculosa) community). The area of Pampas grass (in the middle-ground of the image) is one of the “wetland” areas that fringe open water ponds on the site. These areas form some of the mosaic of ecological resources on the site.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
8
QEDptyl td
Given the modifications to the site there are introduced species that are established there; for example, Olive (Olea europaea) is, in some areas, well established. In wetter areas Pampas grass (initially identified as Cortaderia selloana) is also well established. The field identification of Pampas grass requires confirmation as C. jubata may also be established on the site. Both Olives and Cortederia jubata are Declared species under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004, and must be controlled under the provisions of that Act.
It will be necessary to ensure, by means of accepted survey methods, that the location and extent of patches and individual specimens of plant species that have conservation status are known and mapped; any such species will be protected under legislation and appropriate management action will be required. (Note: there are also seven records of State protected plant species within 800m of the boundaries of the Highbury site).
2.4.2 Fauna Fauna records were collected within the Highbury site in 1992 and 2003. There are a total of 49 records for both samples, which represent 39 bird species, including 3 introduced species; these results broadly indicate the ecological conditions for the persistence of native bird species at the site. These data were collected from two locations in the eastern and southern sections of the Highbury site (neither area was accessible from the quarry site).
The natural conditions of the site e.g. the stands of connected mature vegetation, and conditions created by quarrying (ponds, gullied walls etc) support a broad variety of bird species. Opportunistic sampling of some Eucalyptus stands and the ponded areas recorded 28 bird species (including 3 introduced species); 20 of these species have been recorded previously. The eight species not previously recorded are primarily waterbirds (i.e. associated with ponded areas), one of which were a flock of White-throated Needletails (Hirundapus caudacutus) feeding over one of the larger ponded areas in the quarry site.
The lack of records for reptiles and mammals at the site does not indicate the absence of species of these animal groups. Recording the presence of native mammals requires specialist techniques that are time- and personnel intensive (see Owens, 2000). It is apparent that formal sampling has not been undertaken to date at the site (i.e. there are no records in the South Australian Biological Database for the Highbury site).
Opportunistic sightings (including tracks, scats and other sign) recorded during the initial field assessment indicate that possums, koala and kangaroos are present, as are non-native pest species such as foxes and rabbits (these are Declared species under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004).
2.4.3 Fauna recorded off-site Methodical sampling (as biological surveys) to ascertain inventories of biota, and habitat associations, in the Mt Lofty Ranges has been undertaken on a number of
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
9
QEDptyl td
occasions between 1977 and 2000. Additional surveys have undertaken using the Australian Bird Atlas methodologies for avian species (Barrett et al., 2003).
A comprehensive biological survey was undertaken by the State government in 2000-2001 (Armstrong et al., 2003). The results from that survey indicated that the highest native species diversity was associated with Pink gum (E. fasciculosa) and Messmate Stringybark (E. obliqua); larger areas of Pink gum associations are mapped at the eastern boundary of the Highbury site.
The Biological Survey of the Southern Mt Lofty Ranges recorded 22 species of native mammals (including 8 species of bats). Most of these species have life-habits that are “retiring” - in terms of human observation.
There are 35 (individual) sampling sites within 1500m of the Highbury sites and incorporate 1984 records from 1991 to 2005. The records represent 126 species of birds, amphibians and reptiles only; this total includes 12 species of reptiles and 2 species of Amphibia (i.e. frogs). The smaller numbers of reptile and amphibian species is a reflection of sampling effort (techniques etc) in the immediate area of the site rather than paucity of species occurrence. Compared with the species inventory derived from the 2000–2001 Biological Survey (Armstrong et al., 2003)
There are no native mammal records included. However, the nature and extent of the habitat in the broader area (e.g. immediately to the east and south of the site) indicates that mammals are likely be present (see Armstrong et al., 2003). However, whether likely occurrences of mammals would be as residents or visitors (e.g. to use available resources) is undetermined.
There are sixteen records (collected between 1998 and 2006) for eight bird species that have Conservation Status, under relevant legislation, in South Australia. These records were collected at eight sampling sites within 1000m of the Highbury site.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
10
QEDptyl td
3 Relevant Legislation, associated Regulations and other instruments a) Commonwealth – Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the ‘EPBC Act’) protects nationally significant aspects of the environment and the Australian natural estate (e.g. species, ecological communities etc). Where an action is undertaken that is likely to have impacts on the Matters of National Environmental Significance (as listed in the EPBC Act) the Commonwealth Minister may require that formal processes under the Act may be applicable. If, for example, it was considered that there were likely to be significant impacts on a Matter of National Environmental Significance, a Referral would have to be undertaken.
In assessing whether there are matters of National Significance to consider a Protected Matters Report (PMR) was generated on 11 March 2008. The PMR generated results for a search area that included the Highbury site and a 1.5km buffer-distance around the site boundary.
The data contained within the PMR is taken from a Commonwealth database (i.e. the Species Profiles and Threats Database) which relates to the known distributions of species of interest. The information that follows does not suggest that Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) are necessarily triggered under the Act – rather that some further consideration and investigation be given to whether significant impacts are likely to occur because of development of the site.
The PMR listed three Matters of National Environmental Significance for consideration for the area: i) Threatened Ecological Communities ii) Threatened Species and iii) Migratory Species. The three MNES noted in the Protected Matters Report comprise one Threatened Ecological Community; nine Threatened Species (five faunal and four plant species) and eight Migratory Species (i.e. bird species).
The White-throated Needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus) is one of the eight Listed Migratory species; this species was observed during the initial field-inspection. This has been recorded as a non-breeding species previously in the Mt Lofty Ranges (Armstrong et al., 2003).
Of the species listed in the PMR there are three previous records4 of two EPBC Listed Migratory (bird) species (White Egret and Fork-tailed Swift) and two records of one EPBC Threatened Species (the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren, which has Endangered status) within 1000m of the Highbury site. The three EPBC Listed species were observed between 1991 and 2005.
4 Based on State Government biological database records.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
11
QEDptyl td
b) Commonwealth – Register of National Estate (RNE)
There are three sites that are in relatively close proximity to the Highbury site that are Registered Natural Heritage sites on the RNE. These are:
River Torrens (outside Adelaide City). This is a Registered site because of its significance as a foothills-to-coast ecological corridor.
Black Hill Conservation Park. Torrens Gorge - Gorge Road Cutting and Outcrops.
c) South Australia – National Parks & Wildlife Act 1972
This Act protects native wildlife species (plants and animals) throughout South Australia (s46 et seq). However, the protection of native plants applies to prescribed species on private land and any native species on Crown-owned or managed land. Native animal species (with some exceptions) are protected throughout South Australia (s50 et seq).
These provisions will be applicable to the Highbury site, and all care should be taken in further development of the site (where removal or relocation of species is being considered then authorisation may be required under the Act). Some Scheduled species have been accorded conservation status and these are subject to particular provisions of, and protection under the Act.
There are sixteen records (collected between 1998 and 2006) for nine bird species that have Conservation Status, as Scheduled under the Act5, in South Australia. These records were collected at eight sampling sites within 1000m of the Highbury site.
There are five species that have Rare status, three that have Vulnerable status, and one that has Endangered status.
There are seventy-two records of State protected plant species within 1200m of the boundaries of the Highbury site. The majority of the records were collected between 1960 and 1999. The records represent 21 species. Three species have Vulnerable status under the Act, the balance have Rare status.
Eucalyptus fasciculosa (Pink gum), which is mapped as bordering the Highbury site, and is present on-site, is a protected species under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972. This protection (unless there are proclaimed exceptions) applies across South Australia. The unlawful ‘taking’ of the plant (removal etc) has strong sanctions under the legislation (i.e. fines and a term of imprisonment are potentially available to the Courts if a conviction is obtained). This protection will have ramifications for the Highbury site if this species is present on-site.
c) South Australia – Native Vegetation Act 1991.
The Native Vegetation Act 1991 controls the clearance of native vegetation in South Australia. The Act recognises the habitat value of native vegetation to native species. Clearance of native vegetation under the Act is defined broadly and includes, for
5 Schedules 7, 8 and 9 of the National Parks & Wildlife Act 1972, list the plant and animal species that are, respectively, Endangered, Vulnerable and Rare in South Australia. These are species that have strong protection under the legislation.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
12
QEDptyl td
example, areas of vegetation, individual trees (whether alive or otherwise) and parts of plants. There are exemptions under the Act, and the Highbury site appears to be within an area where the Act may not have force (i.e outside of the designated Hills Face Zone). However, the Act does apply to areas zoned as Metropolitan Open Space (MOSS). Currently available information indicates that these requirements may not apply to the Highbury site.
d) South Australia – Conservation policy
The operative policy for species conservation in South Australia is No Species Loss – A Nature Conservation Strategy for South Australia 2007-2017 (DEH, 2007). This Policy is consistent with South Australia’s Strategic Plan (i.e. Targets 3.1 and 3.2).
e) South Australia – Natural Resources Management Act 2004
The Natural Resources Management Act 2004 (the ‘NRM Act’) has relevance, amongst other matters, for the protection of water quality, soils, biodiversity and watercourses (including ephemeral watercourses) and control of Declared (pest) species (s175 et seq and relevant Schedules).
Further detailed (on-site) work will be required to identify which sections of the Act will be applicable to the site, and the management actions (if applicable) required for compliance. For example, there are mapped drainage lines that intersect with the site and are contributory to the Torrens River that will require appropriate management under the Act. The composition and extent of pest species in the site (and what controls under the Act are relevant) are to be determined.
f) South Australia – Natural Resources Management Plans, Policies and other matters
The Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board has developed a draft Regional Natural Resources Management Plan. This Plan, when adopted, will have relevance for the Highbury site, particularly in relation to water quality, works in watercourses, biodiversity etc. In essence, these matters relate to the maintenance and protection of (ecological) functions and process in the Region.
The Board has identified that the Grassy Woodlands (Pink gum community associations and others) are a Key Natural Asset in the Region (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007b).
It may be necessary to obtain relevant authorisations from the Board for some activities (e.g. activities designated as Water Affecting Activities (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007c))
The Board has also developed a (draft) Pest Management Strategy, which sets out the statutory obligations (including those of the landholders) for the control of pest species in the Region (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007d). These requirements will have ramifications for the control of foxes, rabbits, weed plant species etc at the Highbury site (i.e. all relevant species that have been Declared under the provisions of s174 of the Act).
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
13
QEDptyl td
4 Concluding comments and recommendations The Highbury site has not been assessed over the whole area, because of site constraints. However, the data that are available from the South Australian Biological Database indicate that the ecological context of the site is complex, and floral and faunal species that have conservation status are present. These species have, in some instances, legislative protection.
The information derived from the data has been confirmed by an initial site inspection in early April 2008. The site has mature stands of Eucalyptus species (and associated ecological communities) that generate corridors (continuity of cover and resources) between the hill-slopes and the residential areas to the south and west of the site. The corridors are comprised of a number of species; notable amongst these species is Pink gum (Ecalyptus fasciculosa) which is a protected species under State legislation (it has been designated as a Rare species under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972). The presence, location and extent of Pink gum will have ramifications for planning for and management of the site.
The site supports a representative and diverse biota, which has persisted because of the presence of relatively undisturbed resources.
In light of what is currently known of the site it would be prudent to obtain further (relevant) data and information so that effective planning and management can be undertaken for the site. The recommendations that are offered below (necessarily broad at this stage) are focussed on that consideration:
i) Undertake a detailed survey to determine the location and extent of Pink gum over the whole Highbury site; and
ii) Determine the presence (location etc) of other species with conservation status; and
iii) Determine the presence, extent and location of pest species.
iv) Develop appropriately detailed species’ management plan(s) (whether for fauna or flora) based on the information obtained in i) and ii).
v) Develop a “protected areas” (i.e. for protecting individual or multiple species) plan for the site.
vi) Develop a pest management plan, for managing and controlling pest species.
vii) Initiate the development of any rehabilitation or restoration strategies and plans for the site.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
14
QEDptyl td
5 References Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007a. Creating a Sustainable Future: A Natural Resources Management Plan for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region. Volume A - State of the Region Report (final draft). Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, Eastwood, South Australia.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007b. Creating a Sustainable Future: A Natural Resources Management Plan for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region. Volume B - Ten Year Plan for the Region (final draft). Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, Eastwood, South Australia.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007c. Creating a Sustainable Future: A Natural Resources Management Plan for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region. Volume D – Regulatory and Policy Framework (final draft). Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, Eastwood, South Australia.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, 2007d. Draft Pest Management Strategy. Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Board, Eastwood, South Australia.
Armstrong, D.M., Croft, S.J. & Foulkes, J.N., 2003. A Biological Survey of the Southern Mount Lofty Ranges South Australia 2000-2001. Biodiversity Survey and Monitoring Section, Department for Environment and Heritage, Adelaide, South Australia. 504p.
Barrett, G., Silcocks, A., Barry, S., Cunningham, R. and Poulter, R., 2003. The New Atlas of Australian Birds. Birds Australia, Hawthorn East. 828p.
Boomsma, C.D. & Lewis, N.B., 1980. The Native Forest and Woodland Vegetation of South Australia. Bulletin 25. Woods & Forests Department, South Australia. 313p.
Department for Environment and Heritage, 2007. No Species Loss – A Nature Conservation Strategy for South Australia 2007-2017. Department for Environment and Heritage, Adelaide, South Australia. 84p.
Garden, J.G., McAlpine, C.A., Possingham, H.P. and Jones, D.N., 2007. Habitat structure is more important than vegetation composition for local-level management of native terrestrial reptile and small mammal species living in urban remnants: A case study from Brisbane, Australia. Austral Ecology 32: 669-685.
Gibbons, P. and Lindenmayer, D., 2002. Tree Hollows and Wildlife Conservation in Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria. 240p.
Jessop, J.P. & Toelken, H.R., 1986. Flora of South Australia. Parts I – IV (4th Ed). The Flora and Fauna Handbooks Committee, South Australian Government, Adelaide. 2248p.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. Internet available: http://www.millenniumassessment.org//en/index.aspx
Owens, H., 2000. Guidelines for Vertebrate Surveys in South Australia - Using the Biological Survey of South Australia. Biological Survey and Research Section, National Parks and Wildlife SA, Department for Environment and Heritage, Adelaide, South Australia. 63p. Pino, J., Rodà, F., Ribas, J., and Pons, X., 2000. Landscape structure and bird species richness: implications for conservation in rural areas between natural parks. Landscape and Urban Planning 49: 35-48.
Reijnen & Foppen, 2006. Chapter 12: Impact of Road Traffic on Breeding Bird Populations. In: Davenport, J. & Davenport, J.L. (Eds). The Ecology of Transportation: Managing Mobility for the Environment. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: 255-274.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
15
QEDptyl td
Savard, J-P. L., Clergeau, P. and Mennechez, G., 2000. Biodiversity concepts and urban ecosystems. Landscape and Urban Planning 48: 131-142.
Soons, M.B. & Ozinga, W.A., 2005. How important is long-distance seed dispersal for the regional survival of plant species? Diversity and Distributions 11: 165-172.
Development Act 1993
Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan
Highbury Residential and Open Space Development Plan Amendment
By the Minister
THE AMENDMENT
A
men
dmen
t Ins
truc
tions
Tab
le –
Dev
elop
men
t Pla
n A
men
dmen
t
Nam
e of
Loc
al G
over
nmen
t Are
a:
C
ity o
f Tea
Tre
e G
ully
Nam
e of
Dev
elop
men
t Pla
n(s)
:
Te
a Tr
ee G
ully
(City
) Dev
elop
men
t Pla
n
N
ame
of D
PA:
Hig
hbur
y R
esid
entia
l and
Ope
n Sp
ace
DPA
Th
e fo
llow
ing
amen
dmen
t ins
truct
ions
(at t
he ti
me
of d
rafti
ng) r
elat
e to
the
Tea
Tree
Gul
ly (C
ity) D
evel
opm
ent P
lan
cons
olid
ated
on
4 D
ecem
ber
2008
. Whe
re a
men
dmen
ts to
this
Dev
elop
men
t Pla
n ha
ve b
een
auth
oris
ed a
fter t
he a
fore
men
tione
d co
nsol
idat
ion
date
, con
sequ
entia
l cha
nges
to th
e fo
llow
ing
amen
dmen
t ins
truct
ions
will
be
mad
e as
nec
essa
ry to
giv
e ef
fect
to th
is a
men
dmen
t.
Amendment Instruction Number
Met
hod
of
Cha
nge
R
epla
ce
Del
ete
Inse
rt
Det
ail w
hat i
s to
be
repl
aced
or
dele
ted
or
deta
il w
here
ne
w
polic
y is
to b
e in
sert
ed.
Obj
ectiv
e (O
bj)
Prin
cipl
e of
D
evel
opm
ent
Con
trol
(PD
C)
Des
ired
Cha
ract
er S
tate
men
t (D
CS)
M
ap/T
able
No.
O
ther
(Spe
cify
)
Det
ail
wha
t m
ater
ial
is
to
be
inse
rted
(if
ap
plic
able
, i.e
., us
e fo
r In
sert
or R
epla
cem
etho
ds
of c
hang
e on
ly).
Is Renumbering required (Y/N)
Subs
eque
nt
Polic
y cr
oss-
refe
renc
esre
quiri
ng u
pdat
e (Y
/N) i
f yes
ple
ase
spec
ify.
REG
ION
AL
OR
MET
RO
POLI
TAN
PR
OVI
SIO
NS
(incl
udin
g fig
ures
and
illu
stra
tions
con
tain
ed in
the
text
)
No
amen
dmen
ts re
quire
d
CO
UN
CIL
WID
E PR
OVI
SIO
NS
(incl
udin
g fig
ures
and
illu
stra
tions
con
tain
ed in
the
text
)
No
amen
dmen
ts re
quire
d
Z
ON
E A
ND
/OR
PO
LIC
Y A
REA
PR
OVI
SIO
NS
(incl
udin
g fig
ures
and
illu
stra
tions
con
tain
ed in
the
text
)
Am
endm
ents
requ
ired
R
ESID
ENTI
AL
(TEA
TR
EE G
ULL
Y) Z
ON
E
1 R
epla
ce
Intro
duct
ion
RE
PLA
CE
th
e nu
mbe
r ‘3
5’
with
‘3
6’
in
the
first
pa
ragr
aph
N
N
2 R
epla
ce
Form
of D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 2
R
EP
LAC
E e
xist
ing
PD
C 2
with
the
follo
win
g:
‘D
evel
opm
ent s
houl
d be
a m
ixtu
re o
f: (a
) on
e an
d tw
o st
orey
de
tach
ed,
sem
i-de
tach
ed,
row
an
d gr
oup
dwel
lings
, re
side
ntia
l fla
t bui
ldin
gs
(b)
sing
le
stor
ey
aged
pe
rson
s an
d sp
ecia
l ne
eds
hous
ing
in s
uita
ble
loca
tions
exce
pt in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
whe
re d
evel
opm
ent m
ay
be u
p to
thre
e st
orey
s.’
N
N
3 R
epla
ce
Form
of D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 5
R
EP
LAC
E e
xist
ing
PD
C 5
with
the
follo
win
g:
‘T
he m
inim
um s
ite a
rea
for t
he ‘h
ead’
of a
ha
mm
erhe
ad a
llotm
ent a
ccom
mod
atin
g a
deta
ched
dw
ellin
g sh
ould
not
be
less
than
: (a
) 60
0 sq
uare
met
res
for a
sin
gle-
stor
ey
dwel
ling
(exc
ept i
n P
olic
y A
rea
24)
(b)
900
squa
re m
etre
s fo
r a
two-
stor
ey d
wel
ling
(exc
ept i
n P
olic
y A
rea
24)
(c) 3
00 s
quar
e m
etre
s in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
.’
N
N
4 R
epla
ce
Form
of D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 6
R
EP
LAC
E e
xist
ing
PD
C 6
with
the
follo
win
g:
N
N
‘The
min
imum
site
are
a fo
r an
allo
tmen
t ac
com
mod
atin
g a
grou
p dw
ellin
g sh
ould
not
be
less
than
: (a
) 350
squ
are
met
res
for a
sin
gle-
stor
ey d
wel
ling
(exc
ept i
n P
olic
y A
rea
24)
(b)
325
squa
re m
etre
s fo
r a
two-
stor
ey d
wel
ling
(exc
ept i
n P
olic
y A
rea
24)
(c)
250
squa
re m
etre
s fo
r a s
ingl
e-st
orey
dw
ellin
g in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
(d
) 200
squ
are
met
res
for a
two-
stor
ey d
wel
ling
in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
.’
5 R
epla
ce
Form
of D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 8
R
EP
LAC
E e
xist
ing
PD
C 8
with
the
follo
win
g:
‘T
he
min
imum
si
te
area
fo
r an
al
lotm
ent
acco
mm
odat
ing
a re
side
ntia
l fla
t bu
ildin
g sh
ould
no
t be
less
than
: (a
) 30
0 sq
uare
met
res
(exc
ept i
n P
olic
y A
rea
24)
(b)
150
squa
re m
etre
s in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
.’
N
N
6 R
epla
ce
Form
of D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 9
R
EP
LAC
E e
xist
ing
PD
C 9
with
the
follo
win
g:
‘T
he m
inim
um s
ite a
rea
for a
n al
lotm
ent
acco
mm
odat
ing
a ro
w d
wel
ling
shou
ld n
ot b
e le
ss
than
: (a
) 2
25 s
quar
e m
etre
s fo
r a s
ingl
e-st
orey
dw
ellin
g (e
xcep
t in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
) (b
) 20
0 sq
uare
met
res
for
a tw
o-st
orey
dw
ellin
g (e
xcep
t in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
) (c
) 200
squ
are
met
res
in P
olic
y A
rea
24.’
N
N
7 In
sert
Form
of D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 1
3 IN
SE
RT
the
wor
ds ‘(
exce
pt in
Pol
icy
Area
24
whe
re
dwel
lings
sh
ould
no
t ex
ceed
a
heig
ht
of
thre
e st
orey
s)’ i
mm
edia
tely
afte
r th
e w
ords
‘tw
o st
orey
s’ in
th
e fir
st s
ente
nce.
N
N
8 In
sert
Form
of D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 1
5(c)
IN
SE
RT
the
wor
ds ‘(
exce
pt in
Pol
icy
Area
24
whe
re
the
dwel
ling
is i
n th
e fo
rm o
f a
row
dw
ellin
g, n
o se
tbac
k is
re
quire
d fro
m
the
side
pr
oper
ty
boun
darie
s)’ i
mm
edia
tely
afte
r th
e w
ords
‘ove
r th
ree
met
res’
at t
he e
nd o
f the
sen
tenc
e.
N
N
9 In
sert
Com
plyi
ng D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 2
2 IN
SE
RT
the
wor
ds ‘
or P
olic
y A
rea
24’
imm
edia
tely
af
ter t
he w
ords
‘Pol
icy
Area
20’
whe
re th
ey a
ppea
r in
the
list o
f com
plyi
ng d
evel
opm
ent.
N
N
10
Inse
rt N
on-c
ompl
ying
Dev
elop
men
t P
DC
23
INS
ER
T th
e w
ords
‘,
exce
pt
in
Pol
icy
Are
a 24
: gr
eate
r th
an
thre
e st
orey
s’
imm
edia
tely
af
ter
the
wor
ds ‘
(gre
ater
tha
n tw
o st
orey
s’ o
r ‘(g
reat
er t
han
two-
stor
ey’ w
here
ver
they
app
ear
in t
he li
st o
f no
n-co
mpl
ying
dev
elop
men
t.
N
N
11
Inse
rt P
DC
24
INS
ER
T th
e w
ords
‘, e
xcep
t in
Pol
icy
Area
24:
1 to
3
stor
ey’
imm
edia
tely
afte
r th
e w
ords
‘(1
to
2 st
orey
’ w
here
ver
they
ap
pear
in
th
e lis
t of
C
ateg
ory
1 de
velo
pmen
t.
N
N
12
Inse
rt N
ew P
olic
y A
rea
and
Figu
re
INS
ER
T A
TTAC
HM
ENT
A im
med
iate
ly a
fter
Pol
icy
Are
a 23
Gol
den
Gro
ve S
outh
Pol
icy
Are
a N
N
LO
CA
L C
ENTR
E ZO
NE
13
R
epla
ce
Intro
duct
ion
RE
PLA
CE
th
e nu
mbe
r ‘3
0’
with
‘3
1’
in
the
first
pa
ragr
aph
N
N
14
Inse
rt N
ew P
DC
IN
SE
RT
the
follo
win
g P
DC
imm
edia
tely
afte
r exi
stin
g P
DC
4:
‘5 D
evel
opm
ent
unde
rtake
n in
the
Hig
hbur
y Lo
cal
Cen
tre Z
one
loca
ted
on L
ower
Nor
th E
ast
Roa
d at
H
ighb
ury
shou
ld h
ave
rega
rd to
the
follo
win
g:
(a
) D
evel
opm
ent
shou
ld
be
unde
rtake
n in
ac
cord
ance
w
ith
the
Con
cept
P
lan
Fig
R(T
TG)/3
.
Y
N
(b)
Bui
ldin
g el
evat
ions
fac
ing
resi
dent
ial a
reas
sh
ould
avo
id la
rge
blan
k w
alls
and
sho
uld
be
inte
grat
ed
and
softe
ned
thro
ugh
sym
path
etic
des
ign
and
plan
tings
.
(c)
Adv
ertis
emen
ts s
houl
d on
ly b
e er
ecte
d on
bu
ildin
gs u
sed
for r
etai
l or c
omm
erci
al
purp
oses
and
sho
uld:
(i)
be
dis
cret
e an
d lo
w s
cale
(ii
) no
t mov
e, ro
tate
, fla
sh o
r inc
orpo
rate
an
imat
ed d
ispl
ay o
r run
ning
ligh
ts
(iii)
whe
re il
lum
inat
ed b
e of
low
ligh
t in
tens
ity
(iv)
com
pris
e ty
pe fa
ces,
col
ours
, siz
es
and
form
s co
nsis
tent
with
the
clea
r an
d si
mpl
e st
yles
use
d in
the
nine
teen
th a
nd e
arly
twen
tieth
ce
ntur
ies
(v)
be fi
xed
to b
uild
ings
at t
he p
oint
of
conn
ectio
n be
twee
n th
e ve
rand
ah
and
mai
n bu
ildin
g, o
r app
lied
dire
ctly
to
or h
ung
from
gab
les
or fa
cade
s of
ve
rand
ahs
or m
ain
build
ings
, or
inte
grat
ed a
s pa
rt of
the
build
ing
desi
gn
(vi)
shou
ld n
ot b
e er
ecte
d ab
ove
the
top
of w
alls
or o
n th
e ro
of
(vii)
fre
esta
ndin
g si
gns
shou
ld b
e no
mor
e th
an 5
met
res
abov
e gr
ound
(v
iii)
cont
ribut
e to
the
char
acte
r of t
he
loca
lity
(ix)
not b
e in
tern
ally
illu
min
ated
.
(d)
Ser
vice
are
as to
be
scre
ened
from
su
rrou
ndin
g si
tes
by la
ndsc
apin
g.
(e)
Exi
stin
g m
atur
e tre
es s
houl
d be
reta
ined
and
ne
w d
evel
opm
ent s
houl
d be
und
erta
ken
in a
m
anne
r tha
t sup
ports
the
long
term
sur
viva
l of
exi
stin
g m
atur
e tre
es.
(f)
La
ndsc
apin
g sh
ould
con
sist
of a
cro
ss
sect
ion
of lo
cal i
ndig
enou
s sp
ecie
s so
that
th
e ar
eas
char
acte
r and
nat
ural
hab
itats
are
m
aint
aine
d an
d en
hanc
ed.
(g
) D
evel
opm
ent s
houl
d de
mon
stra
te p
rinci
ples
of
goo
d ur
ban
desi
gn in
clud
ing:
(i)
de
velo
pmen
t des
ign
and
loca
tion
to
min
imis
e im
pact
on
exis
ting
or
pote
ntia
l dw
ellin
gs in
par
ticul
ar
havi
ng re
gard
to c
ar p
arki
ng,
serv
icin
g, n
oise
gen
erat
ion,
odo
ur,
refu
se a
nd w
aste
sto
rage
and
co
llect
ion
(ii)
the
scal
e, h
eigh
t and
bul
k of
bui
ldin
gs
whe
re lo
cate
d ad
jace
nt re
side
ntia
l us
es
(iii)
enha
nce
the
amen
ity o
f the
loca
l ce
ntre
thro
ugh
unifi
ed d
esig
n of
bu
ildin
gs a
nd s
igns
, lan
dsca
ping
, sc
reen
ing
utilit
y ar
eas
and
safe
and
co
nven
ient
ped
estri
an p
athw
ays.
’
EXTR
AC
TIVE
IND
UST
RY
ZON
E 15
D
elet
e In
trodu
ctio
n D
ELE
TE t
he w
ords
‘,
31,
35 a
nd 3
6’ i
n th
e fir
st
para
grap
h N
N
16
Del
ete
Obj
ectiv
e 11
D
ELE
TE th
e w
ords
‘,an
d fo
r the
par
t of t
he
zone
loca
ted
at H
ighb
ury
shou
ld in
corp
orat
e a
north
so
uth
open
spa
ce c
orrid
or th
at e
xten
ds fr
om
Low
er N
orth
Eas
t Roa
d to
the
Riv
er T
orre
ns L
inea
r P
ark.
Suc
h a
corr
idor
sho
uld
be a
cces
sibl
e by
the
publ
ican
d la
ndsc
aped
pr
imar
ily
with
lo
cally
in
dige
nous
nat
ive
vege
tatio
n’ i
mm
edia
tely
afte
r th
e w
ord
‘pra
ctic
es’ i
n th
e se
cond
par
agra
ph
N
N
17
Del
ete
Non
-com
plyi
ng D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 2
3 D
ELE
TE p
art (
f) of
the
exce
ptio
ns to
Lan
dfill
in th
e lis
t of
non
-com
plyi
ng d
evel
opm
ent
N
N
18
Del
ete
Non
-com
plyi
ng D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 2
3 D
ELE
TE th
e w
ords
‘Rec
eptio
n, s
tora
ge, t
rans
fer,
disp
osal
, pro
cess
ing
or tr
eatm
ent o
f was
te in
the
zone
at H
ighb
ury,
oth
er th
an in
the
case
of '
was
te fi
ll'1
used
for t
he p
urpo
se o
f reh
abilit
atin
g an
ext
ract
ive
indu
stry
site
or q
uarr
y’
N
N
19
Del
ete
Non
-com
plyi
ng D
evel
opm
ent
PD
C 2
3 D
ELE
TE th
e fo
otno
te ‘1 W
aste
fill
cons
ists
of c
lay,
co
ncre
te, r
ock,
san
d, s
oil o
r oth
er in
ert m
iner
alog
ical
m
atte
r in
piec
es n
ot e
xcee
ding
100
milli
met
res
in le
ngth
, and
con
tain
ing
chem
ical
sub
stan
ces
in
conc
entra
tions
(cal
cula
ted
in a
man
ner d
eter
min
ed
by th
e E
nviro
nmen
t Pro
tect
ion
Aut
horit
y) le
ss th
an
the
conc
entra
tions
for t
hose
sub
stan
ces
set o
ut in
S
ched
ule
6 of
the
Env
ironm
ent P
rote
ctio
n (F
ees
and
Levy
) Reg
ulat
ions
, 199
4 bu
t doe
s no
t inc
lude
was
te
cons
istin
g of
or c
onta
inin
g as
best
os o
r bitu
men
.’
N
N
DEF
ERR
ED U
RB
AN
ZO
NE
20
Inse
rt In
trodu
ctio
n IN
SE
RT
the
wor
ds ‘
and
TTG
/31’
im
med
iate
ly a
fter
the
wor
ds ‘M
ap T
TG/1
0’ in
the
first
par
agra
ph
N
N
21
Inse
rt N
ew O
bjec
tive
IN
SE
RT
new
Obj
ectiv
e im
med
iate
ly a
fter
exis
ting
Obj
ectiv
e 1
‘Obj
ectiv
e 2:
A z
one
to a
ccom
mod
ate
the
form
er la
ndfil
l ope
ratio
ns a
t Hig
hbur
y an
d pr
ovid
e fo
r th
e m
anag
emen
t of
the
site
s un
til t
hey
are
suita
ble
for u
rban
dev
elop
men
t.‘
Y
N
22
Inse
rt La
nd U
se
PD
C 1
IN
SE
RT
the
wor
ds
‘on
the
Cro
uch
Roa
d la
nd’
imm
edia
tely
afte
r the
wor
d ‘G
razi
ng’
N
N
23
Inse
rt La
nd U
se
New
PD
C
INS
ER
T th
e fo
llow
ing
new
PD
C i
mm
edia
tely
afte
r ex
istin
g P
DC
3:
‘D
evel
opm
ent,
incl
udin
g la
nd d
ivis
ion,
sho
uld
not
occu
r w
here
site
co
ntam
inat
ion
has
occu
rred
un
less
th
e si
te
has
been
as
sess
ed
and
rem
edia
ted
as
nece
ssar
y to
en
sure
th
at
it is
su
itabl
e an
d sa
fe fo
r the
pro
pose
d us
e.’
Y
N
24
Inse
rt La
nd U
se
New
PD
C
INS
ER
T th
e fo
llow
ing
new
PD
C i
mm
edia
tely
afte
r ex
istin
g P
DC
3:
‘A
fter
use
optio
ns
of
the
Cro
uch
Roa
d an
d H
ighb
ury
site
s sh
ould
in
corp
orat
e su
stai
nabl
e w
ater
man
agem
ent
prac
tices
, an
d fo
r th
e pa
rt of
th
e zo
ne lo
cate
d at
Hig
hbur
y sh
ould
inco
rpor
ate
a no
rth s
outh
ope
n sp
ace
corr
idor
that
ext
ends
from
Lo
wer
Nor
th E
ast
Roa
d to
the
Riv
er T
orre
ns
Line
ar P
ark.
Suc
h a
corr
idor
sho
uld
be a
cces
sibl
e by
the
publ
ic a
nd la
ndsc
aped
prim
arily
with
loca
lly
indi
geno
us n
ativ
e ve
geta
tion.
’
Y
N
25
Inse
rt C
ompl
ying
Dev
elop
men
t P
DC
6
INS
ER
T th
e w
ords
‘o
n th
e C
rouc
h R
oad
land
’ im
med
iate
ly a
fter t
he w
ord
‘Gra
zing
’ N
N
26
Inse
rt N
on-c
ompl
ying
Dev
elop
men
t P
DC
7
INS
ER
T th
e w
ords
‘R
esid
entia
l fla
t bu
ildin
g’
in
alph
abet
ical
or
der
in
the
list
of
non-
com
plyi
ng
deve
lopm
ent
N
N
SPE
CIA
L U
SE Z
ON
E
27
Rep
lace
In
trodu
ctio
n R
EP
LAC
E
the
num
ber
‘31’
w
ith
‘30’
in
th
e fir
st
para
grap
h N
N
RU
RA
L B
ZO
NE
2
8 D
elet
e R
ural
B Z
one
D
ELE
TE th
e w
hole
of t
he R
ural
B Z
one
N
N
OPE
N S
PAC
E ZO
NE
2
9 R
epla
ce
Intro
duct
ion
RE
PLA
CE
the
wor
ds ’2
4 an
d 29
’ with
’24,
29,
31
and
35’ i
n th
e fir
st p
arag
raph
N
N
TA
BLE
S
No
amen
dmen
ts re
quire
d
MA
PPIN
G (S
truc
ture
Pla
ns, O
verla
ys, E
nlar
gem
ents
, Zon
e M
aps
& P
olic
y A
rea
Map
s)
A
men
dmen
ts re
quire
d
30
Rep
lace
M
aps
TTG
/2, 3
0, 3
1, 3
5, 3
6 an
d 39
R
EP
LAC
E w
ith A
TTA
CH
ME
NT
B
N
N
31
Inse
rt N
ew P
olic
y A
rea
Map
s IN
SE
RT
ATT
AC
HM
ENT
C
New
Pol
icy
Are
a M
aps
TTG
/43,
44
and
45
N
N
ATTACHMENT A
Policy Area 24 Highbury Policy Area
Introduction
The following provisions apply to the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone Policy Area 24 Highbury Policy Area as shown on Maps TTG/43, 44 and 45. They are additional to those expressed for the whole of the Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Zone and Council-wide, which are relevant to this Policy Area. OBJECTIVES
Objective 1: A residential policy area comprising a broad range of dwelling types including medium density residential development, designed to integrate with areas of open space.
Objective 2: Development that complements the topography, retains local indigenous landscape and re-establishes watercourses. Objective 3: Development that contributes to the desired character of the policy
area.
DESIRED CHARACTER
Policy Area 24 Highbury Policy Area is established for a broad range of residential development including group housing and medium density housing options in suitable locations. The policy area has a distinct landscape character as a valley floor and a former sand quarry that provides an important opportunity to remediate the former quarry, whilst protecting existing remnant indigenous vegetation and re-establishing water courses. The sensitive development of the policy area would create connecting green corridors from the Hills Face Zone to the east through to the Torrens Valley to the south and the established residential suburbs to the west. The open space corridors and water courses would shape development parcels resulting in clusters of residential development. The green corridors would incorporate water courses and storm water detention features with the retention and further planting of locally indigenous plant species. The corridors would also incorporate walk and cycle paths for recreation and to promote local travel by these modes. Site development and buildings would feature water sensitive urban design principles. The open spaces would incorporate low water use and low maintenance best practice design. Innovation in the design of infrastructure and buildings is encouraged in response to the topography and desired landscape character. Formal public recreation space is not contemplated in the policy area. Torrens Road and Halls Road are to provide the main access roads into the new residential development. The internal road network, on-street parking, water tables and crossovers would be designed to contribute to the desired character of the area consistent with housing density and built form. Streetscapes would feature underground power supply. The division of land is to provide for a public road on at least one side of a green corridor containing a water course. The division of land would also incorporate allotments that enable residential development to overlook public open space so as to maximise outlook and provide for passive surveillance. Residential development may take the form of single detached, semi-detached, row or group dwellings and medium rise buildings in the form of row dwellings, group dwellings and residential apartments of up to three storeys above finished site levels. Building design, materials and finishes would be selected to complement the landscape character and not result in glare to adjoining areas or be obvious from the Adelaide Plain. Buildings incorporating upper level balconies and outdoor decks are to be designed and sited with regard to views and solar orientation while limiting overlooking. Landscaping would be an important part of building design and site layout.
PRINCIPLES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
Land Use 1 The following forms of development are envisaged in the policy area:
Affordable housing Carport in association with a dwelling Domestic outbuilding in association with a dwelling Dwelling (buildings between one and three storeys) Garage in association with a dwelling Group dwelling (buildings between one and three storeys) Pergola in association with a dwelling Residential flat building (buildings between one and three storeys) Row dwelling (buildings between one and three storeys) Semi-detached dwelling (buildings between one and three storeys) Supported accommodation Small scale non-residential uses that serve the local community, for example: - pre-school - child care facility - recreation area - open space.
2 The use and placement of outbuildings should be ancillary to and in association with
residential purposes.
3 Non-residential development should be of a nature and scale that: (a) serves the local community (b) is consistent with the character of the locality (c) does not detrimentally impact on the amenity of nearby residents.
4 Vacant or underused land should be developed in an efficient and coordinated manner to increase housing choice and provide dwellings with densities higher than, but compatible with, adjoining residential development.
Form and Character
5 Development should not be undertaken unless it is consistent with the desired character for the policy area. 6 Development should be in accordance with Concept Plan Fig R(TTG)/3. 7 Development should comprise a broad range of dwelling types at low and medium densities, and should include the provision of adaptable housing and a minimum 15% of residential dwellings for affordable housing. 8 Affordable housing should be distributed throughout the policy area to avoid over-
concentration of similar types of housing in a particular area.
9 Medium density development that achieves gross densities of between 23 and 45 dwellings per hectare (which translates to a net density of between 40 and 67 dwellings per hectare) should be in the form of two and three storey buildings. 10 In the case of more than one dwelling on a site, access to parking and garaging areas
from public roads should primarily be via a minimum number of common driveways.
11 Where allotments have a direct frontage to public open space, housing should be at least two storeys and be orientated towards the public open space.
12 All residential development should be designed to ensure the living rooms have an
external outlook.
Environmental Sustainability 13 Development should address environmental sustainability and seek to: (a) manage stormwater on-site or provide satisfactory infrastructure needed to manage flows and water quality in a sustainable manner (b) provide for stormwater re-use (c) maximise the use of solar energy and natural light (d) minimise the lifecycle cost of infrastructure to the community (e) minimise water use. Land Division 14 A dwelling should have an allotment area (and in the case of group dwellings and residential flat buildings, an average site area per dwelling) and a frontage to a public road not less than that shown in the following table:
Dwelling Type Minimum Area (square metres) Minimum frontage (metres) Detached 300 8 Semi-detached 250 6 Group dwelling 250 Residential flat building 150 Row dwelling 200 6
15 Residential allotment(s) that abut public open space should have:
(a) a direct frontage onto the public open space (b) vehicular access provided to the rear of the allotment.
HA
LLS
RD
AM
BE
R R
D
LOWER NORTH EAST RD
BARRACKS RD
TORRENS RD
MA
JES
TIC
GR
WICKS RD
DECLIVITY ST
NURSERY WY
XAVIER ST
CASEMATE ST
SAPPHIRE CR
NIQUET AV
MAYFRED AV
ZIRCON CR
BRUCE CR
DO
MAIN
CM
N
GREEN RD
BEURRE CT
FR
ES
HF
OR
D A
V
MIT
TA S
T
PECAN
CL
ASCHAM RD
RUBY ST
THE PRO
MEN
ADE
BECKMAN AV
MONTICLE ST
CITRINE ST
JOSEPHINE ST
JANET CT
AMETHYST CR
KIN
NA
IRD
CR
OLD SHEOAK CT
ALTAIR AVENUE WEST
TOPAZ CT
PARADIS
E GR
GA
RN
ET
CT
PE
RID
OT
CL
VASEY CT
DO
RD
OY
ST
BR
ET
T C
TO
PAL
ST
WENDY CT
UR
AN
A C
T
ON
YX
CT
LEN
BA
R C
T
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLYHIGHBURY RESIDENTIAL
AND OPEN SPACECONCEPT PLAN
Fig R(TTG)/3
0metres 250 500
Subject Area
Residential Development
Deferred Urban
Local Shopping
Watercourse
Watercourse Floodwater Area
Stormwater Detention
Existing Road
Main Access Point
Proposed Mixed Use Path
Proposed Landscape Belt
Proposed Open Space
Existing High Pressure Water Main
Proposed Intersection Upgrade
ATTACHMENT B
GO
LDEN
GROVE
RO
AD
GRAND JUNCTION
ROAD
MONTAGUE ROAD
WAY
GROV
E
T HE
EASTRO A
D
NORTH EAST
ROAD
HA
NC
OC
KR
OA
D
NORTH EA STROA D
LOW ER
TH
E
GO
LDEN
W
AY
NORTH
MA
IN
MAIN
MAPTTG/3
MAP
MAP
MAP
TTG/10
TTG/15
TTG/20MAP
TTG/21
MAPTTG/36
MAPTTG/17
MAPTTG/5
MAPTTG/6
MAPTTG/14
MAPTTG/18
MAPTTG/24
MAPTTG/25
MAPTTG/4
TTG/12MAP
MAPTTG/11
MAPTTG/13
MAPTTG/16
MAPTTG/27
MAPTTG/29
MAPTTG/28
TTG/7MAP
MAPTTG/22
MAPTTG/26
MAPTTG/35
MAPTTG/34
TTG/33MAP
TTG/23MAP
MAPTTG/19
MAPTTG/8
MAPTTG/9
MAPTTG/32
MAPTTG/31
MAPTTG/37
MAPTTG/30
For the purposes of the Development Plan unless otherwise clearlyindicated, the zone/policy area boundaries depicted on or intended to befixed by Maps TTG/3 to TTG/45 inclusive shall be read as conforming in allrespects (as the case may require) to the sectional or subdivisional boundaries,to the centre line of roads or drain reserves or to the title boundaries, or toimaginary straight lines joining the positions defined by survey or by themeasurements shown on the said maps against which the said zone/policyarea boundaries are shown or otherwise as indicated.
Development Plan Boundary
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
5km0
Scale 1:85000
INDEX TO ZONESMAP TTG/2
LC
LCe
LCNCe
R(TTG)
)R(TTG)
SU
R(C)
TORRENS RD
R(TTG)
R(TTG)
SU
NCe
180
LCe
GRAND JUNCTION RD
GRAND JUNCTION
RD
GRAND JUNCTION RD
LOWER NORTH EAST RD
LOWER NORTH EAST RD
LOWER NORTH EAST
RD
TOLLEY RD
VALLEY RD
ABERCROMBIE CRES
A D DOLORATA CRT
ALISTER ST
ALMERTA ST
ALTAIR AVE
A
AMBER RD
AMETHYST CRES
ANDREA ST
ANDREW JAM
ES CRES
ARIES AVE
ARMBUSTER ST
AUSTRALIA AVE
BARNS AVE
BARRACKS RD
BECKMAN AVE
BELAIR ST
BERRI RD
BORONIA DR
BRADSHAW AVE
BRISTOL CRES
B RUCE CRT
ST
CANIS AVE
CANO RUSAVE
CARNELIAN ST
CHIFLEY AVE
CITRINE ST
COLTON AVE
CORBUSIER DR
COUN
CRISSO U LAAV E
CROW
CURTIN AVE
DEAKIN AVE
DECLIVITY STDENE RD
DORADUS AVE
ST
DUNC ANC RE S
DUNN RD
DUR
ELLISTON AVE
FRASER ST
FRESHF
GARN
ET
CRT
GIFFOR
DAVE
GREEN RD
GUM
TRE
EDR
HAUSSMANNAVE
HEADINGLEY ST
HIGHBURY DR
HILLSIDE AVE
HOLT CRT
HONEYSUCKLE DR
HOTHAM ST
HUGHES AVE
IRENE AVE
ITALIAST
JANET CRT
JOSEPHINE ST
KEEBLE ST
KENNINGTON RD
KORRONGST
LAGONIK DR
LAKE VIEW CRES
LANG ST
LEEDS AVE
LEONIS AVE
LEST ERST
LOVE
LOCK
ST
MACDONNELL ST
MADEIRA AVE
M
MAYFRED AVE
MENZIES AVE
MITCHELL AVE
MONTICLE ST
MONTICLE ST
MOORE CRES
AVE
NENTURA
ST
NIQUET AVE
ORION AVE
OSBORNE AVE
OWE
PARADISEGR
PAYN
E S
T
PEARLC
RT
PEGASI AVE
REGA AVE
RICHMOND RD
ROBIN TCE
ROGERS ST
RUBY ST
SAARINEN AVE
SAPPHIRE CRES
SCULLIN CRES
SIRIUS AVE
TOLLEY CRT
TOOVIS AVE
TRAFFORD RD TRAFFORD RD
TRENTBRIDGE RD
TYNER CRT
VALERIE AVE
WELD CRES
WHITLAM
ST
WICKS RD
XAVIER ST
XAVI
ER
ST
ZIRCON CRES
MAP TTG/25 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/35 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/24 ADJOINSM
AP
TT
G/31 A
DJO
INS
MA
P T
TG
/29
AD
JOIN
S
MAP TTG/34 ADJOINS
LC LCe NCe R(C) R(TTG) SU
Local Commercial Local Centre Neighbourhood Centre Residential (Central) Residential (Tea Tree Gully) Special Uses
Zone Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
500metres0
Scale 1:10000
ZONESMAP TTG/30
R(TTG)
Note : Hills Face Boundary as described in Hills Face Zone Regulations dated 16th December 1971
HFNote : Hills Face Boundary as described in Hills Face Zone Regulations dated 16th December 1971
R(TTG)
R(TTG)
R(TTG)
TORR
ENS
RD
DENN
IS
GR
PERS
EVER
ANCE
RD
ALLAN ST
R(TTG)
R(TTG)OS
DU
LCe
HF
R(TTG)
120
51.5m
60.96mSETBACK
180
CK RD
LOW
ERNO
RTH EA
STRD
LOWER NORTH EAST RD
LOWER NORTH EAST RD
LOWERNORTH EAST RD
ALLAN ST
ALTAIR ST
ASCHAM RD
RT
C A RMEL AVE
CASEMATE RD
CLARIDGE CRT DE
NNIS
GR
DURBRIDGECRT
ENDU
RANC
E
FISHER ST
FRANK ST
HALLS RD
JAMES ST
JANET CRT
JANLYN RD
E ST
KENDA L LRD KI NN AIR D
CRES
LAUR
A S
T
LEOPOLD ST
MADEIRA AVE
MALBEC AVE MANNUM ST
MATARO RD
MATTHEWS ST
VE
NE AVE
RADISEGR
E CRES
SARNIA FA RM RD
TORRENS RD
RES
MAP TTG/26 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/36 ADJOINSMAP TTG/35 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/25 ADJOINSM
AP
TT
G/32 A
DJO
INS
MA
P T
TG
/30
AD
JOIN
S
OS R(TTG)
DU
NOTE: For Policy Areas See MAP TTG/43
Open Space LCe Local Centre HF Hills Face
Residential (Tea Tree Gully)
Deferred Urban
Zone Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
500metres0
Scale 1:10000
ZONESMAP TTG/31
R(TTG) Lot 8R(TTG)FP 17464
R(TTG)OS
SUR(TTG)R(TTG) LP(RT)
216 407
LP(RT)
LP(RT)
SUR(TTG)
SUSU
Rive
r
Torr e
ns
CIT Y
OF
CAMPBELLTOW
N
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
LOWER ATHELSTONE RD
AD
ARMAGH ST
AUST
BELLVIEW DR
RYAVE
BILNEY DR
BOUNDY RD
BRADBROOK RD
BURNBA NKGR
BURTON RD
VE
CLEMENT RD
CONL
ON R
ISE
COOINDA CRES
COULLS RD
COUNTRY LA
COVENTRYDR
CROWN
RD
DEMETER A
VE
RD
DINH
AMRD
EVEREST AVE
OX AVE
FRESHFORDA VE
GREENSIDE AVE
HAGGIS ST
HIGHVIEW RD
HISTORIC DR
HOCKLEY TCE
HUTCHINSON A
VE JOANN ST
JOH NS ONRD
KANTILLA DR
KERLEY CRES
KERRY ST
KILDARE AVE
KIRKVUE RD
LINEA
R PA
RK D
R
LYMN AVE
MEADOWVUE RD
MEATH AVE
MITTAST
NENTURA
ST
N
IQUET AVE
PANORAMA DR
PROSPERITYW
AY
RAYMOND AVE
L RD
RYAN AVE
SHAW ST
SHELTON DR
HEPHER
DSON
RD
TELOPEA DR
THE
DRES
S C
IR
TO M PACKER DR
TORRE N S V IEW CRT
WICKLOW
AVE
WICKLOW
AVE
WICKS RD
WINDSOR RD
WO
ODL
AND
CRT
MA
P T
TG
/36 AD
JOIN
SMAP TTG/30 ADJOINS
MA
P T
TG
/34
AD
JOIN
S
MAP TTG/31 ADJOINS
LP(RT)
R(TTG) SU
Linear Park (River Torrens)
Residential (Tea Tree Gully) OS Open Space
Special Uses
Zone Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
500metres0
Scale 1:10000
ZONESMAP TTG/35
NOTE: For Policy Areas See MAP TTG/44
R(TTG)In
Note : Hills Face Boundary as described in Hills Face Zone Regulations dated 16th December 1971
SU
HFHF
LP(RT)
River Torren s
OF
CIT
YC
AM
PBELLT
OW
N
AD ELAIDE HILLS
COU
N
C IL
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
MA
P T
TG
/37 AD
JOIN
SMAP TTG/31 ADJOINS
MA
P T
TG
/35
AD
JOIN
S
MAP TTG/32 ADJOINS
HF LP(RT) R(TTG)
Hills Face Linear Park (River Torrens) Residential (Tea Tree Gully)
SU Special Uses
Zone Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
500metres0
Scale 1:10000
ZONESMAP TTG/36
NOTE: For Policy Areas See MAP TTG/45
14
14
1513
13
NORTH EAST RD
NORTH EAST RD
HAINES RD
CAMELIA ST
CHURCH ST
ELIZABETH ST
ELLE
N S
T
HEITMANN CT
LILAC
ST
MEM
ORIAL DR
NEALE ST
NICH
OLAS
DR
REDNALL ST
VIZARD RD
WALTERS STWALTERS ST
WATTL
E C
R
WILLIAM ST
MAP TTG/43 ADJOINS
13 14 15
Eastern Core Precinct Central Linear Precinct Western Core Precinct
Policy Area Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
200metres0
Scale 1:5000
POLICY AREASMAP TTG/39
180o
180o
180o
180o
ATTACHMENT C
TORR
ENS
RD
DENN
IS
GR
PERS
EVER
ANCE
RD
ALLAN ST
24
24
CK RD
LOW
ERNO
RTH EA
STRD
LOWER NORTH EAST RD
LOWER NORTH EAST RD
LOWERNORTH EAST RD
ALTAIR ST
ASCHAM RD
RT
C A RMEL AVE
CASEMATE RD
CLARIDGE CRT
DURBRIDGECRT
ENDU
RANC
E
FISHER ST
FRANK ST
HALLS RD
JAMES ST
JANET CRT
JANLYN RD
E ST
KENDA L LRD KI NN AIR D
CRES
LAUR
A S
T
LEOPOLD ST
MADEIRA AVE
MALBEC AVE MANNUM ST
MATARO RD
MATTHEWS ST
VE
NE AVE
RADISEGR
E CRES
SARNIA FA RM RD
TORRENS RD
RES
MAP TTG/45 ADJOINSMAP TTG/44 ADJOINS
24 24 Highbury Policy Area
Policy Area Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
500metres0
Scale 1:10000
POLICY AREASMAP TTG/43
Lot 8FP 17464
24
216 407
Rive
r
Torr e
ns
CIT Y
OF
CAMPBELLTOW
N
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
LOWER ATHELSTONE RD
AD
ARMAGH ST
AUST
BELLVIEW DR
RYAVE
BILNEY DR
BOUNDY RD
BRADBROOK RD
BURNBA NKGR
BURTON RD
VE
CLEMENT RD
CONL
ON R
ISE
COOINDA CRES
COULLS RD
COUNTRY LA
COVENTRYDR
CROWN
RD
DEMETER A
VE
RD
DINH
AMRD
EVEREST AVE
OX AVE
FRESHFORDA VE
GREENSIDE AVE
HAGGIS ST
HIGHVIEW RD
HISTORIC DR
HOCKLEY TCE
HUTCHINSON A
VE JOANN ST
JOH NS ONRD
KANTILLA DR
KERLEY CRES
KERRY ST
KILDARE AVE
KIRKVUE RD
LINEA
R PA
RK D
R
LYMN AVE
MEADOWVUE RD
MEATH AVE
MITTAST
NENTURA
ST
N
IQUET AVE
PANORAMA DR
PROSPERITYW
AY
RAYMOND AVE
L RD
RYAN AVE
SHAW ST
SHELTON DR
HEPHER
DSON
RD
TELOPEA DR
THE
DRES
S C
IR
TO M PACKER DR
TORRE N S V IEW CRT
WICKLOW
AVE
WICKLOW
AVE
WICKS RD
WINDSOR RD
WO
ODL
AND
CRT
MA
P T
TG
/45 AD
JOIN
SMAP TTG/43 ADJOINS
24 24 Highbury Policy Area
Policy Area Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
500metres0
Scale 1:10000
POLICY AREASMAP TTG/44
24In
River Torren s
OF
CIT
YC
AM
PBELLT
OW
N
AD ELAIDE HILLS
COU
N
C IL
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
GORGE RD
MAP TTG/43 ADJOINS
MA
P T
TG
/44
AD
JOIN
S
24 24 Highbury Policy Area
Policy Area Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
500metres0
Scale 1:10000
POLICY AREASMAP TTG/45