Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville - Engagement Report · Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville -...

1 | P a g e

Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville - Engagement Report

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION WITH THE LOCAL COMMUNITY

SEPTEMBER 2017

Prepared by: RSA Engagement Team

2 | P a g e

ENGAGEMENT REPORT

Background

The Project

Renewal SA (RSA) on behalf of the South Australian Housing Trust has begun the Renewing Our Streets and Suburbs (ROSAS) program to renew all pre-1968 SA Housing Trust housing over the next 15 years.

In September 2015 the Development (Renewal of Social Housing) Variations Regulations were made to support the objectives of the ROSAS program. The State Co-ordinator-General (SCG) and the Development Assessment Commission (DAC) were appointed as the relevant bodies to assess the ROSAS development applications.

Applications for dwellings and associated land division proposals will be lodged directly with the SCG, having been assessed against a set of published performance criteria. For Apartment Developments, a pre-lodgement process is undertaken that includes planning and design input from State agencies and Councils.

As part of the SCG process, RSA consults with neighbours of apartment development proposals to canvass comments.

Engagement Objectives & Methodology

To provide an opportunity for residents, property owners and recent purchasers (of land adjacent to the proposed apartment site) who might have an immediate interest in the development proposal for Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville, RSA held a ‘Drop-in and Chat’ session on September 6 2017 at the Park Holme Library. Residents and property owners adjacent to the project site at Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville, were invited (see Appendix 1) and advised that the purpose of the session was to view and discuss the redevelopment plans proposed for the site with staff from RSA and Studio 9 (Architects), and provide comments for consideration by the State Co-ordinator General as part of the planning approval process. If unable to attend this session, individuals (those invited) were encouraged to contact RSA by September 13 to discuss opportunities to view and provide comment. No approaches were received by RSA during this time.

The key audience was neighbouring residents, property owners and recent purchasers within the engagement area (see blue area on map). A Category 2 notification (as defined within the SCG process) was determined, with an extended radius of notification and exclusion of the 3 properties directly opposite the project site on Nilpena Avenue which are Housing Trust properties (2 vacant and 1 tenant awaiting relocation). The Community Drop-in and Chat Session invitation letter was also forwarded to Marion Council. Engagement with local residents focussed on an engagement area of some 11 properties + 5 recent purchasers, (one declining the offer) identified in the map (over).

3 | P a g e

Map showing Project site (red) and Engagement (blue) area.

Key Engagement Findings

Eight people attended the Drop-In and Chat session of which 6 identified themselves as living within the engagement area and the remaining 2 living outside the engagement area, including Mayor Holdfast Bay Council and Liberal candidate for Morphett, Stephen Patterson.

Participants attending the session were invited to view the plans on display (see Appendix 7) and provide comment with post-it notes on the Ideas and Comments panel or in writing by September 20 in two ways, either via email to Renewal SA or by completing a community comment form (which was provided to all attending at the Drop-In and Chat Session and which could be returned then or posted to Renewal SA using a reply-paid envelope).

Participants engaged with team members, discussing aspects of the project plans and expressing views about the planning approach and process, impact of increased density on traffic congestion and car parking availability on Appleby Road, a dead-end road with a playground. No post-it notes (see Appendix 3) or Community Comment Forms (for the State Co-ordinator General) were received (see Appendix 4) at the Drop-in and Chat session with participants electing to take the form home to complete and return.

Nineteen community comment submissions were received by Renewal SA after the session (see Appendix 5). Six submissions were received from residents within the engagement area and thirteen from outside the engagement area (but no further than 700 metre walk from the project area).

4 | P a g e

Key points from the submissions included

• car parking • traffic congestion • location suitability • planning ‘conflict’ • proposed built form • lack of consultation with local residents • current greenspace and proposed streetscape • safety and security concerns.

A summary of the submissions received (ranging from located nearest to and furthest from the project area) is provided in Appendix 5.

In addition, one of the residents from within the engagement area expressed concern at the proposed apartment building development ahead of the engagement process, submitting and receiving responses to two ministerials.

Subsequent correspondence – Letter received from Marion Council October 2017 (see Appendix 6)

RSA has addressed each of the issues raised in the submissions and is providing information on its position/action for each within a separate document accompanying the revised architectural plans to the SCG.

While the submissions are included in this report, the identities of the respondents (and any photographs, illustrations or text identifying or depicting their property) have been withheld from this public document in respect of personal privacy. The full details and all photographs/illustrations have been provided in confidence to the State Co-ordinator General.

5 | P a g e

Appendix 1

6 | P a g e

Appendix 2 – IMAGE DEPICTING ATTENDING RESIDENTS’ LOCATION WITHHELD

Appendix 3 – Post it notes completed by public – NIL

IDEAS or COMMENTS – is there anything that you feel has not been addressed?

IDEAS or COMMENTS – What did you think of today’s drop-in and chat session?

Appendix 4 – submissions received at the Drop-in & Chat Session - NIL

7 | P a g e

Appendix 5 – Submissions received after the Drop-in & Chat session – (19)

Submission Summary

RESPONDENT NO.

LOCATION ISSUES RAISED

1 Within engagement area Issues with built form & location Conflicts with Marion Council DP – overlooking, car parking allowance Conflicts with 30 year plan & RSA goals

2 Within engagement area Built form & Expression Overlooking, height, transit/connected focus, design quality, Housing mix, affordability and noise emissions. Supportive of development but not four storey complex on proposed site.

3 Within engagement area 4 storey apartment out of character for area. Existing car parking problem, privacy concerns, devaluation in area, proposed apartment location and lack of community consultation

4 Within engagement area Oppose the proposal – inconsistent with Marion Council DP, Negative impact, car parking, road safety issues and unsuitable location

5 Within engagement area Opposition to 4 storey – conflicts with what resident was told when they purchased – 4 storey apartment will be 14 metres away from boundary- contradicts Marion council DP. Supportive of Morphettville renewal but opposes 4 storey

6 Within engagement area Development not in keeping with Marion DP policy – building height and privacy concerns. Conflicts with 30 year plan. Proposed project position & traffic increase RSA process not transparent

7 Approx. 250m away from project site

Opposition to proposal of four storey


Disagree with proposal – congestion and insufficient parking

9 300m away from project site

Attended 2016 engagement and no mention of proposal for 4-storey apartment. Car parking, increased congestion, environment and open space concerns


4 storey apartment out of place, add to existing road congestion/cars on street, devalue area and no consultation


Lack of engagement and consultation from RSA, increase in existing traffic (Le Cornu). Safety and blind corner issue, 4-storey apartment not in keeping with the area. Questions affordable housing outcome, impact on current bird life, high density housing impact on demand for utilities and infrastructure


Objection to project, increased traffic, disturbance of peace and safety risk for horses

8 | P a g e

NO LOCATION ISSUES RAISED 13 Approx. 400m away

from project site Opposition to 4 storey, noise and insufficient parking, suggests bridge over the creek, increased traffic flow in Le Cornu Ave particularly


Objection to 4 storey, increased traffic in Le Cornu, noise, suggesting bridge


Concerned about changes to the character of the area, car parking and infrastructure concerns


Objection to traffic caused by density increase. Insufficient parking, road congestion, not located near public transport, Questions planning bodies need to investigate development impact on roads and parking.


‘Totally against 4 storey apartment blocks’. Current townhouses being built insufficient car parking allowance. Question about measures in place re demand on sewerage


Depreciation in area, traffic and congestion, safety issue and traffic hazard for young/aged

19 700m away from project site

Against proposal – concerns about communication to residents, safety, security and quality of life

9 | P a g e

Submission received 11/9/2017

10 | P a g e

11 | P a g e

Submission received 18/09/2017

Renewing Our Streets and Suburbs Comments for the State Co-ordinator General Project: Lot 3 Appleby Road, MORPHETTVILLE Closure Date: 20 September 2017 Name: NAME WITHHELD Address: ADDRESS WITHHELD Email to: [email protected] To Whom It May Concern, With regard to our own personal assessment and with reference to the Government of South Australia - Office of the Coordinator-General, Assessment Criteria Checklist - Stream 2, we would like to raise the following concerns regarding the development of Lot 3 Appleby Road Morphettville.

1. Built form and expression The scale is not consistent with buildings in the area (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2). Currently there are no residences above 2 storeys in height. The tallest structures are the grandstands of the Morphettville Race Course to the north. A four storey building on a suburban street is out of character.

The Marion Council currently describes the character of the Residential Zone within the Racecourse Policy area as “Existing development in this area includes single storey detached dwellings, several with associated stables, a large stable complex and an equine veterinary practice.”

Figure 1: View to the north from the two storey rooftop of address details withheld

showing current neighbourhood scale and character.

Figure 2: View to the south from the two storey rooftop of address details withheld

showing current neighbourhood scale and character.

2. Overlooking

mailto:[email protected]

12 | P a g e

The balconies and placement windows on the existing concept drawings dated 23/8/2017 raise concerns for protecting the privacy of adjacent land.

The current proposal appears to have large waist height windows to bedrooms. Any windows on the north face of the building should be small and frosted such as those used for bathrooms and toilets.

Figure 3: Northern Elevation - Windows and Balconies overlooking adjacent private

open spaces.

The current proposal shows wrap around balconies on the north-western corner and the south-eastern corner (Fig. 3). This provides views over private open spaces on adjacent land. Balconies should be restricted to overlooking Appleby Reserve and only wrap around on the south-western corner.

13 | P a g e

Figure 4: Eastern Elevation - Rear Balconies overlooking private open spaces to the rear of the property.

The rear access balconies to apartments also raises concern as it will provide views of private open spaces to the east (Fig. 4) and north (Fig. 3) of the property. Screening or panelling may be appropriate to restrict views.

3. Height

The proposed development height of 13.7m is not consistent with other buildings in the area. Additionally, the periphery does not transition down in scale and height on the side to interface with the adjacent two storey development (Fig. 5).

Figure 5: 4 storey abuts 1 to 2 storey development.

Additionally, in our own assessment we believe the development does not meet the following objectives or principles of ‘The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide 2017 Update’ published by the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure. (Although we understand that by definition this the development is considered low rise, it is on the cusp of being medium rise and therefore we feel some consideration to the medium rise requirements should be given to better align with the Marion Councils Proposed development plan.)

14 | P a g e

4. A transit focused and connected city P1. The proposed development does not adequately meet the

guidelines for access to public transport. The fixed line transport and high frequency transport services exceed the recommendations of 800m and 400m respectively (Fig. 6 and Fig. 7).

Figure 6: The nearest fixed line transport stop is #12. It is 1.5 km or an 18 minute walk away.

15 | P a g e

Figure 7: The nearest high frequency bus stop is a 650 m or 8 minute walk away.

P5. Due to the distances involved with accessing public transport, we feel that this development does not support public transport use.

P6. This development increases density away from transit corridors.

16 | P a g e

Increased population situated away from main transit corridors and in a cul-de-sac (Fig. 8) will lead to choked neighbourhood streets and increased traffic on minor roads. This is already evident with medium density development on neighbouring streets (Fig.9) and equine activities close to the racecourse (Fig. 10).

This is consistent where Marion Council further describes the character of the areas as, “The built form in this area, while single storey, has a greater level of site coverage with smaller allotments and many stable buildings built to boundary alignments and adjoining one another.” The smaller allotments support our concerns regarding increased traffic density in an already choked area.

Figure 8: The purple pin represents the proposed four storey development. Note that any four storey developments along the river frontage will increase traffic on all minor

roads, funnelling particularly into Grafton Ave/Le Cornu Ave and Nilpena Ave as there is no thoroughfare from the west, across the river. Grafton Avenue is a horse training area and often has horse floats, horses and pedestrians on the road. It is often choked with

vehicles (Fig. 7)

17 | P a g e

Figure 9: Nilpena Avenue showing the number of cars parked on street in medium density housing area. This road would be used as access to the 4 storey complex along with Le Cornu Avenue. This street also has vacant land that remains to be developed.

18 | P a g e

Figure 10: Grafton Avenue showing the horse floats and vehicles parked on the street.

5. Design Quality

P.30. As per ‘1. Built form and expression’ we feel that the development does not support the characteristics, and identity of the neighbourhood. It is out of context, poorly located and placed.

6. Housing mix, affordability and competitiveness

P36. Accessibility to public transport as per ‘4. A transit focussed and connected city’.


7. Health, wellbeing and inclusion


8. Transport


19 | P a g e

9. Climate Change


10. Noise Emissions Increased noise levels in an otherwise quiet neighbourhood due to both increased population and increased traffic. Noise from upper level apartments is likely to travel further disrupting those within the neighbourhood.

We would also like to refer to the column “Pocket Plans for Strip Upgrade” published in the Coast City Weekly Messenger, 30 August 2017.

‘A BID to allow five-storey apartment buildings along the majority of Marion Road has been scaled back…Marion Council is proposing three-storey buildings on a large part of the thoroughfare…The changes are part of council-wide review of planning rules, in a bid to rid suburbs of “ugly” homes and parking problems created by overdevelopment - instead fuelling developers towards major roads.

Mayor Kris Hanna said the council had reduced the heigh limit proposed for the road… based on feedback from the state’s Planing Department.

“The government were saying don’t just have open slather - look at sites where it could be increased without undue impact on the neighbours,” he said.

The council is rezoning large swaths of the district, also making way for taller developments alongside the Seaford railway line and around Westfield Marion and Oaklands Crossing.’

If indeed the Government’s opinion is as stated, we are in full support of such four storey developments being located close to main transport corridors, or at the very least, main thoroughfares such as Hendrie Street, where tenants can access public transport within meters of their doorstep providing greater incentive to utilise it for their daily commute, reducing traffic on minor roads and parking in neighbourhood streets.

In summary, we are opposed to the development of a four storey complex on Lot 3 Appleby Road due to the reasons aforementioned and urge you to consider reducing the height and density of the proposed development or moving it to a more suitable location. We would be in full support of further two storey development, or terraced appartments along the Appleby Road frontage.

Yours Sincerely,

Name withheld

20 | P a g e

Submission Received 19/09/2017

From: Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2017 10:13 AM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: Proposed High Density Apartments for Appleby Road, Morphettvillee

To whom it concerns,

RE: High Density Apartments on Appleby Road.

My name is NAME WITHHELD, residing at ADDRESS WITHHELD Morphettville. I herein list only my major concerns with the proposed high density apartment block for Appleby Road Morphettville.

1. The 4 story structure will be out of character to the quite residential neighbourhood as currently exists. All houses in the area are single or double story. Four story structure will be an eyesore to the neighbourhood. I have cant imagine what such a massive structure, build so deep into a residential neighbourhood would look like, perhaps terrible would be the word. If to go ahead, this structure should be capped at two stories maximum.

2. On street parking will be a huge problem. Already on Appleby, and Nilpena avenue, where new double story dwellings have bee built, traffic log-jams occur almost daily as people park on the road (beacause driveways are very small). These areas are not even completely built with many vacant blocks at this time. It will only get worse. Another 16 families moving into the apartment will equate to a huge traffic problem, which is already bad, in a quite residential area, it doesnt make sense.

3. Privacy. As one of the houses some 50 meters away from the proposed sight, I have no doubt the privacy of my rear yard will be completely lost. My neighbours will all be in the same situation.

4. Loss of value. All of the above reasons will significantly reduce the value of the neighbourhoods houses. This of course has many impacts. Mortgage stress an obvious issue as some 62% of owners in Morphettville are in mortgage stress already (see below website, note the state of morphettville as being one of Adelaides worst)-A devaluation of property will inhibit myself and many neighbours from finding better home loan options, e.g. escaping mortgage insurance (devaluation shares many of the same impacts as an interest rate rise). Resales prices will obviously be impacted. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-21/how-interest-rate-rises-could-affect-home-loan-stress/8798274.

5. Such structures should only be built on Major roads, where access to efficient public transport, health services, schools, supermarkets is simple. This is not the case at Appleby road. Long distance to any major road, and other services I mention. This doesn't make sense for the likely residents of proposed apartment.

6. Lack of communication. We are now having input (appropriately), but cant believe residents first made aware of such plans via a real estate web site. No consultation, no prior knowledge (would have impact my recent purchase of the house, now only 1.5 years ago).

Please fell free to contact me for any clarification


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-21/how-interest-rate-rises-could-affect-home-loan-stress/8798274

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-21/how-interest-rate-rises-could-affect-home-loan-stress/8798274

21 | P a g e


Renewing our Streets and Suburbs – Comments for the State Co-ordinator General

Project: Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville

Closure Date: 20th September 2017

Name:

Address:

Email to: [email protected]

Dear State Co-ordinator General,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed four storey development at Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville.

We are opposed to the proposal as currently presented, for the following reasons which are expanded upon below:

1. It is inconsistent with the City of Marion Development Plan for Residential Zones within Regeneration Policy Area 16

2. It will have a significant negative impact on amenity, aesthetics, character and property prices – preference to see the Linear Park Frontage on Appleby Road remain as renewal with two storey townhouses (maximum three storey as a compromise)

3. It will cause further car parking issues and subsequent road safety issues

4. The location is unsuitable to provide close access to suitable shops, services, and public transport which could be better met at other locations within the Morphettville renewal area

1. It is inconsistent with the City of Marion Development Plan for Residential Zones within Regeneration Policy Area 16

The proposed four-storey apartment is at significant variance to the principles of development control within the City of Marion Development Plan. The area is a Residential Zone under Regeneration Policy Area 16. Regeneration Policy Area 16 states that:

“Development should seek to promote cohesive streetscapes whilst allowing for a variety in housing forms and styles. Buildings of up to two storeys in height are appropriate, with three storey buildings also being appropriate provided the impact of their additional height and bulk does not adversely impact on existing neighbouring development and amenity.” The Marion Development Plan also states that “Maximum Building Height (from natural Ground level) within Regeneration Policy Area 16, is three storeys of not more than 12 metres”.

As per the above, we do not support a four storey development and strongly believe that it will adversely impact on neighbouring properties and the amenity of the area. We seek that the existing two-storey townhouse renewal is continued along the Appleby Road frontage. Or at the very least, request that the proposed development is a maximum of three storeys.

The Marion Development Plan in Residential Zones also suggests that:

“Vacant or underutilised land should be developed in an efficient and co-ordinated manner to increase housing choice by providing dwellings at densities higher than, but compatible with adjoining residential development.”


22 | P a g e

We do not feel that four-storey apartment complexes are compatible with the existing dwellings on this road. We are in support of greater density in the form of small block town houses but not the scale proposed for the apartment.

2. It will have a significant negative impact on amenity, aesthetics, character and property prices – preference to see the Linear Park Frontage on Appleby Road remain as renewal with two storey townhouses (maximum three storey as a compromise)

Appleby Road predominantly consists of two-storey townhouses that have been built in recent years. The townhouses face Appleby Road Reserve / Sturt River Linear Trail. Nilpena Avenue provides a main access route to the reserve (which includes a playground soon to be upgraded), and also across the pedestrian bridge over the Sturt drain, providing access to the other side of the neighbourhood / Morphett Road.

We feel that it would be far better if the Linear Park frontage along Appleby Road retained some cohesive character with the existing two-storey townhouse renewal that has occurred. This would allow the area to retain its more natural character, is in keeping with the expectations that property owners have based on previous consultation with Renewal SA when purchasing our properties in the last two years and would also provide an area within the precinct that could be used to drive property value for the whole renewal zone. This park frontage is premium land and could; if developed in a sympathetic style and not with high rise, significantly increase the amenity of the area and drive median house prices.

We do not feel that a four-storey apartment is in keeping with this natural tree lined park area. We also believe that it will significantly impact on the connection from the eastern side of the neighbourhood to the Reserve, due to the scale of the building (e.g. it will not create a sense of openness and visual connection to the Reserve). 3. It will cause further car parking issues and subsequent road safety issues We have serious concerns over the proposed car parking which even with limited development in the area is already difficult. Appleby Road is a no through road and the street is already at capacity with parked cars from existing dwellings. It is also used heavily by children who play on the street and cross it to get to the reserve. Further cars will exacerbate this existing carparking and safety issue.

Renewal SA and the City of Marion will need to review on-street carparking on Appleby Road when any further development occurs. Indented carparking adjacent to Appleby Road Reserve could be one option considered (with yellow line marking on the eastern side of the street). 4. The location is unsuitable to provide close access to suitable shops, services, and public transport which could

be better met at other locations within the Morphettville renewal area It is noted that the objectives of providing affordable housing as part of the Morphettville Renewal include accessibility to shops, services and public transport. It is understood from the drop in and chat session held on 6 September with representatives from Renewal SA that the services available for this proposed development are on Morphett Road (Denham Ave). We would strongly suggest that these are not suitable ‘services’ for residents of affordable housing. The shops consist of a small IGA that is expensive with limited options, and a couple of take away shops, hence not suitable for people that require affordable food options.

There are no doctors or other services in close walking proximity. In addition, there are many other sites within the renewal area of Morphettville that are much closer to public transport options e.g. bus, on Hendrie Street, Bray Street, Oaklands Road, and Morphett Road. Realistically, suitable services are offered on Oaklands Road, Park Holme or Marion Road, and we strongly suggest that sites for a development of this scale targeted for affordable housing need to be located closer to these areas.

In conclusion, we would like to reiterate that we are opposed to the proposal as currently presented, and urge you to consider our feedback before progressing this matter any further.

Kind regards, Name Withheld

23 | P a g e


From: Sent: To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: Proposed high - density apartments Appleby Rd Morphettville [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

UNOFFICIAL Good morning,

I would like to oppose the building of four storey apartments in Appleby Rd Morphettville. As a resident in ADDRESS WITHHELD, who has recently purchased a property from Renewal SA. We were told that the houses that would be built along the road would be similar to what has been built, a mixture of one and two storey houses and feel alarmed with this proposal from Renewal SA. We would have definitely not purchased the property if we had known that a 4 storey development would be built near our boundary.

The development also contradicts Marion development plan for residential zones within regeneration policy area 16.

We strongly support the renewal of Morphettville, however do oppose the development of a four storey apartment building.

Regards

NAME & ADDRESS WITHHELD


24 | P a g e


25 | P a g e

Submission Received 20/09/2017 - Resident Approx. 250m away from project site

From: Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2017 6:45 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: INVITATION TO PROVIDE COMMENT - Proposed high-density apartments for Appleby Road

Dear Minister,

I would like to express my view that I am against the proposal of building a four storey, high-density apartment block on Lot 3 Applyby Road.

Sincerely,



26 | P a g e

Submission Received 18/09/2017 – Resident Approx. 300m away from project site

From:] Sent: Monday, 18 September 2017 11:00 AM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: PROPOSED HIGH-DENSITY APARTMENTS FOR APPLEYBY ROAD M'VILLE

Hi,

I am a resident of ADDRESS WITHHELD and I received my first notification of this proposal via Stephen Patterson’s letter in the post Friday.

I do NOT agree with 4 storey apartments for Appleby Road as there will be limited parking, Nilpena Avenue and the area is already congested with cars having to park on street.

Thank you for the letter.

Regards

NAME WITHHELD


27 | P a g e

Submission Received 18/09/2017 - Resident 300m away from project site

From: Sent: Monday, 18 September 2017 6:06 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: Proposed high-denisty apartments Appleby Road Morphettville

Renewal SA

I was alarmed to hear that there will be a 4 storey development at the end of Nilpena Ave Morphettville. I knew there was going to be some development but not in that quantity of housing. I went to information session that Renewal SA had a year or so ago and there was never any mention of this. I am already noticing with the current development there is a lot more street parking and even though I am opposite a vacant block there are always cars parked opposite my driveway. There is often cars parked on both sides of the road and I have to give way to get through.

I noticed a lot of the new housing only have single car ports and a small driveway generally house holds have at least 2 cars. The housing has hardly any green space and built close to the road and it is starting to look like a concrete jungle. The reason I like this area was for the open space and tree lined streets leading down to the sturt linear track which has native trees and a lot of bird life. I often use this track to cycle or walk to the Oaklands Wetland which is an amazing haven wildlife and the natural environment.

If they are not providing gardens in these new developments they need to have more greenspace around. Also in the summer the area will heat up more with high rise buildings there will be no circulation of breeze from any shady trees. People will need to use their airconditioners more which will be a cost to them in a low socio-economic area. I would consider leaving this area if it changes not for the better after living here for almost 20 years. Its not all about making a profit you need to think of the people and their environment.

Regards



28 | P a g e

Submission Received 19/09/2017 - RESIDENT Approx. 300m away from project site

From:] Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2017 4:30 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: Re: High Density Apartment Block on Lot 3 Appleby Road Morphettville

To Renewal SA, Re: High Density Apartment Block on Lot 3 Appleby Road Morphettville Yesterday I found out that there a plans to build a 4 storey, high density apartment block on Lot 3 Appleby Road Morphettville. I live nearby and I am very concerned about this proposed development. It is completely out of place in the backstreets of the Morphettville area, if it were on Oaklands Road or Morphett Road that may be different, but it is proposed in a quiet residential area in the backstreets. I am concerned that the over development in this area will not only add to road congestion with numerous cars on the streets but that it will in fact devalue my own property by changing the character of the area I have bought, in turning it into an overpopulated slum in which the suburbs surrounding Morphettville that are not being so excessively high density filled will increase in value and my property will be less desirable to buyers and in fact less enjoyable to reside in. There has been no consultation at all regarding how this multi-storey high density apartment will impact on local residents particularly given the Morphettville population has already recently significantly increased with blocks that used to hold 1 property now containing 3. I also feel that there has been absolutely no foresight into how the Morphettville area will function in the coming years with this drastic increase in residents and properties that do not suit the make up of the area. NAME & ADDRESS WITHHELD


29 | P a g e

Submission Received 19/09/2017 –Resident Approx. 300m away from project site

19th September, 2017

Renewal SA

Dear Sir/Madam,

Ref: Renewal of Morphettville area

I would first like to say that I am surprised that on your website you state that Renewal SA is committed to engaging with people living in this area – I myself am a private property owner and never heard a thing until last week when I received a letter from Stephen Patterson (Liberal for Morphett).

I live in ADDRESS WITHHELD and both my family and I have been here a long time. A number of years ago the first new homes went up just around the corner from where I live and the increase in traffic has been phenomenal and my street gets used as a ‘rat-run’ with cars speeding up and down (not the ones who live here). There is a very bad blind corner which affects traffic going either way and also with the people currently living in those new homes parking both sides of the road and at times right on the corner. Why hasn’t ‘indented parking’ been used as was done when Mitchell Park was renewed years ago?

Now traffic may not be on your agenda but it should be. It’s all so well and good saying you will create lovely new modern and efficient homes for people but at what detriment to those already living in this area. The proposed high-density apartment block proposed for Lot 3 Appleby Rd does not fit in with the character of our community and has to be a definite NO!

How can it be better quality social housing (your wording) when high-density apartment blocks do the exact opposite. Having been bought up in London I know what effect high-density living can do for the immediate area and it’s usually not good – cars everywhere and junk piling up and a great deal of anti-social behaviour.

Developers are too greedy and want to maximise the amount of people living in a smaller area than was the norm previously – they don’t have to live here.

On your website it mentioned that it would be ‘Affordable Design’ and mentioned gardens, trees and shrubs. Well the problem with that, is housing as such as you propose building does not leave enough room for trees and barely enough for shrubs. I’ve had trouble with roots from a neighbours tree invading my property and I have a good size block – what do you think trees will do in those properties. Also, less trees mean less bird life or maybe more birds invading fewer home gardens and destroying vegetation when on the lookout for food.

High density living also means more need for gas, electricity and water of which we all know has become a critical issue for us all. The amount of water mains bursting has been immense, and now with all this infill that is going on it leaves nothing to the imagination what that will do with so many living in those apartment blocks.

As you can see I feel very strongly about this proposal; but of course at the end of the day one word rules a business like yours – ‘MONEY’!

I only hope that this email does get read and given some serious thought and not glanced at and thrown into the waste bin.

Yours faithfully,


30 | P a g e


From:] Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2017 3:43 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: Project: Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville

My name is NAME & ADDRESS WITHHELD and its been brought to my attention there has been a request to build a 4 story complex at the stated address in the Subject Title. I would like to have it know i OBJECT to this project request along with my fellow neighbours as the potential increased traffic would disturb the peace.

Also would like to point out that the increased traffic could also pose a safety risk for the horses that also reside within the area with potential injury by car to said animals.

Unless a bridge is made to connect the address to Morphett Road this will be an issue.

Kind Regards,

NAME WITHHELD


31 | P a g e

Submission Received 20/09/2017 – Resident - Approx. 400m away from project site

32 | P a g e


33 | P a g e


From: Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2017 9:45 AM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Proposed high-density apartments for Appleby Road Morphettville

Renewal SA,

Dear Sir,

I am very glad that a Liberal Candidate for Morphett has brought to my attention the proposal of a 4 story apartment block (and possibly more if approved) in the Appleby/Nilpena road area. I am very fond of the Sturt Linear Walk in that area, but have of recent time been reflecting on the poem “I saw the beauty go,” written by Mary Gilmore many years ago. I am conscious of still seeing that happening as I walk past the characterless, extremely closely built, box like, two story town houses that have already been built near the vicinity of the Bupa Aged care end of the area adjacent to the Sturt Creek channel and Linear walk there. I notice more cars parking along the road – obviously not having enough parking space in the town houses and units. There is a childrens’ play ground opposite where the 4 story block is proposed on Lot 3, – where will the parents of children find reliable parking to watch them? Looking at the 2 story houses from both back and front, very few trees can still be viewed, only an occasional top of a tree above the lower garages. Everything would be entirely blocked out with 4 story apartments. I wonder how people in a 4 story apartment there will enjoy looking at all the electricity wires in front of their apartments if they are built there? Or people behind them may miss the afternoon sun. I am saying that the whole beautiful character of that area, almost semi-rural nature, that I have lived within 5 minutes walking distance from, will be completely spoiled. I have lived in the area for 40 years and have, like many people, enjoyed the fact that it did not contain high rise and very little 2 story places.

Another consideration I am wondering about is the infrastructure for water and sewerage which with many old pipes in the area will probably have ramifications down the track with much increased usage. Has that been considered and its potential replacement cost?

I regret that the Weatherill Government has decided to hand over the Trust Homes to private developers who can make such an undesired impact on what is important to us as residents of this area, and hope that all comments from people on these matters, will be sensitively and seriously considered.

Yours faithfully.



34 | P a g e


From: Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2017 3:39 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Proposed high-density apartments in Morphettville

From: Sent: Monday, 18 September 2017 6:39 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: FW: Proposed high-density apartments in Morphettville

Sorry, right address this time!

From: Sent: Monday, 18 September 2017 6:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Proposed high-density apartments in Morphettville

Hello Mr Patterson,

Thank you for the flyer informing me of the proposed high density apartments in Appleby Road.

I have lived in ADDRESS WITHHELD for five years now and have observed the huge amount of development that is going on around this region.

My biggest objection to the density issue is the traffic!

From my observation, all the roads around the new developments are looking like parking lots as new owners and tenants must find somewhere to park, which in turn causes impediments to free flowing traffic in those areas.

With no shopping centres in the vicinity, people naturally drive to the nearest facility.

Public transport does not extend into the Appleby Road region, which would therefore necessitate a rather long walk to the nearest bus stop.

I feel that the planning bodies responsible for such developments need to investigate how our roads and parking spaces will be impacted.



35 | P a g e

If a multi story apartment block goes up in Appleby Road then I can see the traffic issue getting worse.

Also I fret about the degree of development going on anyway, changing the nature of a potentially charming area of Adelaide into a carpark city.

I do hope we can apply the brakes to some of the development in this region.

Kind regards,


36 | P a g e


From: Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2017 7:16 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: RE: HIGH DENSITY APARTMENTS Appleby Road, Henry Street and surrounding areas Morphettville.

I am writing this on behalf of NAME WITHHELD who have given me permission and have dictated the following:-

Moving into this area some 14 years ago we were impressed with other properties being single dwellings, also of the surrounding park areas and Linear Park walk.

With reference to the many Town Houses that have been built, we would like to point out their establishments’ garages are either too small for vehicles or are being used for storage; therefore cars are left in the street.

I am totally against 4 story apartment blocks; it will deface our lovely area.

What of the extra use of our sewerage and water pipes? Has this been given consideration?

Yours Sincerely,



37 | P a g e


From: Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2017 4:50 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: High Density Apartment Blocks

The proposal to build these high density apartment blocks at Appleby Road and at other vacant housing trust blocks will devalue Morphettville.

I have a number of other concerns including the ever increasing amount of traffic.

The amount of infill in the area is already resulting in cars being parked on roads, not on private property.

This congestion is both a safety issue and a traffic hazard and will only get worse for young children and the elderly.

Yours sincerly



38 | P a g e

Submission received 18/09/2017 – Resident 700m away from project site

-----Original Message----- From: Sent: Sunday, 17 September 2017 12:17 PM To: Renewal SA, Reception (Renewal SA) <[email protected]> Subject: Proposed high-density apartments for Appleby Road Dear Sir or Madam, My name is NAME & ADDRESS WITHHELD. It has come to my attention, that as part of the plan to sell former housing trust public land to private developers, 4 story high- density apartments will be built on Lot 3 Appleby Road situated on the corner of Appleby Road and Nilpena Avenue, Morpettville. There is also a plan to build high-density apartment blocks to the east of Hendrie Street. As a resident of this area, I think the above proposals have not been communicated sufficiently to the wider Morphettville community. I hereby send this email to inform that my family and I are against the proposals because 1) the proposals have not been consulted with wider community in this area; 2) as residents we would like to be informed of the implications of the proposals to our life and what the local government is planning to ensure our current quality of life; 3) our concern is that the proposed development may change current safety and security of this area. Thank you! King regards, NAME WITHHELD


39 | P a g e

Appendix 6 – City of Marion correspondence

40 | P a g e

Appendix 7 – Drop-in and Chat Session Display panels & proposed plans

41 | P a g e

42 | P a g e

43 | P a g e

44 | P a g e

45 | P a g e

46 | P a g e

Park Holme Library

Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville - Engagement Report · Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville -...

Documents

Transcript of Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville - Engagement Report · Lot 3 Appleby Road, Morphettville -...