Fleur Lerwill

2022 candidate for City of Marion.
Heritage survey responses.

1. Do you think that Councils and community members need to have a greater voice in planning and development decisions affecting their local area?
   Yes.

2. What role should Councils play in protecting local heritage places from demolition or inappropriate development?
   Planning power from councils has been diminished through the new State Planning and Design Code. Councils are capable of doing much more if empowered.

3. How would you seek to improve protections for heritage places in your area?
   Approval from the owner should not be important or a requirement at all for councils to be able to list local heritage places. Demolition of buildings should only be allowed under appropriate requirements/circumstances.

4. We rarely see new places added to local heritage listings. Why do you think this is?
   A few thoughts-when listing new places then options should include, for example, mid-century and contemporary buildings, and approval from the owner should not be important or a requirement at all.

5. How has the Planning and Design Code impacted on the heritage, amenity, and environment of your area? What changes would you seek to the Code?
   The Code has had a detrimental effect equating to a “one-size fits all” approach. Examples are local input and more intricate nuances of design control being negated with zoning being oversimplified with local character eroded. The community, local character, and the role of councils are now greatly marginalised. The Community Alliance SA Inc. has made great strides in seeking changes and continues to lobby for change.

6. What are the impacts of infill development in your area? What changes would you seek in the rules around infill development?
   Infill development can reduce open space, trees, and vegetation. This can damage the amenity values of an area. It can also have environmental impacts such as increased runoff, increased erosion, and removal of wind protection. Poorly designed and built infill housing can deteriorate quickly. The change from medium-sized houses on large blocks to enormous houses on smaller blocks has a great impact on the latter. On the other hand, there are options for a younger community to live in areas previously more accessible to the more mature population. Penalties for irregular waste management and policies for the protection of trees may be suggested.

7. Construction of new housing typically uses 30% labour and 70% materials. Renovation of existing housing stock typically uses 70% labour and 30% materials. What policy changes would you like to see made to encourage people to renovate, rather than demolish and build anew?
   The introduction of incentives and penalties with more emphasis to retain local character would be suggested. Incentives may relate to the protection of trees with penalties for waste relating to new housing. There should be an in-depth consideration/cessation of the number of new houses built on old blocks.

8. How should the community be informed and involved in decisions about new developments?
   Councils should be able to advertise new planning applications to the community and should return to the notification of the community and allow responses from all.

9. Do you think there is adequate tree canopy across your local government area?
   Although the City of Marion has more tree canopy than other councils, overall our State’s protection for significant trees is minimal with Adelaide having the lowest tree canopy in Australia. I believe Green Adelaide is about to publish a study/audit to confirm this poor performance.

10. How would you like to see significant and regulated trees in your area protected from removal?
    A number of examples to discourage unnecessary tree removal will include incentives, penalties relating to higher valuation rates, and increased protection relating to best practices.

11. What involvement should Councils have in decisions about protecting or removing significant and regulated trees?
    Our State’s protection for significant trees is minimal with Adelaide having the lowest tree canopy in Australia. Councils should be actively lobbying State and seeking Planning Code amendments to address this crisis with private development needing more control and incentives (e.g. Sturt Road development). I believe Green Adelaide is about to publish a study/audit to confirm this poor performance.

12. What actions would you advocate to slow or mitigate the impacts of climate change in your local government area?
    Certain councils are far more proactive in promoting and facilitating education and increased recycling of green waste. There are so many examples but may include a focus on repair and reusing instead of purchasing new, sharing, active transport, greater access to renewables and community power solutions, community engagement with the climate emergency, increased stormwater harvesting/management, more low-cost public transport options for local travel and connections, rain gardens, increased trees, etc.

13. What issues are there with traffic and parking in your area?
    Currently, cars are the mode of transport option favored by all with insufficient alternatives. There is an area in my Ward where narrow roads are reduced further by parked cars. This is further causing angst for our senior citizens as at times they are unable to exit or enter their driveways and are concerned that, if necessary, emergency vehicles will be unable to access a location.

14. How could transport options be improved in your area?
    This may differ from area to area but generally walking to the train station is more viable due to the infrequency of busses. Consequently, there are more local busses required to access trains and shops. In addition, senior citizens require more access to services for their appointments. Although there are community buses, these are not sufficient to meet the demand.

15. What would your top three priorities be for improving planning policy and outcomes in your local government area?
    All elements of the proposed planning system must be independently reviewed, corrections made to errors within the content and clearer policies provided to guide future development and provide certainty for consumers, developers and community members.
    The planning portal must be independently assessed for: ▪ functionality of delivery and access ▪ content, clarity of policy clearly expressed with consistent terminology. ▪ worded in plain English and use definitions. ▪ released for public consultation for at least four months.
    During the final consultation period, the community should be able to clarify what zonings and overlays will mean for their property, how and why decisions will be made, and what opportunities there will be for public input and what decisions can be challenged in courts. With recognition to Community Alliance SA Inc.