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 2009
at 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.
RN
TH
OR
EA
N RD
ST
NOR
TH E
AST
RD
RD
UNCTIO
WE
LO
D
HANCOCK R
J
GRAND
Hallan
Nominees
LOW
ER
SITA
East Waste (Highbury
Landfill Authority)
CEMEX Australia
Pty Ltd
Minister of Environment
& Land Management
Boylan
Domain Project
Development Pty Ltd
SA Water
GORGE
18 June 2008
Projection: MGA94 Zone 54
Datum: GDA94
Source: PlanningSA, DTEI
DEH, QED pty ltd
Legend
Ownership Boundaries
Affected Area
1:7,500
@ A3
¹
RD
Highbury Residential and Open Space
Development Plan Ammendment
Figure 1: Affected Area
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
Development Act 1993.
the
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.
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
1
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
1.2.1
THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND POLICY DIRECTIONS
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
2
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
3
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
4
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
5
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 Highbury 1.
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
6
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.
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA
7
RD
W
E
E
RD
GO
L
DE
N
Y
H
IT
NW
EE
GR
OV
GR
OV
E
GR
BR
ID
G
RD
RD
E
TH
JOHN
FE
L
LR
GRENFELL RD
D
LADYWOOD
RD
RD
RE
NTY
MCI
MILNE RD
GR
EN
HANCOCK RD
THE
GO
LDEN
WY
RD
YATALA VALE
MILNE RD
KELLY RD
NELSON RD
RD
MONTAGUE
RD
ST
EA
NO
RT
H
RD
PAR
AC
N RD
ND JUNCTIO
OM
BE
R
D
AWOONGA
VALLEY RD
GRA
TOLLEY RD
RESERVOIR
WRIGHT RD
SMART RD
RD
LYONS RD
SUDHOLZ RD
E
LOW
DA
EY
RL
RD
ER
H
RT
ST
E ST
GORGE RD
STRADBROKE
NEWTON RD
RD
RD
MONTACUTE
MARYVALE RD
W
LO
NO
EA
G
GEOR
RD
TH
RA
D
ER
TON
S
L
E
ST BERNARD'
MORIALTA RD
MOULES RD
S RD
CHURCH ST
VINE ST
D
GLYNBURN R
MAGILL RD
Legend
14 March 2008
Projection: MGA94 Zone 54
Datum: GDA94
Source: PlanningSA, DTEI
DEH, QED pty ltd
Study Area
Generalised Landuse 2005
Retail Commercial
Public Institution
Education
Recreation
1:40,000
@ A3
¹
Highbury Residential and Open Space
Development Plan Amendment
Figure 2 - Community Services (within 5km)
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
2700
Road
Lower North East Road, from Perseverance Road to the hills
2200
Hancock Road, from Grand Junction Road to Lower North East
4800
Road
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
9
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
Daily
difference
(vehicles
per day)
Existing
Peak 2way
(vehicles
per
hour)
12,400
+ 4,900
750
1,210
+ 460
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
Location
Existing
Daily 2way
(vehicles
per day)
Predicted
Daily 2way
(vehicles
per day)
Lower North
East Road –
north
of
development
7,500
Lower North
East Road –
south
of
development
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA
Predicted
Peak
2way
(vehicles
per hour)
Peak
difference
(vehicles
per hour)
10
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, 2005 2). 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
11
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 Hydrology 3
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 data 4 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
12
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 Contamination 5
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
13
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 Biodiversity 6
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
14
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 community 7. 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
15
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
16
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
17
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
18
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
19
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
20
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
21
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
22
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
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA
23
APPENDIX A
Sinclair Knight Merz
Level 5, 33 King William Street
Tel:
+61 8 8424 3800
Adelaide SA 5000 Australia
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 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
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
Mr Damien Brown Dequetteville Pty Ltd
7 July 2008
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
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
Mr Damien Brown Dequetteville Pty Ltd
7 July 2008
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
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
Mr Damien Brown Dequetteville Pty Ltd
7 July 2008
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 reworked 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.
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
APPENDIX B
Q EDp ty ltd
CEMEX Australia Pty Ltd
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report
QED pty ltd
309 Angas Street
Adelaide SA 5000
t
f
e
w
08 8227 0188
08 8227 0271
[email protected]
www.qedecisions.com.au
10 April 2008
Job No:
Report No:
1546
08-055
Q EDp tyl t d
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
Figure 2
Figure 3
The Highbury study site
Southern part of the quarry site, looking south-east
Northern part of the quarry site, looking east
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report
Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
3
7
7
i
Q EDp tyl t d
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
1
Q EDp tyl t d
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 codominant 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
2
Q EDp tyl t d
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
3
Q EDp tyl t d
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
4
Q EDp tyl t d
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
5
Q EDp tyl t d
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
6
Q EDp tyl t d
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
7
Q EDp tyl t d
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
8
Q EDp tyl t d
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 20002001 (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
9
Q EDp tyl t d
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 bufferdistance 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
10
Q EDp tyl t d
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
11
Q EDp tyl t d
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
12
Q EDp tyl t d
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
13
Q EDp tyl t d
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
14
Q EDp tyl t d
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.
Highbury DPA - Biodiversity Report
Job No: 10546 Report No: 08-055
15
Development Act 1993
Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan
Highbury Residential and Open Space
Development Plan Amendment
By the Minister
THE AMENDMENT
Amendment Instructions Table – Development Plan Amendment
y Objective (Obj)
y Principle of Development
Control (PDC)
y Desired Character Statement
(DCS)
y Map/Table No.
y Other (Specify)
of Detail what is to be replaced or Detail what material is to be inserted (if
deleted or detail where new applicable, i.e., use for Insert or Replace methods
policy is to be inserted.
of change only).
Subsequent Policy cross-references
requiring update
(Y/N) if yes please specify.
REGIONAL OR METROPOLITAN PROVISIONS (including figures and illustrations contained in the text)
y Replace
y Delete
y Insert
Method
Change
The following amendment instructions (at the time of drafting) relate to the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan consolidated on 4 December
2008. Where amendments to this Development Plan have been authorised after the aforementioned consolidation date, consequential changes to the
following amendment instructions will be made as necessary to give effect to this amendment.
Name of DPA:
Highbury Residential and Open Space DPA
Name of Development Plan(s):
Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan
Name of Local Government Area:
City of Tea Tree Gully
Instruction
Amendment
Number
required
Is Renumbering
(Y/N)
Replace
Replace
Replace
2
3
4
Form of Development
PDC 6
Form of Development
PDC 5
Form of Development
PDC 2
RESIDENTIAL (TEA TREE GULLY) ZONE
1
Replace
Introduction
Amendments required
REPLACE existing PDC 6 with the following:
‘The minimum site area for the ‘head’ of a
hammerhead allotment accommodating a
detached dwelling should not be less than:
(a) 600 square metres for a single-storey
dwelling (except in Policy Area 24)
(b) 900 square metres for a two-storey dwelling
(except in Policy Area 24)
(c) 300 square metres in Policy Area 24.’
REPLACE existing PDC 5 with the following:
except in Policy Area 24 where development may
be up to three storeys.’
‘Development should be a mixture of:
(a) one and two storey detached, semidetached, row and group dwellings,
residential flat buildings
(b) single storey aged persons and special
needs housing in suitable locations
REPLACE existing PDC 2 with the following:
N
N
N
REPLACE the number ‘35’ with ‘36’ in the first N
paragraph
ZONE AND/OR POLICY AREA PROVISIONS (including figures and illustrations contained in the text)
No amendments required
COUNCIL WIDE PROVISIONS (including figures and illustrations contained in the text)
No amendments required
N
N
N
N
Replace
Replace
Insert
5
6
7
Form of Development
PDC 13
Form of Development
PDC 9
Form of Development
PDC 8
N
N
INSERT the words ‘(except in Policy Area 24 where N
dwellings should not exceed a height of three
storeys)’ immediately after the words ‘two storeys’ in
the first sentence.
‘The minimum site area for an allotment
accommodating a row dwelling should not be less
than:
(a) 225 square metres for a single-storey
dwelling (except in Policy Area 24)
(b) 200 square metres for a two-storey dwelling
(except in Policy Area 24)
(c) 200 square metres in Policy Area 24.’
REPLACE existing PDC 9 with the following:
‘The minimum site area for an allotment
accommodating a residential flat building should
not be less than:
(a) 300 square metres (except in Policy Area 24)
(b) 150 square metres in Policy Area 24.’
REPLACE existing PDC 8 with the following:
‘The minimum site area for an allotment
accommodating a group dwelling should not be
less than:
(a) 350 square metres for a single-storey dwelling
(except in Policy Area 24)
(b) 325 square metres for a two-storey dwelling
(except in Policy Area 24)
(c) 250 square metres for a single-storey dwelling
in Policy Area 24
(d) 200 square metres for a two-storey dwelling in
Policy Area 24.’
N
N
N
Insert
Insert
Insert
Insert
9
10
11
12
New Policy Area and Figure
PDC 24
Non-complying Development
PDC 23
Complying Development
PDC 22
Form of Development
PDC 15(c)
14
Insert
New PDC
LOCAL CENTRE ZONE
13
Replace
Introduction
Insert
8
(a)
Development should be undertaken in
accordance with the Concept Plan Fig
R(TTG)/3.
‘5 Development undertaken in the Highbury Local
Centre Zone located on Lower North East Road at
Highbury should have regard to the following:
INSERT the following PDC immediately after existing Y
PDC 4:
REPLACE the number ‘30’ with ‘31’ in the first N
paragraph
INSERT ATTACHMENT A immediately after Policy N
Area 23 Golden Grove South Policy Area
INSERT the words ‘, except in Policy Area 24: 1 to 3 N
storey’ immediately after the words ‘(1 to 2 storey’
wherever they appear in the list of Category 1
development.
INSERT the words ‘or Policy Area 24’ immediately N
after the words ‘Policy Area 20’ where they appear in
the list of complying development.
INSERT the words ‘, except in Policy Area 24: N
greater than three storeys’ immediately after the
words ‘(greater than two storeys’ or ‘(greater than
two-storey’ wherever they appear in the list of noncomplying development.
INSERT the words ‘(except in Policy Area 24 where N
the dwelling is in the form of a row dwelling, no
setback is required from the side property
boundaries)’ immediately after the words ‘over three
metres’ at the end of the sentence.
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Advertisements should only be erected on
buildings used for retail or commercial
purposes and should:
(i)
be discrete and low scale
(ii) not move, rotate, flash or incorporate
animated display or running lights
(iii) where illuminated be of low light
intensity
(iv) comprise type faces, colours, sizes
and forms consistent with the clear
and simple styles used in the
nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries
(v) be fixed to buildings at the point of
connection between the verandah
and main building, or applied directly
to or hung from gables or facades of
verandahs or main buildings, or
integrated as part of the building
design
(vi) should not be erected above the top
of walls or on the roof
(vii) freestanding signs should be no more
than 5 metres above ground
(viii) contribute to the character of the
locality
(ix) not be internally illuminated.
(c)
(d) Service areas to be screened from
surrounding sites by landscaping.
Building elevations facing residential areas
should avoid large blank walls and should
be integrated and softened through
sympathetic design and plantings.
(b)
EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY ZONE
15
Delete
Introduction
Landscaping should consist of a cross
section of local indigenous species so that
the areas character and natural habitats are
maintained and enhanced.
DELETE the words ‘, 31, 35 and 36’ in the first N
paragraph
(g) Development should demonstrate principles
of good urban design including:
(i)
development design and location to
minimise impact on existing or
potential dwellings in particular
having regard to car parking,
servicing, noise generation, odour,
refuse and waste storage and
collection
(ii)
the scale, height and bulk of buildings
where located adjacent residential
uses
(iii) enhance the amenity of the local
centre through unified design of
buildings and signs, landscaping,
screening utility areas and safe and
convenient pedestrian pathways.’
(f)
(e) Existing mature trees should be retained and
new development should be undertaken in a
manner that supports the long term survival
of existing mature trees.
N
Delete
Delete
Delete
17
18
19
Non-complying Development
PDC 23
Non-complying Development
PDC 23
Non-complying Development
PDC 23
Objective 11
21
Insert
New Objective
DEFERRED URBAN ZONE
20
Insert
Introduction
Delete
16
INSERT new Objective immediately after existing Y
Objective 1 ‘Objective 2: A zone to accommodate the
former landfill operations at Highbury and provide for
the management of the sites until they are suitable
for urban development.‘
INSERT the words ‘and TTG/31’ immediately after N
the words ‘Map TTG/10’ in the first paragraph
N
N
N
DELETE the footnote ‘1 Waste fill consists of clay,
concrete, rock, sand, soil or other inert mineralogical
matter in pieces not exceeding 100 millimetres
in length, and containing chemical substances in
concentrations (calculated in a manner determined
by the Environment Protection Authority) less than
the concentrations for those substances set out in
Schedule 6 of the Environment Protection (Fees and
Levy) Regulations, 1994 but does not include waste
consisting of or containing asbestos or bitumen.’
N
N
N
N
DELETE the words ‘Reception, storage, transfer,
N
disposal, processing or treatment of waste in the
zone at Highbury, other than in the case of 'waste fill'1
used for the purpose of rehabilitating an extractive
industry site or quarry’
DELETE part (f) of the exceptions to Landfill in the list N
of non-complying development
DELETE the words ‘,and for the part of the
N
zone located at Highbury should incorporate a north
south open space corridor that extends from
Lower North East Road to the River Torrens Linear
Park. Such a corridor should be accessible by the
public and landscaped primarily with locally
indigenous native vegetation’ immediately after the
word ‘practices’ in the second paragraph
Insert
Insert
Insert
Insert
23
24
25
26
Non-complying Development
PDC 7
Complying Development
PDC 6
Land Use
New PDC
Land Use
New PDC
Land Use
PDC 1
RURAL B ZONE
28
Delete
Rural B Zone
SPECIAL USE ZONE
27
Replace
Introduction
Insert
22
DELETE the whole of the Rural B Zone
N
REPLACE the number ‘31’ with ‘30’ in the first N
paragraph
INSERT the words ‘Residential flat building’ in N
alphabetical order in the list of non-complying
development
‘After use options of the Crouch Road and
Highbury sites should incorporate sustainable
water management practices, and for the part of
the zone located at Highbury should incorporate a
north south open space corridor that extends from
Lower North East Road to the River Torrens
Linear Park. Such a corridor should be accessible
by the public and landscaped primarily with locally
indigenous native vegetation.’
INSERT the words ‘on the Crouch Road land’ N
immediately after the word ‘Grazing’
‘Development, including land division, should not
occur where site contamination has occurred
unless the site has been assessed and
remediated as necessary to ensure that it is
suitable and safe for the proposed use.’
INSERT the following new PDC immediately after Y
existing PDC 3:
INSERT the following new PDC immediately after Y
existing PDC 3:
INSERT the words ‘on the Crouch Road land’ N
immediately after the word ‘Grazing’
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Amendments required
30
Replace
Maps TTG/2, 30, 31, 35, 36 and REPLACE with ATTACHMENT B
39
31
Insert
New Policy Area Maps
INSERT ATTACHMENT C
New Policy Area Maps TTG/43, 44 and 45
N
N
N
N
N
REPLACE the words ’24 and 29’ with ’24, 29, 31 and N
35’ in the first paragraph
MAPPING (Structure Plans, Overlays, Enlargements, Zone Maps & Policy Area Maps)
No amendments required
TABLES
OPEN SPACE ZONE
29
Replace
Introduction
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:
Objective 2:
Objective 3:
A residential policy area comprising a broad range of dwelling types
including medium density residential development, designed to
integrate with areas of open space.
Development that complements the topography, retains local
indigenous landscape and re-establishes watercourses.
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
9
Affordable housing should be distributed throughout the policy area to avoid overconcentration of similar types of housing in a particular area.
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)
Detached
300
Semi-detached
250
Group dwelling
250
Residential flat building
150
Row dwelling
200
Minimum frontage (metres)
8
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.
6
C
KINNAIRD
ALTAIR AVENUE WEST
ASCHAM RD
R
PERIDOT CL
BARRACKS RD
RUBY ST
AMBER RD
ONYX CT
OPAL ST
WENDY
CASEMATE ST
CT
ZIRCON CR
SAPPHIRE CR
MAYFRED AV
BRUCE CR
AMETHYST CR
GREEN RD
CITRINE ST
JANET CT
CT
OLD SHEOAK CT
JOSEPHINE ST
T
RS
VIE
XA
R
E
G
IS
AN
M
BRET
CK
BE
T CT
GARNET CT
Z
PA
TO
AV
AD
R
PA
D
RD
HALLS RD
DO
H
RT
ER
R
ST
EA
NO
ST
OY
W
LO
E
CL
ST
I
NT
MO
D
SR
EN
RR
TO
URANA CT
VASEY CT
ST
FRESH
IT
TA
NIQUET AV
M
LEN
WICKS RD
MAJESTIC GR
BA
R
CT
DECLIVITY ST
FORD
AV
RY
SE
UR
CT
OM
PR
N
E
E
AD
CL
EN
N
CA
PE
CM
TH
RE
UR
BE
IN
MA
DO
N
Y
W
Subject Area
0metres
Residential Development
Deferred Urban
Main Access Point
Local Shopping
Proposed Mixed Use Path
Watercourse
Proposed Landscape Belt
Watercourse Floodwater Area
Proposed Open Space
Stormwater Detention
Existing High Pressure Water Main
Existing Road
Proposed Intersection Upgrade
250
500
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
HIGHBURY RESIDENTIAL
AND OPEN SPACE
CONCEPT PLAN
Fig R(TTG)/3
ATTACHMENT B
MAP
TTG/4
MAP
TTG/3
MAP
TTG/5
MAP
TTG/10
MAP
TTG/11
MAP
TTG/7
MAP
TTG/12
DE
N
OL
E
OV
TH
G
MAP
TTG/14
WAY
GO
D
ST
EA
RO A
MAP
TTG/17
MAP
TTG/21
MAP
TTG/22
ROAD
MAP
MAP
TTG/23
ROADTTG/24
MONTAGUE
MAP
TTG/16
MAP
TTG/20
LD
EN
MAP
TTG/18
MAP
TTG/15
HANCOCK
MAP
TTG/19
E
RO
VE
MAP
TTG/13
GR
G
T HE
RO
AD
AY
MAP
MAP TTG/9
TTG/8
W
MAP
TTG/6
MAP
TTG/27
RO
A
EAST
NORTH
N
AI
M
D
MAP
TTG/25
MAP
TTG/26
H
RT
O
N
IN
ROAD
MA
MAP
TTG/30 D
MAP
MAP
A
TTG/28 TTG/29 NORTH EA S T RO
GRAND
MAP
TTG/33
JUNCTION
WE
LO
MAP
TTG/31
MAP
TTG/32
R
MAP
TTG/34
MAP
TTG/35
MAP
TTG/36
For the purposes of the Development Plan unless otherwise clearly
indicated, the zone/policy area boundaries depicted on or intended to be
fixed by Maps TTG/3 to TTG/45 inclusive shall be read as conforming in all
respects (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 to
imaginary straight lines joining the positions defined by survey or by the
measurements shown on the said maps against which the said zone/policy
area boundaries are shown or otherwise as indicated.
Development Plan Boundary
MAP
TTG/37
Scale 1:85000
0
5km
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
INDEX TO ZONES
MAP TTG/2
A VE
EN
RIN
ST
AV E
OW E
ST
SA A
CORBUSIER
DR
MAP TTG/25
ADJOINS
MAP TTG/24 ADJOINS
D UR
SM
US
E
AV
HA
MOORE CRES
R(TTG)
AN
N
KEEBLE ST
WHITLAM ST
A VE
HUGHES AVE
AUSTRALIA AVE
R(C)
TOOVIS AVE
RD
GIFFO
CURTIN AVE
ABERCROMBIE CRE
S
OSBORNE AVE
FRASER ST
REGA AVE
MADEIRA AVE
RD
ION
A
AVE
N
TI O
NC
RD
ALTAIR AVE
TOLLEY CRT
AN
GR
LCe
PEGASI AVE
GRAND JUNCTION
LC
U
DJ
M
SU
OR
TOLLEY RD
LESTER ST
ARMBUSTER ST
BERRI RD
CANIS AVE
LEONIS AVE
SIRIUS AVE
CANORUS AVE
CHIFLEY AVE
SCULLIN CRES
DEAKIN AVE
R(TTG)
MENZIES AVE
HOLT CRT
ARIES AVE
DORADUS AVE
BARRACKS RD
E E DR
ST
PAYNE ST
RES
D C
W EL
SAPPHIRE CRES
M A YFRED A VE
B RU
LAGONIK DR
GREEN RD
KENNINGTON RD
LEEDS AVE
HONEYSUCKLE DR
LOVELOCK ST
RD
ENS
XAVIER ST
N
MO
LOW ER NORTH EA ST RD
RD
RA ST
River/Creek Floodwater Area
N ENTU
FRESHF
UN
CO
CROW
Creek Centre-line
RD
NIQUET A VE
Scale 1:10000
0
Development Plan Boundary
GR
MONTICLE ST
MAP TTG/35 ADJOINS
LAKE VIEW CRES
Zone Boundary
ISE
S
HILLSIDE AVE
Local Commercial
Local Centre
Neighbourhood Centre
Residential (Central)
Residential (Tea Tree Gully)
Special Uses
D
RA
PA
ST
LE
T IC
IV ITY ST
DECL
MAP TTG/34 ADJOINS
LC
LCe
NCe
R(C)
R(TTG)
SU
ST
EA
CK
NCe
TORR
TH
OR
WI
R
WE
LO
180
RD
LCe
N
ER
LOW
ALISTER ST
R(TTG)
ANDREA ST
HIGHBURY DR
DENE RD
VALERIE AVE
LANG ST
ELLISTON AVE
DUNCA N CRES
ROGERS ST
BRISTOL CRES
ALMERTA ST
A D D OLORA TA CRT
BARNS AVE
SU
XAVIER ST
BECKMAN AVE
MITCHELL AVE
ST
TH EA
NOR
JOSEPHINE ST
DUNN RD
M A CDONNEL L ST
CO
CRT
TRAFFORD RD
BRADSHAW AVE
AVE
GA RNET
CITRINE ST
TRA FFORD RD
N
LTO
CE CRT
S
AMETHYST CRE
IRENE AVE
)
ZIRCON CRES
R(TTG)
T
CA RNELIA N S
JANET CRT
RICHMOND RD
VALLEY RD
ROBIN TCE
TYNER CRT
TRENTBRIDGE RD
KO
RR
ON
G
PEA RL C RT
HEA DINGLEY ST
CRISSOULA AVE
BORONIA DR
ITA LIA ST
MAP TTG/29 ADJOINS
HOTHAM ST
500metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
ZONES
MAP TTG/30
MAP TTG/31 ADJOINS
GUM TR
RUBY ST
ST
BELA IR
AMBER RD
LC
NCe
ANDREW JAMES CRES
GRAND JUNCTION RD
EN
D
UR
AN
C
E
CK RD
SA RNIA
FA R M RD
MAP TTG/26 ADJOINS
NN
DENNDE
IS GRIS GR
RD
CE RD
JAN
LYN
CRT
PERSE
E CRT
CLA
D UR
BRID
G
GE
RID
VER AN
C A R M EL A VE
ST
NST
ALNLA
ALLA
MAP TTG/25 ADJOINS
R(TTG)
FRA
NK
R(TTG)
NE AVE
ST
D
POL
LEO
NUM
O RT H EA ST
RD
ST
LAUR
A
MAN
MATTHEWS ST
MADEIRA AVE
LOWER NORTH
LOW ER N
ST
MALBEC AVE
JAMES ST
MATARO RD
ST
Note : Hills Face Boundary as
described in Hills Face
Zone Regulations dated
16th December 1971
EAST RD
KENDA LL RD
FISHER ST
ALTAIR ST
ES
KINNA IR D CR
A SCHA M RD
HF
A ST
TH E
OR
RN
E
W
LO
OR
TH
E
LOW
R(TTG)
E CRES
RT
RD
ER
N
RES
T
AS
MAP TTG/32 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/30 ADJOINS
CASE
MATE
RD
RD
JANET CRT
R(TTG)
HALLS RD
0
12
LCe
E ST
51.5m
60.96m
SETBACK
DIS
RA
E
DU
GR
HF
Note : Hills Face Boundary as
described in Hills Face
Zone Regulations dated
16th December 1971
180
TORRENS RD
R(TTG)
NS
RD
RE
TOR
R(TTG)
OS
R(TTG)
MAP TTG/35 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/36 ADJOINS
VE
NOTE: For Policy Areas See MAP TTG/43
DU
HF
LCe
OS
R(TTG)
Deferred Urban
Hills Face
Local Centre
Open Space
Residential (Tea Tree Gully)
Zone Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
Scale 1:10000
0
500metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
ZONES
MAP TTG/31
CK
WI
RD
S
RD
N
UN
Y
TR
OS
LA
R(TTG)
IQUET A VE
ST
Lot 8
FP 17464
R(TTG)
MAP TTG/36 ADJOINS
CR
T
A VE
M
A
IT T
SU
W
TO
RR
E
SOR RD
IE
NS V
SU
SU
DR
407
R(TTG)
O
O O DLA ND
RD
DY
F
LP(RT)
r
M
DRE
SS
THE
TO
DR
DR
GORGE
VE
H A
MEAT
A VE
RD
HU
AV
E
TC
ST
HIN
N
SO
N
AN
JO
VE
AV
E
T
EN
EM
CL
LYM N
TE
R
ST
RY
ME
BR
AD
BR
OO
K
RD
DE
DR
AVE
VUE RD
MEADOW
ST
HAGGIS
RD
RES
DA C
COOIN
BURTON
L RD
ITY WAY
PROSPER
RD
RD
AVE
GE
T CE
KLEY
EVEREST
ST
BELLVIEW
W
KLO
GH
MA
AR
KIRKVUE
WIC
KER
GOR
KERLEY
RD
RD
AVE
HOC
KANTILLA
GORGE
r
RD
AVE
RYAN
AVE
LOW
WICK
SHELTON
ARE
KILD
Tor
S
ULL
MA
ORA
PA N
DR
N
ATH
MP
A CK E
R
CO
R
LOWE
RD
ONE
ELST
en
s
RAYM
LP(RT)
PB
E
W
TO
LL
VE
RY A
AVE
OND
CIR
DR
DR
CA
RY
NT
VE
CO
Y
BILNE
RIS
E
Y
CO
NL
ON
C IT
RD
LP(RT)
D IN
HA
M
Riv
e
LIN
E
AR
PAR
K
DR
216
T
CR
R(TTG)
W
N
BOU
SU
R(TTG)
ORIC
HIST
MAP TTG/34 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/31 ADJOINS
T
RA S
N ENTU
ORD
FRESHF
CO
W IN D
N RD
CROW
R(TTG)
MAP TTG/30 ADJOINS
DR
CRES
B
RN
BU
AW
SH
OX
NK
A
ST
E
AV
IDE AVE
GREENS
RD
DR
AUST
AD
HE
PH
ER
DS
ON
RD
A
OPE
TEL
JOHN SON RD
HIGHVIEW
GR
NOTE: For Policy Areas See MAP TTG/44
LP(RT)
OS
R(TTG)
SU
Linear Park (River Torrens)
Open Space
Residential (Tea Tree Gully)
Special Uses
Scale 1:10000
0
Zone Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
500metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
ZONES
MAP TTG/35
MAP TTG/31 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/32 ADJOINS
R(TTG)
Note : Hills Face Boundary as
described in Hills Face
Zone Regulations dated
16th December 1971
HF
HF
GE
GOR
SU
RD
MAP TTG/35 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/37 ADJOINS
In
LP(RT)
GORG
Riv e r
GORG
AD E
LA ID E
E RD
HILLS
To
UN
CO
ns
rr e
CITY
E RD
OF
C
IL
W
BELLT O N
CAM P
NOTE: For Policy Areas See MAP TTG/45
HF
LP(RT)
R(TTG)
SU
Hills Face
Linear Park (River Torrens)
Residential (Tea Tree Gully)
Special Uses
Scale 1:10000
0
Zone Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
500metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
ZONES
MAP TTG/36
ST
ELL
EN
VIZARD RD
WA
TTL
E
CR
REDNALL ST
CAMELIA ST
ST
AC
L IL
CHURCH ST
ELIZABETH ST
WILLIAM ST
180o
180o
180o
14
HAINES RD
WALTERS ST
WALTERS ST
NORTH EAST RD
13
15
14
o
180
NORT
H EAS
T RD
NICHOLAS DR
MEMORIAL DR
13
NEALE ST
HEITMANN CT
MAP TTG/43 ADJOINS
13
14
15
Eastern Core Precinct
Central Linear Precinct
Western Core Precinct
Scale 1:5000
0
Policy Area Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
200metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
POLICY AREAS
MAP TTG/39
ATTACHMENT C
DENNIS
GR
VER AN
RD
PERSE
E CRT
CLA
JAN
LYN
CRT
ST
D UR
BRID
G
GE
RID
AN
ALL
C A R M EL A VE
CE RD
EN
D
UR
AN
C
E
CK RD
SA RNIA
FA R M RD
FRA
NK
ST
NE AVE
D
POL
LEO
NUM
O RT H EA ST
RD
ST
LAUR
A
MAN
LOW ER N
ST
MALBEC AVE
JAMES ST
MATARO RD
ST
MATTHEWS ST
MADEIRA AVE
LOWER NORTH
EAST RD
KENDA LL RD
FISHER ST
ALTAIR ST
ES
KINNA IR D CR
A SCHA M RD
A ST
TH E
OR
RN
E
W
LO
OR
TH
E
CASE
MATE
RD
RD
LOW
ER
N
RES
T
AS
RD
E CRES
RT
JANET CRT
HALLS RD
24
E ST
ISE
GR
TORRENS RD
D
RA
NS
RD
RE
TOR
24
MAP TTG/44 ADJOINS
MAP TTG/45 ADJOINS
VE
24
24 Highbury Policy Area
Scale 1:10000
0
Policy Area Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
500metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
POLICY AREAS
MAP TTG/43
CK
WI
RD
S
RD
T
RA S
N ENTU
ORD
FRESHF
CO
UN
N RD
CROW
Y
TR
LA
N
IQUET A VE
M
A VE
A
IT T
Lot 8
FP 17464
ST
24
TO
RR
E
SOR RD
W
CR
T
MAP TTG/45 ADJOINS
W IN D
MAP TTG/43 ADJOINS
IE
NS V
ORIC
HIST
N
BOU
RD
DY
O O DLA ND
r
M
DRE
SS
THE
TO
DR
DR
GORGE
VE
H A
MEAT
A VE
N
SO
HU
AV
E
TC
ST
HIN
N
R
TE
ME
AD
BR
OO
K
RD
DE
BR
RD
DR
AVE
VUE RD
MEADOW
ST
HAGGIS
RD
RES
DA C
COOIN
BURTON
L RD
ITY WAY
PROSPER
RD
EVEREST
AVE
T CE
KLEY
BELLVIEW
W
KLO
ST
KIRKVUE
WIC
GH
MA
AR
GE
DR
CRES
B
RN
BU
AW
SH
OX
NK
A
ST
E
AV
IDE AVE
GREENS
RD
DR
AUST
AD
HE
PH
ER
DS
ON
RD
HIGHVIEW
GR
A
OPE
TEL
JOHN SON RD
24
RD
AN
JO
VE
AV
E
T
EN
EM
CL
LYM N
ST
RY
KER
GOR
KERLEY
RD
RD
AVE
HOC
KANTILLA
GORGE
r
RD
AVE
RYAN
AVE
LOW
WICK
SHELTON
ARE
KILD
Tor
S
ULL
MA
ORA
PA N
DR
N
ATH
MP
A CK E
R
CO
R
LOWE
RD
ONE
ELST
PB
E
en
s
RAYM
W
TO
LL
VE
RY A
AVE
OND
CIR
DR
DR
CA
RY
NT
VE
CO
Y
BILNE
RIS
E
Y
CO
NL
ON
C IT
D IN
HA
M
RD
Riv
e
LIN
E
AR
PAR
K
DR
F
W
407
O
216
DR
T
CR
24 Highbury Policy Area
Scale 1:10000
0
Policy Area Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
500metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
POLICY AREAS
MAP TTG/44
MAP TTG/43 ADJOINS
24
GE
GOR
MAP TTG/44 ADJOINS
In
RD
GORG
Riv e r
GORG
AD E
LA ID E
E RD
HILLS
To
UN
CO
ns
rr e
CITY
E RD
OF
C
IL
W
BELLT O N
CAM P
24
24 Highbury Policy Area
Scale 1:10000
0
Policy Area Boundary
Development Plan Boundary
Creek Centre-line
River/Creek Floodwater Area
500metres
CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY
POLICY AREAS
MAP TTG/45