Blogawler


Gawler Urban Growth Boundary Forum Committee

Proposed Gawler East Development Site - mostly rural land

Formed at the public meeting on Urban Boundary changes on 20th August 2007, the Gawler Urban Growth Boundary Forum Committee has been busy collecting signatures from residents who want to see much more consultation and a lot more information before anything goes ahead.

Above is a photo of the rural land at Gawler East which is likely to be developed if the UGB changes go ahead.

Attached is a copy of the Forum Committee’s submission to Minister Holloway.
It details many concerns of local people, including:

  • traffic congestion and issues of safety.
  • Loss of the scenic views as you come into Gawler from One Tree Hill and the Barossa (the photo above is of the current view from One Tree Hill Rd)
  • The loss of the character of Gawler
  • Availability of water for new development
  • Extension of train services
  • Overall community infrastructure.

Have a read for yourself and see if you agree! ugb-sub-forum.doc

the Blogawler Team



Planning Institute critical of Government’s UGB changes

In a strongly worded submission the Planning Institute of Australia (SA) says the State Government’s sudden proposal to extend the urban boundary ‘lacks some credibility’ and that the four week consultation process could be seen as a ‘token effort’.  The PIA’s submission calls on the Government to set out a ‘publicly known set of principles and criteria’ for urban boundary review and to engage in ‘meaningful and collaborative consultation with local government’.  The PIA calls the current focus on metro-fringe land releases (as the main way to deal with population growth) ’short-sighted’ and calls for ’stronger emphasis on other growth solutions, including urban redevelopment and growth in the state’s rural and regional centres’.
Go the PIA! The submission is available for download at the planning institute website



The Bunyip’s CIT starting to sound a bit repetitious

We see that for the second week in a row The Bunyip’s ‘CIT on the grapevine’ has run his diatribe about Gawler’s ‘emerging left-wing anti-development fraternity’. Did you not get sufficient reaction last week CIT or are you just low on material? Seriously though, in all of the debate we really haven’t heard an ‘anti-development line’. What we have heard is an almost unanimous call for issues of infrastructure to be researched, planned and resolved before the Urban Growth Boundary is extended. We shouldn’t have thought that was anything to do with being ‘left-wing’ or ‘anti-development’ but simply about putting good planning and proper ‘community building’ ahead of a quick developer profit. Also, we’re wondering when CIT is going to declare his ‘conflict of interest’. Doesn’t he stand to make quite a bit of money when (if) his land is rezoned for urban development??