In rejecting the proposed Vadoulis code amendment, the Minister for Planning, the Hon Nick Champion MP, did take a swipe at the conduct of the Gawler Council during the process.
Minister Champion said, “I note that the position of the Town of Gawler (the Council) on the Code Amendment changed throughout the process, being initially indicating a general level of support on 11 May 2022, subject to attention being given to a list of matters.”
“This was then followed by Council ultimately objecting to the proposal,” said the Minister.
“ I also note that detailed negotiations with the Designated Entity were undertaken and in-principle agreement on a Land Management Agreement was reached, indicating a level of support for the intended development outcomes for the site.”
Mr Piccolo said it appears that the Minister is critical of the council for not doing their homework prior to giving the process their support.
“Upfront engagement is very important in process, as is Council’s understanding of its own Community Plan,” said Mr Piccolo.
“On both counts, the previous Council appears to have failed not only the residents but also the proponents.”
Mr Piccolo said he could understand the disappointment expressed by Mr Milton Vadoulis, the landowner, but I would have to say this is the first time I have heard those views, despite discussing the matter with him previously.
“I’m not sure what has happened in the meantime for him to publicly express views he has not previously shared.”
The Council resolved to give the code amendment process the go ahead at its May 2022 meeting inferring that subject to some financial and technical issues been resolved, the proposal should proceed.
The Minister states that “Whilst I acknowledge that Council’s final resolution was informed by the outcomes of community engagement, I question how the final position hinged on a view that the proposal was at variance with the Gawler Community Plan 2030+ when it does not appear to have been raised as a concern with the Designated Entity earlier in the Code Amendment process.”
“Had Council been more upfront about its concerns, I may not have initiated the Code Amendment in the first instance, saving the Designated Entity a significant amount of time and expense,” Minister Champion added.
Contrary to comments made by Council’s leadership at the time, “the state’s new planning system was established on the premise that the community will have increased opportunity to comment on rezoning proposals – through the Community Engagement Charter,” asserted Minister Champion.
Mr Piccolo said rezoning this piece of land was always a bad idea, and had council done its homework the proponents would have been spared the expense and the community the anxiety.