25 College Rd Kent Town SA 5067

By building a carpark along the frontage of this wide allotment of land, you rob the City of Norwood Payneham and St Peters, and all ratepayers, of the value of otherwise productive land.

In any economically strong, resilient and productive city, land use in prominent areas is set up in such a way that what is built upon that land is able to generate enough value to comfortable and self-sufficiently cover its costs and liabilities to the city. All cities naturally developed in this way from the dawn of time until the auto-centric post-war boom.

Building a carpark on this land not only ensures that a non-productive asset is built right in the heart of Kent Town, but it robs this pocket of Kent Town of the chance to develop further in a meaningful way. Ground and first floor frontages should have some productive use, whether as residential, small commercial, retail, or hospitality. The proposed 1 retail outlet for this building does not go far enough.

Headmaster Bradley Fenner is quoted in the May 31st 2022 issue of The Advertiser: [Headmaster Bradley Fenner said the work at the site, next to the school’s boarding house, would reduce congestion around the college and improve safety.
“We have a number of students who currently park on the (surrounding) streets and we’d get them out of those areas and into a safe and secure place,”
“This is a measure to resolve issues around carparking and safety. We have quite a lot of cars coming onto the site at the beginning and end of the day.”]

In what way does the Headmaster draw the conclusion that building a three-storey carpark, which makes it easier to park at the destination and therefore encourages people to drive, will reduce congestion in Kent Town?

How does encouraging more drivers in an urban environment result in increased safety outcomes? How does it make it safer for pedestrians and cyclists in the area?

PAC should not be using this prime allotment for a carpark and 1 retail outlet. If they are concerned about car parking in an inner-city area, they should be encouraging alternate forms of transport. They should be asking the council + relevant state departments for safer cycling routes, more pedestrian priority, and better public transport links to facilitate more efficient movement of people to and from the school.

They should be making the absolute best use of the land, rather than building a largely non-productive carpark. They should not be asking what they can build to relieve their car parking problem, they should be asking what they can build to reduce their need for car parking entirely. There is no place for such auto-centric infrastructure in an otherwise vibrant inner-city suburb like Kent Town.

Please note, I submitted this via email on 9 June because the website was down (and as per the relevant instructions). I have not yet recieved confirmation that my submission was received.

The specific reasons I believe that planning consent should be refused are:

Social/Community License
Prince Alfred College (PAC) consistently demonstrates little interest in its local community – Kent Town. This goes past disinterest to outright contempt. This is demonstrated through the Development Application’s (DA) reasoning that the ‘development is very important for PAC. The car park will:
• provide an improved and consolidated car parking arrangement;
• cater for existing staff, student and boarding house car parking demands;
• accommodate future growth in student numbers;
• improve overall vehicular movement within and surrounding PAC; and
• create a safer environment for pedestrians within the College grounds.’

The only one of these that could arguably be in consideration of the Kent Town community is ‘improve the overall vehicular movement within and surrounding PAC’. I’m unsure what area ‘surrounding’ refers to but I suspect that it does not consider the broader Kent Town given the school’s apparent disregard of Council's two-hour parking limit on the eastern side of Capper St (i.e. immediately adjacent the main PAC entrance) which is filled with P-plated cars most week days. Kent Town residents have reported observing students swapping car parks on Capper St every two-hours, which seems to me to disregard the objectives of Council’s parking conditions. In this respect, it seems that PAC is trying to push its car parking problem onto the residents of Kent Town.

Discouraging Driving
Increasing the availability of car parks will undoubtedly increase the motivation to drive to school/work. Embarrassingly, I can offer myself as an example of such behaviour. If PAC wants to fix its car parking problem, perhaps it should be encouraging alternate forms of transport such as cycling (and I acknowledge Council’s Beulah Rd cycleway, despite seeing very few students cycling to school), more pedestrian priority, and better public transport options.

Furthermore, the on-street car parks adjacent PAC will be filled immediately, which will result in more cars in an inner-urban environment, creating a less safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists in the area.
Zoning
It beggars belief that ‘the subject land is located within the Urban Corridor (Main Street) Zone’. It hardly needs pointing out that the built form of the subject section of College Rd – between The Parade West and Grenfell St – is entirely residential in nature, bar a small commercial (professional services) complex adjacent The Parade West (a main road).

I can’t think of another example of a multi-story car park on such an emphatically residential (back-)street.
Design

Car parks create dead street frontages which are irresistible targets for graffiti tagging and perfect incognito places for anti-social behaviour, particularly at night (and what about the weekends?), and the lovely ‘artist’s impressions’ decay relatively quickly compared with most other kinds of developments.

Optimal Land Use
Approving a carpark on this land not only ensures that a dead asset is built right in the middle of Kent Town, but it removes the opportunity for this section of College Rd to develop further in an appropriate way. PAC should not be using this prime allotment for a carpark and one ‘retail’ outlet.

Ground floor frontages of course should have some active, productive use, ideally residential, or alternatively small commercial, retail, or hospitality. The idea that a school uniform shop will activate the frontage is inadequate.
‘Driving Growth in Kent Town’

Has/will the NPSP CAP considered the Kent Town Economic Growth Strategy in its assessment of PAC’s DA? As per the following excerpt from the Strategy:
Situated on the edge of the Adelaide central
business district and adjacent to the Adelaide
Park Lands, Kent Town offers an enviable
lifestyle and an accessible and collaborative
environment to do business. With a view
to capitalising on an exciting period of
transformation, the City of Norwood
Payneham & St Peters has prepared the
Kent Town Economic Growth Strategy
2020–2025 to strengthen and grow this
diverse and unique local neighbourhood.

Development of the first Economic Growth Strategy for
Kent Town demonstrates the Council’s ongoing commitment
to recognising and celebrating it as an innovative and creative
neighbourhood in which to invest and do business.

The Kent Town Economic Growth Strategy 2020–2025 is
underpinned by the City of Norwood Payneham & St Peters
long term Strategic Plan CityPlan 2030: Shaping Our Future
and has been informed by other key strategic documents
including the Norwood Payneham and St Peters (City)
Development Plan, the Kent Town Urban Design Framework
and the Kent Town Public Realm Manual.

The Strategy has been developed to build upon the existing
strengths of Kent Town, which presently boasts several strong
and emerging sectors supported by an accessible, culturally
rich and liveable environment. Its diverse built form and
creativity offer a lifestyle which is unique to Adelaide.

Kent Town is home to approximately 13% of the City’s
businesses and currently provides 17.6% of the Council's
employment, illustrating the critical role that Kent Town plays
in being a key contributor to the broader economy of the City.
Complementing the diverse business sector is a significant
component of residential development which highlights the
important contribution that residential development plays in
the success and vibrancy of Kent Town.

Since 2006, Kent Town’s population of 1,252 has remained
relatively stable but is expected to grow as the neighbourhood
evolves with an increasing number of new high density
residential developments.

With a recognised vibrant cultural and creative industries
sector, an evolving built form and a heritage and character
embraced by its community, Kent Town is on the cusp of an
exciting new growth phase driven by its unique competitive
advantages. This Strategy reinforces the importance of these
elements and that of the property market and role of future
investment in the ongoing success of Kent Town, and in
ensuring that Kent Town maintains its reputation as a great
place to live and work.

The Kent Town Economic Development Strategy 2020–2025
has been formulated through a series of discussions and
from feedback received from the community. This Strategy
provides an overarching vision and framework within which
local economic development activity will occur and sets out a
priority agenda for the next five years to:
• attract investment;
• support growth; and
• create prosperity.

The Strategy also recognises the increasing importance of
digital technology and infrastructure as a fundamental enabler
of economic development.

The Council’s approach to economic development also
acknowledges its partnerships with key stakeholders including
the Eastern Region Alliance, the South Australian Government
and the local business community, in delivering the actions
and outcomes of this strategy.

Through the implementation of this Strategy, Kent Town will
offer a vibrant and flourishing local economy full of opportunity.
An enticing inner-city environment where businesses thrive
and gain confidence, investment is encouraged and creativity is cultivated.
As an eternal optimist, I was rather hoping that PAC would be more outward looking to, embracing of, its Kent Town community and I find this DA insensitive and disappointing. It is, sadly, typical of the behaviour of large institutions towards their local communities, in my experience.

If only they would take a look outwards, we would embrace them into the Kent Town community.

I oppose the PAC Carpark application in its present form. You can read my submission at https://rundlestreetkenttown.space/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Car-park-submission-edited.docx. I have asked to be heard at the meeting.
In the submission Dr Kenn Fisher & I address problems with the carpark design and the traffic and pollution implications across the Kent Town community.
We also illustrate that the PAC carpark application fails comprehensively to address NPSP Council’s Kent Town Urban Design Framework factors and the PAC Strategic Plan goals and values of community engagement and environmental sustainability.
We argue that a comprehensive local area traffic management plan and a Master Plan for Kent Town development should exist against which NPSP Council should hold all citizens accountable.
We refer to previous submissions submitted by the community to NPSP Council and shared with PAC over the past three years for such plans.
Importantly for the community, we charge that a prominent private College which teaches the importance of social responsibility and good citizenship and the significance of climate change to its 1250 students should demonstrate its convictions in its actions.
We ask that our submission be considered and the expressed standards of PAC and NPSP for Kent Town should be addressed.

I would encourage the building of a car par for PAC to get cars off the street and into a car park would be the most sensible thing .

I agree with Rachel. Efforts to provide adequate carparking to their staff, visitors and students should be applauded, as it will significantly reduce congestion and parking challenges in the surrounding streets.