2018 candidate for City of Prospect.
Heritage survey responses.
Do you agree that the identification and protection of local heritage places is best done by local councils rather than DPTI (Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure)?
Yes. Local councils together with residents and their local history groups know their patch.With over 8,000 local heritage places, almost four times as many as there are state heritage places (some 2200), indicates that local government should retain the carriage of local heritage items as is the current situation in South Australia. Councils should be the primary initiators and protectors of local heritage with Council approval required to demolish a building located within a Historic (Conservation Zone) whether or not it is listed as local heritage place.
In your opinion, has the current system of local heritage protection served your community well?
It's better than not having it. Local heritage places should not be treated as of any lesser value than state or national heritage with the thresholds for all providing clear guidance. The same criteria should apply to heritage evaluation whether national, state, regional or local. The only variation is that the local heritage places should not need to prove their significance beyond the council area. While national, state and local heritage differ in geographical scope, there is no reason they should differ in the protection afforded them.
Should councils reject proposals to list local places of historic merit simply because an owner objects?
Property owners should be allowed to lodge an objection to any proposed listing affecting their property, and be given a right of review of that listing, based on reasonable grounds. Standard heritage assessment procedures for local government should be established and implemented to provide a consistent policy for the process of assessment, notification and consultation with property owners and the community.
Should neighbours of local heritage listed buildings have a right of appeal on development applications that propose demolition?
Yes- there needs to be greater transparency in decision making through the provision of reasons for listing or non-listing. • Introducing third party appeal rights in relation to local heritage listing decisions. • Restricting ministerial powers to remove or disallow heritage listings. • Reinstating citizen and community rights in planning and development decisions and appeal rights. The right of appeals mechanism puts in an extra safeguard e.g. against scenarios such as on the recommendation of a Council planner, a heritage property could be demolished. There may not even referral to Development and Planning Panels nor community consultation. This would bypass the elected councils that approved the original listing of heritage places (that have already been through an exhaustive justification process being placed on the heritage list). In areas of high development pressure, the introduction of ‘demolition on merit’ would deliver windfall profits to owners who bought property at prices reflecting the dollar value as a protected heritage place. That windfall is unfair, both to the community and to people who sold in good faith. We need a system of ‘preservation’ instead of‘heritage destruction’ that strongly appears to be weighted to providing gains for one segment of the economy, the property industry, to the detriment of other sectors. There no ‘merit’ in demolition of irreplaceable community assets that are then lost to future generations.
Should buildings listed as Contributory Items in your council area receive better protection?
Yes. If a Contributory Item contributes to the historic quality of an area, it should be preserved; to allow its destruction detracts from that area.
Do you agree that places proposed for listing by your council as Local Heritage or Contributory Items should be subject to review by DPTI? Or would reviews be more appropriately conducted by an independent source of expert advice?
Not reviewed by DPTI. Councils should be the primary decision maker as initiators and protectors of Local Heritage and Contributory Items together with an independent source of expert advice such as the local history group and the National Trust. Reviews of listings are not supported if they are to cull local heritage items or diminish heritage protections. Listings should: • Include statements of significance or tangible evidence of the item/place’s significance with suitable interpretation information. • Be comprehensively compiled. Standard heritage assessment procedures for local government should be established and implemented to provide a consistent policy for the process of assessment, notification and consultation with property owners and the community.
Would you like to see your council work more closely with the National Trust of SA in protecting heritage, for example, by signing up as one of the Trust's Civic Partners?
What are your personal suggestions for improving the way your council handles policy and planning?
Should councils actively encourage individuals to nominate places for consideration as local heritage?