The Ombudsman has ruled the State Government should release a range of documents detailing Walker Corporation’s plans and negotiations with the government for the development of the Adelaide Festival Centre plaza and car park.

Greens leader Mark Parnell made a Freedom of Information request to the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) more than 12 months ago, seeking documents relating to Walker Corporation’s plans for the precinct.

The department refused the request because it and Walker believed to release the material would jeopardise ongoing negotiations. They also argued that the release of concept plans and designs would “destroy their value”, according to the Ombudsman’s report on the matter.

The negotiations between the Government and Walker have been shrouded in mystery from the beginning.

Walker Corp was selected by the Government in 2012 to provide plans for a revamp of the Festival Plaza and the car park underneath it. The developer was given a period of exclusivity to develop the proposal.

There was little information provided to the public about what Walker had in mind – nor what the Government wanted to achieve from the deal.

InDaily understands that Renewal SA initially was responsible for coordinating negotiations between Walker and other key stakeholders, such as the Adelaide Festival Centre.

That process hit a stalemate, and former DPTI chief executive officer Rod Hook – axed by Premier Jay Weatherill just over a week ago – took responsibility for the talks.

InDaily understands Walker had extensive plans for new commercial buildings on the plaza site.

However, in February, the redevelopment project became an election issue with Weatherill announcing that there would be no building on the plaza – a decision which followed a similar promise from the state Liberals. Instead, Walker would be contracted to build a 1400-space car park to replace the current crumbling car park.

The Government will lease 400 car parks from Walker at a capped cost of $30 million over 30 years. About 400 car parks will be provided to the Festival Centre to be used as an “ongoing revenue stream”, with some reserved for Parliament House. The remaining 1000 parks will be leased to the Casino for its exclusive use “on terms to be agreed with the parties and on similar terms to that of the State Government”.

Grand plans for the site had been reduced to a simple car-park rebuild.

Further confusion came last week when Walker Corp boss Lang Walker told an Advertiser journalist that he had an $800 million plan for the area. Walker added that DPTI had told him the plans would be going to Cabinet soon but, with Hook getting the axe, he wasn’t sure what would happen.

Parnell said today the Riverbank precinct was one of the most significant public places in Adelaide, and the community had the right to know what the Government had in mind.

“Secret deals between the Government and a private developer need to be brought into the light, so the community can judge whether the public interest is being served,” he said.

“Redevelopment of the Riverbank and Festival Centre precinct is a worthy project, but the public want to be assured that public assets won’t be privatized and that commercial interests do not over-ride the public interest.”

Walker Corporation and DPTI have 30 days in which to appeal the Ombudsman’s decision in the District Court.

Parnell urged both parties not to appeal the Ombudsman’s ruling.

A DPTI spokesperson said the department was aware of the Ombudsman’s ruling but had not yet decided whether to appeal.

InDaily is seeking a response from Walker Corporation.

In his determination, Ombudsman Richard Bingham overturned departmental FOI decisions on a range of emails and other documents relating to the redevelopment negotiations.

He said that given that Walker Corporation had now been engaged as the developer, “I do not accept that it would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest to release the documents”.

He said two documents – one with the intriguing title of “Walker Adelaide Square Preliminary Design Review Executive Summary” and the other, “Adelaide Festival Centre Stage C Report” – were subject to copyright. However, he said Parnell should be able to “inspect” the documents.