CHARACTER PRESERVATION (MCLAREN VALE) BILL

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Urban Development, Planning and the City of Adelaide, Minister for Tourism, Minister for Food Marketing) (15:38): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to provide measures to protect and enhance the special character of the McLaren Vale region; to make related amendments to the Development Act 1993; and for other purposes. Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Urban Development, Planning and the City of Adelaide, Minister for Tourism, Minister for Food Marketing) (15:39): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: On 18 May 1907, the Adelaide Chronicle featured an article called 'Beauteous McLaren Vale', by our special commissioner—perhaps the member for Mawson, I'm not sure—which read:

Few districts in South Australia can boast of greater natural beauty and indigenous fertility than McLaren Vale. From the early days of settlement of the State, when the locality forged ahead as the centre of the wheat growing industry down to the present time, McLaren Vale has ever been conspicuous for its faculty of leaving a lasting and pleasing impression upon the minds of all visitors. Vines have long since superseded wheat, and thereby adding considerably to the scenic effect...

This was a quote from the McLaren Vale Grape Wine and Tourism Association in July of this year.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Got the almonds, indeed. McLaren Vale and the surrounding district is greatly valued by South Australians. It has natural beauty, history, recreation and tourism opportunities, agriculture, viticulture and primary industries. The natural characteristics and features of the area also add to the exquisite backdrop of the state for events such as the recently run Classic Targa Rally and the Tour Down Under.

In February this year, the Premier charged the Minister for Urban Development, Planning and the City of Adelaide with investigating how the government could protect McLaren Vale and the Barossa Valley. The latter is the subject of a separate bill. Fortuitously, the minister also has the portfolio of tourism, which is a significant factor in these two regions. The Premier asked that, as a priority, the protection of the integrity and culture of the Barossa Valley and the integrity and culture of McLaren Vale be investigated. The Premier also said that, if necessary, this be done by special legislation.

It was thought important by the minister that any protection or legislation also prevent inconsistent development in this region and stop urban growth from eating away at this significant area, both from within (that is, from expanding townships) and without (that is urban expansion into the region). As such, the intention of this bill is to protect the integrity and culture of the McLaren Vale region for future generations. There is another bill to be spoken on separately that is to achieve the same protection for the Barossa Valley. The government expects that these two bills could be the framework for other districts that have their own character and identity that require protection.

The government acknowledges that there has been some movement to protect this southern region. As such, the government recognises the work of Mr Leon Bignell (member for Mawson) and the Hon. Robert Brokenshire, who have both brought attention to protecting the Willunga Basin and the geographical indication area that stretches across a significant area of the South of Greater Adelaide.

The government also notes that Ms Pip Forrester and the McLaren Vale Grape Wine and Tourism Association have been working with others to protect this region, including the Friends of the Willunga Basin. Further, the minister also acknowledges the support and interest that representatives from the City of Onkaparinga showed when he discussed protecting the McLaren Vale district with them. I notice that I am speaking in the third person; I do not know why, but it should not be taken as a sign of anything odd.

It should be pointed out, however, that the initiatives of these individuals and groups to protect the McLaren Vale region, and in some cases the Barossa region as well, have had a similar but not identical focus to this one before you today. The government also wishes to bring to the parliament's attention that an interim development plan amendment has been gazetted and is immediately operative to complement this legislation while parliament considers the bill. This amendment will seek to slow any rush of development applications for things that would be at odds with the intentions of the bill.

The practical effect that is intended is that certain types of development applications that are within the affected area will require the concurrence of the development assessment commission should the local council wish to approve them. This includes things that are at odds with the intentions of the bill and some things that are not but that need careful consideration before they are approved. I seek leave to have the remainder of the second reading explanation inserted in Hansard without reading it.

Leave granted.

In June 2011, the Government released two draft maps and a discussion paper, Protecting the Barossa Valley and McLaren Vale, asking for community views. For just over six weeks people commented on the kind of development they wanted in the region and whether the draft district boundaries were appropriate. Information sheets were distributed to all the relevant council libraries and offices (including neighbouring councils), and advertisements were placed in The Advertiser and local newspapers. The City of Onkaparinga held two public information evenings attended by senior staff from the Department of Planning and Local Government to explain the proposal and to listen to people's views.

More than 220 submissions were received on the discussion paper, from councils, Members of Parliament and a wide range of community and industry groups (including the Wine and Food Industry Bodies and the Building Industry). The Government has used suggestions and requests from these submissions to help draft the Bill and amend the district boundaries.

The Character Preservation (McLaren Vale) Bill 2011 has been extensively informed by input from the South Australian community. Generally, the submissions overwhelming supported the proposal to enact legislation to preserve and enhance the special character of the McLaren Vale district. Further and, in particular, there was also support to protect the region from potential future pressure to allow sub division of land for residential purposes, at the same time as achieving the population growth targets of the South Australian Planning Strategy. The community is well informed about the visual and physical impact of urban spread. The community is also concerned about the threat urban spread poses to the food, wine, hospitality, recreation and tourism economy of this illustrious wine and primary industry region with its rich culture and a culinary heritage linked to early settlement. The submissions also describe the hospitality, recreational and tourism potential of the region's scenic beauty, iconic sweeping landscapes, natural vistas and scattered homesteads located in agricultural settings.

The Government thanks the individuals, community groups, councils, businesses and industry groups that participated in this initial consultation.

The area protected by the Bill is defined by the district boundaries and the township boundaries, set out in numbered maps that have been deposited in the General Registry Office.

The McLaren Vale district map has had some changes since the consultation version. These changes were based on:

The objectives of the Bill to protect the special character of the district.

The content and number of submissions suggesting changes.

The need to reflect the identification of future urban growth lands in the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

Wherever possible, ensuring consistency with current planning zones and existing land uses.

There was interest in including other separate and distinct pockets of land outside of the proposed McLaren Vale preservation area and for the preservation district to stretch further into the Adelaide Hills Council region. However, the Government has decided not to include these areas at this time.

One of these areas was Glenthorne Farm, and while it is understood that there is strong public sentiment to protect this area, it was never included in the consultation map and has not yet been discussed with the University of Adelaide. However, the Government is considering additional protection through a Development Plan Amendment to allow such discussions to occur.

The proposed preservation district included in the consultation map, covered some of the Adelaide Hills Council area but this has mostly been removed in the final preservation district. Arguably much of the region of the Hills could lend itself to its own specific preservation district and legislation and it is preferable to look at that area separately in the future, if there is public will to do so.

What the McLaren Vale preservation district map doesn't do — and this may not be to everyone's satisfaction — is that it does not replicate the Geographical Indication zone (GI) and it does not just replicate Local Government boundaries. While the map may follow Local Government borders here and there, it does so because in those locations it provides a sensible boundary for the preservation District. In terms of the GI, while the Government understands there is strong argument that this should be protected, the GI zone as a whole is already irrevocably compromised by existing developments.

This legislation will work to protect much of the remnant GI, as it is inseparable from the region and its traditions. However, the work of this Bill is not to recognize and isolate the GI as the protection area. While there are shared patches of land, the Bill and preservation district have a different purpose to the remnant GI zone. The GI zone focuses on production and the identification of produce within McLaren Vale and the Bill focuses on the preservation of the McLaren Vale District.

So turning to the Bill itself.

The Bill establishes an overarching policy framework that informs and works with the existing development and assessment processes. It does not duplicate the current system but complements the Development Act 1993 in a succinct Bill that recognises the importance of protecting the region through its own distinct legislation. When you are considering this region, you will need to look at this Bill, the Development Act and of course the local government planning policies in the relevant Development Plan. All persons or bodies involved in the administration of another Act, must act consistently with the objects and objectives of this Bill when exercising a power or acting in relation to the McLaren Vale district.

Once operative, this legislation will set out what is desirable and undesirable or prohibited in the preserved McLaren Vale District. No single council or State Government will be able to change the rules, nor allow incremental erosion of the landscape for urban development. In the future, changes must be considered by Parliament and so can be scrutinised by the community.

There are two powerful features of this Bill that the Government has secured to stall urban encroachment in the protected area. The first and perhaps most significant is to prohibit sub division for residential purposes in the district. Sub division in semi or rural areas is a danger to the landscape and primary production in this State. It is sub division in these areas that are the thin edge of the wedge — carving up our rural and agricultural lands so that they are no longer valuable or fit for their best purpose — sustaining crops and livestock. Land division will be able to continue within the townships, and development in the townships will be guided by the Township Objectives set out in the Bill and the local Development Plan.

The second powerful feature of this Bill is to prohibit sub division for industrial development that would be detrimental to the special character of the district. This is to ensure that land cannot be cut up for new industrial developments that are incompatible with the region.

It will be for the Development Assessment Commission to consider these two types of development applications. The Bill directs the Commission to refuse these two types of applications, so effectively land division for housing or inappropriate industrial development in the McLaren Vale district will not be permissible once the proposed legislation is operative.

The Bill has attached Schedules 1 and 2 containing District Objectives and Township Objectives and these are guidelines for assessment authorities when considering development applications. These Objectives are designed to help the region grow in a way that is consistent with its character and land uses. Like the specific prohibitions, the Objectives reflect the many suggestions from the public submissions during the first consultation period.

It is important to reiterate that land division in the townships will not be prohibited and not all land division in the districts will be prohibited. The townships are excluded from the restriction on land division for residential or industrial development in the districts. Applications for land division for other purposes in the districts will be assessed against the District Objectives and the relevant council development plans. Further, while land division in the townships is not prohibited, development in townships will be guided by the township objectives.

The Objectives include desirable development that should be encouraged in the McLaren Vale district. Development that may be detrimental to the district such as residential development, large scale retail development and fast food franchises should be prevented. The Objectives emphasise preserving landscape, protecting primary production and pursuing environmental sustainability.

As indicated, council Development Plans will continue to be the key planning and land use policy documents for the districts. The Minister for Urban Development, Planning and the City of Adelaide will ensure that the relevant Development Plans are reviewed and amended, as required, within six months of the legislation coming into operation. This is to ensure that all Development Plans are consistent with the objects and objectives of the new legislation: both the District Objectives and the Township Objectives will inform the review of the relevant development plans to occur within six months of the legislation coming into operation.

As soon as the legislation comes into operation, that is, even prior to the review of the Development Plans, the new Act will prevail to the extent of any inconsistency between the Act and any of the Development Plans in the district. The Department of Planning and Local Government did a preliminary review of the relevant Development Plans, prior to the current interim Development Plan Amendment. The Department advised that the operative Development Plans provisions were very similar in intent to the objects and objectives of the draft legislation. As discussed above, the interim Development Plan Amendment is to put a hold on inappropriate development pending the review of the Development Plans. Therefore, it is anticipated that to fully align the Development Plans with the objects and objectives of legislation will be a relatively minor task and the interim Development Plan Amendment will no longer be required.

As already stated, the legislation does not aim to replace, or replicate the Development Act processes for the McLaren Vale district. Applications for development will still go to a local council and their Development Assessment Panel (DAP) if necessary. The council and the DAP will then assess the application in accordance with the relevant Development Plan and the legislation, in particular, the District Objectives and the Township Objectives. The only exception to this process is that any proposal for land division in the district (outside of the township boundaries) must go to the Development Assessment Commission for assessment, as discussed above.

Existing businesses and industries in the townships and in the surrounding district will be able to continue. Specific to the McLaren Vale region, these include intensive livestock, waste management, food processing, and mining, such as the Maslins Beach quarry. However, as discussed above the Bill puts some limitations on land-divisions for industrial purposes. Further, the Objectives provide guidance for the assessment authority when considering development applications, which will include any that relate to existing industrial or business activities

Another achievement of this legislation, is that it secures the quality and quantity of one of South Australia's primary production areas. It is important to ensure that McLaren Vale and its surrounding region is retained as a primary industry area because locally grown food keeps transports costs that impact on the cost of products to the consumer to a minimum, and supports local producers and primary industries (South Australian Farmers Federation submission, July 2011). Activities in the region include farming, vineyards, wineries, crops and grazing land; as the community has pointed out the region currently has barley, oats, apples, pears, quinces, apricots, peaches, cherries, plums, citrus, figs, avocados, almonds, pistachios, olives, strawberries, vegetables, herbs, roses, native plants and cut flowers as well as meat (including lamb, beef and venison), honey production, dairying and raising poultry for meat and eggs (Friends of Willunga Basin, July 2011).

The major project provisions of the Development Act will not be available for development or projects in the preserved McLaren Vale District. This will not disadvantage developers in relation to developments or projects in the character preservation area because the major project provisions are chiefly intended for developments of Statewide significance.

The Bill requires a review of the legislation within five years of commencement. In particular, the review should consider the objects and the Township Objectives and District Objectives and the responsible Minister will have to table a report of the review in both Houses of Parliament.

Limited power is provided in the Bill to make Regulations. The provisions are 'limited' in that there is no special power beyond the making of Regulations for prohibiting or restricting certain activities, imposing conditions on activities or prescribing fines for offences against the regulations. At this stage, there is no power for the Regulations to specify exceptions to the requirements of the Bill, that is, the Government will not be able to act without Parliamentary scrutiny to change the legislation.

Following the introduction of this Bill today, it will be released for public consultation for at least four weeks, facilitated by the Department of Planning and Local Government. Following consultation, the Government will advise if it proposes any amendments and will seek that the House then consider the Bill. Given the gravity of this legislation, it is important that it have the weight of Parliament's consideration while public consultation ensues. This will allow Members opportunity to canvas their constituents and give the Bill appropriate consideration.

The Character Preservation (McLaren Vale) Bill 2011 and the related initiatives provides a legislative framework and integrated development and assessment system to ensure that, as a society, we can preserve the McLaren Vale district, for future generations to enjoy and appreciate.

Finally, the Minister expresses his appreciation and thanks to the public servants who have assisted through the consultation, drafting and preparation of this Bill and its partner Bill for the Barossa Valley.

I commend the Bill to Members.

Explanation of Clauses

Part 1—Preliminary

1—Short title

2—Commencement

These clauses are formal.

3—Interpretation

This clause defines certain terms used in the measure.

4—Interaction with other Acts

This clause provides that the measure is in addition to and does not limit or derogate from the provisions of any other Act (except as provided otherwise) and provides that this is to be a character preservation law for the purposes of the Development Act 1993.

Part 2—Objects of Act and statutory objectives

5—Objects

This clause sets out the objects of the measure.

6—Objectives

This clause provides for the district objectives and the township objectives (set out in Schedules to the measure).

7—Administration of Acts to achieve objects and objectives

This clause obliges a person or body involved in the administration of an Act to act consistently with, and to seek to further, the objects and objectives of the measure in exercising powers and functions in relation to the district or a township.

8—Review of Development Plans

This clause requires the review of relevant Development Plans under the Development Act 1993 within 6 months after commencement and provides that—

Development Plans are to be read and construed so as to be consistent with the objects and objectives of the measure; and

any provisions of those Plans that are inconsistent with those objects and objectives are to be disregarded to the extent of the inconsistency.

Part 3—Special provisions relating to district

9—Interaction of Part with other Acts

This Part of the measure is to have effect despite the provisions of any other Act.

10—Major project provisions not to apply

This clause disapplies the major project provisions of the Development Act 1993 in relation to developments or projects in the district.

11—Limitations on land division in district

This clause makes the Development Assessment Commission the relevant authority under the Development Act 1993 for developments involving land division in the district and prohibits—

land division for residential development in the district; or

land division for industrial development in the district that would be detrimental to the special character of the district or is otherwise inconsistent with the district objectives.

Part 4—Miscellaneous

12—Power to require information

A person or body involved in the administration of an Act may require further information for a person applying for a statutory authorisation or from a government or local government authority for the purposes of the measure.

13—Review of Act

This clause provides for a review of the Act 5 years after its commencement.

14—Regulations

This clause provides for the making of regulations for the purposes of the measure. The regulations may, without limitation—

prohibit or restrict the undertaking of a specified activity, or an activity of a specified class, within the district, or a specified part of the district (despite any other Act or law)

provide that a person undertaking a specified activity, or an activity of a specified class, or proposing to undertake a specified activity, or an activity of a specified class, within the district, or a specified part of the district, comply with any prescribed requirement or condition (despite any other Act or law).

Schedule 1—District objectives

This Schedule sets out the district objectives.

Schedule 2—Township objectives

This Schedule sets out the township objectives.

Schedule 3—Related amendments

This Schedule makes related amendments to the Development Act 1993. These related amendments apply in relation to all character preservation laws. The amendments would ensure that the objects, district objectives and township objectives under a character preservation law are incorporated in the Planning Strategy and make provision in relation to amendment of Development Plans to promote the objects, district objectives or township objectives under a character preservation law and allow for the Development Assessment Commission to act as the relevant authority in relation to proposed development in certain circumstances.

Debate adjourned on motion of Ms Chapman.