Bills

Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Environment and Food Production Areas) Amendment Bill

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION (Taylor—Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Housing Infrastructure, Minister for Planning) (15:51): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016.

Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION (Taylor—Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Housing Infrastructure, Minister for Planning) (15:52): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This week, we have seen a change in the way we approach land use planning and infrastructure within South Australia. To echo the comments of the Premier on Monday at the launch of the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan, if we identify a problem, we act. And act we have in response to the mounting challenge of providing housing supply within the Greater Adelaide region.

People are choosing South Australia to live here and rightfully so. There are almost 12,500 more businesses operating in South Australia compared with at the 2022 state election; and 73,000 jobs have been created since 2022, 54 per cent of them full time. We are a city that will reach 2.2 million people by 2051. We have also seen the commencement of AUKUS, the great building of Osborne, which is driving employment and innovation in our state, and our mining and minerals sector continues to be strong.

This government is both serious and steadfast in its commitment to putting our people first. We are the custodians for future generations, and we must plan accordingly, and we must develop our communities to ensure Adelaide remains one of the most liveable cities in the world. That is why we have acted through the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan and the bill before us today.

A key initiative in the government's Housing Roadmap and the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan is to ensure there is an appropriate supply of serviced land to meet both current and emerging housing demand. The GARP identifies sufficient land over the long term to accommodate this growth. There are limited options for where greenfield growth can occur and how much land is identified for medium to long-term growth, and much of the land identified for the medium to long-term growth is within the Environment and Food Production Areas.

Based on GARP investigations, there are likely to be approximately 61,000 dwellings developed on land that is currently within the EFPAs. That is 61,000 dwellings in proximity to existing urban areas which have been locked up and unable to be developed for a significant period of time.

When the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 was first drafted, government policy at the time strongly supported urban consolidation, with a target set for 85 per cent of all growth to occur through infill development. On this basis, the act is currently drafted to ensure that new greenfield land is released from the EFPA only where urban consolidation opportunities have been exhausted.

As intensive and directed urban infill is no longer government policy, the GARP identifies ample greenfield and infill land over the next 30 years. On this basis, there is a disconnect between the existing EFPA provisions in the act and the GARP. I grew up in Kapunda and attended high school there. I know firsthand how important the agriculture sector is to farming communities outside of Adelaide. Primary producers are one of the key pillars of the South Australian economy. We have listened, we have consulted and we have acted decisively.

One of the misconceptions in the public debate is that we are cutting away and removing highly productive agricultural lands, or our food bowl, from the EFPA, and that is not true. Existing use rights are as important as ever. There is no requirement or mandate for farming activities to cease just because land has been removed from the EFPA.

What we are seeking to do is coordinate Adelaide's growth plans with the EFPA and to drive forward our response to ensure our city's growth is appropriate, logical and affords protection to existing land uses. To overcome any disconnect, this bill amends the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 to vary the Environment and Food Production Areas so that they align with the GARP. The bill also provides a mechanism to ensure that the EFPAs remain consistent with the GARP for new growth areas over the next 30 years and the years that come after that. The bill achieves the following. It:

amends section 7 of the Act to designate a revised GRO Plan setting out new EFPA boundaries based on the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan;

confirms that any land that is removed from the EFPA on commencement of the bill has the Limited Land Division Overlay applied to it through the Planning and Design Code. This will prevent unorderly fragmentation of land, resulting in it becoming harder to develop at a later stage;

removes the current urban consolidation test for future variations to the EFPA boundaries;

ensures that future variations to the EFPA are consistent with the GARP and ensure a 30-year land supply; and

inserts new provisions in section 64 of the act requiring the GARP to consider population growth and to identify land to be developed in the short term. This is to ensure that there is an appropriate methodology for land releases within Adelaide.

The areas being removed from the EFPA will still need to be rezoned before they can be used for residential development, and this will occur in a staged manner over the next 30 years to ensure orderly development. Rezonings would occur based on current demand and specifically take into account infrastructure provision and costs.

The government will also be looking to update its policies around the urban and rural interface. This is to ensure that agricultural activities can still continue. These policy investigations will take into account additional issues, such as bushfire protection, dust and noise between residential and farming areas.

Infrastructure is a key challenge for servicing new greenfield urban growth areas. What the GARP sets to achieve is a logical and coordinated approach to the identification of key lands which can be used for vital community infrastructure, such as schools, hospitals and emergency services. We are identifying the land now to ensure the maximum benefit to these new emerging communities and that there are appropriate structure plans in place as part of the code amendment process. We are continuing to invest in water infrastructure, particularly in the north and south, to supply development-ready housing estates that respond to market and community expectations.

The revision of the EFPA still ensures that the key agricultural lands surrounding Greater Adelaide are protected. The changes to the EFPA that were based on a comprehensive analysis represent a loss of less than 1 per cent of key agricultural lands in the GARP area. This, together with the current character preservation districts and the Hills Face Zone, ensures that we retain strong boundaries between residential and environmental and food production areas.

Existing communities are protected, especially for key areas such as the Barossa and McLaren Vale, where our commitment to character protection remains. With 30 years of land now identified, there should be no cause to radically revise the boundaries of the EFPA in the future. It should be noted that, while the bill varies the test to amend the boundaries of the EFPA to ensure that they remain consistent with the GARP, it does not seek to amend the process to vary these boundaries in the future.

The commission will still be required to conduct a review of the EFPA every five years to determine whether changes are necessary. In doing so, the commission must give consideration to the GARP housing and employment growth over 30 years, and protecting areas of rural, landscape, environmental or food production significance within the Greater Adelaide area from urban encroachment. Following the commission's review of the EFPA, it must continue to provide me (or the Minister for Planning) with a report detailing the outcome of its review and highlighting any changes made. The minister will continue to be required to table the details of any changes along with the commission's report in both houses of parliament, either house then having 14 sitting days to pass a motion of disallowance.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the following people for their tireless efforts and their work on the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan and the bill, and other bills yet to come to this house. First is David Reynolds. He is an extraordinary public servant. He has served the state in many roles, but in his role as Chief Executive of the Department for Housing and Urban Development he is responding to longstanding issues of housing supply, the housing crisis, and bringing with him a range of experience in the Public Service which is vital to resolving an issue that nearly every member in this house acknowledges is of vital concern. Good quality Public Service advice is vital to any minister and it is vital to the public interest. So I would just like to put on record my thanks for his advice—not just policy advice but advice of how best to make the machinery of government work in the interests of the people of South Australia.

I also have to thank Craig Holden. Craig Holden has served as the Chair of the State Planning Commission for both the previous government and for this one. Craig has had a different experience in life. Craig has been an architect and he was the lead singer for a short period of time for the band The Angels—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION: Yes, a little-known fact; I do not think he will thank me for sharing that with the parliament, but it is true. I thank all the other members of the State Planning Commission who have been so dedicated.

This is such a big piece of work and, while we have been doing this big piece of work, there have been many other pieces of work that we have asked them to do not just on housing but on bushfire code amendments, flood protection code amendments, heritage protection and a whole range of things, which is so very important to the development of the state. This has probably been one of the busiest times for any state planning commission, and Craig Holden's leadership has been vital.

Sally Smith is the Deputy Chief Executive of DHUD but was formerly the executive director in charge of planning in the state and, again, served governments of various persuasions with really excellent advice on the planning act. She has also been a sort of ex officio member of the Planning Commission for many years and so has been at the heart of not just the new planning act but the implementation of the code under the previous government and, of course, under this government the really vital preparations around the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan and the government's plans to amend this legislation.

Sally's really terrific advice and her diligence and commitment to the state I think should be acknowledged by the house, along with her team, Brett Steiner, Ben Sieben and Mark Voortman, who has just recently joined us from Mount Barker council and brings with him some really vital experience from a growing area. It is important that we acknowledge that. I hear the Deputy Speaker talking about it, and everybody can point to some of the really pressing issues in Mount Barker and Angle Vale. We all know that we should not repeat the mistakes of the past, and it is vital that we have people who have been at the forefront of addressing some of those issues on the ground, people like Mark, in our departments and giving us good advice about planning and infrastructure provision in the future.

Both Brett and Ben have been tireless workers for planning and so I thank them for their efforts, along with the team within Planning and Land Use Services which is second to none. I know that at the end of this process I will probably have to go down to Harry's Bar for knock-off drinks on a Friday, and they will deserve them. They really are a top-quality department and that is evidenced not just through the quality of work that they are doing but the recognition of that work by many people around the country, of South Australia having a very, very good planning system which serves the state. So I would just like to put on record my sincere thanks for their efforts.

In concluding, I would say that without the changes outlined in this bill, South Australia's growth will be stifled and there will be confusion in the community because the EFPA will prevent urban growth as outlined in the GARP. It is very important that this bill passes the parliament in order to, in the interests of the state, provide housing supply, a clear, defined housing supply that will stretch out in the decades ahead of us. I commend the bill to the house and look forward to members' contributions. I seek leave to have the explanation of clauses inserted in Hansard without my reading it.

Leave granted.

Explanation of Clauses

Part 1—Preliminary

1—Short title

2—Commencement

These clauses are formal.

Part 2—Amendment of Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016

3—Amendment of section 3—Interpretation

The amendment to the definition of statutory instrument is related to the amendments to section 7.

4—Amendment of section 7—Environment and food production areas—Greater Adelaide

Section 7 currently establishes environment and food production areas. The amendments substitute the current plan of environment and food production areas with a new plan.

Section 7(3)(a) is amended so that subparagraph (i) of the power to vary environment and food production areas provides that the variation is consistent with any relevant provisions of the regional plan for Greater Adelaide under section 64 and subparagraph (ii) refers to 30 years.

Other amendments are technical or consequential.

5—Amendment of section 64—Regional plans

Section 64 is amended to insert considerations applying to the preparation of the regional plan for Greater Adelaide.

Other amendments are consequential.

6—Amendment of section 125—Time within which decision must be made

Section 125 is amended to provide that the section does not apply to development that involves a division of land that would create 1 or more additional allotments in an environment and food production area or character preservation area.

Schedule 1—Transitional provisions

Schedule 1 provides for transitional provisions for the purposes of the measure.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Teague.