Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Urban Growth Boundary URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS Legislative Council URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS (15:23): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Development and Planning a question about the urban growth boundary. Leave granted. The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS Legislative Council The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS: The state government's urban growth boundary expansion plan was released in July 2007. The plan included provisions to expand the urban growth boundary to the north around Gawler and to the south near Aldinga and Noarlunga. The Barossa Council instigated proceedings in the Supreme Court in late 2007 against the state Labor government after being unable to influence the government's urban growth boundary expansion of metropolitan Adelaide north-east from Gawler into the Concordia district. I understand that the legal action against the urban growth boundary extension was withdrawn by the Barossa Council in early 2008 with the agreement of the Minister for Urban Development and Planning in support of an investigation into the potential for a separate new township based around Concordia. Rather than continuing the town of Gawler, this would allow a buffer zone between Gawler and the Barossa. Will the minister indicate the progress and results, if any, of the investigation over the past 14 months regarding a new and separate township of Concordia being constructed to the north-east of Gawler? The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council Minister for Mineral Resources Development Minister for Urban Development and Planning Minister for Small Business The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:25): The honourable member is correct: the Barossa Council did make some approach to the government after the urban growth boundary was declared, as it believed that it had a better proposal in relation to growth in that area. Since the urban growth boundary was released in December 2007, a number of things have happened: first, the planning and development review has been released. It highlighted that, notwithstanding the increase to the urban growth boundary, we were still relatively short of land that could be developed in the Greater Adelaide area, particularly if we maintained the level of population growth we have in recent times. Clearly, we would place some real pressures on land which, in turn, could make housing unaffordable if we did not address the issue. The recommendation of the planning and development review was that we should move to a 25 year rolling land supply (to be reviewed every year), with 15 years of that zone ready. Under the current urban growth boundary, which came into effect in December 2007, there was probably barely 15 years' supply within that area, a significant proportion of which was not zone ready. The review has reported and the government has adopted its findings. We are now in the process of the 30 year review, and we discussed it at length earlier in question time today. The plan will be released for public consultation fairly soon, that is, within the next few months. Part of the process has included detailed discussions with local government, including the Barossa Council and others, about where Adelaide may grow into the 30 years. Those discussions subsumed the earlier response from the Barossa Council, which arose from the urban growth boundary report in December 2007. Members interjecting: The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: The government has been looking generally at areas where Adelaide might grow in the 30 year plan, and this broader plan has subsumed the specific issue of Concordia. We are looking at the whole of the Greater Adelaide area and where it might grow. I hope that the report will be released for discussion within the next few months and, as part of the process, the government has had very fruitful and productive discussions with local governments throughout the greater metropolitan area in relation to growth. As part of the process, I reiterate the point I made earlier: planning growth is not particularly easy, given our geography. It is not easy to choose land which has minimal environmental impact and minimal impact on good agricultural land and which provides the best use of existing infrastructure, adequately constrains urban sprawl and has water sensitive urban design—all the objectives we would like to achieve. To get all those things together is not an easy task, but those discussions have been proceeding. I know that, in relation to the Barossa area, discussions with that council and with Light Regional Council have been fruitful in relation to outlining the plan which, hopefully, will be released within the next few months.