30-YEAR PLAN FOR GREATER ADELAIDE

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:20): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Development and Planning a question.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD: Family First is greatly interested in the recent release of the 30-year plan for the development of Greater Adelaide, and we will be seeking further information on a number of things in the council in the coming sitting weeks. Today I ask the minister about the overview map accompanying the plan, which has dots travelling up the Adelaide to Crafers freeway marked 'potential mass transit'. There are also two other potential mass transit lines going west near Adelaide Airport, and on another map there is a line going to the eastern suburbs, as well. There are also some dots travelling from the city to Virginia, apparently through North Adelaide (as far as I can work out) and some connecting onto the end of the O-Bahn, with the Gawler rail line. Obviously, I realise that these are only listed as 'potential' mass transit lines, but I also see that they are marked as 'indicative'. Nevertheless, I am sure that they are not drawn on the map carelessly and that some plans must be afoot for development in those areas, along the lines as indicated on the map. My questions are:

1. What exactly are these dots on this map and do they indicate that, indeed, there will be a mass transit line up the Crafers freeway to Mount Barker; and would such a line use the old road past Eagle on the Hill?

2. What other insights can the minister give in respect of other indicated lines which I have mentioned; that is, the ones travelling west from the city and north of Virginia and, potentially, to the Barossa, as well?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:22): There is more detail on pages 80 and 81 of the plan for Greater Adelaide. There is a map, D5, 'Major transit corridors and high order transit-oriented developments'. Clearly, over the next four or five years of the budget, significant investment in public transport has already been announced. Over the life of the 30-year plan, clearly, there will need to be further investment. The 30-year plan has tried to envisage what spacial shape Adelaide might be in in the next 30 years, where the population might be and where the jobs might be, and therefore, as part of that 30-year plan, it has identified potential mass transits.

Obviously, these are indicative only. No studies have begun and, clearly, no funding provided, because we are talking about 30 years, and the budget has had a very heavy commitment out to about 2015, 2016—and even that information is indicated in a table somewhere within the plan. Clearly, those sites are potential transit corridors and, indeed, if Adelaide does grow in the way that the plan envisages over that 30-year period, they are areas where potential mass transit is likely to be provided.

In relation to Mount Barker, I indicated yesterday that the particular corridor follows the freeway. I indicated the other day that one of the potential growth areas could be Mount Barker and, as Mount Barker grows, you could set aside separate bus corridors along the existing freeway, for example, to provide a better delay-free transport. This really is for the future. The 30-year plan does not attempt to depict the exact shape of Adelaide over the next 30 years. Clearly, many of those things may happen. We know the plan that has guided Adelaide's shape since 1962 has turned out to be remarkably accurate in the way Adelaide has grown. The reason we need a new plan is not only that the 1962 plan has been outgrown but also that we need to shift the direction of Adelaide away from a car-dependent society to a less car-dependent society. That is why it is so important that we have this detailed plan to guide our future.

It is part of the 30-year plan that we would update it regularly (annually) so that the plan has flexibility, but those particular transit corridors have obviously been supplied in conjunction with the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure so they reflect its thinking for the future.

I think councils have also raised issues in relation to some of those potential corridors. If one looks at map D6 on page 83, one will see that it is a fairly logical extension of public transit to those areas where we expect most of the growth to be. It is not surprising that, if Mount Barker is to grow to a city the size of 20,000 to 25,000 people, it will need improved public transport.

Similarly, as Aldinga fills out within the existing boundary, even though we are not expanding the urban growth boundary in that area, there is the potential to extend the line from Seaford to Aldinga. The extension to Seaford is already being considered in the current budget. Similarly, regarding the expected expansion east of Gawler and to Roseworthy, there are already rail lines in those areas and that is why these areas were chosen as suitable corridors. However, clearly, the potential will arise over the next 30 years to expand public transport to service those new growing areas.

The other corridor—the line to Virginia—of course, has already been speculated about publicly in relation to a new freight corridor route. Rather than having freight trains going through Salisbury and then out to Virginia, it has already been widely publicised that the government was investigating possibly putting that freight corridor west of the existing Port Wakefield Road. Of course, that also provides the opportunity to serve new growth areas there.

The map on page 83 has some detail, but, apart from the government's existing transit budget which takes us up to 2015 and 2016, those indications are indicative only that, should Adelaide grow the way it is expected to in 30 years, they will be the corridors that are most likely to be planned. However, clearly, they are decisions that will ultimately be made by other governments over the next 30 years.