HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-04-30 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Parliamentary Committees

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE: PLAYFORD NORTH URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT

Ms CICCARELLO (Norwood) (11:02): I move:

That the 287th report of the committee, on Playford North Urban Renewal Project, be noted.

In March 2007, cabinet approved a proposal to provide 814 new or upgraded dwellings for public rental housing across the Peachey Belt and in the adjacent greenfields area. This involved a net expenditure of $50.1 million over 10 to 15 years. The proposal included the redevelopment or renovation of all Housing Trust housing within the project area, and the purchase of land and construction of 428 new dwellings for high-need customers within the greenfield areas.

The Land Management Corporation was nominated as project manager and lead land developer. This project will create 708 dwelling sites—605 for sale and 103 sites retained for building new high-need housing. After the development, there will be 386 Housing Trust owned dwellings within the Peachey Belt suburbs of Smithfield Plains and Davoren Park. The 428 high-need housing sites will be purchased from the Land Management Corporation by the South Australian Housing Trust at a cost of $28,943,878 together with the 103 dwellings within the Peachey Belt at a total estimated construction cost of $60,534,000.

The future construction phase of the project will generate revenue of $102,949,750 (including GST) and expend $149,028,636 (including GST). A further $4,080,000 has been expended in prior years, resulting in whole of construction costs of $153,108,636.

The project will include the relocation of 766 tenants, the demolition of 440 of the existing 1,049 South Australian Housing Trust owned dwellings and renovation of the balance of 609 dwellings. The Playford North project is closely aligned to key South Australian Strategic Plan targets, which aim to increase affordable housing in the community and halve the number of South Australians experiencing housing stress within 10 years.

Financial analysis shows a deficit of $46,078,886 (including GST) and $4,080,000 in expenditure used to purchase housing stock required within the project. A 6 per cent discount rate for these cash flows results in a net present value deficit of $39,355,081. This deficit does not include the value of the retained assets from 2006 to 2018 financial years, although 46 per cent of houses and allotments are being retained for high-need housing instead of being sold to the market. When these assets are taken into account, the net present value becomes a positive $86,833,200, indicating that the project is financially viable.

It is anticipated that the upgrading of existing dwellings and the re-subdivision of vacant land will commence on site in early 2008. The expected project duration is 10 years in the Peachey Belt and 15 years for full development of greenfield sites. This assumes an average rate of development of 60 to 80 lots per annum. Sales of dwellings and lots will commence in late 2008 with the construction of new public and private homes in early 2009. The first new residents will be accommodated in late 2009 or early 2010.

In addition to contributing to affordable and high-need housing, the project will provide an opportunity for urban and community renewal, integrated human services delivery, improved student retention rates and education outcomes and enhanced skill development and employment outcomes. Over the life of the project the community and the new residents will have access to improved housing, public transport, health and community facilities and new schools and enhanced employment and training opportunities.

Urban design guidelines will be prepared and applied to new development to encourage the creation of attractive high quality residential development. They will encourage excellence in urban development, energy efficiency and water conservation and will also protect the rights of individual residents with respect to adjacent development. Housing SA will administer these guidelines for all new housing on South Australian Housing Trust land within the Peachey Belt.

Based upon the evidence presented to it and pursuant to section 12C of the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991, the Public Works Committee recommends the proposed public work.

Mr PISONI (Unley) (11:07): This is an exciting project and I think it is important to note that there needs to be more of this type of work done, particularly in the northern suburbs. There was a very interesting story in the Sunday Mail on the weekend. Jimmy Barnes was a—

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

Mr PISONI: Yes, he did. As the member for Finniss said, he 'stuck it up the government' and pointed out that the northern suburbs really do need rejuvenation. They have lost the sense of community that they had when he grew up in the area. I too grew up in the northern suburbs, so I speak with some authority on this matter. It is good to see some money being spent there, but I think it is also important that we have these homes available for owner-occupiers. I think we all agree that one way to enhance a community is to have people making a commitment to that community by buying, living in and improving their own home.

I am a little disappointed that the LMC has a charter of maximising its profits and competing with the private sector. As someone who has come from the private sector, I am not sure that the government's role is to be actually maximising profits and competing with the private sector. If the private sector can do it, then the private sector should be left to do it, but in this instance where the government has an opportunity to increase home ownership among first-home owners, for example, it has the ability—because it owns this project and is running it—to tweak things, if you like, so that we can encourage more owner/occupiers to buy their own home, get off the rental roundabout and actually get in there and be part of the community for the longer term.

Of course, in this state we do have very high levels of stamp duty for first home owners in particular and although many of these homes would be described as affordable housing, there is still a substantial stamp duty penalty that these people have to pay. Consequently, we do have a situation where there is a 30-day period in which people who are looking for affordable housing are notified of the houses that are available. However, 30 days is not a long period in which to make a decision about the largest purchase in one's life, and that is probably something I would like to see reviewed to give those who are waiting to buy their own home an opportunity to buy it themselves. A period of 30 days is not long enough to organise yourself to do that. However, that is the way the government is operating, and we are told that the charter is to make money on these enterprises, so many of these homes are being sold to investors and will continue to be rental homes. That is disappointing, as I am a strong supporter of home ownership and I am disappointed that over the years it has become harder for our young people to get a start in the real estate market and establish their own home.

In the presentation we were told that the new development is to the west of the rail line. It is good to see that the rail line is a focal point. There is up to a 20-minute walk from some of the blocks to the rail line. It is important that we encourage people to use public transport, because anybody who drives on the roads will know there is a substantial increase in road use. Some could argue that the more people we can get on public transport, particularly from farther out, the better. If people who need to come into town or part-way into town can do so by travelling on the train, it is more efficient and much cheaper for them to do that than travelling in their own car.

It is important that we have developments on public transport corridors and trains are an efficient way to achieve that. We also need to ensure that there is a reliable bus service into shopping precincts, as well as making sure that the streetscape is dealt with. I understand that a deal has been done with the Playford council to provide a streetscape, but I would like to see a tree in front of everybody's house. Where I live in Hyde Park—

Mr Pengilly: No water to water them.

Mr PISONI: Watering is a difficult one, as the member for Finniss points out. However, trees need to be chosen appropriately, and I ask council to consider the way trees look as well as how suitable they are for the area, as it is important to have attractive street trees. There were some areas in Goodwood in my electorate where there was an experimental period in the 1970s, involving the planting of all sorts of native trees that were not suitable as street trees. Some of those trees are growing at almost 90 degrees to the footpath, which makes it very hard to get shade or park your car, and it detracts from the ambience of the area. However, good streetscaping and well-maintained footpaths will make this a very attractive place for residents to live.

I certainly support any improvements we can make in the northern suburbs for residents out there. I have an affection for the northern suburbs as that is where I grew up. Porter Street, behind Barnett Street where I grew up, forms the boundary of the Elizabeth and Salisbury councils. For the whole time I lived there the street was not bitumised because there was a dispute as to whose responsibility it was, and in the end Salisbury did its half and we had one lane that was bitumised and the other one that was dirt. It is just a memory I have.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

Mr PISONI: We had bitumen on ours—we were totally in Salisbury, but for a long time the people behind us had to put up with a partly bitumised and partly dirt road. That situation has now been rectified, and it is time local government bodies realise how important it is to work together for the greater good of the community.

I was disappointed that an opportunity to use a 4.5/three litre, as opposed to a six/three litre, toilet flush was not taken up by the Land Management Corporation in the specifications for this project. That is a constant pattern with projects that have been carried out by Housing SA. It seems to ignore the new technology, flushing away millions of litres of water every year in these new developments.

I will continue to raise this, and I know the member for Hammond will be pleased that I am raising it, because he is a very strong advocate for the preservation of water and fixing the River Murray and I congratulate him on that work. I support the project and I am very pleased to be involved in the process as a member of the Public Works Committee.

The Hon. P.L. WHITE (Taylor) (11:15): I rise briefly in support of this motion and this very worthy project. As a member representing the northern suburbs, I can attest to the need for this project. The renovation, restoration and redevelopment of more than 800 homes will make a huge difference to the area. I have watched the Land Management Corporation during some of its previous projects within my own electorate in the Salisbury North area and parts of Elizabeth and the work that has been done and seen the transformation and the real difference it has made to not only the way a suburb looks and feels but also how people interact within the suburb. I know that, through our deliberations on this project and the information that has been given to us through submissions to the Public Works Committee, a lot of those same factors are being taken into account with this project.

The member for Unley makes some criticism of the involvement of the Land Management Corporation in this endeavour, and I know that his is a view shared by a lot of developers around town and some members on the other side of this house, that is, that profits are there for the private sector and the government should not get involved in these sorts of projects. I disagree. While I have my own arguments at times with the LMC over individual issues, I note that its experience in these sorts of projects is enhancing each development, and a lot of very good outcomes are coming from that and a lot of good planning is being done as a result of its involvement. The relationship it has with councils and the state government is very important in achieving not only the economic outcomes that are desired but also the social outcomes for the local area. So I support the project and look forward to the time when we will see this redeveloped suburb emerge.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (11:18): What I have to say is very much in a similar vein to what other members have said. I have no problem whatsoever with supporting this project that has been brought before the Public Works Committee. I think it is an admirable project. Indeed, as mentioned by the member for Unley, I found the article on the weekend interesting, to say the least. I found the comments of Jimmy Barnes interesting. Clearly, he takes an interest, and always has, in the area where he was brought up, and he quite regularly trots out comments or visits that area, making observations on what has changed and what has not changed.

I find it interesting that people say that nothing is happening in the northern suburbs, given the amount of money that seems to be spent in that area, but in this particular case the 700 new dwelling sites I think will be most advantageous to the northern suburbs of Adelaide. Indeed, if we revisit how that area came to exist, you only have to go back to the good old Liberal government of Thomas Playford. He was the architect of the Housing Trust, and a lot of others things. They called him a benevolent dictator, and I think he did a wonderful job. The northern suburbs would not have been developed to the extent that they have been if Tom Playford did not do what he did so long ago. However, they have been allowed to deteriorate, and it is rather a sad exercise to drive around and see what has not happened in those areas. I think that this project will certainly add a bit of zest and interest and create a favourable impression once it is finished.

This is a large project and, along with the member for Unley, I am concerned about state government entities getting in there to make profits. I believe it is private business that should be making profits, not state government entities. The government of the day (currently the Rann government, but not for much longer, I hope) has to look at the employment prospects in the northern suburbs. The manufacturing base is slowly winding down. We have just seen the demise of Mitsubishi, and no-one in here wishes to see General Motors go the same way. Indeed, I hope that it is most successful and stays for a long time. However, I am deeply concerned.

On Monday afternoon I went to a well-known hardware chain with my wife. We had a wander around and looked at the enormous number of goods that were available to purchase. What I found absolutely stupefying was that everything is made in China, to the extent that small plastic bags of pebbles of different colours from China are available to be purchased. When we start importing rocks into Australia to sell to Australians, I reckon there is something seriously wrong somewhere. I found it totally ludicrous.

Jobs are the critical factor in making this project successful, and it is incumbent on the government to make sure that jobs are available so that family life can continue and that families have a successful future—and that Jimmy Barnes does not have to come back and pooh-pooh too often and express concerns. Things have changed a lot since Jimmy Barnes was young (and, indeed, me and a few others in this place): it is a different world.

What also concerns me is that, morning after morning on the news, one hears of a car chase or a break-in, or whatever, in the northern suburbs, and the fact that the police have caught up with people of Aboriginal descent. It really worries me that there seems to be this stigma about that kind of thing in that area. I would desperately like to see it change, and I hope that this project will assist in changing it. I know that there are many people with a lot of pride in the northern suburbs, particularly in the Salisbury and Elizabeth areas. I have spoken to people in local government and others who are involved in that area, and they say that they greatly enjoy living there. I hope that, when this project is finished and up and running, it will add to that community and that it will be a good place in which to live.

I wish to pick up once again on the member for Unley's comments about toilet flushing. It is a serious issue. We live in the driest state in the driest continent in the world, and we should not be wasting huge amounts of water by flushing it down the toilet. I believe that it would perfectly simple to fix that up. While the Premier runs around making all these wonderful announcements about everything we are doing regarding climate, and God knows what else, here we are with a government entity not insisting that we save water through a simple action like that.

We do not have any water, and we do not look like having any additional water for four or five years. We do not know when the drought will finish. However, the Land Management Corporation is not going to save water in the most simple possible way. I think it is totally ridiculous. Members opposite, who have the ear of the government and whose ministers supposedly are in charge of departments, should lay down the law and say, 'You will not do that; you will save water.' It is totally ridiculous.

If they lived in the bush, as some of us do, they would regard water as an absolute basic staple of life. Until the dual-flush toilets were introduced, we had been putting bricks and rocks in toilet cisterns to save water. It is a simple thing to do. It is errant nonsense and stupidity that they are not being required to do that. I support the member for Unley in relation to that. Likewise, with the landscaping. It can be made a most attractive area if the right trees are planted and established, and we use stormwater run-off, aquifers and things such as that to water them, similar to the wonderful way the Salisbury council has invested in water technology and land care.

We should be looking closely at that for this new urban project so that, when it is up and running, it can be a showpiece for the north and, indeed, a showpiece for South Australia. I have great pleasure in supporting the project. I look forward to seeing the updates and I also look forward to its completion. I rest my case.

The Hon. L. STEVENS (Little Para) (11:26): I make my contribution this morning as a citizen of the northern suburbs, the City of Playford, for the past 30 years. I have lived and worked there, and I have brought up my kids and now my grandchildren in that area. I listened with interest to some of the comments that have been made and some of the expressions used by both my colleagues opposite. I want to take issue with some of them. The member for Finniss, I think, used the term that it was a 'sad exercise' when you looked at what has not happened in the northern suburbs of Adelaide. It is really important that I mention some of the things that have happened in the northern suburbs of Adelaide.

We have the Golden Grove development. At one stage, I think Golden Grove was cited as the best address in the world. We have the Mawson Lakes development, again another Delfin development, but using the most up-to-date technology in terms of water retention, electronic broadbanding and computer access. The University of South Australia is in that area. We have an innovation science park attracting high-tech businesses. We have the Holden plant, which has been there a long while and which is probably one of Holden's best plants in the world. I was speaking with them over the weekend. They are almost at the point of exporting more than what they are making for the domestic market, so successful is that plant.

We also know that the stormwater work undertaken by Playford, Salisbury and Tea Tree Gully councils leads the world in terms of developing this new technology and harvesting water from stormwater, pumping it back into the aquifer and then reusing it in terms of being able to water the trees—and that will happen in the Playford North redevelopment—and providing water in a whole lot of areas. I know that Salisbury council is selling back water that it is reharvesting to businesses in the area. They are right out in front in terms of those things. The government has put multimillions of dollars into health, for instance, the Lyell McEwin Health Service—it would be up to $130 or $140 million over the past year, and another 200 or so to come—and our education sector, with the new schools and, of course, the Playford North redevelopment will benefit from some of those.

The Hon. P.L. White interjecting:

The Hon. L. STEVENS: Of course, the member for Playford reminds me of the new battalion which will be moving into the area, bringing another 5,000 people into the area—more housing, jobs, industry, all linked together.

The Northern Expressway is a major transport corridor, and we know that development follows transport corridors (including rail) and very big freeway-type arrangements, such as the Northern Expressway. I saw the comment made by Jimmy Barnes, and I thought it was a bit of a yawn. Jimmy has said these things before. Jimmy comes back and says these things about his past. Fair enough, that was 40 years ago, but then he whizzes off again. It would be really good if Jimmy Barnes put his money where his mouth is, and if he really thinks these things he should get involved. I noticed that His Excellency the Governor made the same comment. If Jimmy Barnes really thinks this and really wants to do something, then rather than coming here and writing open letters to the media and then disappearing, he might say, 'Right, I'll put some money in. I'll form a foundation,' otherwise I think he should put up or shut up. That is how I feel about Jimmy Barnes.

A meeting was held in the area on Monday night and many people felt exactly the same—people who knew Jimmy Barnes in earlier days. A few eyebrows were raised about a certain amount of hypocrisy in those comments. However, that is enough about Jimmy Barnes. I am sure that he will blow in and say the same things again, and it is a bit of a pity that he does not do something about it. In terms of the specific development, obviously, I support it greatly. I have mentioned the two Delfin developments, and the member for Taylor mentioned the development in Salisbury North. Again, this is another project developing from a greenfield site. We have a joined-up approach between the LMC, the Department for Families and Communities and the Playford council, understanding that we are developing a place for people to live, work and play.

I do not mean to pinch Delfin's motto but, essentially, that is what the development is looking at doing. It will cover the whole of people's lives—their houses, their learning, living and working in a coordinated way in a community. It is obviously the way we need to go in the future to attract people to come to a community, particularly communities that are on the outskirts of cities. They need transport corridors but they need access to all the services. I am pleased that this has happened. I am aware of consultations that are occurring between different service sectors about how all these things will be put together.

Just last week I had the opportunity to visit a new urban development in Victoria, Caroline Springs, which is a new community about 40 kilometres out of Melbourne on the Western Highway to Ballarat where there is enormous growth. This is another Delfin development but, again, it was good to see a joined-up approach, very much like our Mawson Lakes development and the Varsity Lakes development on the Gold Coast. Caroline Springs has an emphasis on understanding all the needs of the people in a community and working in a coordinated, joined-up way to get the best bang for the buck and the best outcome in terms of the provision of services and lifestyle for the residents of the future.

I would like to mention affordable housing, which is a very big issue everywhere and becoming more so right across the country. My officers reported to me that yesterday they attended a briefing by Housing SA in Elizabeth for people and services in the northern suburbs in relation to affordable housing. They told me some of the statistics and information that was given to them in terms of people in need—people who are homeless, people who are living in cars and not able to afford the private rents. They are the things we have always heard but there is just more of it. I note that we will have more than 800 homes in this new area, but it is an issue on which we will have to focus very seriously in the coming year.

It is pleasing that the Rudd government has shown by its early actions that it is a priority, because we will find a significant underclass of people right across our country unless we do something about providing affordable housing.

Ms BREUER (Giles) (11:36): I will speak only briefly, but I want to say that I am very pleased about this development. Certainly, the community out there will benefit greatly, as we did in Whyalla when Housing SA developed an area called Myall Park. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Housing SA, particularly the manager in our area, Irene Adair, on the foresight and work that went into that area.

It was a much degraded area; a typical old Housing Trust area in Whyalla. At the time, we had something like 400 empty Housing Trust homes in Whyalla, and Irene and I got together and formed a committee to look at these issues. We were able to persuade the then Housing Trust board to invest some money into the area, and the change has been magnificent.

There have been quite a number of demolitions and new housing built in those areas. The houses that were there have been upgraded and parks have been incorporated into the area. This has transformed the area magnificently, and we are very, very proud of it. I drove through there the other day and building is still going on. The area looks completely different from how it looked four or five years ago. So, my congratulations to Housing SA, and I hope something similar happens in this particular area.

The development at Myall Park in Whyalla actually preceded the housing boom we are all hearing about in Whyalla. I am not sure whether the housing boom is related to the Myall Park development; I think it is more related to the prospect of the expansion of the mining industry. I am certainly not complaining about the housing boom in Whyalla—it is incredible how many houses are being built—however, I do have some concerns about the developments that are going on.

I hope this development will be sustainable and that it will be required. One of the things that particularly bothers me about it is that country areas seem to be moving towards the smaller blocks you see in the Adelaide area. Traditionally, in country areas we like a backyard the size of half a football oval, and we become very nervous when it is any smaller than that. In these new developments, not just in Whyalla but in other areas as well, the blocks are very much smaller.

I know there is a move to try to increase housing density, certainly in metropolitan Adelaide, where it is probably required, but I do not think we need to be so concerned about it in country areas. What does concern me is that we have these very small blocks, with houses being built very, very close together with no backyards and no front yards, in most cases.

I wonder where the children play. I do not think there has been forethought, particularly in country areas, put into the issue of open space areas where children can play. While it is great for children to be able to go to open space areas, certainly when my children were small, I felt much more secure about them playing in the backyard than in an open space area where I would be required to sit and watch them—and I have the dents on the fences and the garage, where they played cricket or whatever else children play at that age, to prove it. The lifestyle I have, along with most everyone else, does not allow time for sitting around watching my children all day, every day.

So, I do have concerns about this development that is going on and the size of the blocks, etc. Individual councils seem to be allowing this to happen. In the Whyalla area, where there has been a huge expansion in housing, houses are selling at the moment, but I do have concerns about who are buying the houses. I really have a fear that a lot of these houses are being sold to outside developers.

I hope that Whyalla continues to goes ahead. We are certainly looking much more prosperous than we did four or five years ago, and we are very happy about that situation. We do expect our community to go ahead, but I am concerned that, with the number of houses being built, in another four or five years I might have to form another housing committee or forum with Irene Adair to look at all the vacant private real estate housing in Whyalla, because already there are 'for sale' signs going up everywhere.

People are upgrading, but the problem is that, in doing so, they are buying houses on the provision that they sell their own—and they are not able to do so. I do not know whether this is happening in some of the other areas. I am sure that it is not happening in the Copper Triangle area; I am sure they are selling but, certainly, it is happening in my area. The same sort of thing could happen in Port Augusta. I do have concerns about those. I am not sure how much forethought or planning is going into this. I hope that councils are taking these issues into account.

This very concentrated development on very small blocks has nothing to do with concentrating urban areas: I think it has more to do with maxim profits that developers can make. I know of one block of land where there was a double unit Housing Trust home a few years ago. It burnt down, so it was demolished, and there are now five houses on that one block. To me, that is just incredible.

I do not know what safeguards have been introduced. I have concerns where, often, developers promise environmentally friendly housing, maximum environmental standards, etc., and then, often, this does not happen. I do not know what sort of follow-up councils do and what safeguards there to ensure that developers keep their promises.

Another thing that really upsets me at the moment is the building of these kit form Lego shopping centres that seem to be going up everywhere. You get four big concrete walls that go up, and it turns into a shopping centre. They are the most ugly and unattractive things that you have ever seen. Nobody seems to want windows any more. I know that, okay, we will save on power bills if we do not have windows and let in the sun, but whatever we save on that we make up for in providing electric light.

They are just so unattractive, and how they continue to get approval over and over again I do not know. They are usually stuck in the middle of a bitumen car park. You might see a tree if you are lucky—and, often, they are very scrawny looking trees. Perhaps that is native to my area, because we do not get much rain. That does concern me. Someone please design an attractive shopping centre and attractive shops somewhere. I know that there is a now push to build these shops one or two storeys higher, but I do not think that you will be able to do that with your Lego kit. That also concerns me.

An honourable member interjecting:

Ms BREUER: I have just been asked if this is my grumpy day. Perhaps it is. I am letting off steam this morning, but these issues do concern me. I think I had better sit down before I get too angry. I support the motion. I am very pleased that it came up and that I had the opportunity to let off steam.

Ms CICCARELLO (Norwood) (11:42): I thank honourable members for their contribution. This project certainly shows the commitment that the state government has for the development of the northern suburbs. As we have heard from the members on this side of the house, who represent the northern suburbs—the member for Little Para and the member for Taylor, and, indeed, yourself, Mr Speaker—we can be proud of the government expenditure that has gone forth into the northern suburbs to improve economic development and quality of life for people in the area, and to give particularly young people as many opportunities as possible. I commend the report.

Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT