HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2025-04-03 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

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

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 2 April 2025.)

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (12:00): I rise today to express my support for the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Environment and Food Production Areas) Amendment Bill. This bill represents a much needed step forward in tackling South Australia's housing challenges while maintaining a balanced approach that respects our environment, our communities and our agricultural sector.

As South Australians, we take pride in our state's liveability. We value the quality of life that comes with well-planned, well-serviced communities, access to green spaces and the ability to live, work and raise families in areas that meet our needs. However, as our population grows and more older people are staying in their homes for longer and families are living across multiple households, the demand for housing continues to increase. If we are to maintain this standard of living while accommodating new residents, we must be proactive in planning for our future.

For too long the focus has been on urban infill as a primary means of meeting housing demand. While infill does have a role to play, it is not a silver bullet. We have seen firsthand the negative consequences of over relying on this strategy, particularly in suburban areas such as Sturt, Oaklands Park and Dover Gardens. We need a new approach, one that ensures we build homes in a way that enhances rather than degrades our communities. This is exactly what this amendment bill seeks to achieve.

The idea behind urban infill is straightforward. Rather than expanding housing developments into new areas, we increase housing density within existing suburbs. This means replacing single family homes with townhouses and apartment complexes, subdividing larger properties and allowing for multistorey developments in previously low-density areas. In theory, this approach makes efficient use of existing infrastructure and reduces urban sprawl. However, in practice, the rapid increase in urban infill has created serious challenges, particularly in suburbs that were never designed to accommodate such density.

Within the City of Marion we can see clear examples of these challenges. Once known for its balance between residential living, green spaces and accessibility, it is now facing significant pressure from increasing housing density. Traffic congestion has worsened as more cars compete for limited road space, particularly in areas where roads were never built to handle such a high volume of vehicles. Parking has become a nightmare for residents, with many streets now lined with cars from households that suddenly have three or four dwellings on a block that once contained just one.

Community members have voiced concerns about the loss of local character. Neighbourhoods that once had tree-lined streets and open yards are now filled with tightly packed developments, reducing green space and increasing the urban heat island effect. This is particularly concerning given South Australia's hot summers, where greenery plays a vital role in keeping our suburbs liveable. The Greening Marion initiative highlights the importance of maintaining tree cover and green areas for environmental and community wellbeing, yet with increased urban infill, which they have allowed, these spaces are disappearing at an alarming rate.

Additionally, the increased need for housing puts a strain on our infrastructure. Waste management, stormwater drainage and community facilities all experience added pressure and many other areas across metropolitan Adelaide are facing similar challenges. The reality is that urban infill, when pushed too far, can create more problems than it solves. It can degrade quality of life, erode community character and place unsustainable pressure on existing and ageing infrastructure.

This is why the Malinauskas government's amendment bill is so critical. Rather than continuing to force high-density housing into areas that are already struggling, this bill allows for a more balanced approach. It recognises that urban infill alone is not enough and that South Australia must expand housing into new well-planned areas to meet demand. By designating specific areas for new housing development, we ensure that growth occurs in a way that is properly planned and supported by infrastructure. Roads, public transport, schools and healthcare facilities can be built alongside new housing developments rather than being retrofitted into areas already under strain.

This approach allows us to maintain the character of existing suburbs while ensuring those moving into new developments have access to the services they need. Furthermore, expanding housing into new areas allows us to incorporate sustainability from the outset. Rather than squeezing high-density developments into existing suburbs with limited green space, we can design new communities with parks, tree-lined streets and environmentally friendly infrastructure.

Sustainable building practices, water sensitive urban design and renewable energy initiatives can be integrated into these new developments, helping South Australia to meet its climate goals while providing high-quality housing. Economic benefits also flow from this approach. The construction of new housing developments creates jobs across multiple sectors, from construction and infrastructure to retail and local services. A well-planned expansion of housing supports economic growth while ensuring affordability by increasing housing supply in a way that is sustainable over the long term.

One of the concerns raised about expanding housing into new areas is the potential impact on agricultural land. South Australians are rightly proud of our state's agricultural industry and we must ensure that food production remains a priority. However, it is important to separate perception from reality. This amendment bill makes careful adjustments to the environment and food protection areas to unlock land for housing, but it does so in a highly measured way. The changes proposed will affect less than 1 per cent of the Greater Adelaide region's agricultural land.

This means that we can provide the housing South Australians need without significantly compromising food production. Moreover, not all land within the environment and food production areas is actively used for food production. Some areas are underutilised or better suited for development due to their proximity to existing infrastructure and services. By making these targeted changes, we can strike a balance, ensuring that our most fertile and productive agricultural land remains protected while allowing for housing growth where it makes sense.

In conclusion, the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Environment and Food Production Areas) Amendment Bill is a sensible, forward-thinking solution to South Australia's housing challenges. It acknowledges the limitations of urban infill and the growing pressures on existing suburbs, while providing a practical alternative that ensures housing growth is managed responsibly.

This bill is not about reckless expansion; it is about smart planning, and it is about ensuring that new housing developments are properly serviced with infrastructure, that community character is preserved, and that sustainability remains at the heart of our decision-making. By supporting this bill, we are making a choice about the kind of future we want for South Australia, a future where housing is affordable and accessible, a future where growth is planned and sustainable, a future where our communities can continue to thrive. I commend the bill to the house.

Ms O'HANLON (Dunstan) (12:08): South Australians need choice. They need freedom if they are to tackle this state's, this country's, indeed, the developed world's housing supply shortage and we need more housing. If we are to return to young South Australians the ability to be able to believe in the right of home ownership, the quintessentially Australian deal that if you work hard at school, then technical college or university, and then work in your chosen profession or industry, and put something away each week, that homeownership is something you have a right to believe in, then we need more housing.

If we are to be honest and say that the bank of mum and dad is actually un-Australian—we are not Great Britain; Australia is not supposed to have a class system—our ethos is egalitarianism. So the bank of mum and dad, as the party of those opposite believe in, runs contrary to the Australian ethos. The only way we will return a half reasonable chance of young Australians being able to aspire to home ownership is to build more homes. If we do not do this, then we are failing our young people.

But more housing will not happen by accident; it will not happen without a plan. It needs to be planned for, and that is what the Malinauskas Labor government has done—the hard work, the policy development, required to return that right to the young people of this state. The Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Environment and Food Production Areas) Amendment Bill 2025 exemplifies just that. It is a significant piece of legislation aimed at keeping South Australia's planning system responsive as we manage population growth and housing demand.

A key initiative of the government's Housing Roadmap and the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan (GARP) is ensuring a sufficient supply of service land to meet both current and future housing needs. The GARP has identified land needed for long-term growth and, given there are limited options, much of it falls within the current environment and food production areas. Based on these investigations, approximately 61,000 new homes will be built on land currently designated as EFPA.

When the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 was first introduced, government policy prioritised urban consolidation, targeting 85 per cent of all growth through infill development. However, that approach is inconsistent with current policy, which identifies both infill and greenfield development as necessary to meet housing demand. Why? Again, because we listened. I have done a lot of doorknocking in my electorate. I have spoken to thousands of people and what they told me time and time again—and you can have this for free, save using your FOIs to discover what the issues are—is that they were sick of seeing one property replaced by four or even six townhouses.

They were sick of the pressure that put on street parking. They were fed up with trades, contractors, babysitters, family and friends not being able to park nearby. Of course, that impact is even worse on elderly people—people who have lived in their home for years in perfectly liveable suburbs and then suddenly in recent years an explosion of urban infill means they are literally hemmed in by cars. Some streets have become impassable. I passed that on. I had meetings. I had a meeting about it with Minister Champion as far back as April 2022 and the minister listened and the Malinauskas government listened. They listened to the concerns of my community and responded.

One response was the increase in garage sizes, a measure specifically called for by many people I spoke to. People told me time and again that garages were too small for modern cars, and probably not just modern cars, to be honest. I do not think you would have been able to get out of a Holden Kingswood in many modern garages. The new garage sizes mean you will be able to open your car door in the garage, meaning fewer people will need to park on the street. This represents major policy, policy that is thoughtful and responsive to the needs of our population now and into the future. If you remember, Labor went to the 2022 election as the only party with a plan for the future.

There were people who voted Labor for the first time who told me they were doing so because Peter Malinauskas had a vision for the next 30 years for this state. That is exactly what this bill is part of: that vision. But the truth is, if you do not support a freeing up of that imposition to build 85 per cent of all new housing within our existing residential area, then you just are not listening. The EFPA provisions, which were designed to enforce urban consolidation, now need to be adjusted to reflect the reality of South Australia's housing needs.

To address this, the government has introduced this bill to amend the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016, ensuring EFPA boundaries align with the GARP's long-term growth areas. This bill will establish a revised GRO plan, outline new EFPA boundaries, ensure any land removed from the EFPA is protected from premature fragmentation through the limited land division overlay and remove the outdated urban consolidation test that has restricted boundary amendments. It also guarantees that future variations align with the GARP's 30-year land supply framework, and strengthens requirements for considering population growth in planning decisions.

Extensive assessments, as part of the GARP process, have guided these changes, taking into account agricultural land quality, environmental sensitivity, cultural heritage significance and proximity to existing services and infrastructure. The reality is that even with these revisions key agricultural lands surrounding Greater Adelaide will remain protected, with less than 1 per cent of key agricultural land affected.

The EFPA, along with the Hills Face Zone and Character Preservation Districts, will continue to serve as a strong urban growth boundary, balancing housing development with agricultural preservation. Importantly, while this bill amends EFPA boundary criteria it does not change the process for making amendments. The Planning Commission will still review the EFPA every five years, considering housing and employment growth, protection of rural and environmental lands, and consistency with the GARP. Findings will continue to be tabled in parliament, allowing both houses to pass a motion of disallowance if necessary.

This bill is a critical first step towards ensuring South Australia's growth is well planned and our communities remain liveable and well serviced. Without these changes, our ability to meet housing demand would be severely constrained, limiting opportunities for sustainable development. At the same time, the Malinauskas Labor government is committed to protecting our built heritage and character areas.

I want to say that I sincerely appreciate the genuine consultation that Minister Champion has engaged in with me. We have spoken many times about the importance of protecting our state's heritage. Well before 2022, he listened to me as I explained to him in detail the concerns of my community, concerns I knew because I have lived in my community for over 12 years and I have been talking with and listening to people in my community since well before I made the decision to run for parliament.

Minister Champion knows that heritage protection is a particular passion of mine and something I am determined to pursue as a representative now of my wonderful electorate of Dunstan. Minister Champion has listened to the voices of my community. He has taken notice of our passion for protecting our state's built heritage. Indeed, since the 2022 election the Premier, the Deputy Premier and Minister Champion have made it a priority to strengthen the state's planning rules to provide greater protection to historic buildings and character areas.

Unlike under the Marshall Liberal government, the door has now been opened to enable councils to elevate character areas to historic areas, ensuring stronger demolition controls and better preservation of South Australia's unique streetscapes. This government, through the department, is providing councils with guidance and support needed for this to happen, including detailed requirements for heritage surveys and procedural steps for updating character and historic area statements. By refining these statements, councils can ensure that new developments complement the distinct character of historic neighbourhoods, another very important change many in my community asked for.

Stronger demolition controls have also been introduced, requiring that any demolition in character and historic areas can only occur once the replacement building has been approved. Again, this was called for by my community and is important in preventing inappropriate gaps in established streetscapes and ensuring that new developments contribute positively to the area's character.

Additionally, the government is strengthening protections for South Australia's state heritage-listed places by increasing penalties under the Heritage Places Act 1993. Maximum fines for demolition through neglect have been doubled, with individuals facing penalties of up to $500,000 and body corporates up to $1 million, a proper protective measure. Additional enforcement measures, such as repair notices and restoration orders, will further deter neglect of heritage-listed properties.

I want to recognise Mayor Robert Bria, with whom I have a great working relationship and who I know is also passionate about protecting our local character and heritage, and the City of Norwood Payneham & St Peters, who are embracing their role in protecting our local heritage and who have been proactive in implementing these reforms, initiating a code amendment to identify additional representative buildings and extend the historic area overlay to increase protections. This is part of a broader effort to enhance heritage protections in our shared area.

Recognising the importance of these local initiatives, the state government is supporting councils like Norwood Payneham & St Peters by providing matched funding grants of up to $75,000 to assist with code amendments that strengthen heritage protections. Beyond housing and heritage, the government is investing heavily in infrastructure to support growing communities. SA Water has committed $1.5 billion between 2024 and 2028 to unlock new growth areas within Adelaide, and key transport corridors are being safeguarded to ensure long term connectivity. Additionally, the Northern Adelaide Parklands project will provide nearly 1,000 hectares of green space, enhancing biodiversity and creating new recreational opportunities.

This bill is part of a broader, coordinated effort to prepare South Australia for the future. By ensuring our planning system is responsive, our housing supply is sustainable, our heritage is preserved, and our infrastructure is strategically developed, we are protecting what makes our communities unique while ensuring they remain vibrant and liveable for generations to come. I commend this bill to the house.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (12:20): I rise to speak on this bill, but before I get to the actual crux of the bill itself I would just like to provide some context because, like most things we do in this place, things have meaning when you can provide some context—so it is really important to provide context. This bill, the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Environment and Food Protection Areas) Amendment Bill 2025, is before us in the context of two other major policy announcements by the government.

The first was the announcement—last year, I think—of the Housing Roadmap, which did two things. First, it outlined where we are as a state in terms of making sure we had enough housing to meet demand and, secondly, it clearly identified that we do not have enough supply and that work needs to be done on how we can provide land, enable land to be supplied for housing, as well as a whole range of issues. In other words, that we have a workforce to provide that housing and we have the legislative framework that supports houses being built. So there were a lot of changes to the regulations to enable proposals to be approved or assessed more quickly.

That is where the broader context of this bill comes in because this bill, in part, gives effect to that road map, if you like. That road map was a commitment by this government to ensure that, within a reasonable amount of time, we would enable people who want to buy a house or live in a house—or any other accommodation—in South Australia to do so. Part of that road map identified the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan, an extensive plan covering the whole of the broader Adelaide metropolitan area, including parts of Light and also the adjoining electorate of Frome, where I am duty member. The comments I make today are in the context of both Light, where I am the member, as well as some of the issues that have been raised with me in my capacity as the Labor duty member for Frome.

It is important to understand, once we brought those two important policy announcements, what this is trying to do. That is not to say that there have not been issues raised by the community, so the first thing I want to talk about is what the community reaction has been to the GARP, because the GARP is the foundational document for this bill, the response to the bill, and also the road map itself. I will do that first as the member for Light, and then I will go on to some issues that are a little bit different in terms of being the duty member for Frome.

As the member for Light I have been having a whole range of community meetings with residents over a number of years regarding the development of the town of Gawler, but also our contribution to delivering land for housing. Given its location next to major public transport routes like the train line, and next to services and transport corridors, etc., that southern part of Gawler is well placed to enable that area to be developed. It is well placed in terms of people's day-to-day needs but also in ultimately delivering the infrastructure to people who live in that community.

We had a community meeting just last weekend, and the Hon. Nick Champion MP, the minister, came along. We probably had over 130 people come along to this meeting in what is essentially the rural parts of the Gawler council area. People's reaction to the GARP was generally positive. Obviously, they wanted more details, they were interested in timing issues, etc., but people understood the rationale behind it. They also understood the need to make sure that we not only make land available but support it with infrastructure and that we support the full functioning of communities.

Sadly, there have been a number of examples throughout this state over the years where we literally just plonked down houses with no infrastructure in terms of public transport or transport, and no infrastructure in terms of schools or other services. That has created problems for us from a policy point of view. What this GARP does is it provides an important framework to make sure that the infrastructure is delivered on time.

The adoption of the GARP sends a message to all the government agencies that this is where we plan to provide opportunities for people to build a home, to build businesses, to build schools, etc. Now all the agencies need to start planning ahead to make sure that, when the people arrive, the services are there to deliver to them, but some of the services have to be delivered before people arrive. For example, water and sewerage have to be there to enable these developments to happen.

We have seen where there has not been a plan. We did not have a plan to meet our housing crisis before this government came in. We did not have a plan, so what did we have? We have developments now that have come to a standstill because the infrastructure is not there in time. That is the major difference. Both the plan itself—the GARP, which is the road map—and the bill indicate very clearly the direction the government wants to take. It provides an important indicator, for people who want to invest in housing, where they should be investing. The government and the private sector can then come along and provide the infrastructure that is required, and that is a really important point.

We have had a number of examples: Mount Barker is one and, in my own community, Gawler East is another example. They are not good examples of doing planning right. This is a much more comprehensive, thoughtful and thought out process. One of the good things about this plan is it enables us to open up new land to provide housing. As the member for Dunstan quite clearly indicated—and this is true in my own area in the southern parts of my existing electorate—people are over gutter-to-gutter housing and narrow streets where streets literally become car parks. People want a better environment. People are tired of the cutting of the quarter-acre block into four or five, etc.

This ad hoc development, while it was well intentioned in what it was trying to achieve, has created a number of problems. Partly, it has created these situations where some communities are not as ideal as they should be because they do not have the infrastructure. Secondly, particularly in what they call the infill areas, the existing infrastructure was not enough, like with stormwater. Those areas were not engineered for stormwater for that many houses and people. They have a lack of sporting facilities, recreational facilities and a whole range of other services.

While I understand the concerns and criticisms of this mentioned by others, this is what we as a government need to balance up. We need to balance up creating liveable communities against what we have to forgo to do that, and I will touch upon those in a moment.

In the southern part of my electorate people have welcomed this, because it provides more land and also land choices and housing choices. I am a firm believer that all communities need a whole range of housing choices for the whole range of different people with different backgrounds and experiences who live in those communities. Balanced communities are thriving communities.

This proposal before us today shifts the boundary of where you can do residential development. In part of my electorate it shifts that from the Gawler River northwards to past Roseworthy. For some residents and some businesses, this creates new opportunities. There is an area around Buchfelde, Gawler River, Ward Belt and Gawler Belt where people welcome this.

There are opportunities for people through this process to develop land for a whole range of different purposes, not just residential purposes but a whole range of other purposes. They welcome that. That will hopefully then bring some infrastructure like some sealed roads and a whole range of other infrastructure to those communities. So these people are now exploring the opportunities this change will offer them.

As the duty member for Frome, the issues raised there are a little bit different. It would be fair to say that perhaps both the GARP and this bill have not been as well received among all people. Probably the key group of people who do not like the idea are people in the farming community. They have a number of concerns. Firstly, from their point of view there is the alienation of farming land. They see that as reducing our capacity to produce important food and to maintain our, if you like, food sovereignty in this country.

That is a legitimate concern to raise. It would be foolish not to think about that. In alienating farming land we have to make sure we have explored, firstly, all the other opportunities and, secondly, that there will be a net gain—in other words, that we have considered the cost of alienating the farmland and that there will be a net gain to the rest of the community and how we are then going to achieve the same sort of productive capacity.

As a quick aside, I should mention that even though we are alienating some farmland here, which from one point of view is not desirable, what is important to add is that South Australian farmers—and I do say South Australian farmers—are probably the most productive and efficient farmers in this country. When it comes to farming, we are one of the most efficient and productive countries in the world.

We just do it better than other people. Even in times of drought, such as at the moment—and this is why people raise concerns about alienating primary production land—we are still producing an output, when 20 years ago there would have been nothing. We have the most efficient, productive farmers in this country. Our dryland farming techniques are the best in the world. Our farmers plan ahead. That is not to say they do not deserve support; they certainly deserve some support and assistance, and the government has indicated it will provide that, but we have some of the best farming practices in the world, and we should be proud of that.

For some of those people who live in the metropolitan regions and in, perhaps, certain suburbs who look down on farmers and say, 'They are not good at managing land,' etc., I can tell you they are. If they were not, they would not be producing more output for the same piece of land, etc. They do look after their land, they are very careful with their practices, they are improving every day. I think we need to understand that people produce food not only to supply our country but also to supply the world, and we do it really well here. Certainly, the farmers I have spoken to and seen do really understand the importance of good farming practices to protect the environment because an unproductive environment means they cannot farm, whether it is cropping or raising livestock.

Land can be alienated for a whole range of reasons. Sometimes land is alienated in country areas to expand townships and that, done properly, I think is important because some townships need a critical mass of population to support a thriving small town. There are quite a few towns throughout the Frome region and further north where they are struggling a bit because of population decline. I think it is important that we do provide opportunities for those townships to have that sort of population to create the demand so you at least have minimum services in those communities, which service not only those townships but also the surrounding areas.

I think one thing which is perhaps not best understood but is really important is the interdependence between towns and the rural communities around them. Quite rightly we focus a lot of attention on supporting our farmers and primary producers, but we also need to support those small towns because when things get tough, like they are at the moment, the townships suffer as well. Not only do the small businesses suffer because the farmers have less to spend, etc., but also the sporting groups—the footy clubs, netball clubs, all those sporting groups. The money is not flowing; the money is not there to sponsor and support the groups. For example, the local show societies, which are a really important part of our regional communities, do not have the funds to do that either.

The towns need to expand, but they also need the infrastructure, with water being one of them. Managing wastewater is important, and that is why our road map not only addresses the metro area but also our country townships, working out how we can actually provide infrastructure. It is no accident that it took this government to announce an investment of $1.5 billion to make sure that the infrastructure of water and wastewater is spread to these areas to make sure that we can meet increasing housing demand. It is also important that we have water in these areas to enable economic activity. Without water or wastewater management, there are no opportunities to actually have economic activity, and they are important in country towns as well.

We also often alienate land in country areas to enable farming-related industries to be set up, and that is really important to provide jobs locally. As farms become bigger and much more efficient, the machinery gets bigger and the technology increases, the actual amount of labour required per unit reduces. Therefore, we can have a really successful farming community but fewer jobs, and so we need to create other opportunities for jobs in those rural communities to make sure that we actually have stable communities.

The other one, which is an example of achieving a balance between alienating farmland and doing good for another purpose, would be wind farms. I am a supporter of renewable energy. I think it is the way to go. I think that we owe it to our next generations, and hopefully my grandkids will benefit one day—when my kids get around to giving me some grandkids. We will leave this world a better place for our grandkids than when we entered it. That is our obligation as people. To do that, we need to actually improve our environment. Renewable energy is part of that; however, it is like all things, there has to be a net benefit for the community.

I would just like to share a concern some residents in Frome have about a proposed wind farm, the Twin Creek Wind Farm proposal, which actually runs across three councils: Goyder, Light and Barossa. The wind farm there is of such a magnitude that they are concerned about the impact it will have on the community and the environment. This project is located between Kapunda, Eudunda and Truro. It spans three council regions and proposes to have 42 wind turbines, a battery storage facility and associated infrastructure. These wind turbines I think are about 220 metres tall, so anything you see in the City of Adelaide is dwarfed by the size of this wind farm.

While renewable energy is critical for our future, it is essential to ensure that these projects strike a balance between progress, community needs and environmental responsibility. Many locals have raised concerns about the project's environmental impact, such as potential effects on endangered species as well as visual and noise implications for residents. Again, one of the things we need to do is to consider what impact this could have on tourism in the region. We need to make sure that we balance those environmental things with economic and also community needs.

A local advocate, Mary Morris, has been a passionate community advocate for this community, and I would like to thank her for her tireless efforts in organising community forums to make sure people understand what these wind farms seek to do, and also to be aware of the concerns. I have encouraged residents in the area to use the existing processes to make sure their concerns are addressed.

These are just examples of making sure we achieve a balanced outcome. What this bill seeks to do, what the GARP seeks to do and what the Housing Roadmap seeks to do is to achieve a balance.

Ms HOOD (Adelaide) (12:40): I, too, rise in support of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Environmental and Food Production Areas) Amendment Bill 2025. I truly believe that this bill is central to the future success of our state. South Australia, like the rest of the country, is experiencing a housing crisis. But this is not a crisis without solutions. Our government is actively and decisively ensuring that South Australians can access secure, affordable housing now and into the future.

We must get the balance right: we need to make sure, as our state grows, that we plan well, invest in the right infrastructure, protect what makes our communities great and build a future that works for everyone. This is not just about building houses, it is about creating communities. It is about ensuring that our children can afford to buy a home, that workers can live near where they work, and that families can access schools, hospitals, transport and green space.

South Australia is growing. People are choosing to live here, and rightfully so. Since the 2022 state election, almost 12,500 more businesses have started operating in SA and 73,000 new jobs have been created, 54 per cent of them full-time. We are a city whose population is projected to reach 2.2 million by 2051.

Adelaide is capturing the nation's attention like never before with new events such as Gather Round, LIV Golf and the return of the Adelaide 500 all adding to our status as the Festival State, which also includes the Adelaide Festival, the Fringe Festival, WOMAD, the Cabaret Festival, Tasting Australia, Illuminate and more. With this being combined with our beautiful Art Deco and heritage buildings and with our world-renowned Parklands, beaches and wine regions on our doorstep, it is no wonder Architectural Digest named us the world's most beautiful city. Meanwhile, major projects like AUKUS are driving innovation and investment, and our mining and mineral sector continues to strengthen.

With this buzz, vibrancy and growth comes responsibility. We need to ensure our housing supply keeps pace with demand, that development is sustainable and that we are investing in the right infrastructure to support our communities. This is why last month our government launched the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan, otherwise known as GARP, which is a once-in-a-generation plan to guide how and where 315,000 new homes will be built over the next 30 years.

This plan is about smart, sustainable growth. It preserves land for future infrastructure needs, schools, hospitals, roads and public transport. It identifies housing locations already connected to infrastructure or earmarked for future investment. It ensures that, as our population grows by an expected 670,000 people by 2050, we are planning ahead. Importantly, no new general infill developments have been planned as part of the GARP—the GARP has removed the former objective in previous versions, which targeted that 85 per cent of future housing be infill projects. I know this is very welcome news for my community, particularly in suburbs such as Prospect, which I believe has done its fair share of heavy lifting in this space.

Instead, the GARP prioritises new homes in major land releases, as well as developing higher density homes along strategic corridors and in the CBD. This plan identifies a diversity of housing choices across the region. New housing targets will ensure that local councils are actively planning for their communities' housing needs and finding ways to provide housing choices suited to their local area. This provides certainty for homebuyers, businesses and our communities, and it will ensure that the right infrastructure is in place before new housing developments are built.

One of the key steps in delivering the GARP is aligning our environment and food production areas with our long-term housing strategy. That is why we have introduced this bill, which will amend the EFPA boundaries to ensure we have a 30-year housing supply, rather than the current 15-year limit; allow approximately 61,000 new homes to be built on greenfield development areas; ensure that land removed from the EFPA will not be fragmented or developed in an ad hoc way, it will be rezoned in a staged, orderly manner; and ensure that reviews of these boundaries occur every five years based on housing demand and infrastructure capacity.

A key point to make is that this process has been guided by careful analysis, and the changes represent a loss of less than 1 per cent of key agricultural land in the GARP area. This, together with the current Character Preservation Districts and Hills Face Zone, ensures we retain a strong urban growth boundary.

In regard to identifying high-density housing in the CBD, it is always fascinating to look at the most recent statistics of current CBD living. There are 26,120 city residents, of whom—and I find this quite fascinating—40.1 per cent are lone-person households. More than half of those residents, or 56.5 per cent, are renting their homes. Just 8 per cent of households are couples with children, and almost one in four, or 23 per cent, of the city's population attends university.

The City of Adelaide is aiming to almost double the residential population to 50,000 by 2036. This is the equivalent of adding 1,000 dwellings per year to the city over this timeframe. This will not be achieved by adaptive re-use alone, or by residents living in workers' cottages or townhouses; this will be achieved by apartment living. According to the City of Adelaide's city growth plan 2036, a lot of this potential uplift identifies the north and north-west of our CBD. High on the agenda, identified in its report, is the Grote Street gateway. Currently, it has a residential population of only 853 people. The City Plan identifies a 15-year growth horizon of 3,950 to 4,850 people; that represents 13.3 per cent of city growth.

I think key to this development are, obviously, sites like Market Square and the former Australia Post site near West Terrace. These are two important stimulus projects for future residential growth. With our renowned Adelaide Central Market, Gouger Street and Chinatown precinct on the doorstep, as well as being well serviced by retail and other essential infrastructure, it makes complete sense for the Adelaide City Council to grow its residential and business population in this area.

Another area identified for city growth within the council's plan is West Terrace. It currently only has 1,259 residents, and the plan identifies potential for this area to grow to up to 4,350 residents over the 15-year growth horizon, representing 10 per cent of city growth. Indeed, there are multiple large underutilised vacant land parcels in this local area that I believe, appropriately managed, could contribute to mixed-use development to grow and support the local community. The council's city growth plan also identifies the West End local area as one that will:

…continue to evolve as one of the city's most diverse and vibrant neighbourhoods through increased education, health and medical uses, and more residential development supported by improved access to open space and community facilities.

In its plan, the council identifies the current population of around 2,300 people increasing to up to 4,850 over the 15-year growth horizon; that represents 8 per cent of city growth.

I look forward to the City of Adelaide undertaking this important work and seeing this plan turn into action. Increasing the CBD population through appropriate medium and high-density living will take the pressure off our inner metropolitan suburbs, in particular our heritage and character suburbs of Prospect, North Adelaide, Walkerville, Medindie and Gilberton.

The state government is taking its own active steps to achieve this, increasing opportunities and undertaking the work to unlock and build more crucial housing stock in the CBD. The Malinauskas government secured two adjoining sites at 274 and 275 North Terrace on the corner of Frome Road and situated directly across from the Lot Fourteen innovation precinct and the new Adelaide University.

I joined our planning minister and Property Council CE, Bruce Djite, to make this announcement, pitching the combined package as a rare opportunity for the development sector to shape the city skyline whilst providing critical housing stock for the CBD. Combined, these sites offer a rare 2,800 square metre triple-street frontage block and the potential for uninterrupted views of North Adelaide, the Adelaide Hills and the Parklands

Renewal SA will demolish the building at 275 North Terrace and has settled on the neighbouring property at 274 North Terrace, creating a highly flexible, prominent corner development site which could incorporate one or more towers. This site could accommodate a range of potential uses, including market apartments, build-to-rent apartments, hotel accommodation or purpose-built student accommodation and affordable housing.

Renewal SA was also chosen as the successful proponent by the City of Adelaide to develop the old Franklin Street bus depot. This multimillion dollar development will be known as Tapangka and is envisioned to be delivered as Australia's first carbon neutral precinct. Renewal SA will act as master developer of the site, delivering a new standard of inner city living, with two mixed-use towers and a central signature building. The signature building will be carbon neutral in operation and achieve a six-star Green Star certified rating. It will deliver commercial floor space combined with the place of learning, entertainment, culture and community.

This project will provide accommodation for about 1,000 people in our CBD, with 392 apartments being delivered alongside a 200-plus key hotel. Tapangka will also introduce institutional build-to-rent apartments into our city's CBD. Across the two towers, a minimum of 35 per cent will be offered as affordable housing, including apartments for rent and purchase.

Speaking of these strategic master plan sites, the Malinauskas government is also getting on with the job to address the housing crisis through the creation of the new suburb of Southwark. Renewal SA is set to transform the historic former West End Brewery site into a thriving community, setting a new standard for inner city living. The new $1 billion mixed-use development will deliver up to 1,300 new dwellings, which is an increase of up to 300 more homes than originally anticipated.

Southwark was first laid out in 1881 and featured streets lined with cottages on the edge of the Parklands. Some of these cottages then made way for the former brewery, which was rebadged as Southwark Brewery in 1949. Due to the rapid expansion of the brewery and former subdivisions in the area, Southwark became known as Thebarton. At least 20 per cent of the housing at this 8.4-hectare site will be offered for affordable sale or rental through HomeSeeker SA, while the development will also provide for retail, commercial, hospitality and community-use opportunities with direct access to key transport links, employment centres and cultural and sporting attractions.

Importantly, we will also expand the River Torrens Linear Park Trail at this site, with the potential to return more than 6,000 square metres of upgraded green space into public ownership. Key objectives for this development include, as I was saying, that generous inclusion of public and open spaces and a new relationship with a rejuvenated River Torrens corridor; an integrated street, cycle, walking and public transport network, including a new shared-use path connecting the Parklands under Port Road; sustainable buildings in an ecological setting, with a target of a 30 per cent tree canopy; and a six-star Green Star Communities rating, including water-sensitive urban design.

We are not just planning for where houses will be built; we are also ensuring they are built faster, more affordably and with the right services in place, and that is why we released our South Australian Housing Roadmap. It outlined the following key actions:

investing in skills and training, so we have enough tradies to build these new homes;

infrastructure coordination and investment, to ensure new developments have the roads, the water, the schools and the hospitals that they need to create thriving communities;

delivering more public housing across the state;

protecting renters' rights and improving affordability; and

abolishing stamp duty for first-home buyers building or buying a brand-new home.

On that last point, the reason I was able to buy my very first home was thanks to a Labor government introducing the policy of abolishing stamp duty on new homes within the CBD. Just over 10 years ago, I was able to become a home owner thanks to the work of Labor governments.

As I previously mentioned, with more than 50 per cent of those living in our CBD renting their homes, I found it an incredibly important part of my responsibility as the member for Adelaide to advocate for improved renters' rights. This has certainly been a key focus of mine over the last three years. I was proud to partner with constituents Ariba and her partner, Toby, to advocate for and succeed in the banning of rent bidding after the couple, who relocated from Melbourne to Adelaide, contacted me as their local MP to share their experience with this practice. This was just one measure that the Malinauskas government included in its biggest reforms to our state's rental laws in a generation. Under the reforms:

landlords now need prescribed grounds to terminate or not renew a tenancy;

the notice period to end a fixed tenancy has increased from 28 days to 60 days;

tenants' information is now better protected; and

rental properties have to comply with minimum housing standards.

Also, for the first time, tenants are allowed to keep pets in rental properties with clear guidelines to be set by their landlords, such as keeping the animal outside or having carpets cleaned at the end of the tenancy.

As well as improving renters' rights, importantly, we are planning for liveability. We know that open space is vital to our health and wellbeing and that is why we are expanding the Parklands and setting strong environmental targets. In addition to the focus on open green space at Southwark, recently we announced we will create the Northern Adelaide Parklands, which at maturity will cover almost 1,000 hectares. Just to understand how large an area that is, it is 39 per cent larger than our beloved Adelaide Parklands.

The Malinauskas government is investing $53 million in the first stage of this Parklands project, and at the heart will be a 60-hectare Village Green sport and recreation area, which will be the equivalent of 31 Adelaide Ovals in size, featuring courts and clubroom facilities. We want to get kids off screens and outside, keeping active with their friends, and this is why this Parklands policy is not just an environmental policy but a preventive health policy, supporting happy and healthy communities.

In regard to the environmental benefits, more than 760 hectares will be preserved as native green space, increasing biodiversity habitats for native wildlife. The GARP also sets a target of 30 per cent tree canopy across Greater Adelaide by 2055. These new Northern Adelaide Parklands will complement the investment we are making in accessible green space in our nationally heritage-listed Adelaide Parklands.

We are creating 1,000 extra square metres of Parklands as part of our brand-new Adelaide Aquatic Centre, and we are also creating tens of thousands more accessible Parklands as part of our new Women's and Children's Hospital project. Areas of this land for years have been inaccessible, and behind padlocked gates and wire fencing. Meanwhile, the olive groves were fenced off to house the SAPOL greys. This new area of accessible Parklands will be available for both the public and patients of the new Women's and Children's Hospital, from nature play to picnic areas.

Access to open green space is so incredibly important as a therapeutic perspective, as well as respite and wellbeing for families. I will never forget the calm of Adelaide Botanic Gardens during my stepdad's long-term stays for cancer treatment at the old Royal Adelaide Hospital. I know, firsthand, the value of open green space when you are experiencing some of the most challenging moments in your life, so I am proud of this investment in accessible Parklands not just for the general public but for families navigating health challenges.

If we are to encourage the next generation to love the Parklands as much as we do, then we need to foster these connections, encourage more families into our Parklands and create opportunities for more people to enjoy them. They are not owned by one vocal minority, demographic or group. Our Parklands belong to everyone—whether you live five metres, 500 metres, five kilometres or 50 kilometres away. They are a state asset, and everyone deserves a chance to experience our Parklands, whether you love sport including golf or football, or whether you love swimming or cycling, walking or running. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 12:59 to 14:00.

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