HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-05-13 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CODE

The Hon. S.G. WADE (14:35): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Development and Planning a question about the residential code.

Leave granted.

The Hon. S.G. WADE: In a letter to the Premier dated 8 May 2009 and copied to the minister, the City of Mitcham highlighted the apparent conflict between the residential code and stormwater and groundwater sustainability. The council's letter states that the code increases the automatic right of built site coverage from 40 or 50 per cent to 60 or 70 per cent, depending on the size of the allotment. The council's letter raises concern as to the impact of the code on, first, the long-term sustainability of stormwater management; and, secondly, the reduction of permeable land lowering groundwater levels impacting on street trees. My questions to the minister are:

1. What steps did the government take in the development of the residential code to assess the impact of the code on the catchment, including stormwater and groundwater?

2. Can the minister advise the council what impact there will be on stormwater and groundwater and the basis for his assessment?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (14:36): It really is drawing a very long bow to suggest that the Residential Development Code is central in some way to groundwater. I think we know that, more than any other, Mitcham council has been opposed to any form of codification or, indeed, virtually any change at all in relation to development. I think that would be a fair judgment. I think that council has a reputation of one of two councils which is most resistive of any change.

Of course, the alternative is that one does not have a residential code and one does not have policies which encourage density. I point out that I have made it clear from the day we introduced it that the residential code in itself is a policy that is neutral in relation to urban density. It is not a policy which is meant to promote urban density as such; it is a policy to improve the planning system. We would expect that at least 70 per cent of all the developments that would take place under the residential code would be the sort of straightforward development applications that would be and are being approved now throughout most of metropolitan Adelaide.

If one takes the attitude as some councils do (and elements of Mitcham council do) that one is opposed to any further densification of the metropolitan area, the only alternative really is urban sprawl. If one believes that promoting urban sprawl is good for the environment in a whole range of ways, I would strongly argue that that is not the case. What we are trying to do with our plan for Greater Adelaide is to ensure not only that we do have a proper water sensitive urban design incorporated within our developments but also that we make sure that we have greater efficiency in the use of our infrastructure. That would mean more energy efficiency with better transport planning by trying to get our growth along corridors, which means less reliance on motor vehicles, less consumption of fossil fuels and the like.

What we are attempting to achieve in our 30-year plan is a much better integration of energy efficiencies, of water sensitive urban design and other factors within our planning system, and the residential code is but one part of those. All the government's land releases—and one could name Mawson Lakes, Seaford, Meadows, Lochiel Park and Blakeview as examples—incorporate stormwater harvesting measures at the land division stage, and that is where it is most important.

One might have development that covers a large element of the block. That means there will be more runoff, but, providing that water is collected and providing you have at the subdivision stage proper planning, you will be able to collect that water and make sure that you make greater use of stormwater. That is an underlying principle of development within our new developments.

The government is also exploring further integration of water sensitive design through the Water Sensitive Urban Design project. I hope that when the Greater Adelaide plan is released within the next month or so there will be much more information on this, and the honourable member will be able to see for himself the significant amount of work that has been done over quite a long period of time, going back years, in relation to achieving this.

The recently announced planning reforms also seek to further improve the energy and water efficiency of individual buildings through the building code. That has to be part of it. The key point is that we need to increase the density of development in Adelaide, otherwise our city will sprawl unacceptably into places such as the Barossa Valley and McLaren Vale. This government is determined that that will not happen. We are committed to some containment, but the only way that we can realistically achieve that and the growth of the city at the same time is to ensure that we incorporate the redevelopment of our city within corridors. The target of our planning is that up to 70 per cent at the end of the period would be by way of infill or high rise rather than through greenfield development. That is necessary to achieve our objectives.

In relation to the capture of stormwater and maximising potential stormwater harvesting, there are a number of techniques that one can use to achieve that. It is not just the ground coverage, but clearly it is a matter of ensuring that at the land division stage you are able to effectively capture and store that stormwater.

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: We have been planning it for years. All the Liberal opposition did—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Just the other day—and I wish I had brought this in with me—I was clearing out some old books and I discovered the water plan for 2000, which was put out under the then Liberal government. It was very interesting. I thought I would have a look and see what its vision was 18 months before the election in relation to stormwater. I will share this with the council. I think the idea was that by about five years later it would have some plan developed. It also stressed that it was a local government responsibility.

I will have more to say about that on another stage, but it just indicates what frauds these members opposite are in relation to stormwater harvesting. Clearly, if we are to better use stormwater in this state, we have to study the aquifers and get all the information necessary to know where it is appropriate to reuse stormwater.

To get back to the honourable member's question in relation to the residential development code, I believe the influence of the code is essentially peripheral in relation to issues of stormwater management. There is a whole range of other options, particularly those incorporated into the land division stage, which are much more effective for harnessing stormwater than the impact of a residential development code, which in the vast majority of cases where it is applied will simply approve developments which, under the previous system that existed before the code was introduced, would have received approval anyway.

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