HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2010-10-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

SEAFORD HEIGHTS DEVELOPMENT

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (15:16): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Leader of Government Business questions regarding the Seaford Heights development.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: In recent weeks, since we last sat, two world-renowned and highly respected wine writers have criticised the decision of the government to put on the market the land at Seaford Heights. Also in that time, a very specialised soil type analysis report has been released which identifies that the soil type on the Seaford Heights proposed land subdivision is one of only three soil types in the state that allow premium wine grapes to be grown. So far they have not been able to be planted because the land has been tied up with the Land Management Corporation. My questions are:

1. Will the government still be rubber-stamping this development and just putting a buffer zone on the south-eastern side of the development?

2. Will the minister agree to rezone stages 2 and 3 of this development if he proceeds with approval for stage 1?

3. Will the minister also at that time rezone Bowering Hill and take it out of its existing planning category?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (15:18): I answered a question on this in estimates on Wednesday but I am happy to reiterate some of the points I made then. The proposed Seaford Heights development, adjacent to the Seaford rail extension, has been zoned for residential development for more than a decade; it might even be more than 20 years. Seaford Heights is not used for wine production; in fact, I think the only use on part of it has been an ostrich farm. To my understanding, it has never been used for wine production, and it is no secret that the availability of land for housing there was a factor in the decision by the federal and state governments to invest $291 million to extend the rail line to Seaford.

The City of Onkaparinga has been widely consulted by the government in relation to this land during discussions on the realignment of the urban growth boundary in December 2007; after the publication of the Planning and Development Steering Committee's review; before the drafting of the 30-year plan when the government issued its future directions statement; during the Growth Investigations Area process that sought to identify land use options in the southern region; throughout the drafting of the 30-year plan; as part of last year's consultation process that shaped the final version; and also in consultation with the government that led to the agreed statement of intent for the Seaford Heights development plan amendment.

During these numerous opportunities to raise their concerns and to influence the shape of the 30-year plan, the City of Onkaparinga did not object to the development of Seaford Heights. In fact, it was my understanding that they had even tried to change it away, including reducing some of the screening of that area from the Victor Harbor Road, but that is another issue. The City of Onkaparinga had agreed to amend the development plan, as the existing zoning policies were considered out of date and no longer reflecting best practice.

Unfortunately, of course, in the shadows of a council election, the City of Onkaparinga has decided to renege on this agreement and resolved that this land should be back-zoned to rural. This decision flies in the face of logic and surely goes to the competency of the council in dealing with a seemingly straightforward planning matter. Facing this situation, I have been left with little alternative but to pick up where the council has failed in its duties.

We have been going on for years. Council agreed to it, getting right to the end stage and then, at the last minute, with a local government election and some last-minute lobbying, it has suddenly just walked away from the process. If every council were to do this—and I have said this before—we might as well pack up our bags in this state because, if every group that was opposing some change in its area were to prevail, nothing would happen in this city.

As I said, this land has never, to my knowledge, been used for winegrowing; it was used as an ostrich farm. It is unfortunate if, suddenly, a study of geology has found that it is apparently much better grape growing area than apparently the areas where all these winegrowers have obviously not known what they were doing in the last 150 years, where they have been growing wine in other regions of the McLaren Vale basin.

It is rather unfortunate, of course, that this discovery had to happen just before a council election, just at the end of a rezoning process that has been going on for many years. As I said, the commonwealth and state governments are spending $291 million to bring a rail line over the Onkaparinga into this area, I would have thought at the request of and for the benefit of the local citizens in that area.

I can confirm that I have instructed the Department of Planning and Local Government to prepare the documentation required for the amendment to the development plan to be taken over by me, as minister. I will examine all the cases and, as I say, I think a number of reasonable points have been made by the local people, and certainly they have been put to me by the local member for the area, Mr Leon Bignell, in relation particularly to the protection and screening from the Victor Harbor highway of any development that were to take place.

Protection of the character and production capacity of the Willunga Basin is a key policy concern of the government. Specifically, the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide calls for the Willunga Basin to be reserved for agriculture, viticulture, tourism, tourist accommodation and biodiversity-related purposes to guarantee its importance as a tourism drawcard and major wine producing area. To deliver on these objectives, I have asked the Department of Planning and Local Government to progress discussions with the City of Onkaparinga to address management of primary production land in the Willunga Basin.

In the short term, I expect the department to convene a working group of relevant stakeholders to undertake a detailed conversation about the issues confronting the basin, with recommendations to be made back to me in due course. I expect that this working group will address a range of matters, such as:

reviewing the adequacy of existing planning policy to ensure consistency with the 30-year plan (and remember the 30-year plan talks about protecting the agricultural integrity of the McLaren Vale area); and

assessing existing land division policies in rural zoned land to ensure land parcels are of sufficient size and dimension so as to limit the possibility of further division leading to urban encroachment and fragmentation of rural lands.

One of the greatest consumers of good agriculturally productive land is subdivision into rural living-type farmlets. You can drive through the Adelaide Hills, as I did last weekend, and see a number of land sales in those areas of larger holdings, which of course have at some time in the past been subdivided into much smaller holdings.

Back in the 1980s, I think, to protect the Barossa Valley, changes were made to prevent subdivision below a minimum size within the Barossa Valley—I think it was about 40 hectares, from memory. Also, steps had been taken to ensure that no dwelling could be put on an allotment smaller than 25 hectares, as I believe the provision to be.

Clearly, if one is to protect the Willunga Basin, that is the sort of measure that should be investigated here. It is one of the things that I expect this group to look at, to see whether it is appropriate here and, indeed, for that matter, other parts of the Adelaide Hills—around Mount Barker, for example. Outside the urban growth boundary would be a good case. If we continue to divide up productive agricultural land into small holdings of less than 25 hectares, or so, that land will ultimately become economically unviable in terms of agricultural production.

There is a legitimate demand by people who want to live on hobby farms and the like, but we have to be very careful where we locate those farms because it is those farms, I would suggest, that are taking far more land out of effective agricultural production than residential housing development, where allotments are much smaller. That is one of the matters I would like to see addressed through this committee.

The honourable member also raised the issue of Bowering Hill. Part of the group's function is to review existing planning and policy in relation to Bowering Hill to ensure consistency with the 30-year plan. I remind the honourable member that, although Bowering Hill is part of the urban growth boundary, the government did indicate that it would not rezone Bowering Hill but look at the potential of the area for tourism and other uses compatible with viticultural, tourism, tourist accommodation and biodiversity purposes within the McLaren Vale region. So, that will be part of what the group will look at regarding Bowering Hill.

Also, we will be ensuring that planning controls allow for primary production and tourism to be integrated within the Willunga Basin. So, I have asked the member for Mawson, Leon Bignell, to participate in these discussions along with an elected representative from the City of Onkaparinga. This will ensure that the department has local input from locally elected—

The Hon. R.L. Brokenshire interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Well, Mr Bignell has been elected. He is the member for the area. He is the appropriate person to be on the working group. He has been elected as a representative of the area. We will ask the council to provide a representative from the City of Onkaparinga, so it will have a representative as well. This will ensure that the department has local input from locally elected representatives at both levels of government.

The key to the success of the work of the department and the working group will be tackling interface issues between land uses, particularly between rural and urban land use. This work will guide appropriate ongoing management of primary production land, ensuring the preservation of the Willunga Basin's character and production capacity. I think I have covered all the matters that the honourable member asked about.

The Hon. R.L. Brokenshire: Stages 2 and 3.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: That is right; he asked about staging. The only action I propose to take at this stage is in relation to the Development Plan Amendment council released for public consultation. It covers the entire 77 hectares. What is referred to as stage 1, is the land that the Land Management Corporation has contracted to the developer; the Fairmont Group. As I understand it, the development plan amendment being considered by the council, as I said, has taken some two or three years of work, and obviously significant effort has been put into that process by those involved.

In relation to the Land Management Corporation, there are clearly a number of issues that would need a lot more thought before that process was started. To my understanding, no work has been done in relation to any latter stages of development on that land, but I repeat that my understanding is that the zoning of most, if not all, of that land has been residential for many years. Obviously, what happens in those stages will be something for another day.

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