State MPs back plan for urban growth boundary for Adelaide

AN urban growth boundary will be imposed around Adelaide after MPs in Parliament’s Upper House agreed on reforms proposed by Government.

AN urban growth boundary will be imposed around Adelaide after MPs in Parliament’s Upper House agreed on planning reforms proposed by Government.

The food and environment protection area proposed in the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Bill would cover almost 800,000ha of rural land from the Fleurieu Peninsula in the south, past Murray Bridge in the east and north to Kapunda.

Housing could not be built outside the boundary unless both houses of Parliament agreed.

Planning Minister John Rau argued that imposing a boundary would encourage infill housing and deter corruption but the housing industry worried it was too inflexible to respond to future demand, would limit housing choice and put pressure on affordability.

In December, the Opposition — supported by Family First and Nick Xenophon Team MP John Darley — voted down the proposed boundary but Mr Rau reintroduced it when debate resumed on Tuesday.

Mr Rau had been in negotiations with Mr Darley about changes to how the boundary may be reviewed and changed in future.

Adelaide City Council Lord Mayor Martin Haese voiced strong support for infilling in the CBD rather than “rampant urban sprawl”.

“There is many years of infill opportunity that is vacant or yet to be developed,” Mr Haese said.

“When we talk about urban consolidation we’re not necessarily talking about large high rise buildings, what we’re talking about is identifying and developing appropriately many of the lower rise and if not vacant sites in the city of Adelaide.

“There are a number of these sites where we could be doing these things before encouraging rampant urban sprawl.

“If we have a city that sprawls endlessly, once the residential estates have been sold these type of things typically have what I call a ‘long tail’ and the long tail comes at the cost of the taxpayer in the form of buses and all public transport, hospitals and schools.”

Unley Mayor Lachlan Clyne said constricting and consolidating population growth within the urban growth boundary and corridors made economic sense.

“As part of our 30-year plan we have the target of an extra 7000 people living here,” he said.

“We’re looking at having those people along main road corridors such as Unley Rd, Goodwood Rd and Glen Osmond Rd in mixed use multi-storey apartments but the immediate economics of this isn’t going to add up if the urban growth boundary continually expands every five years.”

Mr Clyne said infilling could provide a number of options for people looking to get into inner city areas like Unley or downsize, with an affordable chance to do so.

“We’ve got a number of retirees that can’t look after their larger houses any more but there’s no apartment alternative that is readily available for them to move into,” he explained.

“Same goes for first home buyers who want to buy in the area and have grown up in the area — all the indicators are that people want to remain in the area they grew up in.

“We need all of our inner city and even city areas to have stock to cater for the different demographics in society and so families can live together.”

Urban planner and advocate Stephanie Johnston said the boundary was a “once-in-a-generation opportunity to make sure that due process is followed before any rezoning of agricultural land occurs into the future”.

McLaren Vale and the Barossa Valley were already protected by separate character preservation laws but Ms Johnston said that this resulted in a “pressure shift to other areas ... such as Mount Barker and Buckland Park”.

Ms Johnston said putting a food and environment protection area in place would bolster a bid being developed to gain World Heritage listing for the Mt Lofty Ranges region.

MPs also agreed to allow one local councillor to sit on five-member development assessment panels.

Mr Rau and Mr Darley had wanted local councillors removed from the panels entirely.

Property Council of Australia SA Executive Director Daniel Gannon said his organisation supported reducing the influence of councillors to improve “professional decision-making, streamline approvals and promote economic growth and job creation”.

The Bill will have to return to the Lower House, where the Government has a majority, for final approval.

Mr Rau has indicated he will make changes there to again attempt to ban councillors from assessment panels.