Planning for conflicting demands of urban housing in a sensitive environment - challenges of

developing in the Adelaide Hills area

Presentation toThe LAGQ

12 February 2010

An overview of the AHC Area

AHC has an area of 795 km2 - larger than the combined area of Metropolitan Adelaide

We have a population of 39,048 (2006) only grown by 2000 people in 15 years. Projected to grow to 40,400 by 2016. Overall, 25.7% of the population is aged between 0 and 17, and 16.7% are aged 60 years and over

It is a predominantly rural area with 50+ iconic townships & settlements nestled in scenic landscapes

There are 5 catchments in the AHC area which cover 100% of the Council area, namely Onkaparinga, Torrens, Patawalonga, Gawler & Murray Rivers

Council has 170 FTE staff providing over 200 services to the community with a current annual budget of just over $45 million

Area of the AHC

AHC Area larger than the combined MetroArea

Our towns

The area comprises over 50 localities including townships & urban areasThis presents challenges from a servicing point of viewMany are tourist destinations along main scenic routes through the HillsEconomies of scale cannot prevail in such a dispersed settlement patternThis poses interesting issues in formulating a sustainable development strategy

Mitcham

Tea TreeGully

Playford

C'twn

B'side

Barossa

Mt Barker

MurrayMid

Onkaparinga

AdelaideCBD

KersbrookKersbrook

ForrestonForreston

LobethalLobethal

MtMtTorrensTorrens

CharlestonCharleston

HoughtonHoughton

InglewoodInglewood

ParacombeParacombeCudlee CkCudlee Ck

BirdwoodBirdwood

BalhannahBalhannah

LenswoodLenswood

OakbankOakbankCrafersCrafers

AldgateAldgateHeathfieldHeathfield MylorMylor

Scott CkScott Ck

GreenhillGreenhillUraidlaUraidla

MontacuteMontacute

NortonNortonSummitSummit

WoodfordeWoodforde

StirlingStirling

WoodsideWoodside

GumerachaGumeracha

5

kilometres

100

SimplifiedPlanning zones

Majority of the area is zoned Watershed (Primary Production), followed by the Hills Face and Township/Urban zones

Hillsface

Rural

Living

Other

5

kilometres

100

PredominantLand Uses

Predominant land uses are primary production, followed by conservation, then residentialPrimary production activities -47.2 % of land is classified as grazing land22.0 % as native vegetation and 8.1 % as dairy styleThe extent of viticulture has increased significantly in last 5

7 years with around 15 wineries at presentMarket gardening, grazing and dairy has dropped over the last 10 years

ResidentialPrimary Production

Conservation

Services & other

5

kilometres

100

Rainfall

Area receives between 500 (eastern edge) and 1100 mm (Mt Lofty Summit) of rainfall per annumThis supports primary production activities within the area & excess runoff flows into rivers and reservoirs to supply Metro Adelaide with water

900

700

800

800

1000

1100

900

800

Kersbrook

Birdwood

MtTorrens

Gumeracha

Woodside

Lobethal

Balhannah

Lenswood

Houghton

Uraidla

Mylor

Woodforde

Scott Ck

Stirling

Pressure for residential development

There is pressure for further residential development due to:

Proximity to Metro AdelaideQuality of rural living it offersEase of access to the City

However, its an environmentally sensitive area for a number of reasonsThese factors also pose significant development constraints as follows:

VisionTo value our diversity, our landscape and our people

Environmental Factors / Development constraints

Watershed protection: Water is # 1 issue in our State. 89% of AHC is covered by the Mt Lofty Ranges Watershed. Water collected within the Watershed flows into major reservoirs & contributes up to 60% of Metropolitan Adelaide s drinking water. AHC constitutes 43% of the entire Watershed area

This is a major planning consideration in the area i.e. ensuring development will note negatively impact on water quality & quantity within the watershed

Mt Lofty Ranges Watershed Area

Bushfire Prone Area

The majority of land within the Council area is bushfire proneConsidered to be the most densely populated bushfire prone area in the State

Land along our western boundary is generally classified as Extreme from a bushfire attack point of viewVictorian Bushfires are a stark reminder of the devastation such an event can have on a community

Bushfire History1980 - 1983

Major bushfires in the area were Ash Wednesday fires of February 1980 & 1983These were the most significant fires in the State until recent time28 people died in 1983 including 3 CFS volunteersAsh Wednesday (for Victoria & SA) one of Australia s costliest natural disasters. Over 3,700 buildings destroyed or damaged (approx. 200 more than the 2009 bushfires in Victoria), 2,545 individuals and families lost their homes (vs 7562 on Black Saturday). Livestock losses - over 340,000 sheep, 18,000 cattle & numerous native animals either dead or later destroyed (vs 11,000 on Black Saturday). Total of 4,540 insurance claims paid totaling $176 million with a total estimated cost of well over $400 million (1983 values) for both states or $1.3 billion in adjusted terms (2007)

Kersbrook

Birdwood

MtTorrens

Gumeracha

Woodside

Lobethal

Charleston

Oakbank

Cudlee Ck

Balhannah

Lenswood

Houghton

Uraidla

NortonSummit

Aldgate

Mylor

Greenhill

Woodforde

Heathfield

Scott Ck

Stirling

Crafers

5

kilometres

100

Native Vegetation

Only approx. 14% remnant native vegetation left in the State. AHC has around 22% remnant native veg left and we desire to protect it in order to protect biodiversity and climate change. This will be a constraint for any future development in some instancesHowever, retention of vegetation will be increasingly important for the future to mitigate the impacts of climate changeConflict in this instance between bushfire mitigation & biodiversity conservation 5

kilometres

100

Significant Trees & Native Vegetation

Trees form an important part of our landscape and scenic beautyRequirements around removal of Significant Trees or Native VegetationAssociated bushfire risks need to be weighed up in this instance (fuel loads)

Tree & Vegetation Removal

Soil Disease

Phytophthora is a water mould that attacks and kills a wide range of plants. It cannot be eradicated but may have its spread contained through stringent application of hygiene procedures. It spreads slowly through the soil but rapidly by vehicles, people and water flow. It affects a considerable number of native plants but also ornamental and crop plants such as grapes, raspberries, avocadoes, pome fruits and chestnuts. This organism potentially affects 300 native plant species in the Adelaide Hills Council district.

PhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraPhytophthoraHIGHHIGHHIGHHIGHHIGHHIGHHIGHHIGHHIGHHIGH

N

RISKRISKZonesZones

5 10

kilometres

0

Infrastructure Constraints

Majority of the AHC area is not serviced with mains water, sewer or stormwater. Effect of this is all these services need to be provided for on-site. Further, capacity within existing infrastructure to support future development needs is limitedOn site effluent disposal needs to be carefully managed impact on the WatershedDispersed settlement pattern & topography makes it uneconomical to provide such services to areas where they are currently not provided

Site Plan Development details

Cross Section Effluent Disposal Areas

Transport Infrastructure

Council has over 1100 km of road network of which approx. 650 km is sealedAny sustainable development strategy needs to factor in transportation & accessibility issuesThe area is not well serviced from a public transport point of view due to dispersed settlement pattern & lack of economies of scaleLoad Limits on some roads & bridges can be a constraint for growth of the agricultural sector & the area as a whole

Kersbrook

Birdwood

MtTorrens

Gumeracha

Woodside

Lobethal

Charleston

Oakbank

Cudlee Ck

Balhannah

Lenswood

Houghton

Uraidla

NortonSummit

Aldgate

Mylor

Greenhill

Woodforde

Heathfield

Scott Ck

Stirling

Crafers

Made Road

Unmade Road Reserve

5

kilometres

100

Developer Contributions

No developer contribution system in the State for off site infrastructure provisionOnly alternative is negotiated agreements with developers (e.g. Land Management Agreements)

Developer Contributions - Legal Agreements

In the absence of a legislated framework for obtaining developer contributions, legal agreements are required which details respective responsibilitiesDevelopers to provide direct infrastructure at time of undertaking development of sitesFinancial commitment in place should be by way of bank guarantee for off site (indirect) infrastructureSuch agreements then registered on titles before development approval or rezoning of lands occurs

Some issues with such a system

More than 1 developer leads to multiple legal agreementsNeed for coordination of multiple land division approvalsCollaborative approach by engineers and planners is required Staging of land divisions & provision of infrastructure has presented challenges for Mt Barker Council particularly when different to preliminary planning with developers

Some issues with such a system (Cont.)

Changing demands can impact on the actual infrastructure e.g. infrastructure identified may no longer be required but something else is e.g. Roundabout vs. t-junction Off site infrastructure prioritization & clarity of spending Community Infrastructure PlanMt Barker experience - significant task of managing the agreements (diverts scarce staff resources where project managers should be appointed)

Topography

The AHC area is primarily undulating and hillyTerrain poses difficulties & results in associated excavation and filling of land Impact of such earthworks on the landscape needs to be mitigatedTerrain can pose problems for CFS vehicle access & turn around areasTerrain can impact on bushfire behaviour

Protecting scenic beauty & landscape character

Development should not detract from the established character of the area and the design should be in keeping with that found within the localityImportant to protect our scenic landscapes & character of our iconic towns from a tourism point of viewEnvironmental Covers to protect crops from weather conditions (hail, heat, wind) will have an impact on scenic character

Primary Production & Land use conflicts

Majority of the Council area is zoned for primary productionResults in land use conflictsWider setbacks & buffers generally required to mitigate these issues

Need to protect prime agricultural land for this purpose & prevent encroachment of rural living developments

May be a resurgence of market gardening activity to supply Metro area with more food & reduce food miles

Importance of Primary Production to AHC

For the Adelaide Hills Region:Gross food revenue (Excl. wine) = $431mWine grape value nearly $57m7.9 million litres of wine exported over seas36% of activity is wine production, 35% livestock and 27% horticulture

Important therefore to protect prime agricultural lands for this purpose & maintain this economic development asset

Rural/Urban Interface

Draft 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide -Regional Planning Strategy

No expansion of townships permitted in order to minimise impacts on the environment/watershedAny new development has to be accommodated within existing town boundariesA balance between watershed protection & development pressures requiredDevelopment must have a neutral or beneficial impact on water qualityPrimary production sector is healthy and expanding & there are opportunities for future growth. Policies identify & protect areas of primary production significanceManage the interface between primary industry & urban/rural residential areasProtect areas of environmental significance

Impacts of Climate Change

More extreme rainfall events impact on stormwater management issuesResult in more incidents of localised floodingNumber of high fire danger days will increase, exposing residents to increased bushfire risksFrequency of extreme weather conditions will impact on native trees knock on affect is increased limb or total failures & associated risks to the public

To Conclude

Adelaide Hills Council area is not a growth Council due to the limitations imposed by environmental, infrastructure & policy constraintsOpportunities for growth mainly in primary production & tourism sectorsClimate change will have an impact on the planning & development of the area opportunities for creation of carbon sinksDispersed settlement pattern & lack of effective public transport system increases per capita carbon emissionsExtent of green spaces & remnant vegetation are valuable for maintaining biodiversity, absorbing carbon & negating possible impacts of climate changeThere sustainable development principles need to apply when developing in the Hills

Conclusion (Cont.)

Primary production activities need to be undertaken in an environmentally sustainable mannerResidential growth to be within townships & urban areas through infilling & increasing densities where infrastructure capacity & character principles permitSuitable developer contribution system required to fund off site (indirect) social & service infrastructureWatershed protection & management of water resources within sustainability principles of paramount importance in our areaAchieving a balance between development pressures & the environmental issues/constraints (e.g. bushfire risk, biodiversity conservation, watershed protection) are a primary consideration for future planning & economic development strategies

VisionTo value our diversity, our landscape and our people

Mission StatementTo improve services and protect our landscape for the people who live and visit our area by providing quality and appropriate infrastructure, planning,

community services and good governance